We welcome your comments and postings on our blog

Tuesday, May 19, 2020


Please indulge me.  As I have said more than once, I think it is important to chronicle the criminality, corruption and derangement of tRUMP and his gang.  As is often the case, tRUMP has produced multiple big stories in one day.

       In yesterday's press conference tRUMP exposed   his total corruption for the world to see.  He said he thinks there should be NO, repeat NO, inspectors general. The function of IGs  is to keep the government honest.  In other words,  tRUMP admits he wants a corrupt government.

         tRUMP has not yet fired every inspector general.  He said he has fired and will continue to fire any inspector general who was appointed by Obama.  tRUMP's venality leaves me breathless.  As far as I know Charles Grassley is the only Republican senator question  the firings.  I think every one of the 53 Republican senators should be outraged.   Inspector generals keep watch over the executive branch.  The legislative branch should embrace the system of inspectors general. Republican senators  have completely abdicated their roles as a check on the executive.  What is wrong with them?  A bigger question is whether any of this matters to any tRUMP supporter?  The answer is obvious.

     The latest firing was the inspector general of the State Department.  News reports are that the IG was investigating a number of possible claims about Mike Pompeo.  Some are relatively small like having government employees walk his dog, pick up Chinese food, pick up his dry cleaning and perform other personal services on the taxpayers' dime.  Another is huge, having to do with tRUMP's declaration of an emergency to send billions of dollars worth of arms to Saudi Arabia.   In answer to the firing, Pompeo has stated that he had no idea what the IG was investigating.  Therefore he could not possibly be charged with retaliation against the IG.  Please take five minutes to stop laughing before you go to the rest of my blog.

     Now to the story of tRUMP's ongoing lunacy.  He declared that he has been taking hydroxychlorquine (HCQ) for about a week and  a half.  He said that he has talked to "a lot of people" who say it is a good idea.  He disagrees with the FDA and the vast majority of physicians  and scientist who say it is dangerous to take HQC unless there is a specific indication.  
        I followed several newscasts that reported the story.  In my view every newscast missed the most important point of this crazy story.   When tRUMP and a few doctors started advocating HQC, they did so as a  treatment for people who were seriously ill with covid 19.  It has never been promoted, or even suggested, that it can prevent covid 19.  If it prevented covid there would be no  need for  a vaccine.  HCQ would be the vaccine.  Why is tRUMP taking this drug?  Has he tested positive for the virus?  Or is he just crazy?  I go with the crazy answer.

        So another day another corruption scandal and another glimpse into a very sick mind.  Take care all.  Stay safe.  


Monday, May 18, 2020

tRUMP's mental illness

If you don't want to read another one of my tRUMP rants, please skip down to the last paragraph.  You will love it.   During tRUMP's campaign I wrote about the several well recognized mental disorders from which  tRUMP suffers.  Mental disorders do not get better on their own.  Treatment may help.  But absent treatment, the disorders get worse.  There is no doubt that tRUMP's mental disorders are progressing.

        This week tRUMP ranted that Obama and Biden have committed the worst crimes in U.S. political history.  They should be thrown in prison for fifty years.  No response is necessary to this lunacy.  Among other conditions, tRUMP suffers from a personality disorder known as neurotic projection.  Obama's presidency was recognized as  among the least corrupt presidencies in history.  tRUMP's presidency is probably the most corrupt.  So, because of his mental illness tRUMP projects his own corruption on Obama.

        I am not a student of history.  As far as I know, no president has ever attacked a predecessor so viciously.  But this is more than an attack.  I believe it is the clearest sign yet that we have a progressively more  deranged president.  If further proof is needed, On May 4 tRUMP accused Joe Scarborough of killing a young female  assistant  in 2001.  tRUMP called Scarborough "Psycho Joe."  The accusation is pure nonsense, but it comes from the president of the United States.

           This week I will be writing or calling several Republican senators asking them when they will publicly denounce this craziness.  Is there no John McCain among the fifty three spineless creatures  in the Senate?  

          On May 3,   CNN's Don Lemon made the most prescient statement about tRUMP's Obama obsession.  This is what he said:

                            What is it about President Obama that really gets under
                            your skin.  Is it because he's smarter than you?  Better
                            educated?  Made it on his own? Didn't need daddy's 
                            help? Wife is more accomplished?  Better looking? What
                            is it about him?  That he's a black man that accomplished 
                            being president?  That he punked you on the whole birth 
                            certificate thing?  What is it?  Just wondering.

