When Somebody Has No Good Reason For Limiting Your Rights…

…they usually cite the excellent experiences of Europeans.

We should let our kids drink wine at dinner, because of the French. Long holidays and government pensions?  It works for the Greeks!  

Now comes the argument for hate speech laws…from a junior at the University of Austin:

In more than 80 percent of European countries, including Germany, France and the United Kingdom, hate speech is largely prohibited and subject to criminal sanctions. These countries prove the ability and efficacy of such laws, but unfortunately the discussion of how and even if they can by implemented domestically usually stops when the First Amendment argument, a favorite of racists and bigots, is raised.

[Jefferson, Madison and others liked it too! — Dave]

Law professor H.W. Perry has been traveling Europe to deliver speeches about the wide gap between the U.S. and other countries when it comes to freedom of speech.

“Some of the European states have pretty robust protection of freedom of speech,” Perry said. “Particularly Germany has laws that balance free speech with claimed rights of human dignity.”

“Pretty robust” is not my goal for freedoms.  

I won’t copy some of the hundreds of mean tweets that a Hollywood actress is said to have gotten, but here’s the follow up sentence in the article:

Such unnecessary and hurtful words lend nothing to potentially improving the actress or movie, and instead seem aimed purely to do emotional harm.

Yes.  But emotional harm isn’t the same as physical harm, or unfair financial harm, or any of the other things which would prompt a mature person to seek redress from the government.  I have emotional harming experiences every day.  It helps to have a loving family, and a dog.  

What is it about our younger generation — and for Europeans for that mastter —  that makes them so willing to turn to the government as censor?  

Colin Kaepernick is a Racist @$^%&^;! but Not a Bad American

Gus Bailey:
Oh, don’t be fooled; just because he’s half black doesn’t mean he can’t be a racist.  His deeds and words back me up: “… I’m going to continue to stand with the people that are being oppressed.”  Just who the hell is oppressed around here?  Who is being denied their right to speech?  Their right to freely associate?  Their right to petition the government for redress? 
I’ll admit that there are certain pockets of America where due process is under some stress and strain.  I would argue that the social contract is under more stress and strain in those same areas.  Apparently Mr. Kaepernick would rather I didn’t make note of the co-location of the sparks of Blue on Black homicide with the raging inferno of Black on Black genocide.
Thing is being a racist moron doesn’t make you anti-American. 
Colin thinks there’s problems with America.  He feels that he needs to bring attention to the problem.  Not a dishonorable motive.  He has chosen a very high profile medium and method for his protest.  Nothing illegal, or immoral, but verrrrrry sure to get folks attention. 
My problem is that he insists on viewing the situation through racially ‘tinged’ glasses.  The result is that he is failing to fight to save the dozens of lives of young black men because he can’t accept that those same young black men seem to be the problem.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color…”
“To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”  –Colin Kaepernick


So, I’ve been thinking and listening and watching. There’s a lot of hullabaloo about some clown on the San Francisco Football team. It seems that folks are debating whether we should debate whether this football guy is right or wrong for not standing up for the national anthem. That’s a stupid argument. It’s a free country, he can be a racist feminine hygiene product all day long if he wants. However, doing so in a flamboyant manner won’t change the fact that he’s a flaming racist. — Gus

Fixin’ to Sue Somebody

In my part of North Carolina, there is a unique phrase which seems to mean “I am preparing to be about to do something.”


As in “I’m fixin’ to crank up the engine.  Hold my beer.”

It does not mean getting ready.  It’s close, though.

It actually is what happens the moment before, the moment before you do something.  Fixin’ describes the mental process which precedes actual preparing to do something.  People who are fixin’ to leave are actually still on the couch.  People who are on their feet are leaving.  

For the last couple of years, Bill Schmalfeldt has been suing Sarah Palmer of BillySez, getting ready to sue Patrick Grady and/or Paul Krendler…or he has been facing Peace Orders for his activities online.   

Yet he written, then has shuttered up, dozens of websites, Twitter accounts and podcasts. A lot of it about Sarah and Paul.  He might have some copies of his writings, but I’ll bet most of the evidence is gone the moment he makes a decision to erase it. His copy anyway.

“So…the yutes commenced to spoliating?”

You might say Bill has been fixin’ to sue Sarah Palmer and Patrick Grady in Federal Court for a long time. I wonder if that’s what lawyers mean by “likely litigation?”

From Practical Law:

The knowledge that evidence is relevant to pending or likely litigation gives rise to a duty to preserve that evidence. Failure to comply with this duty may result in sanctions.


Of course, I’m not a lawyer, because the LSAT was very hard that year.  But I do know that lot of litigation can come down to trust.  Who can you trust? I’d be unlikely to trust someone who publishes certifiably nasty things online, and then deletes the stuff.

