Victim George Zimmerman has finally decided to throw his lot in with like minded individuals in the Gun Cult. Remember the gun store in Florida that declared a "Muslim Free" policy? Well, ol' Georgie has painted them a little Confederate flag to auction off. Make sure you check out the video in the link. What an excellent illustration of the Gun Cult!
Although, I am still wondering if they understand that by vigorously fighting for looser gun laws, they are, in fact, helping the very Muslims they purport to be against acquire more weapons. Don't they realize how much they have in common with Islamic extremists?
Maybe the could just hug it out:)
Tuesday, August 18, 2015
Frank Zappa Long Ago Predicted Where The GOP Would Be Today
Frank Zappa Sees the Future of the Republican Party in 1986
Frank Zappa Sees the Future of the Republican Party in 1986THE SOURCE for this videohttp://youtu.be/WmhjyB3QfEg
Posted by Roger A Summers on Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Monday, August 17, 2015
The Problem We All Live With
Right now, all sorts of people are trying to rethink and reinvent education, to get poor minority kids performing as well as white kids. But there's one thing nobody tries anymore, despite lots of evidence that it works: desegregation. Nikole Hannah-Jones looks at a district that, not long ago, accidentally launched a desegregation program...
Sunday, August 16, 2015
Southern Politics
I've been visiting family in Southern Illinois and Missouri for the past few days and it's always amusing to discuss politics with them. Both of my mom's sisters love Donald Trump. Interestingly, the cite the same reasons as many other conservatives have cited. He says what he thinks, he's not a career politician, he'd be tough with China (that's a big deal down in these parts...you know, those crafty Chinks), and he'd fix our country's financial woes because he's a good businessman.
Politics must be the only field where a good chunk of the country doesn't want specialists in that field running the show. Think about this for a minute...would you want an electrician doing your plumbing? How about a lawyer building your house? So, the least of us that is experienced in government should get the nod. Yeah, that sounds like a whole bunch of adolescent nonsense to me. If you are one of these people that is bent out of shape about career politicians, why don't you put your put your time where your mouth is and run for office yourself? Or support someone with a like minded ideology? Otherwise, get over the fact that you didn't succeed in life and someone else (a politician) did.
I can report some good news from the Show Me State. One of my aunts finally gave in and enrolled in the Affordable Care Act. My mom and I kept telling her that she would save a ton of money if she did but she didn't believe us...because Obama. Cognitive dissonance finally gave way to the reality of a premium drop from $800 a month to $100 a month. They get to keep their own doctor (hee hee) and actually have better coverage.
Recent polls show the rest of America is catching up as well. Funny how reality works...
Politics must be the only field where a good chunk of the country doesn't want specialists in that field running the show. Think about this for a minute...would you want an electrician doing your plumbing? How about a lawyer building your house? So, the least of us that is experienced in government should get the nod. Yeah, that sounds like a whole bunch of adolescent nonsense to me. If you are one of these people that is bent out of shape about career politicians, why don't you put your put your time where your mouth is and run for office yourself? Or support someone with a like minded ideology? Otherwise, get over the fact that you didn't succeed in life and someone else (a politician) did.
I can report some good news from the Show Me State. One of my aunts finally gave in and enrolled in the Affordable Care Act. My mom and I kept telling her that she would save a ton of money if she did but she didn't believe us...because Obama. Cognitive dissonance finally gave way to the reality of a premium drop from $800 a month to $100 a month. They get to keep their own doctor (hee hee) and actually have better coverage.
Recent polls show the rest of America is catching up as well. Funny how reality works...
Saturday, August 15, 2015
The Real Reason Conservatives Oppose the Iran Deal? Oil!