       Lemon nailed tRUMP up to a point.  He implied  a mild mental derangement.  I don't think it's mild.
          One more thing.  Tonight at 8:00 there will be a nationwide virtual high school graduation.  It will be carried on all major networks including Fox.  President Obama will be giving the commencement address.  Don't miss it.  I wish there were a video cam in the White House.  Smoke will be coming out of tRUMP's ears.  Take care.  Stay safe.


Thursday, May 14, 2020

Supreme Court reporter

My favorite thing to do when I visit Washington is to watch oral arguments in the Supreme Court.  Today I listened to arguments  about tRUMP's tax returns as they were broadcast by C Span.  There were two cases.  The first was The House Of Representatives subpoena of tRUMP's returns.  The second was the New York district attorney (Cyrus Vance) subpoena of tRUMP's returns.  Here are my thoughts.

      The new format of arguing remotely is not the same format as when all of the justices sit together at the court.  The usual format is that an attorney starts speaking and is then interrupted by a justice asking a question.  Then the attorney starts answering and another justice asks a question.  This goes on for the entire argument.  That format allows justices to ask multiple followup questions.  In remote  format, the justice gets a turn and then it's over. Each justice's turn and the answer lasts about three minutes. I don't care for this format.

       The first case involved the House Of Representatives suing tRUMP's accounting firm to get a whole bunch of records including tRUMP's tax returns in the years before he became "president".  The first attorney for tRump made the bold statement that never before have the personal records of a president been subpoened.  There must be a compelling need, which does not exist in this case.   Later he referred to  "demonstrated need." He argued that Congress had come up with a completely phony pretext to subpoena the records.  
          The House lawyer was the worst of the  lawyers who argued.  He fumbled.  He was obsequious.  Ar one point he could not come up with an answer to a hypothetical.  But at least he did say why there was a compelling need.  There were three committees which requested the subpoenas.  The subpoenas were requested after explosive information came to light about tRUMP's finances.  The intelligence Committee wanted to investigate whether a foreign power would have undue influence over the president.  The oversight committee was investigating whether there had to be legislation improving the Ethics in Government Act".  I believe the third committee  was looking at possible changes in the tax law.  To me, each of those committees had a compelling interest.

         Justice Ginsberg's first question out of the box was the best.  She asked tRUMP's attorney how was this case differed from  subpoenaing  Bill Clinton's Whitewater records , the subpoena of Hillary Clinton's billings, the Nixon tapes,  Watergate records and the Paula Jones case.   tRUMP's attorneys did not make any decent  argument distinguishing those cases.

     Justice Thomas asked a couple  of surprisingly good question.  In the first case he asked whether Congress had implied powers to issue subpoenas.  The answer was "Yes."  Some have argued that subpoena power is not enumerated in the constitution.

        Breyer asked a simple question, "were the subpoenas in Watergate legal, yes or no?"   The response was that the President is on duty 24/7 and therefore cannot be burdened with a subpoena.  In other words a non response.

On the other hand, Breyer made a statement that was chilling.  He said he worried that if there is no limit on Congressional subpoena power of the president, a future Joe McCarthy could subpoena a future Franklin Roosevelt.  I usually like Breyer.  Not this time.  In this case he was using a Reductio Ad Absurdum argument .  He was using the most absurd hypothetical possible to attack a reasonable proposition.  It seemed like Breyer was so fervent in his argument that he might vote with tRUMP.  I don't know how he can ignore the legitimate legislative concerns of Congress.

Alito asked an interesting question.  He asked if the president can be used as a case study for potential legislation.

          Sotomeyor had a great reference to an earlier Supreme Court case which said that a subpoena is valid if there is any conceivable reason to issue the subpoena. 

            Kagan made the point that there have been hardly any prior similar cases because Congress and the president have always come to an accommodation.  In this case, tRUMP refused any accommodation.

             Roberts asked if tRUMP's position is that the court must probe the mental processes of Congress to see if this is a pretext.

               tRUMP's attorney said that Congress needs to show the legislation it is proposing in order to justify the subpoena.  Ginsberg pointed out that legislation comes about only after investigation, not before.

