February 10, 2016

"Hillary Clinton is set to campaign with Trayvon Martin’s mother and Eric Garner’s mother."

And so we turn to South Carolina.

The narrative of the primary season proceeds from ethanol, to heroin addiction, to black people. Are black people pleased to find themselves the subject of the week or is this irksome?
[The Clinton] campaign, sources said, is expected to push a new focus on systematic racism, criminal justice reform, voting rights and gun violence that will mitigate concerns about her lack of an inspirational message.

“The gun message went silent in New Hampshire,” remarked one ally close to the campaign. “Guns will come back in a strong way.” She is expected to highlight the problem of gun violence as the leading cause of death among African-American men as she campaigns in South Carolina on Friday.

In her [New Hampshire] concession speech... Clinton began to preview that new message... “Where people are held back by injustice anywhere in America, that demands action,” she said. “We also have to break through the barriers of bigotry.”
South Carolina has an open primary, by the way. Consider:



ADDED: Ta-Nehisi Coates says:
One can say Senator Sanders should have more explicit antiracist policy within his racial justice platform, not just more general stuff, and still cast a vote for Senator Sanders and still feel that Senator Sanders is the best option that we have in the race. But just because that’s who you’re going to vote for doesn’t mean you then have to agree with everything they say....

I will be voting for Senator Sanders. I have tried to avoid this question, but, yes, I will be voting for Senator Sanders. I try to avoid that, because I want to write as a journalist—do you know what I mean?—and separate that from my role as, I don’t know, a private citizen. But I don’t think much is accomplished by ducking the question. Yes, I will vote for Senator Sanders. My son influenced me.

132 comments:

AJ Lynch said...

Is it systemic racism or systematic ? Seems it should be the former but I ain't a journalist.

Brando said...

Well, it's about what I'd expect. Naked racial pandering and stoking fears and separation. This is what the Clintons do best.

Are black voters dumb enough to trust this woman (whose record as well as her husband's on crime and civil liberties matters is less than stainless)?

madAsHell said...

Trayvon's mother?? Eric Garner's mother?? Really??

Was Beyonce, and her Black Panther dancers already booked??

Original Mike said...

"Hillary Clinton is set to campaign with Trayvon Martin’s mother and Eric Garner’s mother."

Talk about a special place in hell...

Matthew Blaine said...

For every Trayvon Martin there are several Suzanne Hogans. But white women murdered by black men doesn't turn out the vote.

Brando said...

I'd also like to see someone explain exactly what they mean by "systemic racism" rather than chalking it up to that and wiping their hands. Are we simply talking about the fact that blacks are disproportionately in run-ins with the police, and disproportionately incarcerated? Because that doesn't prove systemic racism without something more.

But if we're talking about how blacks may have internalized their mistrust of the police and that this begets more confrontations with the police (and less help from the police) then you might have something.

I suspect, thought, that Hillary would not want any nuance when she can just pander about how she'll somehow "fix" all this or at least "be their champion on this issue" which is about as bogus as Trump's promises of "trust me, I'll have us all winning. Don't sweat the details, winning is what I do."

The Cracker Emcee said...

Yeah, gun control. In the South. That's the ticket.

Wouldn't the smart politician find ways of turning out one part of their base without alienating another part? Or does Identity politics make that difficult or impossible for a Donk politician?

Levi Starks said...

Stunning-ly....
Predictable.

Bill R said...

Hillary, honey, sweetie-pie: This isn't going to work.

Getting black people to hate white people is a double edged sword for you. Think about it.

Mike Sylwester said...

I feel sorry for the Peruvian-immigrant mother of George Zimmerman.

She must have felt much emotional pain having to hear so many times how her son was ambushed and how his face was punched and how his head was knocked repeatedly against pavement.

Then this immigrant mother had to watch as her son was abused legally by her state's zealous prosecutors. Her son was tried on a frivolous, ludicrous charge of second-degree murder.

I hope that one of the Republican candidates will campaign with George Zimmerman's mother.

Brando said...

"Yeah, gun control. In the South. That's the ticket."

I don't get the idea that gun control is really the winning issue among blacks that Hillary thinks it is.

This will be interesting to see who is more successful with the black vote--Hillary, who is targeting her pandering towards straight up race (particularly crime and police issues) or Sanders, who is promising a much expanded social safety net (which should appeal among poorer voters).

Owen said...

Traveling circus. Under the Big Top, Hillary in top hat and a charming red coat with tails, cracking her whip to put the Lyin through his paces. A troupe of bearded lady acrobats, the Flying Transgenders, flies above the ring. A giant Pander ambles about, begging for treats from the audience. The Outrage Sisters sing an angry duet with fireworks. In the sideshow, grievance hustlers in their bright multi-culti garb strut, shout and throw dung everywhere.

holdfast said...

I assume that the push for anti-Constitutional civilian disarmament is to ensure that the ONLY white votes she gets in SC are those of middle aged white women?

The Drill SGT said...

Clinton is set to campaign with the mothers of Trayvon Martin and Eric Garner, unarmed African-Americans who died in incidents involving law enforcement officers and a neighborhood watch representative, respectively.


The reporter can't even get the polarity of the references correct.

No. Martin was the NW incident, and Garner was the NYPD case, not the reverse

AJ Lynch said...

Crazy huh Obama's presidency is known for all of the racial healing and now the Clintons are going to tear us apart.

OT, the thought occurred to me that Trump's appeal is he claims he wants to improve the lot of all Americans by pushing back against other countries and illegal immigrants.

While Sanders is doing the same old same old Dem platform of pitting groups of Americans against one another.

tim in vermont said...

It's not a bad system where the different regions of the country get a chance to make their case to the future president, whomever it might be. It's kind of a bit of sensitivity training for the job. Of course Obama just used the time to make lists of enemies to screw over, but it needn't be like that.

mezzrow said...

This kind of campaign is exactly what has gotten Hillary to where she is today.

Self-awareness is like sight, and Hillary is so deep in her royal bubble that she is completely unaware of how this appears to the hoi polloi.

I can't lie, I'm enjoying this, but I'm not proud of it.

tim in vermont said...

Going both barrels on gun control to win the primary is kind of like eating your seed corn to survive another week. It's only advisable under the most desperate circumstances.

madAsHell said...