The news is full of stories of economic woe in oil-producing states. From North Dakota:
The benchmark crude price has declined to $42 per barrel, after rallying in June to $60. North Dakota’s crude oil trades at a discount to the Oklahoma benchmark because of the higher cost of shipping most of it by rail. Helms said Friday’s North Dakota wellhead price estimate was $28.50 a barrel, down nearly $11 from last month.From Texas:
“People didn’t have to work anymore [during the height of the fracking boom],” said Elliott Skloss, a sign maker for the county road and bridge department. “Now they’ll have to work or panhandle if the oil price doesn’t go back up.” His family farms had five oil and gas wells that earned monthly checks worth $50,000 just a year ago, but they now earn one-tenth as much because of the decline in prices and well production.From Alaska:
The result, historians and economists say, is beyond the experience of this state, or probably any other in modern times: more than half of the tax base — predicated on crude oil selling at around $110 a barrel — is simply gone in the whirlwind of $50 oil, as though it never existed. A spending plan of $6.1 billion for 2015, passed by the Legislature last year, will fall $3.5 billion short, or more, if oil prices keep falling. Alaska collects no state sales or income taxes to pick up the slack; a savings fund from past oil earnings will help, but it cannot fully fill the gap either.If the Iran nuclear deal goes through, the sanctions that keep Iranian oil off the world market will be lifted. Iranian oil will flood the market and oil prices will plummet to even lower levels. Oil industry analysts are predicting major savings:
"Once we get past Labor Day, we should see gas falling by 10 to 15 cents a month," said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst with the Oil Price Information Service. "By December a lot of places are going to see gasoline at $2 or less."Remember Sarah Palin's salacious "Drill, baby, drill!" innuendo? Michelle Bachmann's "I'll bring back $2 gas" promise? Well, it's happening on Barack Obama's watch.
This is the real reason conservatives are opposed to the Iran nuclear deal. This is the real reason conservatives are opposed to renewable energy such as wind and solar power, which are quickly becoming cheaper than oil and natural gas even at historically low fossil fuel prices. This is the real reason conservatives oppose fuel economy and power plant emissions regulations, which save consumers money and and save lives.
The oil and pipeline billionaires dictate domestic and foreign policy to the Republican Party based on what's profitable for them, regardless of what's good for the economy and the environment.
Friday, August 14, 2015
The Beauty of The Free Market
Check out this fantastic piece on the decline of coal.
The overblown political rhetoric about the plan tends to obscure the market reality that the coal industry has been in steady decline for a decade, partly as a result of the natural gas boom, but mostly because consumers are demanding cleaner air and action on climate change. Communities across the U.S. have led the way in persuading utilities to close dirty old coal plants and transition to cleaner forms of energy.
Man, I love the free market!
The overblown political rhetoric about the plan tends to obscure the market reality that the coal industry has been in steady decline for a decade, partly as a result of the natural gas boom, but mostly because consumers are demanding cleaner air and action on climate change. Communities across the U.S. have led the way in persuading utilities to close dirty old coal plants and transition to cleaner forms of energy.
Man, I love the free market!
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Yet Another Affordable Care Act Lie Torpedoed
Conservatives spent a great deal of time assuring Americans that the Affordable Care Act's rules on health care for businesses would result in all sorts of problems ranging from less hiring to reduced hours.Three recent studies, including one from a conservative group the American Enterprise Institute, shows that this has not been the case.
So far, though, researchers say employers have not changed how they hire and schedule their workers in response to the law. "The data, to date, basically say that that hasn't happened, at least on aggregate basis -- that there really hasn't been nearly the change that some people were expecting," said Chris Ryan, a vice president at the payroll-management firm ADP.
Shocking, I know, that a prediction of doom and gloom from the right did not, in fact, come to pass. Ah well, reality has a well known liberal bias:)
So far, though, researchers say employers have not changed how they hire and schedule their workers in response to the law. "The data, to date, basically say that that hasn't happened, at least on aggregate basis -- that there really hasn't been nearly the change that some people were expecting," said Chris Ryan, a vice president at the payroll-management firm ADP.