                 At one point tRUMP's attorney said that there needs to be a higher standard to subpoena the President.  Ginsberg asked how did that work out in the Paula Jones case.  She was cut off before the attorney could answer.

                Kagan brought up that in the Paula Jones case, Clinton argued that a deposition placed an undue burden on him.  The Supreme Court rejected that argument.

                  Gorsuch asked an excellent question.  Would it be a legitimate subpoena if Congress was investigating whether it should pass a law requiring presidents to disclose their tax returns.  tRUMP's lawyer answered "Yes."  As far as I'm concerned that question and answer should end the discussion.  Gorsuch followed up by saying the Whitewater subpoena was very much like this subpoena.  

             At some point tRUMP's lawyer said that the House had never articulated a legislative purpose for the subpoena.  The House attorney  said that the legislative purpose  was laid out in pages 17-36 of its brief.

              In the House case there is an issue of separation of powers.  That issue is not involved in the NY case.  I believe there are two big issues in the House case.  First,  did the house have a legitimate purpose for issuing the subpoena?  Second, does the Subpoena place an undue burden on the president?    I believe both issues should be decided in favor of the House.  Regarding the first issue,  the House set forth multiple reasons it had for wanting the tax returns.  Regarding the second issue, none of tRUMP's attorneys detailed how subpoenaing  the records would place and undue burden on the president.  If I had been representing the House, I would have argued that there is not only no undue burden, in fact, there is no burden whatsoever.  The accounting firm would turn over the records.  tRUIMP could go on being president and playing golf. It was impossible, however to read where the Court was going.    I worry that the justices will rule that the Congressional subpoenas violate the separation of powers doctrine.  I don't buy it because  Congress had legitimate legislative reasons to get the records.  But then again, I am not a Supreme Court justice. 

          It turns out that the NY case is more compelling than the House case.   Even Jay Sekulow admitted that there is nothing improper for the district attorney to do a criminal investigation of the President.  Sekulow drew the line, however, at issuing a subpoena.  He argued that a sitting president has absolute temporary immunity.  He had to concede to Justice Thomas  that such immunity is not written anywhere.  I was waiting for a justice to ask about immunity in the setting of the President shooting someone on Fifth Avenue, but no one asked the question.  

        In the NY case tRUMP was represented by Sekulow and the solicitor general of the United States.  They both brought up the ridiculous argument that there are 2300 county district attorneys in the United States.  If Cyrus Vance is allowed to Subpoena the president's records, that would open a Pandora's box allowing 2300 prosecutors to file law suits.  The NY attorney shot that argument down.  tRUMP lived in NY and his business enterprise was located in NY.  There is no jurisdiction in the 2300 other counties.

      I know this is an extraordinarily long e mail.  Trust me, I have enough notes to make it twice as long.  Let me just summarize.  tRUMP's side says that answering the subpoena would place an undue burden on him.  Remember the subpoenas were not issued to him but to his accountants. Throughout the argument I never heard a description by tRUMP's attorneys of the undue burden.  On the other side, I did not hear a good argument refuting the undue burden argument.  Second,  everyone seems to agree that subpoenaing the president requires a higher standard than subpoenaing an ordinary person.  Congress and NY both argue that the higher standard was well met.  Third, there is the issue as to whether Congress issued the subpoena for the purely political reason of harassing the president.  This was Sekulow's argument.  No matter how the Supreme Court rules, I can't imagine it will buy Sekulow's argument.

         As I said at the outset, it is impossible to read how  the the Court is going based upon today's oral arguments.  I thought Thomas and Gorsuch asked good questions which would seem to favor the legitimacy of the subpoenas.  But Breyer gives me pause.  It would be fantastic if this court followed the Supreme Court precedent in Watergate and unanimously rule against the president.  But this is a completely different time and court.  I would be happy with a five-four ruling against tRUMP.  My prediction is that the Supreme Court will send the NY case back to the lower court to investigate whether there was  a legitimate reason to investigate a possible crime.  This would conveniently prevent the turn over of records until after the election.  I worry that the court will rule against The House based upon the separation of powers doctrine.  I would hope that at a minimum the Supreme Court will send the House case back for a determination as to whether there was a legitimate legislative purpose.  We should know the decision by the end of June.


