As fat as these?
Posted on 10/09/2011 5:44:47 PM PDT by OL Hickory
"My client will not be bullied out of exercising his First Amendment right to make clear his belief that your client is a spoiled, brainless twit who is cheapening the political discourse in this country"
Mike Riggs | October 5, 2011
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
OOOOPS...”Dose of reality” (sorry fat fingers)
I thoroughly enjoyed that letter. Thanks!
As fat as these?
Context, please? Something?
Although I do not envy you the Herculean task before you, please make sure your client understands the potential consequences to her personally – in addition to those her attorney would face – for pursuing this ill-advised course of action.
That letter is, like, awesome, and stuff!
Spoiled, rich, fat and stupid is no way to go though life...
I almost forgot arrogant and petty....
I can almost hear her say “daddy make them stop”
Thank you, thank you—you’re a great crowd!
Now this one goes to a very special lady,
very pneumatic, `Meg’ you know who you are ...
Yeah you, got that something
I think you’ll understand
When I say that something
I wanna hold your gland
I wanna hold your gland
I wanna hold your gland
I wanna hold your gla-a-a-a-a-a-and
Goodnight, have a soma. I have CDs for
sale on the table in the back. Thank you!
hehe...precious b/c its a twofer....
got the (politically) very loose Lady & her Scheming Attorney
Dose of whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?
Her Grandfather's money allows the McCains to be an embarrassment to this country with his money.
The last action I saw this ill-advised was the Canadian “media critic” who attempted to engage in a war of words with Mark Steyn.
The result wasn’t pretty. But it was VERY funny.
Where’s that picture of the serious girl’s self portrait she sent out on twitter? You know, that slut boob shot she sent out to the world of serious people.
That was about the time she was whining about getting no sexual satsifaction with Republican men (because Republicans are prudes not properly celebrating the anal sex movement) and how much she was aching for some limo-liberal slut sex. She was also smash mouthing the Palin clan for not being “smart” and classey like her and her friends.
Before she did the boob shot, I was warning people she was going to pull off a Britney croch shot for attention if her Rino daddy did not give her the hook. Too late, out came the booby shot on twitter which afterwards, she appologized for going off the “moderate” Republican sex pot deep end.
There is nothing serious about Megs unless you are feeling concerned for her as she suffers serious mental problems having grown up with a drug addicted mom and a kooky senator dad. She’s starved for attention - any attention will do. She’s “progressed” from flashing her boobs to leveling law suits for attention.
Never mind, I got it.
**************
Last month the conservative site RedState posted its second parody of Daily Beast contributor Meghan McCain, daughter of Sen. John McCain. The author name on the post (”Totally Meghan McCain”) and the content of the post (”Firstly in the first place, some people had a question about my very obvious statement, ‘I don’t necessarily agree that Rick Perry is George Bush on crack, but he could definitely be described as George Bush 2.0’”), clearly indicated that the post was parody. Nevertheless, Meghan McCain threatened to sue Red State.
Her lawyers sent a letter to the site’s owners alleging that “these fake front page posts place Meghan McCain before the public in a false light which is highly offensive to a reasonable person,” and that the RedState community “acted at least in reckless disregard as to their falsity and the false light in which Meghan McCain was being placed.” RedState editor Erick Erickson said he was “confident that we are within our rights to parody and mock Meghan McCain on this,” but removed the posts because “it is frankly not worth our time.”
The American Spectator’s J.P. Freire got his hands on the letter sent to Meghan McCain’s people by attorney Christopher Scott Badeaux, who is representing RedState satirist Leon Wolf. It. Is. Awesome:
[T]he subject matter of your letter is a fairly obvious parody to any person of even barely functional literacy. Thus – and your client probably didn’t tell you this – even she recognized that the posts were parodies (or “parody’s,” as she put it). At approximately 8:25 p.m. EDT on September 17th, your client posted to her Twitter feed, “I don’t care about parody’s(sic) or fake names – but falsely putting my name on someone else’s writing is illegal.” She then subsequently deleted this Tweet, presumably when someone told her that “parody’s” were constitutionally protected and it might look bad in a subsequent lawsuit if she were caught admitting in public that these posts were obvious parodies. Not to worry: My client has screenshots.
(I treat as obvious humor the assertions in your letter that the parodies in question were appropriations of your client’s likeness for advertising purposes, and that persons with no minimum contacts at all with California would in any way be susceptible to jurisdiction there. It is my sincere suggestion that your client do so as well.)
My client will not be bullied out of exercising his First Amendment right to make clear his belief that your client is a spoiled, brainless twit who is cheapening the political discourse in this country. Therefore, henceforth, the “Totally Meghan McCain” series may be found at http://pajamasmedia.com for your client’s reading pleasure.
On the off chance that your client actually files the baseless litigation you threatened in your September 23, 2011 letter, Mr. Wolf will pursue all available remedies available under any applicable anti-SLAPP statutes, State law malicious prosecution/abuse of process actions, and/or Rule 11 sanctions. Although I do not envy you the Herculean task before you, please make sure your client understands the potential consequences to her personally – in addition to those her attorney would face – for pursuing this ill-advised course of action.
(because Republicans are prudes not properly celebrating the anal sex movement)
Did she really complain about not having anal sex????
What do you think it is about what homos are doing to another’s bodies when Megs complains about the hatefulness of Republicans (Christians) in rejecting of homosexuality? What do you think Christians are excatly rejecting there?
When you hear about liberals promoting homosexuality to kiddos in “comprehensive sex education”, what do you think they learn about? When you hear liberals demand that society accept homosexuality, what are they demanding that you accept? Could you say “anal sex is gross” and not be called a hater of homos in the game of political correctness? No!
Liberals like Megs don’t say “anal sex”; they say homosexuality. I don’t say “homosexuality”, I say anal sex because that is what they mean and try to cover up with politically correct language. That is what they are demanding everyone celebrate and name wonderful.
I especially liked the spelling correction to me that just added just the with touch. Herculean task indeed. LOL
OPPPSSS with = right
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.