Way back in 2005, the Congress passed (yes, I know the words "Congress passed" don't appear together very often) the Stolen Valor Act. Seriously, who names these bills? must be the same guy who names car paint colors and lipsticks. Apparently there were a considerable number of men claiming to have been awarded the Medal of Honor and other decorations that they had not earned. While lying on your resume is as time-honored a tradition as lying on your taxes, Congress felt that the misrepresenting of ones military achievements was something that required a legal remedy. In all likelihood, this bit of feel-good legislation would have been consigned to the same file that contains Congressional passage of National Prostate Exam Month, however such is not the case.
Enter one Xavier Alvarez. Senor Alvarez managed to get himself arrested in a nasty little fraud case in which he tried to secure health benefits for his wife while he was serving on the Pomona, California water board.Further investigation revealed that Mr. Alvarez claimed to be a 25 year Marine Corp vet and recipient of the Purple Heart and Medal of Honor. None of that was true.
Clearly the word reprehensible was coined to describe Mr. Alvarez. Anyone who has worn the country's uniform finds lying about combat awards tantamount to cowardice under fire. Given the opportunity, we would gladly sentence this turd to spend a few quality minutes with some real Marines in an alley near Camp Lejeune. At least he would earn that purple heart.
This however, is America. We don't do frontier justice. Mr. Alvarez's case has made it all the way to Washington where the Supremes, fresh from the Whitney Houston funeral, will decide his fate. Of the nine justices on the court, three have served in the military: Breyer and Alito in the reserves, Kennedy in the National Guard. None have seen combat (unless you count Sonia Sotomayer's growing up in the Bronx). The military service of the Court members is relevant. Anyone who has spent time in the military imagines a special place in hell for those who fabricate their wartime experience. Any Justice who wore green, even in an armory in New Jersey, will react badly to someone professing courage under fire when none was demonstrated.
Still, for as much as we wish Mr. Alvarez to be publicly humiliated (a beating with a sock full of manure in front of the Iwo Jima Memorial springs to mind) the issue before the Court is, when does lying become crime? Is fudging your resume the same as forgetting to tell your fiancee that you are already married? Should we prosecute Senator Richard Blumenthal for "misstating" his military record during the 2010 campaign? What about Hillary Clinton's assertion about arriving in Bosnia under fire? Or Marco Rubio's "confusion" about when his parents came to America? What about Michele Bachmann telling Iowans she was born in the same town as John Wayne? Should there be a "just plain stupid" exemption? And let's not forget the 4,000 dead military personnel who paid the price for George W. Bush's lies.
It's a safe bet that, disgraceful as Mr. Alvarez's conduct might have been, the Supreme Court isn't likely to send him to the stocks. The First Amendment allows for free speech and, because there appears to be no actual damage, like yelling fire in a theater or "Obama" at the CPAC convention, there is no criminality. It seems certain that the "Liar, Liar, Pants On Fire" statute will not survive a Constitutional challenge. Mr. Alvarez will be returned to California where he can attempt to convince everyone that he arm-wrestled the Court for the verdict. Actually, this creep couldn't beat Ruth Bader Ginsberg in a thumb war.
No comments:
Post a Comment