Saturday, May 9, 2020

Bill Roy Cohn Barr

 tRUMP infamously said, "where is my Roy Cohn?"  At that time tRUMP was upset that Jeff Sessions acted ethically in recusing himself from the Russia investigation  tRUMP wanted an unethical attorney general.  Roy Cohen was a poster child  for unethical lawyers.  tRUMP now has his Roy Cohn.

      Yesterday, Bill Roy Cohn  Barr (hereafter referred to as BRCB) made an unprecedented motion to dismiss the conviction of Michael Flynn.  Please remember how that conviction came about.  Flynn had inappropriate contacts with the Russian ambassador. Then Flynn lied to Pence about his contacts.  Then tRUMP fired Flynn for lying to Pence.  Then Pence pleaded guilty to lying to federal investigators.  Flynn was scheduled to be sentenced on his guilty plea  on 12/18/18.  Prior to sentencing his attorneys submitted a sentencing memo saying that Flynn was unfairly tricked into pleading guilty.  At that hearing the judge made it clear that he would not guarantee that Flynn would not be incarcerated.  The judge said it appeared that Flynn may have betrayed his country.  The judge asked if Flynn wanted to withdraw his guilty plea.  Flynn did not.  The judge asked Flynn if he was pleading guilty because he was guilty.  Flynn answered "yes."  Please remember that Flynn not only pleaded guilty twice, but he was required to agree to a written detailed statement of facts describing his crime.  
       Now along comes BRCB.  He was previously excoriated by a huge number of former U.S. attorneys as well as many legal scholars for contradicting his line prosecutors' sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone.  Up to that point, no  one could recall an attorney general doing such a thing.  Now  BRCB  has  his previous improper interference in the judicial system as a precedent.  But this is far worse.  And it is scary.  Barr  is literally the  consigliori for  the tRUMP criminal enterprise.  He is in a position to help his criminal friends and prosecute  his political enemies.  This sounds very much like Stalin's courts of justice.  

         Barr's motion to dismiss does not deny that Flynn lied.  He merely asserts that the lies were not "material."  This is a defense which had been available to Flynn at any time.  When he pleaded guilty his attorneys knew that materiality was an element of the crime. 

        This story is barely 24 hours old.  I predict that the outrage in the legal community will be far greater than the outrage over the Stone imbroglio.  I am hoping that BRCB suffers the same fate before the bar of justice as did Roy Cohn, tRUMP's hero.  Roy Cohn was disbarred by  the New York State bar for unethical and unprofessional conduct.  One of the charges against Cohn was that he put a pen into a comatose client's hand and scrawled a signature on a will.  The will  made a huge bequest to Cohn.   I will be asking my colleagues who are much more knowledgeable about the canons of ethics whether Barr may be subject to disbarment proceedings.

             And how about this for closing the circle.  In 1979, Roger Stone was employed by the Reagan for president campaign.  During that time Stone stayed at Roy Cohn's townhouse in Manhattan.  Cohn had a scheme to put John Anderson on the Liberal Party ballot for president.  This would presumably split the opposition to Reagan.  It worked.  Reagan carried New York State with 46% of the vote.  Stone told the story that at one point Cohn gave him a suitcase to be delivered to a prominent attorney for the Liberal Party.  Cohn  told Stone not to open the suitcase.  Years later Stone said that he assumed that the contents of the suitcase were a bribe.

                So tRUMP wanted his Roy Cohn  He has him.  His Roy Cohn interfered in the criminal case involving Cohn's old buddy  Roger Stone.  In my view Roger Stone will never see the inside of a jail cell.  Either tRUMP will pardon Roy Cohn's buddy, or he will have his consigliori do the dirty work.  I said it long ago, this will go down in history as by far the most corrupt presidency ever.  God willing it will end soon.  And if it does, a new attorney general may look into the activities of the tRUMP continuing criminal enterprise.
             On that optimistic note, stay safe.


Thursday, May 7, 2020

More tRUMP

As we know, tRUMP creates a major story  every day, sometimes two or three.  I
 The last several days have been no exception.   I will write about a couple.

        In some ways it is easy to figure out tRUMP.  He is a simple minded person who cannot think past the next hour.  At other times he has an actual long range strategy.  I think his disgusting support of the Michigan demonstrators is a combination of both.

