skip to main |
skip to sidebar
"... which carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison."
Other counts against the cops include involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault and false imprisonment. The five men and one woman posted bond and all but one reportedly were released.
“We are satisfied with today’s charges,” Gray’s stepfather, Richard Shipley, told a news conference. “These charges are an important step in getting justice for Freddie.”
"Officer Caesar R. Goodson Jr., 45... has been on the force since 1999..."
An African American, Goodson drove the van that transported Gray to jail. Goodson, whose bail was set at $350,000, is the only officer in the group facing a murder charge...
Goodson is the grandson of a police officer.... He lives in Catonsville in Baltimore County, where two of his neighbors said Friday that he had minimal interactions with them.
Frances Hubbard, who lives on his street, described the officer as a “family man, always polite, always speaks. I see him eating with the family.”
पोस्ट्स
११८ टिप्पण्या:
He's not a Black cop. He's Blue!
Why haven't we seen the full autopsy report on Freddy Gray?
We have seen this movie before and it's not going to end well, a political show trial in Baltimore is what that city has come up with? Shameful day no doubt.
he drove and killed. i don't think this was hit and run?
Often I wish I weren't the only person in America who couldn't give a flying fuck about the gossip that gets reported by the media as if it were news.
Guess there just aren't enough Filipino soap operas to go around.
Frances Hubbard, who lives on his street, described the officer as a “family man, always polite, always speaks. I see him eating with the family.”
He will make an excellent impression on the entire country when, dressed in his police uniform, he testifies during his trial, which will be broadcast live.
He will deny politely that he drove the vehicle roughly, and the public will believe him.
He will testify sentimentally about his long police career, about how he always tried to serve his community professionally and to treat his fellow African-American citizens with courtesy and dignity.
The trial will be yet another fiasco for Scientific Progressives.
The jury, selected from some mostly White venue far from Baltimore, will decide that the death was an accident and so will unanimously acquit all the defendants.
He's probably one of those white African-Americans.
I don't like the rough rides.
But man.....if all people being arrested would just promise not to act injured or bite the cops who belt them into their seatbelts, everything would be a lot easier and safer, no?
Dr. Ben Carson is pointing out that the fractured cervical vertebrae and crushed larynx could not have come from a rolling around in the back of the van. It needed a direct application of greater force.
I suspect the rough van ride is a cover for direct assault on Gray done by some officer. The question is how to get the police to squeal on one another. The answer is to charge the group that knows and bring them to trial until one or more offers to testify to the truth.
There seems to be a rush to judgment. I'm guessing this is going to undermine several careers.
Tarantino is obviously Italian. is that white enough for you ?
I hear the wind whistling out of the protest balloon.
"The trial will be yet another fiasco for Scientific Progressives.
The jury, selected from some mostly White venue far from Baltimore, will decide that the death was an accident and so will unanimously acquit all the defendants."
I agree ands then the rioting will resume. This will be one more disaster for the leftists. The timing will probably be around the 2016 election.
A passage from David Simon's article: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/29/david-simon-on-baltimore-s-anguish
How does race figure into this? It’s a city with a black majority and now a black mayor and black police chief, a substantially black police force.
What did Tom Wolfe write about cops? They all become Irish? That's a line in “Bonfire of the Vanities.” When Ed and I reported “The Corner,” it became clear that the most brutal cops in our sector of the Western District were black. The guys who would really kick your ass without thinking twice were black officers. If I had to guess and put a name on it, I’d say that at some point, the drug war was as much a function of class and social control as it was of racism. I think the two agendas are inextricably linked, and where one picks up and the other ends is hard to say. But when you have African-American officers beating the dog-piss out of people they’re supposed to be policing, and there isn't a white guy in the equation on a street level, it's pretty remarkable. But in some ways they were empowered. Back then, even before the advent of cell phones and digital cameras — which have been transforming in terms of documenting police violence — back then, you were much more vulnerable if you were white and you wanted to wail on somebody. You take out your nightstick and you’re white and you start hitting somebody, it has a completely different dynamic than if you were a black officer. It was simply safer to be brutal if you were black, and I didn't know quite what to do with that fact other than report it. It was as disturbing a dynamic as I could imagine. Something had been removed from the equation that gave white officers — however brutal they wanted to be, or however brutal they thought the moment required — it gave them pause before pulling out a nightstick and going at it. Some African American officers seemed to feel no such pause.
"I understand why the mayor and state attorney want to prevent riots... but that's not the job of the justice system... You cannot allow police officers or any other defendants to become scapegoats for crowds demanding a continuation of rioting,".
"There's no plausible, hypothetical, conceivable case for murder under the facts that we now know them. You might say that conceivably there's a case for manslaughter. Nobody wanted this guy to die, nobody set out to kill him, and nobody intentionally murdered him.
