So that's the newest presidential hashtag campaign: #DoSomething.
We can all understand Obama's intense desire to be seen as active and engaged, but championing the TSA's "no fly" list as a way of stopping…what, exactly? Terrorism? Gun crime? Mass shootings? Jeez, that's just sad.
Whatever else you can say about it, the government's no-fly list is a travesty of justice. As Scott Shackford noted here just a few hours ago, the ACLU is suing the government over its random and unfair administration of the list, which keeps people from being able to travel freely within the United States. As Shackford summarizes it, "The way the federal government under Obama has managed the no-fly list is already a fairly clear violation of our Fifth Amendment right to due process of law."
So here's a new and improved hashtag/twee that Obama, who used to brag about being a constitutional law prof back when the stuff mattered to him and Democrats, might want to adopt:
#DueProcess beats #DoSomething every day, but especially in a free society.
Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com
posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary
period.
Subscribe
here to preserve your ability to comment. Your
Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the
digital
edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do
not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments
do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and
ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
reminds me of my little brother's old rec league basketball coach. Guy had no idea what he was doing. During games he could be seen running up and down the sidelines yelling "DO SOMETHING! DOOOO SOMETHING!" Since he didn't really coach the kids, they had no idea what it was they were supposed to do, they lost every game
That said, the counter-campaign should be called DueSomething.
"If you're too dangerous to board a plane/You should, like, be given a speedy jury trial and, if convicted, put in jail, or whatever. #DueSomething"
"If you're too dangerous to board a plane/It's irrelevant, because you're presumed innocent until the state provides evidence of guilt sufficient to convince a jury of your peers. #DueSomething"
If you're too dangerous to board a plane, then why are you able to operate outside prison or within the U.S.? Simply prosecute these people based on the evidence the government has that you are dangerous. In the event that the evidence is inadequate, get warrants and investigate the suspect. Then prosecute or remove from the list.
especially sad coming from a constitutional law prof.
Referring to him as a 'constitutional law prof' is is even more sad. Some people should hang their diplomas so they face the wall when they read this kind of shit.
Yes, he was not a professor nor even any kind of scholar. He was, at the time, a useful idiot who was paid to spread generic left-wing propaganda to college students.
Nope, the reference needs to be made every single time he tries to pull this bullshit. It highlights how meaningless that title was, so the next time they try it people will be inoculated.
Oh, by the way, using my best understanding of the arguments I've seen over the years, denying people guns because they're on a no-fly list would be racist, I think?
Let me repeat this quote showing the logical endpoint once we start taking away people's rights by administrative order, without a proper trial. First it's the right to travel by plane, then it's the right to bear arms, and if we're logical, it soon becomes this:
"...At the order of the minister, a person deemed a communist, a terrorist, a member of a banned organization, or otherwise a threat to the security and public order of the state could be confined to his home or immediate surroundings, prohibited from meeting with more than one person at a time (other than his family), forced to resign any offices in any organization, prohibited from speaking publicly or writing for any publication, and barred from certain areas, buildings, and institutions, such as law courts, schools, and newspaper offices. Moreover, the banned person could not be quoted in any publication. The effect was to render the banned person a public nonentity. Opponents of the apartheid regime could be banned on the whim of a minister or even a local police officer and be deprived of any legal safeguards in the event of their disappearance or death. From 1950 to 1990 more than 2,000 people were banned in South Africa, such as ANC leader Albert Luthuli, who was banned and confined to his home for lengthy periods of time in the 1950s."
"The revolution is successful. But survival depends on drastic measures. Your continued existence represents a threat to the well-being of society. Your lives mean slow death to the more valued members of the colony. Therefore, I have no alternative but to sentence you to death.
Your execution is so ordered, signed Kodos, Governor of Tarsus IV."
I just remembered - when the apartheid government issued a banning order, the cops personally served it on the target individual. It wasn't filed away somewhere, its existence denied even when the person got hassled for violating it.
The left loves its gun bans, but (traditionally, anyways) isn't too fond of national-security based government lists.
The right is (traditionally) more than happy to back up these lists and their efficacy, but ain't so hot on gun bans.
Our fucking President, OTOH, is all for promoting both -- in a way that is more banal than your average slacktivist campaign to #SaveTibet. It's fucking amazing that this man was chosen to be the most powerful person in the world at this moment in time.
No, we're due for one last attempt to restore the republic, which will appear to begin working, then we'll finally get the competent tyrant we've been begging for.