Shocking, I know, that a prediction of doom and gloom from the right did not, in fact, come to pass. Ah well, reality has a well known liberal bias:)
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
A Call To The Private Sector On Inequality
Peter Georgescu has become another member of the one percent to call for action on the inequality in our country. This time, however, he's going directly to the private sector.
Who will be courageous enough to start the ball rolling? The most obvious choice is our government. But the current Congress has been paralyzed.
Paralyzed by ideological intransigence...
Gerogescu lays out the future quite nicely.
If inequality is not addressed, the income gap will most likely be resolved in one of two ways: by major social unrest or through oppressive taxes, such as the 80 percent tax rate on income over $500,000 suggested by Thomas Piketty, the French economist and author of the bestselling book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century.”
I've said the the same thing many times on this site.
So what are the action items that the private sector can pursue?
First, invest in the actual value creators — the employees. Start compensating fairly, by which I mean a wage that enables employees to share amply in productivity increases and creative innovations.
Second, businesses must invest aggressively in their own operations, directing profit into productivity and innovation to boost real business performance. Today, too many corporations reduce investment in research and development and brand building. As a result, we see a general decline in the value of their brands and other assets. To make up for those declines and for anemic revenue, businesses buy back their stock (now at record levels), and thus artificially boost earnings per share.
Yep.
Will they do it?
Who will be courageous enough to start the ball rolling? The most obvious choice is our government. But the current Congress has been paralyzed.
Paralyzed by ideological intransigence...
Gerogescu lays out the future quite nicely.
If inequality is not addressed, the income gap will most likely be resolved in one of two ways: by major social unrest or through oppressive taxes, such as the 80 percent tax rate on income over $500,000 suggested by Thomas Piketty, the French economist and author of the bestselling book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century.”
I've said the the same thing many times on this site.
So what are the action items that the private sector can pursue?
First, invest in the actual value creators — the employees. Start compensating fairly, by which I mean a wage that enables employees to share amply in productivity increases and creative innovations.
Second, businesses must invest aggressively in their own operations, directing profit into productivity and innovation to boost real business performance. Today, too many corporations reduce investment in research and development and brand building. As a result, we see a general decline in the value of their brands and other assets. To make up for those declines and for anemic revenue, businesses buy back their stock (now at record levels), and thus artificially boost earnings per share.
Yep.
Will they do it?
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
The President Channels Zombie Politics
I wonder if the president reads Zombie Politics...
President Obama stands by comments linking Republicans to Iranian hard-liners
“Just because Iranian hard-liners chant ‘Death to America’ does not mean that that’s what all Iranians believe,” Obama told students and faculty at the university. “In fact, it’s those hard-liners who are most comfortable with the status quo. It’s those hard-liners chanting ‘Death to America’ who have been most opposed to the deal. They’re making common cause with the Republican caucus.”
Hee hee...
President Obama stands by comments linking Republicans to Iranian hard-liners
“Just because Iranian hard-liners chant ‘Death to America’ does not mean that that’s what all Iranians believe,” Obama told students and faculty at the university. “In fact, it’s those hard-liners who are most comfortable with the status quo. It’s those hard-liners chanting ‘Death to America’ who have been most opposed to the deal. They’re making common cause with the Republican caucus.”
Hee hee...
Was The American Civil War About Slavery?
Here is a great answer to that question...
Was the Civil War About Slavery?
New Video! "Was the Civil War About Slavery?"What caused the Civil War? Did the North care about abolishing slavery? Did the South secede because of slavery? Or was it about something else entirely...perhaps states' rights? Colonel Ty Seidule, Professor of History at the United States Military Academy at West Point, settles the debate once and for all.
Posted by Prager University on Monday, August 10, 2015
Monday, August 10, 2015
Just Let the Lower Ninth Ward Go...
For years there have been articles (like this one) about how poor neighborhoods in New Orleans have not come back after Hurricane Katrina. The implication is that society doesn't care about poor people and revitalizing the places where they live.