Rachel Dolezal, and Shaun King weren't available?

Funny, spell check wanted to change Dolezal to Doleful.

Original Mike said...

"I don't get the idea that gun control is really the winning issue among blacks that Hillary thinks it is."

I think "gun control" is Hillary's attempt at playing the race card, trotting out Trayvon and Garner, without explicitly mentioning race.

madAsHell said...

Malfeasance, or incompetence.....I just can't decide.

Tank said...

Is she going to explain how systemic racism causes Hispanic people to shoot black people who are in the process of killing them?

I'd like to hear that.

tim in vermont said...

Funny, spell check wanted to change Dolezal to Dolefu

It wants to change "Althouse" to "although," which I think is pretty funny too.

Fernandinande said...

She is not expected to highlight the problem of African-American men as the leading cause of death among African-American men as she campaigns in South Carolina on Friday.

Henry said...

I wonder if Kasich could swing Nikki Haley's endorsement. Christie is toast and Rubio is badly damaged.

LYNNDH said...

Talk about pandering! Poor ole Bernie is left with nothing, not even the Left.

Laslo Spatula said...

Hillary, sewing up the Police Vote.

I am Laslo.

Bob Ellison said...

The New Hampshire heroin story seemed like a manufactured one. It's that bad in New Hampshire, but not in Vermont, or Boston, or Michigan, or Pennsylvania? What are the real numbers?

Limited blogger said...

If the Democrats didn't have identity politics, they would have no politics.

Henry said...

@Bob Ellison. It is bad in Vermont, Boston, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

National numbers.

Regional numbers.

damikesc said...

Shame Trayvon's mother couldn't give enough of a shit about him when he was alive and "thuggin'"

Wouldn't the smart politician find ways of turning out one part of their base without alienating another part? Or does Identity politics make that difficult or impossible for a Donk politician?

The white Democrat vote here consists of old bigots or morons who have never watched anything besides MSNBC for "news" in years. There isn't much in terms of white Democrats in the South, thanks to the Dems deciding that all Southerners are necessarily bigots.

I don't get the idea that gun control is really the winning issue among blacks that Hillary thinks it is.

Just run on "Hillary wants the ONLY people to have guns to be the police. Think about that."

Or "Hillary thinks Hispanic men just want to shoot blacks".

That'll help the turnout, I'd have to imagine.

Slam her for her racism. Make her hurt for doing this.

I wonder if Kasich could swing Nikki Haley's endorsement

She isn't going to endorse a loser. Kasich will do exactly jack squat here.

tim in vermont said...

Heroin is a huge problem in Vermont. We actually had a shooting on Church Street in Burlington. One NYC gang member shot another NYC gang member over the heroin trade here. As you can see, the problem is gun control. But shootings are the least of it.

LarsPorsena said...

Clinton is set to campaign with the mothers of Trayvon Martin and Eric Garner,

After their 'settlements' the 'mothers' will be swathed in mink and draped in bling.

Rumpletweezer said...

Okay. I get it. I'm in the Matrix. None of this can be real. It's just too ridiculous. The Republican front-runner is an amoral used car super salesman. The two candidates on the Dem side are a communist and a felon. Sure. And I'm supposed to believe this can happen in the real world? Phooey!

MadisonMan said...

I think "gun control" is Hillary's attempt at playing the race card, trotting out Trayvon and Garner, without explicitly mentioning race.

It's Hillary trying to triangulate, something her husband was quite good at. She isn't as good.

Mrs Whatsit said...

Bob Ellison, there's nothing manufactured about it. The erupting heroin epidemic is all too real in New Hampshire, Vermont, Boston, Michigan, Pennsylvania and all over the place -- especially in rural and suburban areas.

Here are some numbers for you from the NYT in October 2015.

Lonetown said...

Clintonian sized pandering. While I'm sure that appealing to a sense of victimhood will attract many, redistribution of wealth is a world class winner.

clint said...

Sign of desperation.

If she thought she was about to sweep the early March states, she'd be tacking to the middle for the general. Instead she's tacking left. Not a sign of strength.

Why Gun Control? It's the one issue on which she's *actually* to the left of Bernie.

Original Mike said...

You should have taken the red pill, Rumpletweezer.

Hagar said...

An insult to the Black people of this nation.

Libertarian Advocate said...

I beginning to wonder if Mook isn't really a Sanders deep penetration agent.

Bob Ellison said...

Henry and Mrs Whatsit, thanks.

The way it's been played in the national "narrative", though, both right and left, is that New Hampshire is outstandingly bad. That was a big lead-in to the primary the other day. It does not appear to be true. That is, if heroin is on the rise everywhere, and not just in New Hampshire, then don't let's make New Hampshire the drug story of America.

Mike said...

Cops wouldn't have been hassling Garner if White Liberals like Hillary! hadn't supported the insanely high, black market enabling, "loosies"-causing cigarette taxes. Garner died for selling cigarettes in Bloomberg's city. He died because when you vote for high taxes, you're voting to collect them at the point of a gun, if necessary.

There might be enough free-market Republicans left in the race who will be more than happy to point out that the Dowager Empress of Chappaqua is on both sides of this issue. Her husband's history of signing max-min sentencing laws should keep him off the field in SC, or at least far away from the mothers of dead black men.

traditionalguy said...

Hillary is closet anti semitic and expects that will draw black voters.

The racists are still lurking in the Cruz wing to divide black and white, but Trump will beat them all with his positive thinking message to make America great again.

Trump is the real fighter. Southerners will follow him because they are real fighters too.

gspencer said...

"She is expected to highlight the problem of gun violence as the leading cause of death among African-American men"

BUT

she's not expected to mention that black males are the ones taking the lives of other black males.

PB said...

Some people never learn. They think they'll get something by giving their support, but they're just being used.

Real American said...

I guess OJ wasn't available.

Tank said...

traditionalguy said...

Hillary is closet anti semitic and expects that will draw black voters.


This made me laugh - probably because I am a bad person. Also, just enough truth there.

Sal said...

Are black people pleased to find themselves the subject of the week or is this irksome?

Week? This is supposed to be Black History Month!.

Big Mike said...