Yes, because then they'd have to admit things in open court which might be embarassing, (ie, fuckups like the typo mentioned below by Paul. Or they'd have to admit that the no-fly designation was the result of secret evidence.
BTW, I told you the whole no-fly list process was too valuable, which is why they claimed that woman got on the no-fly list based on a typo. The government lied to everyone, including the courts precisely so they could keep then no-fly list in place and we let them get away with it.
So, WTF is that logo beside the hashtag just below "Congress needs to close this loophole now"?
It looks like a candle with one of those anti-drip hand shields, such as the candles often carried by those at memorial vigils (vigilantes?). It also looks suspiciously like the Amnesty International logo which is a candle wrapped in barb wire. Just when you thought this administration could not be any worse they go and disappoint you.
Ugh, so easy to blindly throw your support behind a random catch-phrase without thinking about it. Unfortunately, that's how government around the world is run.
OK. Now prove beyond a reasonable doubt, in public and on record, that all of the people on the no-fly list are too dangerous to be on a plane.
Hell, I'd like to see him prove it even by just the preponderance of the evidence.
Shut the fuck up, Barack Obama.
No airplane seat for you!
Sincerely, the airplane seat Nazi.
#STFUBarry
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
The hashtag is actually "DoSomething".
You can't make this shit up. Top Men.
Coming soon: #DoSomethingNow
Followed by #DoAnythingComeOnPlease
#TapTapIsThisThingOn
#dosomethinganythingitdoesntmatterwhat
#WheresMyTeleprompter
#DooDooSomething
Dude, our fucking TOP MEN are more high school level idiots than most high schoolers. It's amazing.
If only all their power could be taken away and they could be filmed in all their idiocy.
reminds me of my little brother's old rec league basketball coach. Guy had no idea what he was doing. During games he could be seen running up and down the sidelines yelling "DO SOMETHING! DOOOO SOMETHING!" Since he didn't really coach the kids, they had no idea what it was they were supposed to do, they lost every game
Ha. Like stupid soccer coaches who yell RUN! And 'ATTACK' for nothing.
I HATED those coaches.
Sometimes the players actually need this though. Like Liverpool in every other match where they're just standing around looking dazed.
Yeah but to some coaches it's a means to an end.
Good God, there's nothing more useless than the football coach that just yells "Hit somebody!" all through the game.
Let DoSomethings out themselves, I say.
That said, the counter-campaign should be called DueSomething.
"If you're too dangerous to board a plane/You should, like, be given a speedy jury trial and, if convicted, put in jail, or whatever. #DueSomething"
"If you're too dangerous to board a plane/It's irrelevant, because you're presumed innocent until the state provides evidence of guilt sufficient to convince a jury of your peers. #DueSomething"
I love this and if I was on the Twitter, I would totally do that.
It's perfect. I'm going to now have to go around and explain Reason memes to family members, so they too can enjoy the ridiculousness.
It's like they don't know the politician's syllogism is a joke
That would also be a good hijack of the hashtag. "We must do something/This is something; therefore we must do it. #DoSomething"
#DoSomething
#ThisIsSomething
#DoThis!
Please, somebody who is the twitters start attaching these to the Obama campaign.
Due something is right.
'Dew something' is about the right intellectual tone.
Due faux pas.
Doin' the Dew!
Or maybe "doo" given the things they are likely to do.
"Too dangerous to board a plane."
Assumes facts not in evidence.
Due something something.
If you're too dangerous to board a plane, then why are you able to operate outside prison or within the U.S.? Simply prosecute these people based on the evidence the government has that you are dangerous. In the event that the evidence is inadequate, get warrants and investigate the suspect. Then prosecute or remove from the list.
especially sad coming from a constitutional law prof.
Referring to him as a 'constitutional law prof' is is even more sad. Some people should hang their diplomas so they face the wall when they read this kind of shit.
Lecturer.
Adjunct. Without scholarly publications, which makes him also not a legal scholar.
So many lies needed to prop up our supposed betters. Odd.
Yes, he was not a professor nor even any kind of scholar. He was, at the time, a useful idiot who was paid to spread generic left-wing propaganda to college students.
Nope, the reference needs to be made every single time he tries to pull this bullshit. It highlights how meaningless that title was, so the next time they try it people will be inoculated.
Seems about right when you consider that most of constitutional law is finding ways to avoid the plain meaning of the constitution.
#DoSomething is the most truthful Twitter campaign I've seen in a long, long time.