       In the last 3 1/2 years practically nothing has stuck to tRUMP.  Any one of a number of scandals would have sunk any other president.  There is one exception to the Teflon man, namely his comments after Charlottesville.  tRUMP said that there were very fine people on both sides.  That comment was universally condemned by Republicans and Democrats.  tRUMP and his handlers twisted themselves in knots trying to do damage control, but to know avail  The comment will be stuck to tRUMP forever.  A normal human  being would never make the same mistake again.   The  word "normal' can never be used in the same sentence with "tRUMP".

        In Lansing there were thugs armed with assault weapons.  There were confederate flags.  There were swastikas. There were nooses.  tRUMP's response was to say these were very good people but they were angry.  If there is one person whom I don't want to be angry it is a nut job carrying an AK 47.  Is it possible that these angry people were angry because tRUMP tweeted  "liberate Michigan"? There is nothing good about people carrying confederate flags or swastikas.   There is nothing good about people congregating in close quarters without masks thus  endangering themselves and others. tRUMP is unable to keep his mouth shut or his twitter finger in check.  Why in the world would he repeat his Charlottesville gaffe?  My guess is that there are two factors.  First, he is incapable of learning a lesson.  Second, he has a long range strategy to keep his base happy. 

         Can anyone name the Secretary of the Interior?  It is David Bernhardt.  His qualification to be Secretary Of The Interior is that he was a lobbyist for the oil, gas and mining industries.  He has been found to violate environmental laws.  He has all kinds of conflicts of interests.  He has scuttled scientific analyses.  And, of course, he is a tRUMP sycophant.  Bernhardt  is every bit as corrupt as his predecessor Ryan Zinke.  He usually stays below the radar.  But this week he became a huge blip on the radar screen.  He violated a law concerning the Lincoln Memorial.  The law explicitly prohibits any events taking place inside the Lincoln Memorial. But that's where tRUMP wanted to hold his Fox News "town hall".  Bernhardt, knowing full well the prohibition, nevertheless announced that because the town hall was an important public event he was waiving the prohibition.   In the town hall tRUMP as is typical lied about the venue.  He said he knew nothing about the choice and merely assumed that Fox had arranged it.  If you believe that, you may want to purchase the Lincoln Memorial from tRUMP.

          Then there is tRUMP Virus news.  There is no doubt that China delayed and lied about the virus up to a point.  In late January, however China publicly announced the danger of a pandemic.  Since that time, the well documented bungled response by tRUMP has without question cost lives and an economic disaster.  In order to deflect criticism of this administration, tRUMP and Pompeo have gone after China.   This is not a legitimate argument.  It is a conspiracy theory based diversion.  Here is how we know.  Richard Grenell the uber  tRUMP loyalist director of national intelligence has stated that there is no evidence that the virus originated in a Wuhan laboratory.  This was directly contradicted by Pompeo on Sunday when he said there was "enormous" evidence that the virus originated in the Wuhan lab.  Given Grenell's statement, you know that Pompeo's statement is a bald faced lie.  There is zero evidence. But to seal the deal, on Monday the National Geographic published an article about Dr. Fauci.  Fauci stated that the overwhelming scientific evidence shows that the virus originated in an animal, probably a bat, and jumped species to humans.  He went further to say that chasing the Wuhan lab theory is a waste of time.  

              tRUMP stories  never end.  In fact, they   almost write themselves.  Thank you tRUMP for extending my writing career.  Thanks for listening.  Stay well.  Stay safe.


Friday, May 1, 2020


The classic definition of chutzpah is a man who killed his parents asking a judge for mercy because he's an orphan.  There are a million examples of tRUMP'S chutzpah and that of his criminal gang.  Let me give just a couple.

      tRUMP lies about things big and small.  He lies when he doesn't have to.  His lies often make no sense.  His lies are easily exposed.  And yet, he simply can't help himself.  I think it is the ultimate example of chutzpah to lie when the truth is easily exposed.  In a  press conference last week,  he blurted out that he hadn't left  the White House for months.  He said the only time he left the White House was to go to Virginia to kiss the hospital ship. He was pressed about  a rally he had held in March.  His response, " I don't know anything about a rally.  Did I do a rally?  I don't know anything about a rally."  He then went to another reporter. Of course he knew about the rally.   Lying is simply what he does.  As for his claim about staying in the White House for months, he had 5 rallies in February in addition to the one in March.  On top of that he spent a number of prolonged weekends in January and February at Mar A Lago.   So this lie will soon be forgotten as a torrent of future lies smack us in the face.