Bill has also stated that if other people have copies of his Tweets, podcasts and comments online, why…that’s proof the material isn’t really gone. Again – hard LSAT, not lawyer – I’m pretty sure that the volume of material which others have stored is actually evidence of Bill Schmalfeldt deleting potential evidence.  Evidence for a Federal Lawsuit he knew was likely for a long time.

‘Cause he’s been fixin’ to sue these people for years.




So, I Decided to Put Up Some Violent Imagery to Demonstrate My Frustration…

Bill Schmalfeldt has been advised by his attorney to NOT comment on a lawsuit.  This must feel a bit like being told not to itch that scratch… You know, the one right there between the shoulder blades.  

Bill Schmalfeldt’s latest:

I just deleted a 1,000-word post in which I refuted some remarkably stupid allegations made by a person I am suing in Federal Court.
While proofing the post I had to ask myself, “What’s the point I’m trying to make here? If this incredibly stupid person being sued for making incredibly stupid and defamatory remarks wishes to dig in deeper by accusing me of faking my Parkinson’s disease, thereby throwing gasoline on an already raging fire, why would I interfere?”
If this person wishes to ignore even the most basic advice any lawyer would give to someone being sued, that being “don’t give the Plaintiff any more ammunition to use against you,” why in the world would I refuse to accept delivery of the pallets of ordnance being delivered free of cost?
If someone is that dim, that bereft of common sense, that deluded about the nature of the allegations in my complaint that he or she would voluntarily hand the metaphorical baseball bat wrapped in metaphorical barbed wire to my attorney to be used to bash his or her metaphorical head until it is a pulpy mass of metaphorical bone and brain tissue, who am I to tell this person that he or she overdid it with the barbed wire?
Screen Shot 2016-08-29 at 7.56.50 PM

I took nearly the entire post, as Bill Schmalfeldt cares very much about context.  If I quote just a tiny bit, we might miss the nuancy contextual threat thread of the post.  If Bill figures I have violated his copyright on the post, I’ll consider editing.  Frankly, it’s worth the potential legal trouble to simply document in complete detail what just got published. The art was in his original post.
What is he talking about in the post?  Here’s the funny thing:

Sarah Palmer at BillySez has apparently NOT been advised to stop writing about Bill. She quotes his online material, including the stuff he spoliated.

Image result for baby diaper

Mommy.  I spoliated another diaper.

Spoliation is the destruction of evidence.  Bill Schmalfeldt has destroyed much of his online writing over the past few years — to the point that he probably doesn’t know what he really has said.  
Sarah does.  And as she publishes and comments on the psychology and pathology of Bill Schmalfeldt, he stews in his own juices.  Just like our little fellow on the right.

And so, he publishes a post with violent imagery, in response to someone he is suing, who has already convinced a judge that he is a threat to her, after his lawyer has advised him to avoid commenting at all about the case.

When will Bill Schmalfeldt’s original post be spoliated, and the heartfelt but inappropriate venom hidden from view?  I’m not a betting guy, but probably it will disappear sometime around the time Bill’s attorney reads his morning email on Tuesday.

I think he has ignored the most basic advice any lawyer would give to someone being sued suing someone, that being “don’t give the Plaintiff defendant any more ammunition to use against you…”

Long ago,  I offered Bill Schmalfeldt valuable advice.  He has not taken it, and won’t take my advice now.  I’ll try again.

Follow your attorney’s advice.  

Dear Hollywood, this is what a funny man is…


Gene Wilder was 83.


Gene Wilder, who regularly stole the show in such comedic gems as “The Producers,” “Blazing Saddles,” “Young Frankenstein,” “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory” and “Stir Crazy,” died Monday at his home in Stamford, Conn. His nephew Jordan Walker-Pearlman said he died of complications from Alzheimer’s disease. He was 83.

His nephew said in a statement, “We understand for all the emotional and physical challenges this situation presented we have been among the lucky ones — this illness-pirate, unlike in so many cases, never stole his ability to recognize those that were closest to him, nor took command of his central-gentle-life affirming core personality.

Playing chess with Cleavon Little.  Waiting for poor Augustus Gloop to become unstuck.

In this interview,he actually says “I don’t think I’m funny.” So wrong.

If You Have to Say It…

“Like, she’s a person. She’s a normal person,” Tanden insisted. “She laughs. She cries.” — senior Clinton aide Neera Tanden

When challenged by Thrush, Tanden admitted Mrs. Clinton wasn’t exactly “normal” but complained that reporters were too suspicious about her deleted emails.


Tanden was reportedly vague on the subjects of blood pressure and ingestion of food, but was confident of the ‘laughs and cries’ comment.  I’m sure someone has to remind her when to stop laughing, but yeah.  I’m sure she does it. — Dave