There might be some truth to that. But the bigger truth is that people should never have lived in those places to begin with. The elevation of the Lower Ninth Ward is zero -- it's at sea level -- and some parts are four feet below sea level.
Lots of New Orleans is below sea level. That part of Louisiana is basically a gigantic swamp built up by silt in the Mississippi delta over millennia. No amount of money spent on Army Corps of Engineer projects will ever make the Lower Ninth a safe place to build homes.
As climate change causes sea level to rise, places like New Orleans and Florida are going to get flooded more and more frequently (high tides now threaten major flooding in Miami Beach). The Lower Ninth Ward was one of the last areas developed in New Orleans because it's a stupid place to build. The poorest people are victimized because they could only afford cheap (and unsafe) land.
But it's sheer stupidity to compound these travesties by bemoaning the fact that few people are moving back and encourage them "return home." On the contrary, everyone should be moving out. Turn the whole place into a big park designed to survive flooding.
I'm not just picking on the Lower Ninth Ward. In 1997 the Red River flooded, destroying thousands of homes and businesses in North Dakota. Fifty thousand people were evacuated. And lots of them wanted to rebuild in exactly the same place. It's sheer idiocy, as shown by the 2009 flooding of the Red River.
It's stupid and dangerous to build in the Lower Ninth Ward, on Florida's eroding beaches and in the flood plains of the Red River and the Mississippi. The federal government should help out the victims of natural disasters, but they shouldn't subsidize greedy developers and local politicians who blindly focus on growth and build on land that will be under water when the next hurricane or spring thaw hits.
There might be some truth to that. But the bigger truth is that people should never have lived in those places to begin with. The elevation of the Lower Ninth Ward is zero -- it's at sea level -- and some parts are four feet below sea level.
Lots of New Orleans is below sea level. That part of Louisiana is basically a gigantic swamp built up by silt in the Mississippi delta over millennia. No amount of money spent on Army Corps of Engineer projects will ever make the Lower Ninth a safe place to build homes.
As climate change causes sea level to rise, places like New Orleans and Florida are going to get flooded more and more frequently (high tides now threaten major flooding in Miami Beach). The Lower Ninth Ward was one of the last areas developed in New Orleans because it's a stupid place to build. The poorest people are victimized because they could only afford cheap (and unsafe) land.
But it's sheer stupidity to compound these travesties by bemoaning the fact that few people are moving back and encourage them "return home." On the contrary, everyone should be moving out. Turn the whole place into a big park designed to survive flooding.
I'm not just picking on the Lower Ninth Ward. In 1997 the Red River flooded, destroying thousands of homes and businesses in North Dakota. Fifty thousand people were evacuated. And lots of them wanted to rebuild in exactly the same place. It's sheer idiocy, as shown by the 2009 flooding of the Red River.
It's stupid and dangerous to build in the Lower Ninth Ward, on Florida's eroding beaches and in the flood plains of the Red River and the Mississippi. The federal government should help out the victims of natural disasters, but they shouldn't subsidize greedy developers and local politicians who blindly focus on growth and build on land that will be under water when the next hurricane or spring thaw hits.
Climate Change Goes Local
I was very please to see this week's cover story in CSM regarding climate change going local. Here's the skinny...
In city after city in South Florida, local officials are dealing with climate change. So, too, are municipalities big and small across the United States. The same determination is evident among governors and legislators in more than two dozen states. And it is magnified worldwide: Surprising progress in grappling with global warming is coming from surprising nations.
This groundswell of action on climate change is producing solutions and often bypassing lagging political leadership. The gathering force of these acts, significant and subtle, is transforming what once seemed a hopeless situation into one in which success can at least be imagined. The initiatives are not enough to halt the world’s plunge toward more global warming – yet. But they do point toward a turning point in greenhouse gas emissions, and ambitious – if still uneven – efforts to adapt to the changes already in motion.
Outstanding!
Here's something else that's very interesting...
