Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under. – H.L. Mencken
In yesterday’s column I linked a New York Times article about streetwalkers which was offensive on so many levels it practically constitutes a case study. One especially repellent statement: “In a separate case underscoring the ubiquity of streetwalking, a 32-year-old Pennsylvania man was arrested on Feb. 6 after impersonating a police officer to extort sex from prostitutes…” The veriest ass under the sun could recognize that the reason a rapist could pull this off was due to prostitutes’ fear of cops; it has nothing to do with the ubiquity of streetwalkers, and everything to do with the ubiquity of cops who use their power to extort sex from women. Though the Times reporter appears to be in denial about it, virtually nobody else is; that’s why it isn’t surprising that a Toronto man came up with the same idea at virtually the same time. Nor do perverts in “authority” limit their victimization to whores:
…A Dallas woman says TSA agents repeatedly asked her to step back into a body scanning machine at DFW International Airport. “I feel like I was totally exposed,” said Ellen Terrell…“They wanted a nice good look”…[when] she tried to leave [the scanner, a] female agent stopped her…[and] sent her back a second time and even a third. But that wasn’t good enough. After the third time, Terrell says even the agent seemed frustrated with her co-workers in the other room. “She’s talking into her microphone and she says, ‘Guys, it is not blurry, I’m letting her go. Come on out’”…
… “I think it’s sexual harassment if you’re run through there a third or fourth time,“ responded Texas State Representative Lon Burnam of Fort Worth. “And this is not the first time I have heard about it,” said Burnam…CBS 11 News dug through more than 500 records of TSA complaints and found a pattern of women who believe that there was nothing random about the way they were selected for extra screening…“It just makes me wonder what’s going on. Are they doing this all over the country? They’re missing their focus,” said Charlie Terrell…
I beg to differ, Mr. Terrell; they’re not missing their focus at all. The primary purpose of the TSA is to train Americans to submit to any indignity inflicted by an “authority”, no matter how invasive and arbitrary. And given that most Americans still meekly submit like sheep, and many even make excuses for grotesque violations of their rights that would’ve provoked their grandparents to armed rebellion, I’d say it’s working perfectly.
But while the TSA seems content (for the moment) to ogle and grope, the same can’t be said for local police:
Pittsburgh police Chief Nate Harper said he is looking for additional women who might have been bribed by a city police officer who was charged…with telling three women he could spare them and their acquaintances trouble with the law in exchange for sexual favors. Officer Adam Skweres, 34, was arrested…[for] crimes stemming from three incidents, two of which date to 2008…[in which he offered to intervene with “Child Protective Services”, cancel a traffic ticket and release a woman’s boyfriend from arrest in exchange for oral sex]…”The behavior of this individual is very disturbing and should not be viewed as a reflection of the conduct of the good and honorable men and women who serve on the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police,” Chief Harper said…
No, of course not, Chief Harper; we know “good and honorable” Pittsburgh cops are only allowed to rape whores, not “real” women. And Skweres is indeed a rapist; a fourth victim has come forward saying she submitted to his demands after he threatened her with his gun. But while Skweres made his demands openly, some British cops created fake identities, seduced women into thinking they were having real relationships, got them pregnant and then vanished without any concern about having to pay child support…because they were acting with the tacit approval of Whitehall:
Two undercover police officers secretly fathered children with political campaigners they had been sent to spy on and later disappeared completely from the lives of their offspring, the Guardian [revealed]…In both cases, the children have grown up not knowing that their biological fathers – whom they have not seen in decades – were police officers who had adopted fake identities to infiltrate activist groups. Both men have concealed their true identities from the children’s mothers for many years. One of the spies was Bob Lambert, who has already admitted that he tricked a second woman into having a long-term relationship with him, as part of an intricate attempt to bolster his credibility as a committed campaigner. The second police spy followed the progress of his child and the child’s mother by reading confidential police reports which tracked the mother’s political activities and life. The disclosures are likely to intensify the controversy over the long-running police operation to infiltrate and sabotage protest groups.