@Henry, I followed your regional link and two things jumped out at me from the graph.

First, the areas reporting "high" availability of heroin are in the mostly in the north (Middle Atlantic being the exception). The traditional drug running areas are Florida, the Gulf Coast, and the Southwestern states bordering Mexico, but the northern regions dwarf them. This suggests to me that the drug may be coming in from Canada, where Homeland Security doesn't even make the token effort that they do in the Southwest.

But against that, the graph merely shows where the police report that the availability of heroin is "high." Perhaps the standards in the northern regions are different from the standards in Florida and the Southwest? The article doesn't clarify.

I'm allergic to non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (Advil, Aleve, even aspirin) so after my surgeries the doctors normally prescribe Oxycontin or Percocet for my recovery. It would be pretty rough for me if Oxycontin was banned because it's thought to be a gateway drug for heroin.

Big Mike said...

I have one simple question for Trayvon Martin's mother.

Lady, how come you never taught your son not to jump a honkie who's got a gun?

mccullough said...

The people in South Carolina, especially the black community and the church members in Charleston, responded gracefully to the shooting at the church in Charleston last summer.

Hillary is a divisive person.

Big Mike said...

@Sal, thanks for the reminder. IMHO the worst soldier in the 54th Massachusetts regiment was worth a thousand Trayvon Martins.

Fernandinande said...

Mrs Whatsit said...
The erupting heroin epidemic is all too real in New Hampshire, Vermont, Boston, Michigan, Pennsylvania and all over the place -- especially in rural and suburban areas.


Those articles conflate heroin with prescription drugs (either clearly or misleadingly**); this article doesn't, and heroin deaths are fairly rare and not increasing much ... compared to "pharmaceuticals". (up to 2010).

**E.g. "Today’s Heroin Epidemic" heroin immediately becomes "heroin-related", which is heroin + pharmaceuticals.

lgv said...

I'm not clear on the message being created by campaigning with these mothers. It sounds like a new program targeting racist police and licensed gun owners. Maybe it's about criminal reform that puts too many black men in prison. Maybe it is about getting rid of illegal guns that are being used to kill blacks.

Wait a minute. If you put people who have illegal hand guns in jail, wouldn't that increase the incarceration rate of black men? If we get rid of the guns that are killing blacks, does mean we need to disarm police? What a great idea.

I'm more interested in hearing her black accent on the campaign trail. I think she has been practicing.

madAsHell said...

This is supposed to be Black History Month!.

It's also the shortest month of the year. Go figure!!

jacksonjay said...

Whatever happened to Hands Up, Don't Shoot?

pm317 said...

well, she needs to do what she has to do to win. With Bernie the fraud braying in one ear and Obama pricks doing their thing on the other, she has no choice but to do things like this. Anyway, Trump voters will not go for her even if she didn't do this.

William said...

Errol Garner had been arrested over forty times. A lesser man would have considered that the selling of loose cigarettes gig wasn't working out. But not so Errol. He kept plugging away. As a result of of his persistence and fortitude his wife and children --including the most recent addition-- are today multimillionaires. It's an American success story. Perhaps Mrs. Garner can make a financial contribution to Hillary's campaign.......I wonder how much George Zimmerman's wife would have been able to sue for if he had died or been disabled as the result of Trayvon's assault.........This style of campaigning will garner more votes for Trump than for Hillary.

Lyle Smith said...

A wall along the Mexican border will benefit the black working class like nobody's business.

Hunter said...

Hillary may not have won in NH, but she ain't no ways tired.

MikeR said...

Can anyone explain why Clinton is more popular with blacks than Sanders? I think their policies are all terrible for blacks in the US, as have been all liberal economic and political policies in the last half-century. But blacks tend not to agree with me, and vote Democratic. I get that. But why Clinton more than Sanders?

The Godfather said...

What a minute! We've had a Black president for almost 8 years, and racism is STILL a problem?

And the way to solve that problem is to elect a White granny as the next president? I don't understand. I just don't understand.

Char Char Binks said...

Suck up to violent BLM racist nihilists.

Brando said...

"Can anyone explain why Clinton is more popular with blacks than Sanders? I think their policies are all terrible for blacks in the US, as have been all liberal economic and political policies in the last half-century. But blacks tend not to agree with me, and vote Democratic. I get that. But why Clinton more than Sanders?"

I'm equally puzzled by this. Someone suggested it was because Bill Clinton spent his career schmoozing with blacks, visiting their churches, coddling their local and national leaders, and even setting up his post-presidential office in Harlem, and blacks transferred their affection towards him on his wife.

But that seems rather superficial (Jack Kemp campaigned a lot in inner cities but didn't seem to bring a groundswell of black voters to the GOP) and it's hard to find a policy Clinton or his wife are known for that was at least viewed as good by blacks. Welfare reform--for its merits to those of us who aren't leftist--is seen as harmful to the poor. He wanted to "mend, not end" affirmative action, and favored the death penalty (which disproportionately is used on blacks) and in his crime law of 1994 hired a lot more cops. It's hard to see what anyone thinks he or his wife did for them, and their opposition to Obama's candidacy was particularly nasty in a way that McCain's never was.

If Bernie challenges her hard for those votes, I wonder if her black support might melt away.

Char Char Binks said...

"This ends today!" Eric Get got what he had coming.

Bob Ellison said...

William, do you obey the law even though you know it's stupid, and when most people also ignore it? Like when driving?

40 arrests doesn't mean anything more than the displeasure of the executive to discipline the people that pay for it.

Brando said...

"Errol Garner had been arrested over forty times. A lesser man would have considered that the selling of loose cigarettes gig wasn't working out. But not so Errol. He kept plugging away. As a result of of his persistence and fortitude his wife and children --including the most recent addition-- are today multimillionaires. It's an American success story. Perhaps Mrs. Garner can make a financial contribution to Hillary's campaign.......I wonder how much George Zimmerman's wife would have been able to sue for if he had died or been disabled as the result of Trayvon's assault.........This style of campaigning will garner more votes for Trump than for Hillary."

I wouldn't put Garner and Martin in the same category. Garner never attacked anyone, and the Martin case has a haze where it's not clear who started the confrontation leading to his death.