Green lawns trump the political arguments over climate change, says Mr. Brown. “We don’t say ‘climate change,’ ” he admits. “It’s ‘protecting resources’ or ‘sustainability.’ That way, you can duck under the political radar.”
Right. This is exactly what Mooney talked about in "The Republican Brain." When words like "climate change" become so propagandized, you have to tell a different story. Who wouldn't be for protecting resources and sustainability?
In city after city in South Florida, local officials are dealing with climate change. So, too, are municipalities big and small across the United States. The same determination is evident among governors and legislators in more than two dozen states. And it is magnified worldwide: Surprising progress in grappling with global warming is coming from surprising nations.
This groundswell of action on climate change is producing solutions and often bypassing lagging political leadership. The gathering force of these acts, significant and subtle, is transforming what once seemed a hopeless situation into one in which success can at least be imagined. The initiatives are not enough to halt the world’s plunge toward more global warming – yet. But they do point toward a turning point in greenhouse gas emissions, and ambitious – if still uneven – efforts to adapt to the changes already in motion.
Outstanding!
Here's something else that's very interesting...
Green lawns trump the political arguments over climate change, says Mr. Brown. “We don’t say ‘climate change,’ ” he admits. “It’s ‘protecting resources’ or ‘sustainability.’ That way, you can duck under the political radar.”
Right. This is exactly what Mooney talked about in "The Republican Brain." When words like "climate change" become so propagandized, you have to tell a different story. Who wouldn't be for protecting resources and sustainability?
Sunday, August 09, 2015
It's Not _____________ When We Do It!
Donald Trump banned from RedState over menstruation jibe at Megyn Kelly
Aw...were their feelings hurt? Are they are all PC and shit now?
Sheesh...what a bunch of hypocrites. So much for the "outrage" over everyone being offended all the time:)
Aw...were their feelings hurt? Are they are all PC and shit now?
Sheesh...what a bunch of hypocrites. So much for the "outrage" over everyone being offended all the time:)
Good Sunday Words
"The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! 'Father, the atheists?' Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class. We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all. And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: We need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. 'But I don't believe, Father, I am an atheist!' But do good: We will meet one another there."
---Pope Francis, 22 May 2013
---Pope Francis, 22 May 2013
Saturday, August 08, 2015
Debate A Go Go
Lots of post debate analysis out there. Here are a few of my favorites...
Fear That Debate Could Hurt G.O.P. in Women’s Eyes
Ya think? It will never cease to amaze me how conservatives play the victim card and blame the media for the ACTUAL WORDS THAT COME OUT OF THEIR FUCKING MOUTHS. Save Carly Fiorina, none of the GOP nominees will get the female vote. I thought they were going to try to fix that after 2012.
FactChecking the GOP Debate, Late Edition
Darn those pesky fact checkers!! Reality has a well known liberal bias...
If you listened closely Thursday night, several Republican candidates let some heresies slip out.
Indeed:)
Hillary Clinton Can’t Stop Laughing At Dumbass Republicans
I wonder how much she wants Trump to be the nominee...:)
Fox News panel blasts Trump’s debate complaints
Are they serious wondering why Trump is so high in the polls right now?
Think about the personality of Donald Trump and how that represents the characteristics of the GOP base. Trump is angry, hateful and peddles fear on a consistent basis. His behavior is similar to that of an adolescent bully and is most aristocratic, believing firmly in a hierarchical structure for society where the wealthy and privileged few lord over the peasants (see also: the Antebellum South). These are all traits that exemplify people in the GOP base and it's exactly why he is ahead in the polls.
More importantly, Trump is a "have"...a mega wealthy person who GOP voters...the "soon to haves"...believe will someday be them if they just pull themselves up by their bootstraps. That is, of course, if the federal government, liberals, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the gun grabbers don't foil them in their quest to be just like The Donald.
