It has already been established that Rachael Ray is everywhere, but now she's crossed the line. She's on my On Demand cable menu at unpredictable times (yet all of the time), and I find this highly intrusive. So I've been researching my legal options, and let's just say she'd better lawyer-up for SGM v. Rachael Ray.
I am quite confident of my victory as the Supreme Court has already dealt with this issue definitively:
. . . the broadcast media have established a uniquely pervasive presence in the lives of all Americans. Patently offensive, indecent material [including unusually annoying voices, stupid jargon and ill-fitting shirts] presented over the airwaves confronts the citizen, not only in public, but also in the privacy of the home, where the individual's right to be left alone plainly outweighs the First Amendment rights of an intruder. Rowan v. Post Office Dept., 397 U.S. 728. Because the broadcast audience is constantly tuning in and out, prior warnings cannot completely protect the listener or viewer from unexpected program content. To say that one may avoid further offense by turning off the radio [or tv] when he hears [or sees Rachael Ray] . . . is like saying that the remedy for an assault is to run away after the first blow. One may hang up on an indecent phone call, but that option does not give the caller a constitutional immunity or avoid a harm that has already taken place.
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 736 (1978), the bold and the brackets are mine but really, it's only a matter of time before the Supreme Court adopts my words as its own.
You have struck the first blow, RR and I am not running away, oh no. I would rather bury my face in Britney's dirty laundry than hear your voice or see your flailing arms in my home (and that's really saying something). It's ON, Mrs. Asshat. Have your fancy legal team call me. I'll be waiting.