"The worst-case scenario is a case for involuntary manslaughter or some kind of reckless disregard, but the idea of without further investigation coming down with murder indictments... This is a show trial. This is designed to please the crowd. It's designed to lower the temperature."
"It may have been the criteria in Rome, for Fidel Castro, in Iran, and in other countries, but in our country you don't base indictments on what impact it's going to have on the crowd."
"You base it on a hard, neutral, objective view of the evidence, and it doesn't look like that was done here... They have invited a mess. What they did is they bartered short-term results today for long-term problems in the future.
"My prediction? They've overplayed their hand, it's unlikely they'll get any convictions in this case as a result of this, and if they do, there's a good possibility it'll be reversed on appeal and will just postpone the riots for months ahead."
Alan Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Harvard Law School, retired.
"It was simply safer to be brutal if you were black"
Careful, Mr. Simon. You sure you wanna go there? And does that apply just to cops?
On the other hand: once the racial revenge mob gets going, black lives matter, black cops' lives not so much.
"in our country you don't base indictments on what impact it's going to have on the crowd"
I guess it's not "our country" anymore, then.
How can we blame white Republicans now? Don't worry, I'm sure someone will find a way. Maybe some enterprising SJW will discover the guy has white ancestry (as most American blacks do) and he can be relabeled "white black person."
The prosecutor is trying to railroad these cops, the truth or skin color be damned.
She's married to a city councilman for Christ's sake!!!
Wake up folks.
There is no way the state will prove murder and no way the false arrest stands.
Yes, let's arrest cops for doing what cops do just because there is a large mob I need to vote for my husband and me to stay in power.
Brazen political charges. The prosecutor is going to burn in hell one day.
Why do so many conservative knee jerk rush to the defense of police brutality and corruption? What could they possibly be thinking?
tradguy- where are you seeing the knee jerk defense?
3 of the 6 officers are black. One is a woman who is black. What does that say about the template being applied here. In fact the guy charged most seriously is black The white guys are peripheral characters.
And so, the template that blacks are being targeted because they are black - why would this guy do that? He may have driven the car around intentionaly because Gray pissed him off, but I doubt he would do such a thing because he hates black people.
Also, this prosecutor better be able to prove this. Some of the charges seem extremely flimsly and I doubt a jury will convict for manslaughter a cop who may not have even known he wasn't wearing a seat belt.
If its' perceived that she charged the cops without getting all the facts, to appeal to the mob and the case turns out to be extremely flimsy, her career will be the equivalent of Nifong's.
traditionalguy wrote:
Why do so many conservative knee jerk rush to the defense of police brutality and corruption? What could they possibly be thinking?
and why do you rush to accuse the cops of police brutality and corruption?
""The worst-case scenario is a case for involuntary manslaughter or some kind of reckless disregard, but the idea of without further investigation coming down with murder indictments... This is a show trial. This is designed to please the crowd. It's designed to lower the temperature."
"It may have been the criteria in Rome, for Fidel Castro, in Iran, and in other countries, but in our country you don't base indictments on what impact it's going to have on the crowd."
"You base it on a hard, neutral, objective view of the evidence, and it doesn't look like that was done here... They have invited a mess. What they did is they bartered short-term results today for long-term problems in the future"
Excactly right. She's playing with fire here. Best not let herself get burned.
"Why do so many conservative knee jerk rush to the defense of police brutality and corruption? What could they possibly be thinking?"
I don't think that is what is going on here, or with Dersh. The criticism I am expressing, and probably many others, is that the charges are excessive and the timing is obviously political, even if she hadn't explicitly said so.
The victim had an arrest record that went back to his juvenile period with increasing evidence of violence which is so characteristic.
There is also talk about his being mouthy to the cops and probably defiant.
The police get no brief from me but this is the situation where they are isolated by politics and their natural paranoia about "civilians" is going off the charts. Do you want to live in a culture without police ?
I see moderation is on. I'll be back tomorrow.
@Fritz,
Some African American officers seemed to feel no such pause.
A few years back, the WaPo did a series on the police & minority communities in the District. The Latinos interviewed all said the same thing: the white cops were much easier to deal with than the black cops.
@viator,
I agree with Dershowitz --- the DA has overplayed her hand, and the charges won't stick. This will be a on-going festering wound for the nation, but especially for Baltimore. I live 40 minutes south of Baltimore going up I-95. I have clients in Baltimore. I really don't want to see Baltimore go to hell in a handbasket.
traditionalguy said...
Why do so many conservative knee jerk rush to the defense of police brutality and corruption? What could they possibly be thinking?