Police chiefs claim that undercover officers are strictly forbidden from having sexual relationships with the activists they are spying on, describing the situations as “grossly unprofessional” and “morally wrong”. But that claim has been undermined as many of the officers who have been unmasked have admitted to, or have been accused of, having sex with the targets of their surveillance. Last month eight women who say they were duped into forming long-term intimate relationships of up to nine years with five undercover policemen started unprecedented legal action. They say they have suffered immense emotional trauma and pain over the relationships, which spanned the period from 1987 to 2010. Until now it was not known that police had secretly fathered children while living undercover. One of them is Lambert, who adopted a fake persona to infiltrate animal rights and environmental groups in the 1980s. After he was unmasked in October, he admitted that as “Bob Robinson” he had conned an innocent woman into having an 18-month relationship with him, apparently so that he could convince activists he was a real person. She is one of the women taking the legal action against police chiefs…
The story goes on to say that the cop who spied on his victim and child via police surveillance reports was “haunted” by his deeds. Cry me a river. These men, and all cops who use their position to extort or trick sex from women, are nothing but sexual predators who conceal their exploitative behavior under the guise of law.
One Year Ago Today
“Mardi Gras” provides a whore’s-eye view of the holiday, which fell much later last year than this.
Britain is small enough to be a complete police state with nearly everyone under 24 hour surveillance. The British TV series MI5 portrays this with great accuracy, though of course the bad deeds are always done in the name of the national interest.
If this country hasn’t reached the same level of surveillance it’s certainly not for want of trying. I say they haven’t because they still can’t solve some crimes, which indicates their surveillance isn’t perfect. Nevertheless we’re racing towards a complete police state disguised as a republic.
Some of the reasons they can’t solve all the crimes …
1. “Overhead” that has nothing to do with law enforcement that takes cops off the streets. The cops have all kinds of weapons now – and they have to maintain qualification on them. Of course, every cop JUST NEEDS a fully auto M-16 in the trunk of his car, along with his shotgun … and some might have a need for sub-machine guns, or CAR-15 variants, and of course – TASERS. They have to take all these guns to the range and practice their target shooting skills by shooting at pictures of investigative reporters they are pissed off at …
http://www.fox8live.com/news/local/story/Taking-aim-at-Lee-Zuriks-photograph/8Tlb1Ka_-E2hzB_jx7kHSw.cspx
Hmmm … and I got booted off a jury this week for giving the cops a “6” score for integrity on a scale of 1 to 10. I’m sure Maggie’s pissed about this since a “6” is actually above average. 😛
2. Enforcing laws against victimless crimes. In Kenner, Louisiana, the cops are all proud of themselves, as they’ve figured out how to create a “backpage” prostitution ad to entrap Johns. They buzzed NINE Johns the other day – and are just beside themselves! They even got the Times Picayune to publish the names and addresses of these John’s in the paper! For the WIN! Maybe someone will swing by the homes of these men (who are merely ACCUSED of breaking the law) – and throw a couple of shotgun rounds through their windows. Then the cops won’t have escort these “perps” to court.
3. Guarding courthouses with ARMIES of cops. Like I said, for a short time this week I was on jury duty in a three story courthouse. Not only was there a platoon of cops at the entrance checking people with metal detectors – but there were two cops in every court room, two cops outside of every courtroom – and ten others patrolling each floor. I’m a big boy, and every Cop I walked by gave me the “once over” – I’m certain if I had a tattoo I would have been tasered!!
Sorry to hear about the personal hassling but as you say the cops are fucked.
I hope the accused johns sue the cops for slander.
Unfortunately, they can’t; all stories like that say is that they were arrested, which is demonstrably true. Until the Supreme Court declares these procedures what they are – punishment without due process – they will continue.
That would be the SAME supreme court that jailed Ezra Pound for 12 years without charge CORRECTLY pointing out that the USA and Italy were collaborating to kill off more men in the italian theatre of war?
Dont be holding your breath.
No, it isn’t the same Supreme Court. Those Justices are all dead now. It’s nine different people.
Now, it is entirely possible that THIS SCOTUS is no better than THAT SCOTUS, at least on issues like this. But it is NOT the same Court.
Sailor,
there may be 9 different people. But the supreme court is still a UCC Legal entity operating under admiral jurisdiction. Not that I would expect you to understand what that means.