What Hillary's doing here though is disgusting--trying to use their mother's as a campaign prop, and solely to pull in the black vote. Both of those cases involve at most serious questions and it is irresponsible and immoral to use them just to rouse the rabble.

Brando said...

"Whatever happened to Hands Up, Don't Shoot?"

It turned into "let me try to beat you up while you're in your car, but don't shoot".

Brando said...

"Lady, how come you never taught your son not to jump a honkie who's got a gun?"

From the Hispanic features of Zimmerman, the word "honkey" is not what comes to mind when I see him. "White Hispanic" description aside.

Mrs Whatsit said...

Ferdinande, your 2010 graph is way out of date. Also, you're misreading the CDC article when you assert that the phrase "heroin-related" overdose deaths include deaths from prescription opiates. Read the article more carefully. You'll see that it doesn't. Here's another CDC article that draws a clear distinction between the two. Scroll down to figure 3 to see why your 2010 graph is not useful in 2016.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db190.pdf


coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Matthew Sablan said...

"Going both barrels on gun control to win the primary is kind of like eating your seed corn to survive another week."

-- Only if you had to fear anyone would check you on it. She'll get a pass on it and never need to mention it again until after the election, if she wants.

Matthew Sablan said...

"The white Democrat vote here consists of old bigots or morons who have never watched anything besides MSNBC for "news" in years"

This weekend I was out to lunch and sat through a small session of Fareed Zakaria's show. The people on his panel included Arianna Huffington and a few other decidedly liberal people. The things they said were pretty much fact value empty, but highly emotionally charged. They talked about Rubio, "Sure he's young, but his ideas are old and hate filled."

cubanbob said...

Henry said...
@Bob Ellison. It is bad in Vermont, Boston, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

National numbers.

Regional numbers.

2/10/16, 9:10 AM"

Tell me why I should give a crap about people who for the most part are too stupid to live?

Brando said...

"Going both barrels on gun control to win the primary is kind of like eating your seed corn to survive another week."

I doubt it makes much difference--the sort of people turned off by Clinton's gun control proposals aren't the sort who would have voted for her anyway.

Now, pissing off police unions, running against Wall Street (which usually backs both sides to hedge their bets), and scaring off moderate whites with talk of racial retribution--that is a dangerous game.

cubanbob said...

Matthew Sablan said...
"The white Democrat vote here consists of old bigots or morons who have never watched anything besides MSNBC for "news" in years"

This weekend I was out to lunch and sat through a small session of Fareed Zakaria's show. The people on his panel included Arianna Huffington and a few other decidedly liberal people. The things they said were pretty much fact value empty, but highly emotionally charged. They talked about Rubio, "Sure he's young, but his ideas are old and hate filled."

2/10/16, 11:22 AM"

Lost among these brilliant minds is that the irony Bernes.

It's only natural that Hillary sympathizes with the families of criminals.

Remorse said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Char Char Binks said...

Brando said...
"Errol Garner had been arrested over forty times."

Play "Misty" for me.

holdfast said...

So - guns are bad, therefore civilian disarmament is good and the result will be that only cops (and criminals of course) have guns.

But of course, all cops are evil racists, just itching for the chance to gun down an unarmed black child (a 6'4" 240lb child).

So really, the only ones who should be [tacitly] permitted to have guns are the criminals. Well, Hillary does know how to play to her base.

Amadeus 48 said...

Kasich, baby.
Rubio is too callow. Christie ruthlessly exposed it.
Christie is a thug at heart. Rubio exposed it.
Cruz is too callow, like Rubio. Plus, he is a self-centered prig.
Bush is too shop-worn, plus he is a Bush (stop them before they kill again).
Trump is an empty blow-hard who believes in big government.
Kasich is a successful governor who was in the GOP leadership in the Gringrich years (when they were good).
Kasich will look good compared to either Hillary or Bernie.
I was for Walker and Perry, but they are gone.
Kasich for America!

holdfast said...

Joking aside, in 2008 Hillary! and Bill did play the race card against Obama, and it did win her a lot of Southern white votes from folks who were, shall we say, skeptical of the slick young black dude from Chicago.

But does she really think that the same thing will work against Bernie? If you're really a misanthrope Dem, you'll simply cross-over and vote for Trump. If you're a Southern Dem for whom Hillary! is an acceptable candidate, then you're just as likely to vote for Sanders. They are both old, while, Northern Liberals. Yes Sanders is nominally Jewish, but he's less actively Jewish than Obama is actively Christian. And his Jewishness is cancelled out by her shrill, but dated, feminism.

holdfast said...

@Amadeus 48

Kasich is the most reasonable Democrat in the race.

Voting for Kasich is like voting to bring a rubber knife to a gun fight.

Bay Area Guy said...

There is a factual distinction between Garner and Martin:

Garner was arrested for selling loose single cigarettes. Why this is a crime is beyond me.

But, then the NYC authorities (all Democrats I might add) decided to crack down on these nefarious "Loosie" peddlers, arrested Garner, and things sadly went haywire.

I have sympathy for Garner's family.

However, Martin, was simply a young thug looking to cause trouble, and found it.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

When Donald Trump starts campaigning with Kathryn Steinle's family I'm sure the Media won't call that crass or somehow improper, right?

That's the new standard, wave a bloody shirt, that's praiseworthy now, very well; you can bet your ass Donald Trump ain't no ways taaared.

Brando said...

"Brando said...
"Errol Garner had been arrested over forty times."

Play "Misty" for me."

Ok--maybe I'm dense but I don't get your point. Are you suggesting a guy with a long arrest record for petty crimes (many of which should not be crimes--selling loose cigarettes? That's up there with selling sodas from too big a cup) deserved to die during his arrest? I'm not even saying the cops were necessarily negligent, but if they weren't, it's still terrible that a guy died over something so petty. It's not like he was attacking them for crying out loud.

"Garner was arrested for selling loose single cigarettes. Why this is a crime is beyond me."

Exactly. I don't think he should be lumped in with Michael Brown who almost definitely was scuffling with the cop, and most likely was attacking him (the hands up thing was a myth).

Bruce Hayden said...

I wouldn't put Garner and Martin in the same category. Garner never attacked anyone, and the Martin case has a haze where it's not clear who started the confrontation leading to his death.