Why did Traditionalguy knee jerk rush to the defense of Trayvon Martin? What could he possibly be thinking? It looks like white guilt.
Why do so many rush to judge cops?
Let's strong him up and hang him!
Michael K said...
"I agree ands then the rioting will resume. This will be one more disaster for the leftists. The timing will probably be around the 2016 election."
Will it? If the goal is to get democrats elected we considered the Trayvon Martin case to be an embarrassment for leftists and how did that work out? Ferguson was an embarrassment too. Now Baltimore.
Obviously to us Baltimore has been a democrat city for over a generation. Every part and policy that has failed in this case was progressive. But notice the complete dearth of coverage of the root causes. The complete docility of the republican party. Only Cruz has really come out and called the democrats out for the racists they are.
Progressives don't care about successful policy nor do they care about how they look or are perceived. Their goal is division and strife. Their goal is hopelessness. Their goal is a permanent dependent underclass. They are winning here.
Look at the pictures of the cops. Three black, three white, one woman. Team America!
TG
Why do so many Libs knee jerk rush to the defense of systemic Dem corruption & neighborhood destruction in the inner cities? What could they possibly be thinking?
Why do so many Libs knee jerk rush to condemn police conduct in a city where the Police Chief & Mayor are Black? And where 1/2 of the accused cops are Black? What could they possibly be thinking?
Freddie's dead. The most likely cause is some type of police misconduct, but let's see how the evidence plays out. I just don't see how you can make the leap to deliberate murder. In any event, this cop is a more worthy citizen than Freddie, but you'd never know it from media accounts. Freddie with his twenty priors was some kind of near saint, and these cops are depraved bullies.......Any time a beat down is administered there's mortal risk. That was what was going through Zimmerman's mind,
My theory? The prosecutor intentionally overcharged in hopes that at least one of the defendants--especially Goodson? (aside--what a perfect name that is for a defendant: "good son")--would attempt to plea-bargain down in exchange for ratting out the others (especially his white "brothers in blue") with a made-up story that fits the narrative.
Trad guy: "The question is how to get the police to squeal on one another. The answer is to charge the group that knows and bring them to trial until one or more offers to testify to the truth."
Really? I would have thought that as a defense attorney you would find this kind of tactic repugnant. Is it that police officers, unlike your clients, don't deserve to be charged based on the evidence?
Anyway, it looks like the State's Attorney in Baltimore agrees with you. Based on the information that has been made public, I don't see that she has much chance of making the charges, particularly the murder charge, stick.
I am only going to address the second degree murder charge against the driver of the van. I am not addressing the negligent homicide charges against the others, based on failure to provide medical care to a prisoner in their custody.
If driver was giving Gray a "rough ride," that is, if as alleged he put Gray in the van cuffed and shackled in such a way that Gray couldn't brace himself against suddens stops and turns, and then proceeded to administer a bunch of sudden stops and turns, all in order to bang Gray up a bit and teach him a lesson about not running away from arresting officers, and if Gray died as a result of that "rough ride," I don't see why that doesn't present a perfectly conventional case of second degree murder. You "take your victims as you find them," and the fact that the driver didn't intend to kill Gray but only to bang him up a bit is irrelevant.
Dr. Ben Carson is pointing out that the fractured cervical vertebrae and crushed larynx could not have come from a rolling around in the back of the van. It needed a direct application of greater force.
Where is the "crushed larynx" narrative coming from? So far, I've only heard it from the family attorney. Is this a known fact or something made up like the "Mike Brown was shot in the back" bullshit?
You have a legit source for that?
I've also read that Freddie Gray had mercury or lead poisoning as a child and that his bones were more brittle as a result.
traditionalguy: Why do so many conservative knee jerk rush to the defense of police brutality and corruption? What could they possibly be thinking?
You were dead wrong about Trayvon Martin. You were dead wrong about Micheal Brown.
Why do you continue to speak on issues like this? Have you no shame at all?
Sit down, shut up. We know your game, its failed at least twice now. Whether we are right or wrong, you have lost the right to lecture us on this.
Now the charges are just that, charges. No convictions yet.
I do agree with the charges and for them to let the chips fall where they may.
I have no doubt the lawyers for each of the cops will counsel them to turn on the others and give testimony for a deal.
Yes the driver will be the main one at fault for actually bouncing him off the walls of the van.
But who was the one responsible for not belting the suspect in? That will be the 64 thousand dollar question.
There is no question but that Freddie Gray was handcuffed and then shackled and was never tied to the seat with a seatbelt.
So, if Freddie was on his feet banging his head against the front of the compartment for whatever reason and whether hard or gently, would he not be likely to loose his footing and fall over backwards whenever the van started moving from a stop?
And falling over backwards he may have hit his head on the seat edge, and it broke his neck?