Fear That Debate Could Hurt G.O.P. in Women’s Eyes
Ya think? It will never cease to amaze me how conservatives play the victim card and blame the media for the ACTUAL WORDS THAT COME OUT OF THEIR FUCKING MOUTHS. Save Carly Fiorina, none of the GOP nominees will get the female vote. I thought they were going to try to fix that after 2012.
FactChecking the GOP Debate, Late Edition
Darn those pesky fact checkers!! Reality has a well known liberal bias...
If you listened closely Thursday night, several Republican candidates let some heresies slip out.
Indeed:)
Hillary Clinton Can’t Stop Laughing At Dumbass Republicans
I wonder how much she wants Trump to be the nominee...:)
Fox News panel blasts Trump’s debate complaints
Are they serious wondering why Trump is so high in the polls right now?
Think about the personality of Donald Trump and how that represents the characteristics of the GOP base. Trump is angry, hateful and peddles fear on a consistent basis. His behavior is similar to that of an adolescent bully and is most aristocratic, believing firmly in a hierarchical structure for society where the wealthy and privileged few lord over the peasants (see also: the Antebellum South). These are all traits that exemplify people in the GOP base and it's exactly why he is ahead in the polls.
More importantly, Trump is a "have"...a mega wealthy person who GOP voters...the "soon to haves"...believe will someday be them if they just pull themselves up by their bootstraps. That is, of course, if the federal government, liberals, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the gun grabbers don't foil them in their quest to be just like The Donald.
Friday, August 07, 2015
Political Correctness? Conservatives Invented It!
It's common for conservatives to bitch about "political correctness." In the debate last night, Megyn Kelly called Trump out:
You’ve called women you don’t like ‘fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals,' " Ms. Kelly said during the debate, which set a cable record, with 24 million viewers tuning in. "How will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who [is] likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?”As you can see from the highlighted section, Trump was not-so-subtly threatening to savage Kelly with the same sort of epithets he uses on other women if she didn't treat him with kid gloves. And, true to form, after the debate Trump whined like some fourth grader about what a meanie Kelly was:
“I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct,” Mr. Trump said, to some applause.
Then it got slightly ugly. “And honestly Megyn, if you don’t like it, I’m sorry. I’ve been very nice to you, although I could probably maybe not be, based on the way you have treated me. But I wouldn’t do that,” Trump said.
“The questions to me were not nice,” Trump said. “I didn’t think they were appropriate.”Did she call him an egotistical, misogynistic, fat, old, balding, combed-over, narcissistic, smug, sociopathic liar and dick? No, even though all of those things are demonstrably true. She said nothing nasty or profane about Trump. She merely asked him to how he would respond when the vileness and insults that he and so many conservatives spew about women were quoted back to him. How dare she confront him with his own words!
Trump especially took issue with Megyn Kelly, the Fox News host who began her first question to Trump by listing the derogatory remarks he’s made about women he doesn’t like.
“I think Megyn behaved very nasty to me,” he said.
Tellingly, Trump's first recourse, like so many conservatives of the Limbaugh ilk, was to hide behind the guise of speaking truth and being put down by "political correctness." Whenever these ... men blurt out the verbal diarrhea that is their misogyny, racism and homophobia, and people call them out for it, they defend themselves by claiming that they are the victims and that "politically correct feminazis and liberals" are trying to muzzle them.
Which is the height of hypocrisy, because conservatives invented political correctness. They don't call it that, of course. They gave it all sorts of dire-sounding names: blasphemy, sacrilege, heresy, miscegenation, profanity. In Trump's case it's different, obviously, because nothing is sacred to him except himself.
When teachers first taught evolution in the schools conservatives called it sacrilege and tried to muzzle them. More recently conservatives have literally forced political correctness on school curricula by rewriting history to edit out the crimes whites visited upon black and native Americans, and turning history books into Ronald Reagan hagiographies. When blacks demonstrated in the 1950s and 60s for civil rights, challenging the conservative notion that God had made the races separate with whites superior to blacks, conservatives sent cops and dogs to beat the protesters into submission. When blacks married whites conservatives called it blasphemy and miscegenation. When homosexuals marched in gay pride parades and demanded the right to marry the person they loved conservatives screamed blasphemy and claimed God sent hurricanes in retaliation.
