No, I Do NOT Know What Schadenfreude Is; Please Tell Me Because I'm Dying to Know [UPDATED]
Ha ha! Li'l Miss "That's Hot" might be put on ice:
It couldn't happen to a nicer piece of ameritrash.
(Why do I care? I told you. Schadenfreude. I get to feel more virtuous. I can drive recklessly without the help of alcohol, thank you very much.)
Update:
Well, at least one court recognizes that ameritrash are not above the law any more than the President:
(Why do I care? I told you. Schadenfreude. I get to feel more virtuous. I can drive recklessly without the help of alcohol, thank you very much.)
Update:
Well, at least one court recognizes that ameritrash are not above the law any more than the President:
Hilton...arrived at least 20 minutes late...was stopped twice for driving on the same suspended license. Hilton was required to enroll in an alcohol education program...but she didn’t do it.
How does this not show contempt for the law?
I left it out of the quotation, but the article said that the requirement that she enroll in an alcohol-education program was "...a court-dictated order...". Usually such a thing is just called a 'court order;' what's up with the "dictated"? Does the writer really think it's tyrannical for a duly constituted court of law to order her to attend alcohol-ed? Practically everyone in her circumstances gets ordered to do so, which I fear is the writer's point. The fact that many other celebrities get off for many other crimes does not entitle the rest of them to the same. The problem is that some get off, not that others don't.
And then there's this, from the BBC's article:
I left it out of the quotation, but the article said that the requirement that she enroll in an alcohol-education program was "...a court-dictated order...". Usually such a thing is just called a 'court order;' what's up with the "dictated"? Does the writer really think it's tyrannical for a duly constituted court of law to order her to attend alcohol-ed? Practically everyone in her circumstances gets ordered to do so, which I fear is the writer's point. The fact that many other celebrities get off for many other crimes does not entitle the rest of them to the same. The problem is that some get off, not that others don't.
And then there's this, from the BBC's article:
Her mother, Kathy, laughed when the demand for a custodial sentence was made during the prosecution's closing argument
and then
...when the ruling was announced,...her mother shouted at the prosecutor: "You're pathetic."
Furthermore, her lawyer – who somehow figured that she had a "right to drive" even though her license had been suspended after due process – had the audacity to suggest that she "...was singled out because she's who she is." Yeah, she was singled out for that reason — but it wasn't the court's doing, pal. She's been given three chances on this already; WTF else do you want?
I have no patience with the geopolitical notion of "American exceptionalism;" I have even less with the idea that de facto "wealthy exceptionalism" somehow makes it de jure. The question now is, will the higher courts let the ruling stand?
Oh, and a pedant point: Hilton is not, properly speaking, 'famous.' Having done countless damned things but not one blessèd one, she is 'notorious.'
I have no patience with the geopolitical notion of "American exceptionalism;" I have even less with the idea that de facto "wealthy exceptionalism" somehow makes it de jure. The question now is, will the higher courts let the ruling stand?
Oh, and a pedant point: Hilton is not, properly speaking, 'famous.' Having done countless damned things but not one blessèd one, she is 'notorious.'
posted by Dr. Bubbles at 14:19
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home