I seem to remember a good many TV shows where something like this was the basis for the plot.
Anyway, I think the cops may be on the hook for not seatbelting him in, which may be "gross negligence," but the prosecutors can't make any kind of a murder charge stick.
Fen, FWIW, I was right about both Martin and Brown, and I think the police conduct here was very questionable at best.
The "nickel ride" is entirely an assumption and no evidence has been presented that such a thing occurred in this case.
Hagar - Gross negligence would be involuntary manslaughter. As I said elsewhere, if the prosecutor can prove that the driver intentionally administered a "rough ride" intending to bang Gray up a bit, and if she can prove that rough ride caused Gray's death, that's enough for a murder conviction.
Douglas: Fen, FWIW, I was right about both Martin and Brown, and I think the police conduct here was very questionable at best.
If that's true then you deserve to be taken seriously when you question police conduct here.
Its the others I'm talking about, the ones who ranted propaganda and hyperbole re Martin, Brown, Gardner, etc that I'm referring to.
There should be consequences for getting caught in a web of lies. The simplest is that you are no longer taken seriously here.
Depraved heart would depend on action and intent. As well as classifying the factors that lead to death. The "rough" treatment may only be incidentally related, a catalyst that exploited an unknown, unforeseeable vulnerability (e.g. porous bones, preexisting condition).
The police officers stand accused but not convicted before due process. It's unfortunate that the government permitted the civil disruption and exploited justice for a political cause.
You are likely to have a predominantly black jury. And whatever zeal there was before to convict will be undermined when they are confronted with the possibility of sending two black men and a black woman to prison. These folks might have been evil cops before, but now they are black defendants under assault by an oppressive system.
Meanwhile, going more to the merits of the case, assuming that the fatal injury occurred in the vehicle, as suggested by the coroner, if the handling of Gray followed standard operating procedure, if the officers were simply followed established protocols and official policy in cuffing and/or not using a seat belt, it is hard so see the case even going to the jury for lack of any criminal intent.
It's interesting to note that so many of the black citizens of Baltimore, including the elected officials, see their lives and aspirations reflected in Freddy and not in the three officers who are charged with his death. My guess is that some of the officers faced down problems similar to those of Freddy and worked out a more elegant solution to those problems. Freddy had twenty priors. He wasn't very good in his chosen career as a drug retailer. Something bad was going to happen to him. The cops were present and perhaps to some extent responsible for his crash. But Freddy was going to crash.
Douglas: "As I said elsewhere, if the prosecutor can prove that the driver intentionally administered a "rough ride" intending to bang Gray up a bit, and if she can prove that rough ride caused Gray's death, that's enough for a murder conviction."
I disagree. Murder normally requires an intent to kill and/or malice aforethought which may be implied from the circumstances. Intent is clearly missing or unprovable here. "Bang(ing) Gray up a bit" doesn't look like actual or implied malice to me. Death was not a likely or necessarily predictable outcome.
Baltimore is officially now the most fucked up city in America. From any vantage.
3:55 "intent to kill or do serious bodily injury...."
I really don't want to see Baltimore go to hell in a hand basket.
Lol. Is there really any better way to describe Baltimore? In a city that poorly run, something like this, or worse, was bound to happen someday.
Look at the pictures of the cops. Three black, three white, one woman. Team America!
Lol. And according to rioters, "racism diversity". Hahaha.
Rhythm and Balls: "Baltimore is officially now the most fucked up city in America. From any vantage."
Is it, or is it simply the "hottest" right now and therefore only appears to be most fouled up at the moment where the "moment" will more than likely pass at some point in the near future?
Detroit is still going gang-busters in the "hopeless" category after all.
I'm getting a bit discombobulated sensing that I am in broad agreement with R&B's on this one.
Now the libs are saying black cops are indoctrinated into systemic racism and white supremacy.
By Democrats, I guess, when it comes to Baltimore. But that's par for the course with them.
No they aren't, Jason. Check out the comments here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/opinion/black-culture-is-not-the-problem.html
Tide's a-changing on that tune.
Go to "readers' picks".
Rhythm and Balls said...
Baltimore is officially now the most fucked up city in America. From any vantage
Yes, but you need to identify the party who is responsible for the evil and the corruption in Baltimore.
One party rule = evil. This is a real problem in majority black cities, because black people have bought the line that Republicans are racist, a line the media has been feeding them for decades.
Contrast New York, which is a liberal city. But it's not majority black, which means Republicans can and do run campaigns and get elected. Which keeps the city relativity non-corrupt, especially compared to majority-black cities.
Black people who vote in racial lock-step are responsible for their own stupidity, their own racism, which leads to these disasters.
