It’s in the Constitution: The right to not put your bag in the overhead shall not be infringed.
“I will do what’s right. I don’t care if it costs me an election,”
Yes, that’s because you’ll just claim it was stolen from you.
23 years ago, that sort of talk would get you in SO much trouble… glad those days are over, phew!!
To prove that they’re the alpha in any situation. It’s an authoritarian mindset, which believes that being in charge means abusing others and being an asshole. It’s not more complex than the bullies we grew up with in school. Most of them never grew out of believing that the way to get ahead is to make others feel small.
“I don’t care if the school principal gets mad at me, or the county commissioners get upset with me, or if the flight attendants kick me off the plane. I will do what’s right and answer the call.”
“answer the call” …of what? nature?
If they talk to you like you need to listen to them. Because real Americans don’t take orders. They go where they want and do what they want. They don’t need to put on their masks or unload their guns or wash their hands after using the toilet. They don’t need to be considerate…you should be ready to explain yourself to them. It’s a mistake that they need to pay taxes or obey the courts. America is all about freedom to act like a selfish toddler, and if someone suggests for one moment a real American deserves less, they should be ready to show them just how big a screaming fit they can make.
Oh and in case folks are so inclined…
Another loyalty test for the MAGA crowd. If they will risk prison and martyrdom for air piracy, then she knows that the success of The Insurrection - Part 2 will be more certain.
I could make an exception, dependent on the launch system.
That drive from Central Kansas to Eastern Colorado at night is very unstimulating and from experience can be very hard to stay away awake on. Just saying…
“Answering the call” often refers to urinating on whatever’s handy, which would not make MAGAs popular and could get them arrested. So… GO FOR IT, ALL YOU “PATRIOTS”! TELL THEM BOEBERT SENT YA!
" [Members of Congress] shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace , be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."
I wonder if the TSA No-Fly list could be used to prevent a member of Congress from traveling to DC. And yeah, Breach of the Peace probably covers it. But there’s a case to be made that they can’t. That said, it would be an interesting road test for a mostly obscure part of the Constitution.
Doesn’t mean individual airlines couldn’t ban her. And they ought to.
When they tell you who and what they are believe them. We saw it J6
This is a great place for constitutional interpretation to come into play. From a strictly textualism view, I agree. But Originalism would point you to the notion that Members of Congress are supposed to be able to get to Congress (as it’s part of the Speech & Debate Clause) so, what if the police just blocked off every bridge and road into DC – they aren’t being detained and you are free to go anywhere except to Congress. But that can’t possibly be the result here, so Arrest has to mean something broader than that.
Just three airlines go into Grand Junction and only two of them - American and United - have connecting flights to the East. All they have to do is say nope.
Anyway, I just like when odd parts of the Constitution get litigated. See, e.g., Engblom and Palmer v. Carey, et at. 677 F.2d 957 (2d Cir. 1982), the leading Third Amendment case.
If I ran an airline, I would decline to sell her a ticket after this commentary. “You have the right to say what you want, but I believe your words mean you intend to disrupt my business. Kindly fuck right off.”
At least make her sit in a dirty restroom for the entire flight. Lock the door on her.
What did she actually say? Reminds me of Peter Sellers and his Party Political Speech conclusion Peter Sellers - Party Political Speech (1958) a Half-Century on - YouTube
She’s an actual terrorist and as such she wants to use terrorism to hurt and control the population of the US because she knows they won’t ever democratically arrive at her desired outcome so this is her shot?
And she’s doing it. Right in front of us. Watch: does anybody really stop her?
If we are lucky she will be voted out eventually I guess. If her terrorism fails or backfires I guess maybe that could happen.
What astounding freedom of speech! That freedom won’t be here long if she gets her way.