Admiralty jurisdiction is a false distinction between the laws enacted by Congress and the states and those of an illegitimate and secret source. This is the premise Sovereign Citizens, an enormous militia group, uses to refuse to obey the laws of the USA. Very curious – people are subject to the laws of any country they are in, whether they are citizens or not. These people think that if they spell their name in upper case letters it’s a genuine change of identity.
If these people want to secede I can understand that and sympathize with it. But their arguments are both paranoid and ridiculous.
My info comes from the Southern Poverty Law Center and from one of the Sovereign Citizens own websites.
I’m personally glad that island-building technology is maturing quickly. Those who wish to secede may soon do so, and if their new societies have anything of value, then the rest of us can benefit as well.
Well said. I’m in favor of secession myself, but the transitional period could be a complete nightmare. I’ve been told New England could legally secede, but I have serious doubts that New England generates enough revenue to support an ever growing number of SS recipients and disabled people. Maine can hardly afford to repair roads and New Hampster, RI and Vermont have very small populations. The bulk of the financial burden would fall on CT and MA. Without consulting with economists I can’t say how it would work out but I have my doubts.
They could raise revenues by auctioning off the broadcast spectrum (the US has been giving it away for nothing) and other such. The real handicap is that the rest of the country would refuse to trade with them.
But a new nation created from scratch (as opposed to part of an existing nation splitting off) would be respected by a lot of people, without the whole “that state is a traitor!” public relations problem.
Krulac,
Are you saying that the jury pool was winnowed on the basis of absolutely believing what a cop says was true or not?
Yeah but … this is the way the system works.
The defendant was charged with illegally distributing a schedule 2 controlled substance (oxymorphone). However he distributed it, and however much of it he distributed – he didn’t get paid for it. The cops also – had no physical evidence of the distribution – only circumstantial evidence and the testimony of two or three cops that the defendant did, indeed, distribute it.
With this kind of a case – the prosecutor wants people on the jury who believe that cops are a “cut above” the rest of society when it comes to integrity. He wants people on the jury who don’t question the integrity of cops. He wants people who will BELIEVE cops without question.
So … I ranked them a “6” – which is, above average (average being 5). But – I’m sorry, I can be that generous – but no more than that. After Katrina, we had Cops abandoning their posts, murdering people on bridges, and stealing Cadillacs, and confiscating guns from law abiding citizens. This is not even mentioning what Maggie went through with her arrest. They also attempted to prevent me from getting to my property the day after the storm to check damage. I disobeyed their orders though and “hiked” in to my home after they refused to let my vehicle pass.
And I could go on – so “6” is as high as it goes for me.
None of the minorities in the jury pool gave the cops better than a “4” or “5” for integrity and many gave 1-3.
So the prosecutor rejected any juror who gave the cops less than an “8” for integrity on a scale of 1-10.
12 Jurors were selected – from a pool of 40 people (which is excessive in my opinion). Hell – with 40 to choose from – it’s easy to find 12 who think the cops are GODS.
Krulac wrote:
“So the prosecutor rejected any juror who gave the cops less than an “8″ for integrity on a scale of 1-10.”
It’s really too bad that the defense attorney didn’t respond with the exactly opposite standard. But if he was court appointed or a public defender, he probably wouldn’t have dared bite the hand that feeds him.
I’ve been in the jury pool 3 times in the last 10 years. I never get selected because I know some cops – we have disclose that on the jury questionnaire – and two former state Attorneys General are among my “family” acquaintances. I’m assuming that I’m getting “preempted” by the defense which is ironic. I’m likely to be among the most skeptical of cops giving testimony given the disparity I’ve observed between their claims of probity and their actual behavior.
The fact that the prosecutor was essentially stacking the jury box with people who would accept his witnesses’ accounts without any intermediation like rational thought or careful judgement calls to mind the following definition from Vin Suprynowicz:
“voire dire From the Latin and Old French meaning jury tampering.”
There’s a few reasons why the defense may not have responded with an opposite standard. One might have been – he knew he had an air tight defense no matter who was on the jury.
The defense attorney was BY FAR the sharper lawyer in the court. The prosecution guys dressed a bit better though – they were dressed exactly like 30’s gangsters in double-breasted pin-striped suits. Who goes there in 2012? LOL.