But the media, run by white liberals, is also largely to blame. They are not addressing black racism, they barely recognize such a thing.
Indeed, the media often incites racism. They divide people into races, they label Republicans as racist, regardless of what Republicans say on the subject. Any idea that would help black people, like school choice, is derided as Republican and racist.
When you label Republicans as racist in a dishonest way, in effect you are giving black voters no choice at all. When every Republican is David Duke, the only thing to do is elect Edwin Edwards. So congrats on your corrupt criminal cities, liberals. You did it.
A family man? Who eats dinner with his family? That's enough right there to show a "depraved heart".
He's guilty as hell.
Obama ran as post-racial, and he rarely talks about race. When he does talk about race, for instance the Trayvon Martin case, he is intentionally trying to stir up racial anger (and voters). So he's not post-racial at all, he's just hiding it and using code words.
I believe his antipathy to Republicans is racially-motivated. He can't deal with them or talk with them, there is a hostility there that keeps his Administration from reaching any sort of compromise. For many years I thought it was simply ideological, an ideological dispute.
And yet, look at the way he negotiates with Iran. In good faith! Seeking compromise! What can you say about somebody who trusts Iran's government more than his own Congress? It's bizarre. It's completely irrational.
But Iranians have darker skin, so he trusts them more.
Iranians invade an embassy and take Americans hostage. Hey, let's trust them! They should have nukes.
Republicans refuse to raise the debt ceiling. They're taking America hostage! Who can trust those evil Republicans?
Here is what George W. Bush did in Africa.
It didn't really matter. Here is Kanye West, speaking racially, dividing people into races, making racial assumptions. The vibe I get from West's rant is that if New Orleans was Iowa, he wouldn't be there, he wouldn't give a damn. He's worried about "my people" and attacking white politicians.
And sure, sometimes you really are Moses attacking Egypt, or MLK attacking Bull Connor. There are racists. And there are politicians who make appeals on the basis of race.
So here's the question. Are there no black racists? Are there no black people who should be accused of racism? And why do we rarely see these criticisms in the media?
Yes, but you need to identify the party who is responsible for the evil and the corruption in Baltimore.
No I don't. I can identify the people. Since democratic elections are still held in America - in case you forgot - the people get the government they deserve. As they do in all the socially dysfunctional, divorce-riddled, methamphetamine-addicted, government-dependent, tourism-averse, red states. As much as you hate to admit it, one-party government has not yet arrived in America.
because black people have bought the line that Republicans are racist…
Oh. And why on earth would they do that? Maybe this guy knows…
Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?
Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."
Take responsibility for your own failings before you ask that of others, you hypocritical toddler.
I believe his antipathy to Republicans is racially-motivated.
No, it's competence-motivated. The state of the union in 2008 was FUBAR thanks to eight years of Republican rule and nearly 30 years of Republican domination by at least the executive and/or legislative branches, and he changed that for the better. The American people had simply had enough of optional, unfunded wars, economic calamities, and the generally unscientific religious psycho-babble of right-wing partisanship.
Saint Croix believes that, in Baltimore at least, the government can MAKE the people better. If only they vote for Republicans, that will make them better people.
Behold the top-down, government-enforced, authoritarian understanding of virtue exemplified by right-wing nuts like Saint Croix.
So here's the question. Are there no black racists?
The question is actually whether there are no black idiots. Which surely there are, just as there are incompetent white idiots like the people identified as heroes by Saint Croix.
Ritmo wrote:
No I don't. I can identify the people. Since democratic elections are still held in America - in case you forgot - the people get the government they deserve.
and in the case of Baltimore that is Democratic rule. From top to bottom. Surely they should take some credit, or lack of credit for the SHIT HOLE that Baltimore is.
As much as you hate to admit it, one-party government has not yet arrived in America.
You need to read Williamson's article. It has arrived, in several big cities, with disastrous results.
Ritmo wrote:
No I don't. I can identify the people.
So, uh what party are those people in? And what party did the people elect?
R&B, I don't say there are no white racists. I think there are. And there are white racists who operate in secret, who use code words.
The problem with the media is that Republicans get tarred with the "racist" complaint all the time, regardless of what they say or do. Innocent people who are not racist get the exact same criticism.
I would like to see black people criticized for their racism to the same extent that white people are criticized for their racism. You might assume that white people are more racist than black people, but that assumption needs to be proven. Otherwise it's just racist.
Saint Croix believes that, in Baltimore at least, the government can MAKE the people better. If only they vote for Republicans, that will make them better people.
No, but I believe it will make government better. When the government is the problem, as you yourself identified, the solution is a new government. Which means you vote for the other party, dumb ass.
