There must be something about people pointing a camera at a person a lot that inspires the delusional belief that he is irresistibly interesting, stunningly intelligent and unbelievably important. We see evidence of this unfortunate mistaken belief every day. As you well know, actors, desperate to be considered serious people, rather than the vacuous glamour pusses that we know them to be, suffer from an irresistible impulse to make horses’ hind ends of themselves by incessantly popping off about public policy issues better left to the grown ups.
Note to Steve Buscemi and Susan Sarandon: the Sandinista crypto-commie mayor of New York City can spew leftist cant without your adding your two cents, which is about how much anyone with more than a room temperature IQ would pay for your opinion, or that of any of your fellow thespians, on any important question affecting the future of this country. Maybe you don’t realize what we do; specifically, that someone else, someone smarter wrote what you have memorized and are repeating during your “brilliant” performances. So, put a sock in it, please.
There’s another group of blow-dried, pancaked buffoons who would be horribly insulted to be told the obvious: they are also nothing more than glorified actors, reading from scripts, and this bunch is even more insufferable because, in some quarters, they are taken much more seriously. I refer to television “journalists,” who would be better described by the phrase that they use in the U.K., “news readers”, if they were in fact reading any actual news, rather than shilling for the Democrat party’s agenda under the guise of reporting.
Today’s example of this modern cultural phenomenon is CNN’s Chris Cuomo, who is a proud graduate of Fordham Law School, which clearly needs a visit from whatever certification agency is attempting to make sure that law schools actually teach their students about our laws and especially about the Constitution. Either that or Mr. Cuomo slept threw Con Law. (Another possibility: he attended a class taught by a devotee of the “Professor” Obama school of Constitutional jurisprudence.)
I say this because of his most recent offering, sharing pearls of wisdom about the First Amendment in the wake of the Garland, Texas attack by two Islamist maniacs on Pamela Gellar’s “Draw a Cartoon of Mohammed” contest. Like many of the East Coast Brain Rot afflicted, including, sadly, many on the allegedly “conservative” cable network, Chris disapproved of Ms. Gellar’s attempt to sound the alarm that our precious First Amendment, and our whole way of life, is under relentless assault by these head-chopping lunatics.
On a recent edition of CNN’s morning show, New Day, Chris expressed his distaste toward Ms. Gellar’s event. Actually, “distaste” is probably the wrong word. He basically blamed her for the horrific attack on her and her contest that fortunately resulted in the death of the two attackers rather than the murder of innocents.
Defying even the ACLU, Chris Cuomo proclaimed that the First Amendment does not protect “hate speech,” which, according to Cuomo, the cartoon contest clearly was. Of course, because the only reason we need the First Amendment is in case someone defiantly says something inflammatory like “I love fuzzy bunnies and snuggly puppies, and I don’t give a damn who knows it!” Hell yes, we need to protect that kind of speech!
After Cuomo delivered his bizarre opinion about the First Amendment, the Twitter verse exploded, with many pointing out that he may be a tad confused about what the Founders intended (or telling him that he’s an idiot and a disgrace to his law school). Confronted by the obvious reality—that he is clueless about what the First Amendment means—he mounted an adept defense, one unique to a liberal; that is, claiming to see something in the Constitution that is not in fact there. Did he find it in that magic “penumbra?” No, he cited a Supreme Court case, Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (1942), the so-called “fighting words” decision, which has been effectively overruled by subsequent decisions like Snyder v. Phelps. (2011). Finding something in a Supreme Court decision doesn’t mean that we can find it by reading the Constitution as Cuomo recommends. Perhaps he can find someone to read it to him.
This instance is not the first time Mr. Cuomo has demonstrated his lack of understanding about the Constitution and our founding documents. Last February, in another example of his legal genius, in a debate with Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, Cuomo said ““Our rights do not come from God, your honor, and you know that,” said Cuomo. “They come from man. Our laws come from collective agreement and compromise.” Right. Our rights are up to mutual agreement. And we can see how well that has worked out in Cuba and North Korea.
Idiocracy is here.
Politics, Pop Culture, the Hottest Issues of the Day, the flagship show o”f the Informed America Radio network, The Teri O’Brien Show, featuring America’s Original Conservative Warrior Princess, Live and in vivid red, white and blue, Sundays 5-7 pm Eastern time (4-6 pm Central) at teriobrien.com and http://www.spreaker.com/show/the-teri-obrien-show, and anytime on demand on iHeart Radio, Stitcher Radio, and iTunes.
Image: Modified from http://www.garysworldusa.com/sitemap/people/?vasthtmlaction =viewforum&f=7.0