Not really, if you watched the case closely, esp. as it went to trial. There was, essentially, no forensic evidence supporting the prosecution, and it all supported Zimmerman's story. AND, even if Zimmerman had stalked Martin, had started the confrontation, etc., he still would have been legally justified in shooting Martin, because "sticks and stones may break your bones, but words never hurt you". Words might get you killed in the inner city, but they are almost never a legal justification for using force. But, of course, there was no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman started the confrontation, and some evidence that Martin had made it mostly to the house he was living in, and then turned around and went back to confront Zimmerman.

Moreover, Martin had offensive wounds, and not defensive wounds (except for the single gun shot), while Zimmerman had the opposite. There is no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman ever struck Martin, and that means that Zimmerman was legally entitled to use force in self-defense, and there was no testimony or other evidence contradicting Zimmerman's claim that Martin had beat his head into the concrete walk and then tried to strangle him, and photos and medical reports to corroborate the former. This means that there was uncontradicted evidence that lethal force had been used by Martin, legally justifying Zimmerman's use of such in his defense.

In the future, ignore the people who are trying to whitewash Martin's guilt in causing his own death by his thuggish behavior. There is no real evidence that Martin was anything except for 100% responsible for his own death.

damikesc said...

Well, noted dropout Coates needs somebody to influence him.

And he wants to write "as a journalist"? Isn't he just PRECIOUS?

When Donald Trump starts campaigning with Kathryn Steinle's family I'm sure the Media won't call that crass or somehow improper, right?

I'd bet the Benghazi families would do it.
Ditto Kathleen Willey.
Juannita Broadrick.
Probably the family of the officer killed by Fast & Furious guns...

Trump could go all out, if he so wished to do so. And I think he'd wish to do so.

AnnaP said...

A little confused here. Gun control has nothing to do with Garner, Michael Brown, and Trayvon. That fight is about Police violence. Gun control has to do with totally different circumstances. Why are the two being lumped together as if they have anything to do with each other?

Bruce Hayden said...

I don't know the answer to Eric Garner's death. As someone above pointed out, when the govt. imposes taxes, etc., they are ultimately collected at the point of a gun. The state cannot allow walking away to be the ultimate answer to violating the laws on the books, no matter how trivial. Because, if they do, then no one will stick around and pay the fines, etc. And, indeed, that is probably part of why he had been arrested 40 times, mostly for BS type offenses. The cops were just following orders, and Garner was illegally resisting arrest. The fault was in their management, and, in particular, the mayor's office, which gave marching orders to the police. I think that we can all pretty much agree that Garner shouldn't have died over a couple loose cigarettes, but that really means, working backwards, that NYC shouldn't have criminalized selling of such, and that, of course, was in response to people trying to evade the grossly high per pack taxes assessed by the city. Eliminate the tax on packs of cigarettes, and Garner would probably be alive today. But, of course, the city needs the tax revenue, to pay for outsized pensions and generous pay of its (mostly Democratic) labor force, so the real solution is to probably abolish govt. employee unions. Or, at least do what Wisconsin has done with them.

Amadeus 48 said...

holdfast--I agree with you for purposes of discussion--but I think we'd be better off with Kasich than Hillary, Sanders or Trump, and the other Republicans left in the race have limitations that will keep them from winning in 2016. Rubio needs to go back to Florida, run for governor and have some successes. Cruz has no accomplishments in the Senate. Christie is gone as of this morning, Bush is a Bush (nuff said), and Trump is the antithesis of a small-government type. The question always is, are we better off if the Dems win? Based on 2008 until 2010, the answer is a resounding no. Will Kasich be able to work with a GOP controlled Congress? Yes. Will he appoint better Supreme Court justices than Hillary, Bernie or Trump? Yes. Will he do things that drive we right-wingers/ libertarians nuts? Yes. But he'll still be better than Hillary, Bernie or Trump. 2016 is a terrible year.

Mike said...

Damisek, it was announced yesterday that Kathleen Wiley is campaigning against Hillary with a rape survivor group.

Mike said...

Woman who accused Bill Clinton of assault to campaign against Hillary presidential run.

Bruce Hayden said...

@Anna - George Zimmerman was a civilian legally carrying (and ultimately legally using) a concealed handgun. Trayvon Martin died as a direct result of his physical attack on Zimmerman, and then utilizing deadly force against him.

And, Brown died as a result of physically assaulting an armed police officer, and then trying to take his gun away from him. That converted a low grade strong-armed robbery into attempted murder, and would have legally justified the use of deadly force, even if Officer Wilson had not been able to utilize the same sort of self-defense law to his benefit that Zimmerman had used. Both Martin and Brown used deadly force against their killers before being shot. And, both died as a result.

Bruce Hayden said...

Damisek, it was announced yesterday that Kathleen Wiley is campaigning against Hillary with a rape survivor group.

I don't think that you can make this sort of thing up. The left, esp. on campuses, has been obsessed about the (supposed) rape culture, and rape "survivors" are given almost unprecedented moral authority. Wiley has a far more credible claim to victimhood than most of the campus rape situations we hear about. As someone pointed out - pass out the popcorn and get ready for a good show.

Brando said...

"There is no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman ever struck Martin, and that means that Zimmerman was legally entitled to use force in self-defense, and there was no testimony or other evidence contradicting Zimmerman's claim that Martin had beat his head into the concrete walk and then tried to strangle him, and photos and medical reports to corroborate the former. This means that there was uncontradicted evidence that lethal force had been used by Martin, legally justifying Zimmerman's use of such in his defense."

I'm not doubting that that may be how it went down--Martin may well have struck first. But it certainly is possible that it started as a verbal confrontation and Zimmerman tried to grab Martin, and they struggled, and Martin struck in self defense. I don't justify brutally beating a person, but if a stranger tries to grab you I could see getting scared and striking out, and things escalating from there. My point is we don't know for certain how it began, only that at one point Martin was beating on Zimmerman and Zimmerman shot him.

"A little confused here. Gun control has nothing to do with Garner, Michael Brown, and Trayvon. That fight is about Police violence. Gun control has to do with totally different circumstances. Why are the two being lumped together as if they have anything to do with each other?"