I accept your resignation.
#DoSomething
Oh, by the way, using my best understanding of the arguments I've seen over the years, denying people guns because they're on a no-fly list would be racist, I think?
+1
Let me repeat this quote showing the logical endpoint once we start taking away people's rights by administrative order, without a proper trial. First it's the right to travel by plane, then it's the right to bear arms, and if we're logical, it soon becomes this:
"...At the order of the minister, a person deemed a communist, a terrorist, a member of a banned organization, or otherwise a threat to the security and public order of the state could be confined to his home or immediate surroundings, prohibited from meeting with more than one person at a time (other than his family), forced to resign any offices in any organization, prohibited from speaking publicly or writing for any publication, and barred from certain areas, buildings, and institutions, such as law courts, schools, and newspaper offices. Moreover, the banned person could not be quoted in any publication. The effect was to render the banned person a public nonentity. Opponents of the apartheid regime could be banned on the whim of a minister or even a local police officer and be deprived of any legal safeguards in the event of their disappearance or death. From 1950 to 1990 more than 2,000 people were banned in South Africa, such as ANC leader Albert Luthuli, who was banned and confined to his home for lengthy periods of time in the 1950s."
"The revolution is successful. But survival depends on drastic measures. Your continued existence represents a threat to the well-being of society. Your lives mean slow death to the more valued members of the colony. Therefore, I have no alternative but to sentence you to death.
Your execution is so ordered, signed Kodos, Governor of Tarsus IV."
I just remembered - when the apartheid government issued a banning order, the cops personally served it on the target individual. It wasn't filed away somewhere, its existence denied even when the person got hassled for violating it.
If you're too uninformed to defend due process
You're too dangerous to lead a country
Voters should fix this problem.
#dosomethingintelligent
On a related act of theatrical nonsense...is Obama still issuing his issue-theme-based Spotify playlists?
What it would be for a terrorist attack?
Rock the Casbah?
She Shot Me Down (Bang Bang)?
Hey Man, Nice Shot?
sounds like we need an amendment affirming the right to fly.
+1 moon door
Do-Somethingism is a mental affliction. Sufferers should be prohibited from flying, voting or running for office.
It's interesting, isn't it?
The left loves its gun bans, but (traditionally, anyways) isn't too fond of national-security based government lists.
The right is (traditionally) more than happy to back up these lists and their efficacy, but ain't so hot on gun bans.
Our fucking President, OTOH, is all for promoting both -- in a way that is more banal than your average slacktivist campaign to #SaveTibet. It's fucking amazing that this man was chosen to be the most powerful person in the world at this moment in time.
Really, how far are we from fascism? We should do a pool.
how far are we from fascism
Hard to say, without an electron microscope.
No, we're due for one last attempt to restore the republic, which will appear to begin working, then we'll finally get the competent tyrant we've been begging for.
Really, how far are we from fascism?
Well, we sped through the gates a few years ago, so pretty far I'd imagine.
We been there since 1/20/09.
Too dangerous to charge with a crime and prosecute?
No, it's far too perilous.
Yes, because then they'd have to admit things in open court which might be embarassing, (ie, fuckups like the typo mentioned below by Paul. Or they'd have to admit that the no-fly designation was the result of secret evidence.
Secret evidence. Hmmm, how does that work with the due process requirement again?
With their chief weapons, of course.
BTW, I told you the whole no-fly list process was too valuable, which is why they claimed that woman got on the no-fly list based on a typo. The government lied to everyone, including the courts precisely so they could keep then no-fly list in place and we let them get away with it.
So, WTF is that logo beside the hashtag just below "Congress needs to close this loophole now"?
It looks like a candle with one of those anti-drip hand shields, such as the candles often carried by those at memorial vigils (vigilantes?). It also looks suspiciously like the Amnesty International logo which is a candle wrapped in barb wire. Just when you thought this administration could not be any worse they go and disappoint you.
Rufus staring at dead body.
Rufus's clone: DO SOMETHING!
Usually, the person who says 'do something' they're without ideas or thought.
Nice Freudian slip.
"The politician's syllogism, also known as the politician's logic or the politician's fallacy, is a logical fallacy of the form:
We must do something
This is something
Therefore, we must do this.
#didsomething - every other President in the history of the U.S.A.
#AmateurPrez
Ugh, so easy to blindly throw your support behind a random catch-phrase without thinking about it. Unfortunately, that's how government around the world is run.