The Urge to Control

This is the personality of the people we are electing to higher office.  They have such an urge for control that they will not allow cell phone pictures taken of them in public.  By personality, these people have to control everything.  Is it really any surprise when they turn around and read our email?

From the article at the fabulous Photography is Not a Crime:

Hillary Clinton’s henchmen snatched a smartphone from a man who had photographed her giving a speech in Miami Thursday, deleting the image before returning the phone.

“That’s American politics,” one of the individuals in charge of preventing the presidential hopeful from being photographed told a Miami Herald reporter covering the meeting.

No, that’s Russian politics. Or Chinese politics. Or Cuban politics.

By the way (and I could be wrong here) Carlos Miller strikes me as much more Occupy than Tea Party in his political preferences.  But he obviously doesn't pull any punches on his issue (legality of public photography) when his team is involved.


  1. notmyrealname:

    "Carlos Miller strikes me as much more Occupy than Tea Party in his political preferences." Some elements of Occupy and some elements of Tea Party are extremely close, except for hair style and mode of dress.

    They'd never admit it. But each has a big distrust of government. Then each starts picking parts of the government it trusts, and that's when they diverge.

    To oversimplify, Occupy trusts the EPA and anything that sounds like Consumer Protection. Tea Party trusts the military and the cops. In both cases, there is no logical reason for picking that part of the government to trust to the exclusion of others.

  2. norse:

    There is an argument to be made here (and I believe Douglas Adams made it years ago), that anyone we elect to run our lives for us who actually *wants* the job is - by definition - unfit to do it properly. I agree that our politics of today would be shocking to Americans of a few decades ago and are much more like the Soviet/3rd World antics we used to be able to make fun of. What I fail to see is the canonical "here's how we fix this", unless we start a mandatory draft of folks for political office who have absolutely no interest of serving in one...

  3. mesaeconoguy:

    I'm shocked - SHOCKED - that the economy is so currently fucked up (by leftists).

  4. Matthew Slyfield:

    You are wrong, it got so fucked up by both parties working together for their interest above the peoples interests.

  5. mesaeconoguy:

    Agreed, but let's be specific: The Collective Interest became a central plank of leftists, right around 1928.

  6. mesaeconoguy:

    There is now no way out.

    We have collectivized our stupidity enough that the exit plan is now gone.

    I have my towel; where’s yours?


  7. mesaeconoguy:

    Actually back in the 1840s in Europe

    But here/US around 1928.

  8. Matthew Slyfield:

    Yes there is a way out. The collectivists will always eventually run out of other peoples money. Then the system collapses under its own weight.

    Burn the rubble to ash, Salt the ground it sprang from and start over.

    It won't be fun, but it is a way out.

  9. mesaeconoguy:

    What happens when the source of funds/resources runs out?

  10. Henry IX:

    “If any man aspires to any office he is sure never to compass
    it." --Thomas More, Utopia

  11. Matthew Slyfield:

    "the system collapses under its own weight."

    Then if we are ready we can build an new system and start over.

  12. mesaeconoguy:

    I fear that is precisely where we are headed.

  13. Matthew Slyfield:

    Personally, I would worry more about ending up in a road warrior movie than the trash compactor on the death star. :)

  14. Matthew Slyfield:

    I did mention that getting there wouldn't be fun.

  15. mesaeconoguy:

    Note to self: stockpile gas instead.

  16. mesaeconoguy:

    In all seriously, we have such fabulous legal minds out there, when SHTF, that we have a very deep bench when violence erupts.

  17. mesaeconoguy:

    We also have excellent snipers.

  18. desconhecido:

    I like Miller's website (though not as much as yours), but I think he blew it on this one, and I say this in as friendly a way as possible, so did you.

    If you read Miller's article carefully you find that the event was not a public event so it's incorrect to write that the photograph was taken in public. In addition, the rules, apparently, were publicized and known: neither photography nor voice recordings was to be permitted.

    As a result of reading the Miami Herald article that Miller quotes, I also doubt that the description of the phone being "snatched" or swiped is accurate. Sounds like our protagonist was observed taking photographs at an event after at least implicitly agreeing with the no-photo rule. Probably the security person asked the man to surrender his camera and he did.

    Note the man's explanation -- he deliberately violated the rules for his own trivial personal reasons -- rules that he implicitly agreed to.

    The Hillary dog had no write to demand the phone and no right to delete the photo without the photographer's consent -- what he should have done was to escort the perpetrator from the venue for violating the rules; what is sometimes called trespassing him out.

  19. Gil:

    "The collectivists will always eventually run out of other peoples money."

    Said by Libertarians for at least the past 50 years now.

  20. Matthew Slyfield:

    And they are all correct, it just takes a while. I don't profess to know how long it will take in the US, but it will happen eventually.

  21. Matthew Slyfield:

    The collectivists in Greece have already run out of other peoples money if you really need proof.

  22. MNHawk:

    "“I wanted to take pictures for my girls; I have four girls,” Rothberg,
    who was writing a piece about the conference for Boca Raton-based Grey
    Matters Magazine, told the Miami Herald."

    Bet he still votes for Clinton. Those bending over, asking for another, know no better.