They have nothing to do with each other. This is an example of Hillary's team missing a few cylinders. Somehow they're trying to connect "something bad involving guns" with "hey, maybe guns are bad".

I suppose some leftists might try to conflate the issues in the Martin/Zimmerman case, because Zimmerman was a private citizen with a concealed carry permit and Florida had the "stand your ground" law (though it didn't apply in that case). Maybe they think if they can cut down on guns the Zimmermans of the world would have had to settle for being hospitalized.

But here's the rub--what exactly is Hillary proposing? Closing the gun show loophole? More extensive background checks? Outlawing high magazine capacity weapons? Even with all those things (which is DOA in Congress, but let's imagine) it's hard to see how it will prevent handgun deaths. It's cheap signaling, a way of saying "I'm with you guys!" What's weird is the gun control argument works more with suburban white upper class leftists, not black voters.


jr565 said...

Ugh. So in Trayvons case it wasnt' a cop shooting and trayvon most likely was pounding a "White" hispanic guys head in the pavement.
And in Garners case cops had every right to roust him from in front of the store since he was there constantly acting like a nuisance. if he died its because he was a fatso who needed to be pulled to the ground. If you are playing football you now that such take downs can often lead to injuries. Cops, I believe were cleared as well.
And even if you want to make the case that its for a non violent crime, why would the cops go after selling of loosies in the first place? Diblasio wanted them to crack down on that sort of crime. So, its govt's fault, if you want to make that case.

jr565 said...

Bruce Hayden wrote:
I think that we can all pretty much agree that Garner shouldn't have died over a couple loose cigarettes, but that really means, working backwards, that NYC shouldn't have criminalized selling of such, and that, of course, was in response to people trying to evade the grossly high per pack taxes assessed by the city.

Well, I have an issue with the fact that he died "BECUAUSE" he was selling loosies. This arrest could have occured for any type of crime, from non violent to a burglarly to a murder. Why the cops arrested him is immaterial since the reason he died was because he resisted arrest. I woudlnt say that he DESERVED to die if he,instead was resisting arrest for shoplifting or fighting with cops. The death was accidental, and coudl have occured if the cops took him down for anything.

Brando said...

"Damisek, it was announced yesterday that Kathleen Wiley is campaigning against Hillary with a rape survivor group."

I hope this is true--and I hope it gets press. Wiley could not be written off as a Republican plant.

"holdfast--I agree with you for purposes of discussion--but I think we'd be better off with Kasich than Hillary, Sanders or Trump, and the other Republicans left in the race have limitations that will keep them from winning in 2016. Rubio needs to go back to Florida, run for governor and have some successes. Cruz has no accomplishments in the Senate. Christie is gone as of this morning, Bush is a Bush (nuff said), and Trump is the antithesis of a small-government type. The question always is, are we better off if the Dems win? Based on 2008 until 2010, the answer is a resounding no. Will Kasich be able to work with a GOP controlled Congress? Yes. Will he appoint better Supreme Court justices than Hillary, Bernie or Trump? Yes. Will he do things that drive we right-wingers/ libertarians nuts? Yes. But he'll still be better than Hillary, Bernie or Trump. 2016 is a terrible year."

I think conservatives would be nuts not to go with Kasich, for all of his "moderate" image. He's got a very conservative record for a man who has to govern a purple state, he's proven that he can get conservative deals out of Congress, and his "compassionate" stuff--while it may rankle conservatives--makes it harder for the Left to make him a boogeyman (not that they won't try).

jr565 said...

"Errol Garner had been arrested over forty times. A lesser man would have considered that the selling of loose cigarettes gig wasn't working out. But not so Errol. He kept plugging away. As a result of of his persistence and fortitude his wife and children --including the most recent addition-- are today multimillionaires. It's an American success story. Perhaps Mrs. Garner can make a financial contribution to Hillary's campaign.......I wonder how much George Zimmerman's wife would have been able to sue for if he had died or been disabled as the result of Trayvon's assault.........This style of campaigning will garner more votes for Trump than for Hillary."


Errol Garner? The famed jazz pianist? man, I guess file sharing really cut into sales of jazz records. To be reduced to selling loosie cigaretes. oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Ta-Nehisi Coates says:

Yes, I will vote for Senator Sanders. My son influenced me.

Out of the mouths of babes...
...comes regurgitated pablum

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brando said...

"This arrest could have occured for any type of crime, from non violent to a burglarly to a murder. Why the cops arrested him is immaterial since the reason he died was because he resisted arrest. I woudlnt say that he DESERVED to die if he,instead was resisting arrest for shoplifting or fighting with cops."

That's true, but I think what rankles a lot of people is that if the cops weren't required to arrest people over something so petty, none of it would have happened. It doesn't make the arrest itself improper, but I think if this all happened and he was arrested for selling crack people wouldn't be quite as disgusted with the NYPD.

I don't think he deserved to die, and it was a tragedy that it happened, but that doesn't necessarily mean the cops did anything wrong (I don't think they realized how much trouble he was in until too late). But I see it very differently from the Brown case, where he actually went halfway into the cop's car.

Amadeus 48 said...

The grammar police just pulled me over and asked if I knew why. I said, "Was it when I wrote 'we right-wingers/libertarians' when I should have written 'us right-wingers/libertarians'?" He said, "I am letting you off with a warning this time, but don't do it again."

Char Char Binks said...

Brando said...

"Are you suggesting a guy....deserved to die during his arrest?"

Yes. Everybody's gotta die somehow. Garner wasn't killed for selling loosies; he died because he resisted a lawful arrest while being a grotesquely overweight smoker suffering from asthma, diabetes, heart disease, and apnea. Do you know what apnea means? And if the tax on cigarettes had been eliminated, so would Eric Garner's job of selling loosies.

Bay Area Guy said...

Tennessee Coats is feelin' the Bern!

William said...

If Trayvon Martin was a white asshole who had been killed by Zimmerman under similar circumstances and Zimmerman had also been subsequently charged with his murder, then we would have learned much of George's Hispanic heritage. The black and Hispanic communities would have joined hands to protest the miscarriage of justice. In like manner, if Freddie Gray was white and those three black officers were charged with his death, we would have heard much from the black activists about the virulent racism of the DA.......Why are black officers involved in law enforcement considered Uncle Toms and traitors to the race while black people involved in criminal activity are considered to be avatars of their race?