This is interesting …
http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/09/with-12-beholders-you-just-need-one-to-s
I was just going to boycott jury duty in the future – because I can have my boss write a note to get me out of it. I’ve thought this through though – next time I’ll do the duty and give the cops an “8”. I’ll just “game” my way on to the jury – and vote to acquit. Goes directly against my sense of honesty – but it’s not an honest system anymore.
Look for that story a week from Thursday (March 22nd). In my old home town, I was never ONCE called for jury duty because they knew I was a charismatic, opinionated, civil-rights-loving, government-mistrusting bitch who would not only vote to nullify any bullshit prosecution, but convince the other eleven to go along with me.
Thanks, Krulac, for that link.
I just busted up over the following sentence by Fresno Dan;
I do have say I am now curious about sequels 8 & 9 – were they not considered for prosecution because they were fawned over by the critics?
I once watched a medical video about removing a 180 lb fatty tumor from a 350 lb man’s abdomen. It was horrifying. And – I – could – not – stop – watching – it.
There are plenty of things that people routinely do that I find disgusting but so long as it is done by mutual consent and they don’t force me to watch it, it is not my problem.
I horrified my Japanese sister-in-law by telling her I’d eaten natto every morning for 3 months on a bet. Natto is fermented soybeans that smell like they’ve spoiled and have a chalky consistency – once you’ve chewed them a few times – that is somewhat offset by what looks and acts like a generous covering of mucus.
Jury nullification is one of the few ways left for us to covertly protect against gross injustice. And I think that anything you can conveniently hang your hat on to do so is morally justified.
As far as the Gangster look; it’s entirely possible that the prosecution understands the root of their profession and decided to embrace it in all its glorious thuggery.
Natto! The first time I ate it I was like, “Meh. It’s not that good, but it’s not THAT bad.”
The next time I thought, “You know, it isn’t that bad. With a touch more soy and the diced green onions, I could even like it as a side dish.”
The next time I decided I’d eat it a couple of times a month, just to break up the monotony of my usual routine.
Then I found it moldy the next two times I bought it, and the market quit carrying it after that.
It’ll come, Maggie.
“The primary purpose of the TSA is to train Americans to submit to any indignity inflicted by an “authority”, no matter how invasive and arbitrary. And given that most Americans still meekly submit like sheep, and many even make excuses for grotesque violations of their rights that would’ve provoked their grandparents to armed rebellion, I’d say it’s working perfectly.”
And that is why I read your blog. Barely ANY MRAs have figured this out yet. They have not figured out that the abuses of the family courts are intended to find out how much the men can be abused without fighting back…and then the fight will start from when they start fighting back.
Dumb smucks. They have not figured out better to fight sooner rather than later.
And what are we told by those who created one of the greatest experiments in guvment of all time….?
“That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. …
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.”
It is not like I am quoting from esoteric or obscure sources. Yet MRAs refuse to read these words and heed them. How about sex workers Maggie? Will they read these words and heed them? MRAs cant get off their arses and help themselves so they are not going to help sex workers.
As these men noted. Men have a duty to “institute new governmen”.
For those men who want it. This will be the new government and new jurisdiction they can step into which will deny the jurisdiction of any other guvments.
If women want one too? Happy to assist.
http://www.mensbusinessassociation.com
Hookers in training? This is absurd beyond belief.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2112156/Dance-Moms-hits-new-low-Girls-young-EIGHT-wear-nude-bikinis-burlesque-routines.html
Looks like the Mail got a little sensational on that.
“Dance Moms” is a stupid assed reality show but … because my daughter is involved in Combat … er … “Competition Dancing” – I have to watch this show every week. Believe it or not, but my daughter has become a much better dancer because she’s exposed to Abbey Lee Miller’s hardnosed training tactics on that show. Miller IS a very successful dance teacher and her students are really amazing.
But the “drama” of the show is mostly feigned, I think. The costumes that ACTUALLY made it to the stage performance were white “booty shorts” and a tan halter top – each of which had LOTS of rhinestones. It was very clear the kids weren’t nude.
Additionally, “fan dancing” is an historic ART. Yeah sure, the women who performed it were often nude – but you can’t in any way compare a fan dance to a “strip show” … fan dance was nude art. If you have something against nude art – then don’t go to the French Museum in Lille, France – because the medieval artists whose work is displayed there were practically obsessed with the nude form.