Whenever their sacred cows are gored, conservatives are the first ones to whine about being attacked. When their tender notions of religion or sexuality or American exceptionalism (or Trump's ego) are challenged they act as if the trumpets of doom have sounded and the world will end at any moment.
The thing that conservatives call "political correctness" is just the Golden Rule: treat others as you would have others treat you. But that's a teaching they don't seem to have heard of.
If Trump is going to call women fat pigs and and Mexicans rapists he can't whine about "political correctness" when people call him what he's just demonstrated he is: a misogynist and a racist. Donnie boy, if you're going to dish it out, you have to take it -- you can't go whining to mommy that Megyn was being nasty to you by holding you to account for what you said.
Debate Winners and Losers
Here are my takeaways from the two GOP debates yesterday...
For the first debate, Carly Fiorina was the clear winner. She was sharp, articulate, and substantive. The other six were essentially non entities although Lindsey Graham made some interesting points but that was largely due to his experience in the Senate. Rick Perry was awful. He just looked ridiculous. Pataki and Gilmore...why are they even running? Jindal very much looked and acted like he belonged at the kiddie table. Santorum's time has come and gone...just like evangelical Christians.
In the second debate, the clear winner was John Kasich. Even when pressed on issues like Medicaid and gay marriage, he stuck to his guns and proudly defended himself. Jeb Bush did an alright job as well but he needed to do more than that. The Donald was the Donald, of course, and, once again, lacked any real substance on policy. The first question was hilarious and it's going to be mighty interesting if he decides to run as a third party candidate.
Ben Carson was too flat. Chris Christie's main schitck has been stolen by the Donald so he wasn't much of a factor. A lot of people thought Rubio was good but I didn't see it. It's the same old ideas dressed up in a young, diverse looking package. Like Santorum, Huckabee's time is done. Cruz couldn't really be himself, again because of Trump. Paul really looked terrible but at least he didn't come off as bland as Walker, the real loser of both debates. His defense of himself as "aggressively normal" does not translate well to the national stage. If he is going to catch fire, he has to be a whole lot more than he is now. I don't think he can do it.
I'll give some props to the Fox News commentators for asking tough questions but they started off so fucking bad it was hard to take them seriously. Did they know the cameras were on for that pre -game 10 minutes? How was this planned? They looked very unprofessional.
Look for Fiorina and Kasich to move up in the polls.
For the first debate, Carly Fiorina was the clear winner. She was sharp, articulate, and substantive. The other six were essentially non entities although Lindsey Graham made some interesting points but that was largely due to his experience in the Senate. Rick Perry was awful. He just looked ridiculous. Pataki and Gilmore...why are they even running? Jindal very much looked and acted like he belonged at the kiddie table. Santorum's time has come and gone...just like evangelical Christians.
In the second debate, the clear winner was John Kasich. Even when pressed on issues like Medicaid and gay marriage, he stuck to his guns and proudly defended himself. Jeb Bush did an alright job as well but he needed to do more than that. The Donald was the Donald, of course, and, once again, lacked any real substance on policy. The first question was hilarious and it's going to be mighty interesting if he decides to run as a third party candidate.
Ben Carson was too flat. Chris Christie's main schitck has been stolen by the Donald so he wasn't much of a factor. A lot of people thought Rubio was good but I didn't see it. It's the same old ideas dressed up in a young, diverse looking package. Like Santorum, Huckabee's time is done. Cruz couldn't really be himself, again because of Trump. Paul really looked terrible but at least he didn't come off as bland as Walker, the real loser of both debates. His defense of himself as "aggressively normal" does not translate well to the national stage. If he is going to catch fire, he has to be a whole lot more than he is now. I don't think he can do it.