Or you criticize your own party for its own mistakes. You identify the racists in your own party and drive them out. That's what Republicans did. It's time for Democrats to step up and follow our lead.
@R&B,
As tendentious as you always are, R&B, you left out Atwater's quote which follows immediately after your quote:
Atwater: But Reagan did not have to do a southern strategy for two reasons. Number one, race was not a dominant issue. And number two, the mainstream issues in this campaign had been, quote, southern issues since way back in the sixties. So Reagan goes out and campaigns on the issues of economics and of national defense. The whole campaign was devoid of any kind of racism, any kind of reference. And I'll tell you another thing you all need to think about, that even surprised me, is the lack of interest, really, the lack of knowledge right now in the South among white voters about the Voting Rights Act.
In other words, even he was surprised at how little the appeal to racism was needed in the South by the Reagan campaign. Not to mention, being surprised by how little Southerners cared about issues like the Voting Rights Act, which should have been thorns in their sides if they had been concerned about racial issues.
You need to put a crimp in calling other people "toddlers" until you have some clue as to how to actually, you know, read texts.
and in the case of Baltimore that is Democratic rule. From top to bottom. Surely they should take some credit, or lack of credit for the SHIT HOLE that Baltimore is.
As Republicans should take credit for how they got America to the point it was at in 2006 and 2008. But they won't.
I'm not aware that these elections were party lists. I have a feeling that actual candidates were presented, and voted upon. If it's machine politics that decides them, that's also local. And surely you know about machine politics - as that's how the GOP is run: Like an organization of criminal corruption and influence.
You need to read Williamson's article. It has arrived, in several big cities, with disastrous results.
Williamson's a defender of executing the innocent, so I take no stock in what that Neanderthal has to say about anything.
So, uh what party are those people in? And what party did the people elect?
Um, not the people that The Party of Nixon elected?
I think that's what I'll call lovers of the Republican Party like you. Obviously you think that individual responsibility and local accountability matters less than party politics. Thanks for showing it!
The problem with the media is that Republicans get tarred with the "racist" complaint all the time, regardless of what they say or do. Innocent people who are not racist get the exact same criticism.
Well, then maybe they shouldn't be sending out greeting cards with the White House lawn seeded with watermelons after 2008. Their problem is idiocy and tone-deafness when it isn't out-and-out racism. Still their problem, though.
Black "racism" is about as much a problem as a hangnail. If the only "damage" it causes is to the feelings of hypersensitive white nationalists, it's not much of a problem at all. The real problem with black America is its hatred for education and self-improvement, but as we can see that hurts them most of all, and they're the only ones who can bother to do anything about it.
No, but I believe it will make government better. When the government is the problem, as you yourself identified, the solution is a new government. Which means you vote for the other party, dumb ass.
See. This is why you knuckle-draggers went all Tea Party. You recognized that your party organizes itself like a lock-step politbureau, and then went "rogue" by voting for wild yahoos. Not much of a way to fix the problem.
The problem with Baltimore is the people of Baltimore. You're arguing yourself into circles trying to deny that you said that the right government could make its people and civic culture better. It can't. It's an either/or-yes/no thing. Either government can make people better, or it can't. By saying the "right" party could, you are endorsing such a view.
You need to put a crimp in calling other people "toddlers" until you have some clue as to how to actually, you know, read texts.
Oh really? Tell me what you read in Atwater's previous reference to "coded" that I didn't, then. Because, unlike you, I don't have to ignore everything that he previously said in order to read the supposedly un-incriminating sound bite that you snip off into a closed quote as if it lacked any relation to what just came out of his mouth a few seconds before.
Not to mention, being surprised by how little Southerners cared about issues like the Voting Rights Act, which should have been thorns in their sides if they had been concerned about racial issues.
The VRA had nothing to do with which ethnic community benefited best by government attention to the political "spoils" they thought they deserved more. As we can see post-VRA, one can either appeal to direct government action benefiting one community or the other, but the ethnic benefit is undeniable. Atwater admits as much. He just says that by foregoing an overtly racial appeal, racism might go away, but he didn't say he wasn't making use of it in the meantime in order to advance party interests at the expense of the black voter. That's exactly his point.
The problem with Baltimore is the people of Baltimore.
No, the problem is with the government of Baltimore. The government that is dominated by the Democrat party. Good luck on your "fix the people" project. What are you, racist? You don't like majority-black cities?
And what is the fix you propose for the people of Baltimore? Vote Democrat, again? Vote for the black guy?
You might seriously reflect on your hostility to Republicans and the demonization that you, and so many others, engage in. What has that done to the city of Baltimore? You've run all the "bad" Republicans out of town. And what is the result?
Quoting you:
Baltimore is officially now the most fucked up city in America.
