My life would not make for a particularly compelling YouTube video. There's me making coffee in the morning. Exciting. There's me reading an e-mail from a PR flack. Captivating. There's me with a red pen in hand marking up a story on a city council race. Riveting. There's me drinking a beer and watching reruns of the hit educational drama, The Sterilizer, starring Nancy Cook. Jaw-dropping.
But things were different when I was a wee lad. If YouTube had been around, I would have been a bigger star than Star Wars Kid, the Numa Numa guy, and Super Becca. The trips, the falls, the face-plants. The pranks gone horribly wrong. Those unfortunate moments when I was caught in the middle of a karaoke session in front of the bathroom mirror. I would have been the red-faced king of the viral video, the clown prince of cyberspace.
Which is why I sympathize with Sen. Randy Scott. Thanks to the power of the internet, the entire world knows the state senator's horrible secret — he apparently doesn't know his ABCs. And to add insult to injury, he's even worse at counting.
Truth be told, Sen. Scott isn't quite an internet celeb yet, but he should be if the video of his arrest is any indication. Seriously, have you watched this thing? If not, then head on over to The Post and Courier's website.
In the video, Scott is asked by the arresting officer to recite — not sing — the ABCs. The state senator then sings — not recites — the alphabet. Even better, he somehow manages to slip the letter R in there twice — the first time after Q, the next time after U.
And when asked to count backwards from 59 to 33, Scott coasts through numbers 59 to 41. That's when the trouble begins. After 41? 48, 47. After 47? Well, 48 and 47 once again.
In the second video, the officer administering the Breathalyzer test, Deputy Willard Driggers, challenges the state senator's bid for internet notoriety. What's noteworthy here is Driggers' apparent failure to understand the very words coming out of his own mouth. Once again, I sympathize. That's a typical Friday night for Brer Haire.
The P&C provides a nice summation of that encounter:
"Driggers reads Scott his rights, in which Scott is informed that he can have an attorney present. Scott asks for his attorney. Driggers tells him the test has already begun and cannot be stopped.
Driggers informs Scott that he can have an independent test at his own expense. Scott asks for an independent test by a highway patrolman. Driggers says the test has already begun.
The two men banter. Scott repeatedly asks for his attorney and Driggers repeatedly tells him the test has already begun.
Scott asks to make a phone call to his attorney. Driggers tells him he has to have a code to make a phone call. Scott asks for a code and Driggers tells him he can't give him a code. Driggers tells Scott he can call his attorney when the test is finished."
Now, I'm not a legal expert by any means, but I'm thinking that if I'm an attorney I don't have to really worry about doing a whole lot of legwork to help my client — I've already won the case. You can't tell a suspect he has a right to an attorney and then deny him access to his attorney. Right? I mean, I hate to think that Law and Order has filled my head with nothing but nonsense.
Once again, a grade-A screw up has been caught on tape. It's no shocker really. The fact that it involves an elected official makes it even less so. The same goes for a law enforcement officer. You might say they're always on camera. And soon we will be, too.
And when that day comes, all of our most embarrassing moments will go viral.