I'll give some props to the Fox News commentators for asking tough questions but they started off so fucking bad it was hard to take them seriously. Did they know the cameras were on for that pre -game 10 minutes? How was this planned? They looked very unprofessional.
Look for Fiorina and Kasich to move up in the polls.
Thursday, August 06, 2015
Where's the Outrage? Where's the Video?
Almost two weeks ago South Carolina cops shot and killed Zachary Hammond, a 19-year-old unarmed white man, in a drug bust. His family and lawyer are dismayed that there isn't a national outcry:
“It’s sad, but I think the reason is, unfortunately, the media and our government officials have treated the death of an unarmed white teenager differently than they would have if this were a death of an unarmed black teen,” Bland told The Washington Post this week. “The hypocrisy that has been shown toward this is really disconcerting.”
It's not hypocrisy because the situations isn't the same: Hammond was not "unarmed" -- he was driving a car -- and most importantly, there's no video of the shooting.
In the Sandra Bland case a cop forced Bland to change lanes, then pulled her over and ticketed for not signalling the lane change, then arrested her for not putting her cigarette out in order to receive the ticket. Then she was thrown in jail for three days and committed suicide.
In the Samuel DuBose case the shooting officer's own body cam recorded an assassination. In the Walter Scott shooting a passerby used his cell phone to record the cop murdering a fleeing man. In the Michael Brown case there was no video, but the cop was in a car and Brown was just walking down the street.
In Hammond's case, the shooting officer is claiming that Hammond was trying to run over him with a car. This is what the officer claimed in the DuBose case, but the video showed he was lying. (There are also rumors that DuBose had marijuana in the car.)
Getting run over by a car is a serious concern for cops at traffic stops. Two years ago police in Des Moines shot and killed Tyler Comstock, an "unarmed" white 19-year-old man who had taken his father's truck after an argument over cigarettes. The elder Comstock reported it stolen; when police caught up with Tyler he led them on a wild car chase through city streets, endangering many other drivers and pedestrians, finally pulling into a park, where he tried to ram cop cars. The police finally shot and killed him.
Did they really need to kill Comstock once his car was stopped in the park? Hard to say. But the episode was caught on video, and it was clear that the kid was totally out of control, trying to kill the cops. Hence, no outrage.
Last weekend Officer Sean Bolton, a cop in Memphis, was killed during a traffic stop for drugs:
"Officer Bolton apparently interrupted some sort of drug transaction," Armstrong said. "A digital scale and a small baggie of marijuana ... were located inside of the vehicle."
The violence was senseless given how mundane the stop was, Armstrong said.
"We're talking about less than 2 grams of marijuana. You're talking about a misdemeanor citation," he said. "We probably would not have even transported for that."
I suspect that the cop in Zach Hammond's death used excessive force. I suspect it was a bad shoot, that the cop was angry because the murdered kid was fleeing (the Guardian reports that Hammond was shot in the side, which means the car wasn't bearing down on the cop). I suspect that the department are helping Hammond's killer cover up a bad shoot by refusing to name him and release video of the killing. But I can't know these things without that video.
Our system gives cops the benefit of the doubt to use deadly force to protect themselves and others. That's the deal society makes with cops to make it possible to put their lives on the line every day.
This situation might seem hopeless, but there is something that we can do about these senseless deaths at traffic stops. And it's not just putting body cams on every cop.
Both Bolton's and Hammond's -- and perhaps DuBose's -- deaths were ultimately caused by drug laws. I personally think smoking weed is stupid and useless. But it's clearly no worse than drinking whiskey.
The easiest thing we could do to make cops and the public safer during traffic stops would be to decriminalize drug use. Drivers would be a lot less likely to flee or fight if drugs are legal.
That will make cops a lot less likely to stop random cars for minor infractions -- it's usually just an excuse to check for drugs, except in cities like Ferguson that balance their budgets by making cops shake down motorists for trivial offenses.
It would also prevent a lot of gang warfare and put South and Central American drug cartels out of business.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)