But, regarding Competition Dance – I think it’s great. When I was in High School – none of the girls did competition dance, so there were really no sports for the girls – no team sports like for the boys. But, having been exposed to this dance thing for the last few years, I can tell you – this is a good thing for girls. I watch girls walk out on stage in unison … focused, just like my old football team used to be when we took the field. And – I think these dancers are more athletic than we were in playing football. In football, if you are big – they put you in a position to run over people, if you’re fast – they put you somewhere to run fast – there’s not a lot of diversity in skill for the individual, you get “pigeon holed” in whatever you’re good at. Not so in dance – these girls use the full range of athletic skills. A few weeks ago I watched a girl, thick and built like a power lifter, dancing on stage and doing incredible acrobatics – it was AMAZING!
So hopefully “Dance Moms” … silly as they are – will inspire more kids to enter competitive dancing.
You think that’s bad, people are now complaining about girls playing volleyball in the usual spandex because it is too provocative. My response is get on the other side of the net and try to return a ball from a ranked 17 year old outside hitter. Once you find your teeth let me know how turned on your are.
a) If the show is called Dance Moms, it should be the moms dancing.
b) Don’t you just love this sort of thing? They make sure to go on and on about how “terrible” it is, about how it’s “just too much,” but they don’t hesitate to show us the little girls in their pseudonude outfits, their “overly suggestive” dance moves. I swear, I believe these folks cry salty tears every time a case comes out about child pornography, because they SO WISH that they could show it to us.
c) I don’t know if Abbey Lee Miller’s teaching techniques are too harsh or not; I don’t trust media to convey the real story on that. But it bothers me that the most common defense is that “it works.” If she isn’t too harsh, then she wouldn’t be too harsh even if it didn’t work, and if she’s too harsh, then she’s too damn harsh whether it works or not. Effectiveness is not the only moral value, and it’s starting to look like some people think that it is.
Dancing isn’t about moral values – it’s about becoming a great dancer. Only people who see their daughters becoming professional dancers bring their kids to study under her. They’re not there to become better people – but to become better dancers.
Abbey Lee is tough – tough as any football coach or military drill instructor I ever had and she doesn’t swear nearly as much. I think it’s refreshing … she’s the female Vince Lombardi.
Dancing isn’t about moral values, but raising children is. That’s what I’m afraid some of the parents are forgetting. Or maybe the articles and TV shows are edited to make it look that way.
Again, I don’t know if Abbey Lee is too harsh or not. I do know that “horrible harsh coach terrorizes kids” will sell more papers than “tough but fair coach turns kids into great dancers with good character.” So I’m certainly willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.
That said, I want to restate my stance that there’s more to life than efficacy. Some things are wrong, even if they are effective, even if they do get results. Is this one of those cases? Beats the hell out of me, but some people seem not to care.
Finally, I wasn’t talking about the little girls becoming better people. It wasn’t their morals I was looking at.
You’re not going to raise better kids by coddling them.
And – I’m a guy that raised three, and I never hit or spanked a single one of them (didn’t have to).
But … I WAS tough on them. Oh sure, I was the “nice dad” too – but when called for, I was “Mr. Hyde Dad”. When Abbey Lee says … “You go home and cry into your pillow – you don’t bring the tears into the dressing room with the whole dance team.” – that’s her being hard-nosed, and training kids to deal with disappointment.
And, I’ll tell you – a kid that can deal with disappointment in a solitary manner will grow up to be a happier and more productive adult.
Like I said, I don’t know Abbey Lee. I’m not saying that she’s some evil harpy. And no, you can’t coddle kids all the time. And yes, you have to get tough sometimes. But as you point out, you can’t be Sgt. Jerk all the time either.
Anywho, I wasn’t talking about the best way to be a parent. I was just pointing out that “it works” shouldn’t be the sole criteria for what kids are exposed to. It’s like, if you execute litterbugs, there would probably be less littering, but it would still be wrong to execute litterbugs.
What is called Dance Moms just used to be called “Stage Parents”. Lordisa, I met more than a few in my 15 years of ballet. I can spot them from a mile away.