William Chadwick said...

I like to ask "liberals" and other doofuses who feel sorry for Trayvon if they would participate in an experiment. I'll arm them with a paint-ball pistol, and they can hold it while they lie face up on the pavement. Then I'll pound their heads into the pavement, and at any time when they feel their lives are threatened they can shoot me with the paint-ball gun. I've never actually done it, but it would be interesting to see how many times their heads have to slam into the pavement before they think they're justified in pulling the trigger.

jr565 said...

WIlliam, great idea. Its like the experiment to determine how many licks it takes to get the center of a Tootsie Pop.

Fabi said...

One. Two. Th-reee.

MikeR said...

Coates for Sanders. This is Huge!

Brando said...

"If Trayvon Martin was a white asshole who had been killed by Zimmerman under similar circumstances and Zimmerman had also been subsequently charged with his murder, then we would have learned much of George's Hispanic heritage."

Pretty much--the rush to convict when the prosecution couldn't meet its burden had me wondering "don't these morons realize that it's the poor and black who tend to be most likely to be railroaded if we convicted on weak cases?" Also, I don't know why Hispanic groups didn't jump in on that case--it was the system trying to push a prosecution of an Hispanic where the police initially concluded they didn't have enough evidence to convict. Did Hispanics decide that black "victim" rights trump their own?

Brando said...

"Coates for Sanders. This is Huge!"

Not that I care what Tennessee Coats thinks normally, but this is interesting as he's the racialist activist type, and while not "old" he's not exactly a college kid too, so you might see him as part of Hillary's "firewall" of black support against Sanders. Him coming out for Sanders may be an indication that that firewall is crumbling.

MikeR said...

"Him coming out for Sanders may be an indication that that firewall is crumbling." Well, I'm still waiting for an explanation why there is black support for Clinton at all. "First black First Lady?"

Brando said...

""Him coming out for Sanders may be an indication that that firewall is crumbling." Well, I'm still waiting for an explanation why there is black support for Clinton at all. "First black First Lady?""

Hopefully black people will start to wonder that as well.

MikeR said...

Well, blacks basically haven't voted yet. Maybe they will think more about it closer to their primaries, starting in South Carolina. If they would shift it would be a totally new ball game.

Char Char Binks said...

Blogger Brando said...

" Did Hispanics decide that black "victim" rights trump their own?"

Remember, Zimmerman was initially called white simply because of his name, before the general public got a look at his face. I know some Hispanics who supported him, but most just went with The Narrative of a white man who murdered a black boy, it seems. They didn't need Jorge making them look bad.

holdfast said...

"Moderate" USSC picks quickly become liberals. Even Reagan appointed SDO'C.

Hell, even Roberts has been getting squishy lately.


I'd rather have President Hillary! and a strong GOP Congress than Squish Ball McObamacare.

ken in tx said...

Systemic Racism is a form of Bearing False Witness in my opinion. It's accusing people who are not racist in thought or deed of racism. It's especially annoying to hear one of our ministers go on about it. I refuse to feel guilty about something I didn't do. This used to be called Collective Guilt, and was considered wrong.

Bruce Hayden said...

I'm not doubting that that may be how it went down--Martin may well have struck first. But it certainly is possible that it started as a verbal confrontation and Zimmerman tried to grab Martin, and they struggled, and Martin struck in self defense. I don't justify brutally beating a person, but if a stranger tries to grab you I could see getting scared and striking out, and things escalating from there. My point is we don't know for certain how it began, only that at one point Martin was beating on Zimmerman and Zimmerman shot him.

But, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman started the physical alteration, that they had words before Martin hit Zimmerman in the nose, knocking him to the ground. None. All you have is wishful thinking on the part of people who want to ignore the evidence. As I said, Martin had offensive wounds, Zimmerman had defensive wounds. And, none of the reverse, except for that one fatal gunshot received by Martin. There is no rational reason to believe that the altercation went down the way you are suggesting. None. No evidence. None. Even Martin's "girlfriend" essentially corroborated Zimmerman's story.

Jack Wayne said...

Shorter Brando - I want a Bush third term and I want it now.

Jonathan Graehl said...

Hillary In 1994: “They are not just gangs of kids anymore,” she said. “They are often the kinds of kids that are called ‘super-predators.’ No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel.”'

This in support of Bill's "federal $ to add 100,000 more cops" - she was for cops before she was against them. She was against super-predators before she was for them

'Super-predators' - they are called that, she says, presumably meaning criminal blacks. I think the term today is just 'youths'. I think we should spend more time talking about the incredibly violent+successful mexican gangs like MS13 (perhaps they don't pick on civilians as much and that's why they're less on our mind?), but that may just be my CA bias.

Bruce Hayden said...

That's true, but I think what rankles a lot of people is that if the cops weren't required to arrest people over something so petty, none of it would have happened. It doesn't make the arrest itself improper, but I think if this all happened and he was arrested for selling crack people wouldn't be quite as disgusted with the NYPD.

The problem there, as I see it, is that if the police don't arrest people who violate the laws in effect, and esp. when it is done right in front of them, then why have the laws on the books? And, if it comes down to being able to walk off, when challenged, instead of accepting the being arrested and cited, then not walking off and evading arrest will be the patsy's game. Moreover, discretionary enforcement ultimately revolves to us being a nation of people, and not a nation of laws, and that means that the police will have no moral legitimacy.

The other part of this whole thing though is that these petty crimes are used, essentially, by many cities to raise revenues (to fund, among other things, excessive salaries and pensions for the govt. workers). The problem though is that the cost inevitably falls the hardest on those least able to pay. Garner was essentially living on the fringes of society, getting by as best he could. Every time he was arrested, the further behind he got. And, I expect that that was why he just tried to walk away - he had had enough of being hassled because he was poor, and couldn't get a real job. He was making a living in one of the only ways he knew, but that was illegal, of course, because it ultimately cut into the city's cigarette tax revenues. He lived in a system that was rigged against him, and, indeed rigged against most of the people he lived around, the inner city poor. And, for those reasons, I do feel sorry for Garner - I just don't know what to do about it, except for the cities that try to fund themselves with this sort of taxes and fees should cut down on their spending so that they can live within their means, absent these taxes on their poorest inhabitants. But, that isn't going to happen any time soon, because the municipal employees, and esp. the unionized ones, have far more power than the poorest people in the cities, like Eric Garner in NYC.