You're arguing yourself into circles trying to deny that you said that the right government could make its people and civic culture better. It can't. It's an either/or-yes/no thing. Either government can make people better, or it can't. By saying the "right" party could, you are endorsing such a view.
One party rule is a fucking disaster, Ritmo. Maybe you can find Republican hellholes that are also one-party disasters. I'm a Republican, which means that I think Democrat solutions are a recipe for disaster. But having no other option, no competition, one-party rule, is a fucked up situation on top of any Democrat stupidity.
You might say, since Democrats so dominate Baltimore, that Democrats are winners and Republicans are losers. But since your winning has resulted in the resulting hellhole, you might contemplate if you have won fairly and respectfully.
One-party rule is a disaster, above and beyond any particular party's stupidity. If you can agree on that, you ought to reflect about what happened in Baltimore. And Detroit. And you might start by reading Williamson's article, as opposed to being proud of your ignorance about what he is saying.
What are the Republican one-party hellholes, Ritmo? Just curious.
And why isn't one of them the worst city in America?
Is it your position that the people of Baltimore cannot be governed? They're just bad people?
You think this hellhole was created in a vacuum? Democrat rules, Democrat rulers, Democrat-controlled society, it's a hellhole, but it has nothing to do with Democrats?
What are the Republican one-party hellholes, Ritmo? Just curious.
Oh, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, etc., etc., etc.
And why isn't one of them the worst city in America?
Worst STATES! Even better than bad cities.
You're not too swift. Nowhere in my quote on Baltimore did I use the word "government".
You seem to not realize how voting works. This isn't Iraq. People in government can't just be installed. There is no Ahmed Chalabi for Baltimore. No Vladimir Putin underling, no Bush. No one to be installed at your choosing just for a reward of being of the "noble" party of Nixon and Palin.
My city, Charlotte, is a majority-black city. I like it. It's a great city.
Our last election for mayor, we had a black Democrat running against a white Republican. And our newspaper endorsed the Republican. Very surprising to me, it's a liberal paper. They endorsed Carter, Mondale, Dukasis, Kerry, you name it. But in the mayor election, they endorsed the Republican.
It didn't matter. He still lost.
One of the commentators at the paper said the Republican didn't have a chance. That surprised me. Our city is 45% Republican, more or less. Surely some people would cross over, and vote for the Republican if he's a better candidate?
Nope.
Our new mayor, Patrick Cannon, was soon indicted on corruption charges. He is now in prison.
I say I like my city. But if the people in my city continue to vote for Democrats, regardless of anything else, a few decades from now we will start to see white flight. And as the city becomes more and more dominated by one-party rule, it will become a hellhole like Detroit. Or Baltimore.
Oh, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, etc., etc., etc.
All of those states are two-party states, with viable candidates from both parties. Have you not noticed that these states sometimes have Democrat governors?
Blacks hate Republicans because FDR gave to them what Reagan wanted to take from them, Saint Crock. Get the fuck over it! It's not my problem that they hate you and the way you talk down to them for wanting to take from them what FDR did (before that they didn't vote as often for Democrats). That's your problem. Keep pretending that I care all you want. I don't.
Detroit's problems resulted from the Big Three's business declining on account of them deciding to manufacture crap (a Republican specialty) and deciding that no transit infrastructure would link city to suburbs and provide the framework for gentrifying to recover after the riots of the 1960s - as the other cities did. Only a dupe who has never been to Detroit and serves as a talking head for partisan Republican political games thinks anything different.
But let's face it - "think" is a generous way of describing your participation in that talking point. You're just parroting what Rush Limbaugh told you.
And that's why thinking people don't vote Republican, either. You might as well write your party talking points into the bible, the way you value belief and feeling over fact and reason. You really a sheep of the highest order. No wonder you assume other people don't actually have good reasons for disagreeing with and seeing things differently than you do. You really do assume that they're as stupid and mentally subservient as you are. How pathetic!
I believe it's fair game to call President Obama a racist. Remember how he defended Susan Rice during Benghazi -- not on her merits but because she was "a woman of color." That's bigotry in a nutshell.
And that's why thinking people don't vote Republican, either.
I like the idea of "thinking people" voting for the choices the DNC offers.
LOL!
DNC's choice brought you a tripling of the DJIA, cutting unemployment in half and no involvement in optional unfunded trillion-dollar wars abroad Chickie but if you prefer going back to all that then I can't say I blame people who refer to the right-wing as the party of stupid.
Plus they harbor all the creationists and various other science deniers.
It's not my problem that they hate you and the way you talk down to them
Black people don't hate me. I've never run into this hatred that you mention.
They hate an idea, a mythical Republican, a media-creation. They don't hate me.