           Talk about Chutzpah, how can we forget Ivanka?  She has very publicly advocated staying at home during the  crisis.  Then she, Jared and family went to their New Jersey country club for Passover.  They claim that the closed country club was in effect a personal residence therefor they were merely traveling from one personal residence to another.  This was their official line.  Of course it's nonsense.  What we don't know and will probably never know is whether Kushner's  extended family attended the Seder.  I  can't imagine the little nuclear family sitting in an empty dining room waited on by servants.  I don't want to waste more than 10 seconds thinking about the Seder. But what gets me is the incredible chutzpah to be tRUMP's principle advisor, to advocate behavior for every person in the  United States, and then to publicly flaunt her  disregard for the behavior  she advocated.

         This brings me to Pence.  Talk about Chutzpah!  He was told explicitly by the Mayo Clinic that he needed to wear a mask.  Not only did he not wear a mask, but he stood in a crowded room and hovered over a patient.  His excuse was that he has been tested frequently  and was negative.  Was he tested that day?  He might have been tested the day before, or the week before.  Equally as important, testing appears to have a false negative rate in the area of 25%.  And finally,  he is supposed to be a role model.  If people see him in a crowded hospital room without a mask, they will think it's okay, just as it must be okay to drink Lysol if the president says it's okay.

         Here is what I don't get.  What;s the bid deal about wearing a mask?  Trump says he will never wear a mask.  Now Pence  will follow his fearless leader's example.  Just wear the f...ing mask.

       I just want to leave you with one more thing.  David Frum is an extremely conservative political commentator.  He was a speech writer for George W. Bush.  He despises tRUMP.  It remains a mystery why there is not a significant percentage of traditional Republicans who  feel exactly the same.  In any event,  here is Frum's most recent tweet:

                               For an extreme NPD (narcissistic personality disorder)
                               case like Donald Trump the lives and troubles of 
                               other people are remote, incomprehensible, less real
                               to him and infinitely less important  than an incorrectly 
                               melted slice of cheese on his day's hamburger.

          That says it all.  Take care.  Stay Safe.


Michigan Protest

As many Michiganders are aware, about 1000 of our ‘lesser intellect’ citizens descended upon Lansing today to protest against an extension of Governor Whitmer’s emergency powers (not the stay-at-home order...they seem not to know what the Legislature was voting on today, but I digress).
As you may also have heard, three of these critters were in Lansing yesterday seeking entry into a closed Capitol, with the result that 2 of the 3 were physically removed after refusing to leave after multiple requests and becoming belligerent. One of whom, a loud mouthed twit from Ann Arbor..Wendy Darling..walked out of the gallery and immediately called for an ambulance claiming she had been assaulted (by the Capitol police). As she continued filming herself, she fell into hysterics and began screaming and crying, explaining she suffered from PTSD. Eventually she was whisked away to the hospital, released and sent home. She did not return to Lansing today.
The other ‘ladies’ (pictured above) are Audra Johnson and Shelley Gregoire, from Grand Rapids and Battle Creek, respectively. They returned today and can be heard quite loudly urging insurrection inside the Capitol. They both brought their ‘security’ with them today....the rednecks with the guns. Giggling throughout their videos the whole time about this...it was ‘funny’.
BTW...Shelley Gregoire is also a candidate for State Representative...she’s the short bumpkin with glasses.
Honestly, these hayseeds make me embarrassed to be a Michigander. These 3 went looking for a fight yesterday...and they got it. And damned if they didn’t look for the same today. I’m sure they’re disappointed tonight.
As for the others in Lansing today, I’d just have to ask, ‘What in the world is wrong with you?!?!?! No masks, no social distancing, NO FCUKING REGARD for anyone but themselves! Kudos to the MSP and Capitol police who had to endure these degenerates yelling and screaming in their faces (without masks over theirs). 
Absolutely disgusted with this appalling display of ignorance. You want to work? Plenty of places are hiring. You want to contract the ‘Rona?!?! That’s fine too (#Culltheherd). Just remember you may be bringing the disease to your family. But more disgustingly, you may be bringing it to innocents and those unaware of your callous disregard for others.
These Darwin candidates need to remember one basic principle...YOUR rights end where MINE begin!