The Cracker Emcee said...

"Well, blacks basically haven't voted yet. Maybe they will think more about it closer to their primaries, starting in South Carolina. If they would shift it would be a totally new ball game."

Won't happen. Not in this generation anyway. The rock-bottom catharsis necessary for African-Americans to realize their vicious exploitation by white liberals is nowhere in sight. It's gonna be ugly when they wake up but I hope I'm alive to see it.

AllenS said...

Never forget this -- there is a reason why Black people have Community Organizers. No other racial entity needs it.

Hillary know this.

Amadeus 48 said...

holdfast--you say that you'd prefer President Hillary! with a strong GOP Congress to Squishball McObamacare (presumably also with a strong GOP Congress). Why? I don't understand your thinking. And who is your alternative candidate that has a chance of winning? Does Ted Cruz have a history of persuading his colleagues and opponents in the Senate? What exactly has Marco Rubio done other than get himself elected to the Senate, which he doesn't like and is leaving. How is he different than Obummer in 2008? Is Jeb Bush your man? Are you dynasty driven? Do you like the fact that he and his allies have spent $50 million so far knocking other Republicans? How much more wrecking can the GOP take at the hands of the Bushes? What about Trump, who has been a user and abuser of the perogatives of big government thoughout his career? Is he really for the little guy? Isn't he mostly for himself?
There are lots of things wrong with Kasich, too, but I think you would like many of the things he would do as president with a GOP congress. I am confident that we would like all of his appointments better than we would like any of Hillary's. The last 6 years have shown the damage the executive branch can do on its own.
We need to focus on getting a GOP candidate that is going to win and have some respect for the Constitution.

MikeR said...

"Won't happen. Not in this generation anyway. The rock-bottom catharsis necessary for African-Americans to realize their vicious exploitation by white liberals" Uh-yeah, but here it's two different vicious exploiting white liberals. They just have to choose one over the other.

Bruce Hayden said...

Never forget this -- there is a reason why Black people have Community Organizers. No other racial entity needs it.

Just finished the latest book by Dinesh D'Souza's latest book: Stealing America, where he puts his experiences in a halfway house (after being prosecuted by the Obama Administration for $20,000 in illegal campaign contributions, after he made an anti-Obama film), where he learned about crime and criminals. And, one of the things that he claims to have learned was that both Obama and Hillary are cons - the difference being their scope. Obama was into the small con, and Hillary the big one. In any case, getting back to the subject at hand, he calls community organizers as essentially small time cons, who organize for the purpose of skimming some of the monies that result from a successful con. It is, essentially, a protection racket, little different from the ones the mafia made famous for extorting money by breaking kneecaps. The idea is that if you don't pay off the community organizers, their people will make life difficult for you (and, mostly, for your company). The difference with Hillary though is that her con involves skimming off the federal govt., and not just shaking down businesses, which is why she and her husband are worth more than a hundred million dollars now, and control more than a billion dollars in their foundation.

AllenS said...

Exactly, Bruce, it's the con. The usage of "black" anything is a con. That's why you don't have any Polish, Russian, English, French... community organizers.

90% of blacks embrace the con. That will explain their voting patterns.

Douglas said...

If HRC has lost TNC, she's toast. He's the bellwether, all-purpose, Official Black Intellectual(tr) and if he says it's OK for blacks to abandon the Clintons and support Bernie, she's toast. And I mean, black, burned, inedible toast.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Original Mike said...2/10/16, 8:59 AM

I think "gun control" is Hillary's attempt at playing the race card, trotting out Trayvon and Garner, without explicitly mentioning race.

It's also about the one "liberal" issue where she can claim that Bernie Sanders is on the other side. And she can hope most gun owners will vote in the Republican primary.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Re: Hillary trying to appeal to blacks:

Don't forget Flint, Michigan, with the "poisoned" water. Except that it wasn't poisoned. At least not with lead, which is what everybody is talking about.

What the difference from before was, was that the water had an acidic pH. The acidity of the water caused lead to dissolve from the pipes into the water.

And the problem is not, and was not, at every home in Flint, which is what the idea of the water being "poisoned" would convey to you. Whether someone's water had too much lead or not had to do with the local pipes, some owned by the city, and more by the home owner. It was very patchy and spotty. Maybe 5% of the homes were affected. This problem isn’t only in Flint. The same thing happened in Washington, D.C. from 2001 to 2004 and in Sebring, Ohio last year. {New York Times Tuesday]

Now the problem in Flint is pretty much remedied, except maybe for somebody with completely rusted pipes.

This is case study NOT in what is wrong with fiscal conservatism, or with Republicans, or with white people when dealing with black people (at least if they are Republicans.) It is a case study in what is wrong with socialism, which doesn't make Bernie the best person to explain what really happened here. But people are understanding it better than they did three weeks ago and the coverage is getting more accurate, so maybe she could get in trouble by claiming the water was "poisoned." Maybe some media people will, just in the natural course of talking or writing about it, expose this formulation is an appeal to ignorance. Maybe even Donald Trump could get this started, like he did about the women whose reputations Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to damage.

Furthermore, what was wrong was not just government ownership (which removes agreat deal of the fear of the poliicians and the lawyers and the fear of losing your job or going to jail) but with the entire professional training of some people.

The regulatory system is wrong, and it makes no provision for fixing it by adding something to the water. Instead, a slow replacement of lead pipes is mandated, once the problem has reached beyond a certain percentage of the customers.

People with actual experience know what to do. Add orthophosphates to the water, which changes the pH and coats the lead pipes with lead oxide.

How to cure this (not really recognized by federal regulations)

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/01/why-flints-water-still-unsafe-or-it

The untreated water from Detroit also had a similar, not as serious, problem, which was taken care of by adding orthophospates. Flint tried to add some other chemical instead. Because they didn't know, because the whole way people are educated about this is wrong, because only the people on the job know what to do.