As far as Abbey Lee Miller’s teaching techniques, I haven’t seen them. I will say that at a certain level of performance art (dictated by age AND ability/talent) most likely the student will try to go professional. The arts world is not for the faint-hearted– it may look pretty but behind that is a lot of stress, heartache, blood, sweat, and tears (blood, especially if you’re on pointe). So being soft won’t serve that student in the long run. If you really want to see some harsh teaching in the ballet world, I highly suggest the 2006 documentary Ballerina, which follows four prima ballerinas of the Kirov (Mariinsky) Theatre. Extremely strict regimen in any Russian ballet company worth mentioning, but they also produce the world’s best ballerinas, the ones all other ballerina want to be.
Notice that the authors of the Pittsburgh story claim that the women involved were “bribed” for sex, not extorted.
I also don’t see any rape charges listed against Skweres, though rape by coercion is generally recognized by the law.
Yeah, I noticed that too. A “bribe” offered by a man with a gun who can throw you in a cage, lie about it and be believed, is extortion no matter what the cops call it.
In many third world countries, the ability to extort bribes is openly considered part of a police officer’s remuneration package. Perhaps the ability to extort sex from prostitutes is viewed in the same way in US police forces – simply a perk of the job?
I do not live in the US, so I can’t be certain, but from what I see and read, the willingness, let alone the ability, to hold the police accountable for their actions seems to be growing increasingly weak amongst those who actually have the power to do so.
Historically, allowing a police force to develop a sense of immunity has never been a good thing, even for the elite.
The way to hold the cops accountable is this: Every time there’s some outrage on your local police force. a group of citizens should attend the local council meeting and demand that the police budget be decreased. The stance should be “If they’ve got time to do…. there’s too many of them.” When budgets get cut, the top cops get the message, and fast.
Our whole way of policing in the USA, and in many other nations, is corrupt.
The police are the most visible arm of government, and a reliable barometer of the layers of bureaucracy above them. However corrupt and brutal the police are, so is the rest of the government above them (though in a less-visible, less-direct fashion). Hitting the police via their budget is good, but not good enough; American and British laws (and I’m sure other countries have ’em too) which allow the police or higher levels of government to profit from their victims must be repealed; all government activities, especially those of police, need to result in a net loss to the respective departments so they’re not motivated to inflict harm on citizens for profit. And criminal penalties for any kind of malfeasance in office need to be disproportionately large (at least three to five times what they would be for a private citizen) and to have a lower burden of proof. Finally, all police and government official crimes should be investigated by an independent bureau whose budget depends entirely on how many bad cops they catch and convict, creating an incentive for aggressive investigation which benefits the citizens.
I agree Maggie, but one reason the cops are nearly invulnerable is because of police unions. This is yet another layer of resistant bureaucracy. Grr!
It’s enough to make a grown man scream.
Public-sector unions should never have been allowed. Trade unions represent the workers against management, who represent the interests of stockholders; they’re on different sides, so there is an incentive for management to give as little as possible. But public employees and their managers are on the same side, and the “negotiators” won’t get fired even if they give away the ranch because it isn’t their money and they aren’t held accountable. So there are no checks and balances, and all the most powerful US unions are now public-sector ones.
I submit. Maggie for Dictatrix. 😎
If I remember rightly it was the Boston Police strike of 1919 that made the city knuckle under. Other cities followed suit.
Maggie,
I do not know if you actually want to know HOW the US got into such bad shape. But if you do? This is an excellent book to read. I was just told about it last week and I am passing it along as much as I can. The US was transitioned to Admiralty jurisdiction in the 1800s and the process was completed in the 1930s. The courts are admiralty courts and can only be put into common law by a sovereign man who knows how to do that….like me.
http://commonlawjurisdiction.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/pied-pipers-of-babylon-verl-k-speer-common-law/
Goddamn it, Peter. That is such bullshit. Even if someone failed to dot an ‘i’ somewhere in the constitution, it doesn’t mean we’re now beholden to a super seeektrit government that performs all of the actual government functions (unless we say the super secret password that no actual governmental employee actually knows).
The government we appear to have is the government we actually have. Sorry this burns you so much.
In the mean time, can I just read Maggie’s blog in peace without your filling the comments with the most obtuse form of political extremism I’ve ever heard of?