None of what you just wrote speaks to me or my family, R&B. It all goes right over my head to some other intended target that you imagined. I liked you better when you were grounded in reality.
The Republicans they hate are no less mythical than the imagined, whitewashed white knights you make Republicans out to be.
Let the record show that Chickie can't follow the DJIA, unemployment rate or whether unfunded wars are being fought, but that his head is grounded just far enough in "reality" to know that Democratic choices are baaaaaaaaaad!
How scientific of you.
I don't imagine Republicans are white knights. Why don't you read what I write, quote it, and respond, as opposed to making up mythical quotes or ideas I never said, or even suggested?
Ideas are important. But these ideas need to be grounded in reality. You imagine black people hate me. They don't. You imagine I think Republicans are white knights. I don't.
This myth-making is symptomatic of major problems I have with liberals, specifically liberals in the media. Stick to facts. Quit imagining facts and treating these imagined facts as if they are real.
In a city that poorly run, something like this, or worse, was bound to happen someday.
You said this, Ritmo. Remember? I am quoting you.
Who runs Baltimore? What party controls that city? Name names. Name what political party they belong to. Identify the bad apples and help people get rid of them.
The moment I mention they are Democrats, you stop being honest. You change the subject. You talk about anything other than Baltimore.
You are a political obsessive. Blaming politics for everything and seeing all things through the lens of political partisanship. Boring.
And dishonest.
According to people like you, the problem with Nixon was that he was a Republican - not a crook.
What's the difference?
That you are too stupid to see what you are doing only reinforces the stupidity that is rampant among the Republican party.
The moment I mention they are Democrats, you stop being honest. You change the subject. You talk about anything other than Baltimore.
I actually did talk about Baltimore.
You, OTOH, (as is evidenced in that very quote), needed to talk about politics.
You are too dumb to even see that it is you who is changing the subject.
Typical thing for a Republican to do.
Name what political party they belong to. Identify the bad apples and help people get rid of them.
And replace them with corporatist whores - i.e. REPUBLICANS!
Glory, glory Hallelujah! The Lord has come! In the form of an elephant! The elephant money-god is our salvation! O Lord!
and why do you rush to accuse the cops of police brutality and corruption?
Because a man who had not committed a crime ended up with a severed spinal cord while in police custody. He didn't just bump his head getting into the police van.
I'm a big fan of Alan Dershowitz. Old school liberal, always honest, always says what he thinks.
Let the record show that Alan Dershowitz does not think that voting Republican will be the salvation of Baltimore.
Or that it will lead to peace in the Middle East.
Or that it will turn America into a utopia.
Or give us free, clean, limitless energy.
Or cause lions to lay down with lambs.
But that is because Alan Dershowitz is not a cuckoo bird.
So, unless we hear otherwise, R&B and Freder (two birds of feather)'s answer is to keep calm and keep electing Baltimore Dems.
Got it!
Or is R&B a closeted Hillary! fan?
Move to Baltimore, Lord Chickenshit. Vote for whomever you want.
You're an interesting study in self-contradiction, R&B.
Do you suppose that I'm the only one who reads what you write here and what you write at Lem's?
What I like about Dershowitz is how he always takes the defendant's side, all the time, regardless. You have to think that Dershowitz does not like cops. What defense attorney likes cops? Cops are their default bad guy. And yet here he is, jumping up and down, protecting these cops.
So I like that about Dershowitz. Also I like his fearlessness, how he sticks his neck out and does not care if people will think he's a racist, or suspect him of bad motives. His commitment to fair criminal trials impresses me.
Dershowitz was a participant in the O.J. Simpson trial, which was another racial circus. ("You once used the word 'nigger' in a screenplay! Didn't you!") The race-baiting, the racial appeals, intentionally jamming the jury with black people and then appealing to their worst instincts. Ugly and vile.
I wonder if he actually thought O.J. Simpson was innocent? Or does he feel guilt for his (limited) participation in that circus?
Anyway, I'm happy that he is objecting, loudly, to any racial circus by prosecutors. I think it's very early in the process to be yelling "show trial!" But I like his fearlessness, his willingness to voice his suspicions.
hombre wrote: "Murder normally requires an intent to kill and/or malice aforethought which may be implied from the circumstances. Intent is clearly missing or unprovable here. "Bang(ing) Gray up a bit" doesn't look like actual or implied malice to me. Death was not a likely or necessarily predictable outcome." You don't need intent to kill, you just need intent to inflict harm. The law says that "you take your victims as you find them." If you sucker punch someone in the nose (say in the "knockout game"), and the victim suffers a fatal brain hemorrhage, that's enough for a murder charge even though most people don't die from being punched in the nose.
1. The check is in the mail
2. I gave at the Office
3. Diversity is our strength
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा