If there was any doubt that GZ was in fear of being beaten to death by TM – just look at the video of those 15 y/o thugs on the school bus beating the 13 y/o White kid.Imagine how vicious and deadly those thugs will be in 2 years.
Followed a link to a piece about polling on race relations since the president took office and embedded in it was part of a private conversation that the NAACP had with black voters around election time.
If you can believe electing Romney would put you back out in the fields, believing Zimmerman was just looking for a black kid to shoot wouldn't even raise a sweat on your brow.
Zimmerman's been tagged as white (good thing, too, because otherwise there wouldn't be an injustice to stoke for votes) and Democrats will always be closer to La Raza than Republicans when it comes to amnesty.
My H always says everything is always about money.
This is not what a lot of folks signed up for, but essentially what many of us predicted a few years ago.
One thing that throws me a bit - the Hispanics, as a voting bloc, elected Obama. What will happen with the race war that has cone out of the Zimmerman-Martin debacle? How does this impact 2014 Congressional elections? Does it change the trajectory of 2016?
Had a friend back in the '80's that was part of the Shreveport oil crowd. At the time, he was in his late 20's as was about everyone involved in the story, which I'll keep mercifully brief.
All oil field people, some professional, some just very well paid, some with with family money on top. One of the perks of Shreveport, if you're a hunting and fishing type, was/is corporate or family duck hunting opportunities at camps in the more prime areas of Arkansas --- the area of Stuttgart being one of the more prime ones for both ducks and what they eat.
Blustery, bluebird Sunday morning - not the best weather for calling in ducks - finds ten or twelve hung-over twenty-something males drinking whiskey and playing table top shuffle-board for some serious money. Fifty bucks from each two player side, as I recall. Not enough to kill over but more than enough to cause fights over rules interpretation. Pucks have been thrown, enough points are laying on the table to settle the game depending on how one hanging off a corner is scored, and the arguing begins. Runs on long enough to gather enough steam that it's starting to look like a fight/friendship ender/lost business relationship/etc., all with: "it ain't about the money" every 30 seconds or so.
Over and over: "it ain't about the money".
Alan M. - son of a drilling contractor, not a player, and wiser than I at that age - walks over to the table and pockets the two fifties, which draws the attention of our irritable contestants, who ask him what the hell he's doing. He replies: "since it ain't about the money, y'all won't mind if I take it."
You can fill in the rest, which brings us back to the current topic: "it's always about the money."
Obama was going to be our post-racial future. Unfortunately, it's turned out he's a whole, whole lot like Al Sharpton instead, albeit a Sharpton with a Harvard Law degree. He's got legislation to pass, elections to turn for the party, he's got to keep his eye on the ball, which is that money ball, not that "national conversation on race" ball Holder's prattled about and liberals will forever seek.
I'm probably being a fool, but I can't believe the one they're instigating right now is the one they've been promising.
It is my belief that most of the blacks at these rallies do NOT know the fact of this case.
The protestors seem to be focuses on two things -- (1) Martin was profiled and then followed by Zimmerman because Martin was a young black male and (2) Martin was killed by Zimmerman, a non black.
All that stuff in the middle seems to be left out of the analysis. It's all that other stuff that shows the jury correctly applied the law and acquitted Zimmerman.
-- Edited by Razorsharp on Sunday 21st of July 2013 07:51:46 AM
I watched Hannity's panel last night....many blacks still do not get the facts of the case, they refuse to acknowledge that Martin had 4 minutes to get the heck out of there, but hung around and decided to confront Zimmerman.
It is my belief that most of the blacks at these rallies do NOT know the fact of this case.
When the president of the United States, the most powerful person in the world, goes on tv and nurses his past grievances, what can anyone say.
When Trayvons's mother goes on TV and says that her son was gunned down for being black, not because of any actions he may have taken that night, what can anyone say.
The November 2011 study concluded that "young black males were disproportionately involved in homicide compared with their proportion of the population."
This is understating it. The precise data show that even though black men between the ages of 14 and 24 make up only 1% of the U.S. population, they represent 27% of all the nation's murderers. This bears repeating: 1% of Americans are committing over a quarter of the murders.
The problem with Rachel Jeantel's credibility with the jury as a witness was not her language skills, color, or "relatability," but rather 1) she and the state had to admit that she had lied under oath at least twice during the course of the investigation; 2) her first interview with the DA was in the presence of Trayvon's mother and the Martin family attorney (!) rather than in a controlled investigative setting (after she had been first interviewed by the Martin attorney) and she admitted that those circumstances affected what she said; and 3) her testimony at trial, that Trayvon told Zimmerman, "Get off, get off," did not appear in any of her earlier accounts of the event.
That said, Rachel's testimony did provide information that supported the defense theory of the case. Rachel testified that at the time of her last call to him (around 7:12 according to phone records) Trayvon told her that, after running away, he was near the back of his father's fiance's house and had lost the crazy-ass cracka who had been following him. According to the 911 records, this was at the same time when Zimmerman told the 911 operator that the suspicious guy had started running and he lost him. Assuming that the confrontation began when Rachel said it did, just before her last call with Trayvon ended (at about 7:16), and that the confrontation took place in the vicinity of the T intersection where all the evidence of confrontation was found, which is a distance away from where Trayvon was staying, Trayvon apparently made the decision within those 4 minutes to leave the area of the house where he was staying and had returned, to return to the T intersection, where he found Zimmerman exactly where Zimmerman said he was at the time. This was picked up by the male alternate juror who was interviewed last night, and has not been really mentioned by any of the commentators I've heard. I don't even think O'Mara made the point in his closing as clearly as he could have done, that, according to Jeantel, Trayvon was already home long before the confrontation began.
And with that, I'm returning to my actual life, for now.
it also takes less time writing in cursive than block letters. Even for a generation raised on computers, comes a time for many people - high school or college, usually, when one must take notes by hand. Even in college classrooms, not everyone is furiously hacking away on keyboards in class.
I know, next it will be books. So Old school. Everyone will be on e-readers and Ipads.
just hope we never have an electro- magnetic surge that wipes out our computers. We will be really screwed, then.
Oh, and another thing. Walter Williams finishes his article with this:
I hope Rachel Jeantel's court performance is a wake-up call for black Americans about the devastation wrought by our educational system.
The root problem is not the educational system. The root problem is the mentality of victimhood-entitlement. It just so happens that the educational system is reaping what that mentality sows.
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
Drexel University history and political science professor George Ciccariello-Maher disapprovingly says that the reaction to Jeantel's court performance "has been in terms of aesthetics, of disregarding a witness on the basis of how she talks, how good she is at reading and writing." Harking back to Jim Crow days, he adds: "These are subtle things that echo literacy testing at the polls, echo the question of whether black Americans can testify against white people, of being always suspect in their testimony. It's the same old dynamics emerging in a very different guise."
Professor Ciccariello-Maher is absolutely right, but in the exact opposite way he means. He's a professional victim. Everything bad is somebody else's fault. AND it's their fault because there's something inherently, morally, or psychologically wrong with THEM.
Side note: It's interesting that a "he" has a hyphenated last name. If he marries a woman with a hyphenated last name; say smith-jones, for example. Will their kids last name be Ciccariello-Maher-Smith-Jones?
And what about THEIR kids? Cicarieallo-Maher-Smith-Jones-Zuckerberg-Winklevoss-Hossenfeffer-Incorporated?
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
Winchester, just to be clear, I was being sarcastic in my previous posts.
Yes I realize that.
The fact that so many people jump straight to racism as the cause for so many things that happen is tragic.
On another note: The notion of "minorities" creates a sense of entitlement and righteous indignation among members of the minority.
College programs like gender studies or black studies foment victimhood, anger, and hatred. They don't help to solve problems of bias or discrimination, they contribute to them.
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
Why would Jeantel or any other <40yo would want to use cursive or to be able to read it?
There are many things in this World where we are witnessing the demise of ancient traditions and rise of new technologies. Perhaps we should be teaching Greek, which is of course, block print.
Jeantel is a senior at Miami Norland Senior High School. How in the world did she manage to become a 12th-grader without being able to read cursive writing? That's a skill one would expect from a fourth-grader. Jeantel is by no means an exception at her school. Here are a few achievement scores from her school: Thirty-nine percent of the students score basic for reading, and 38 percent score below basic. In math, 37 percent score basic, and 50 percent score below basic. Below basic is the score when a student is unable to demonstrate even partial mastery of knowledge and skills fundamental for proficient work at his grade level. Basic indicates only partial mastery.
I think Rachel is actually pretty bright, certainly when it comes to emotional intelligence. That's what burns me about this whole thing. Instead of pointing fingers at people who question her "communication skills," how about pointing fingers at the educational system that failed her? I have not heard one word about that.
Hey I just saw the same thing...I was wondering if I heard wrong. I believe it was reported very early on he said that, and, of course it was debunked, just like his reporting Trayvon was black to the dispatcher before he was .asked was debunked (tape had been altered by NBC).
I could not believe Erin did not correct her. I don't know why I still watch CNN-- they have lost so much credibility in so many ways recently.
There has been one black guy on, head of the NYC Tea Party or something like that, who has been a rare voice of reason amid the hype.
I just watched a pretty black talking head on Erin Burnett's show say that race was involved because Zimmerman said "****ing coon". I don't recall Zimmerman saying coon in any of the testimony. Where does this woman get this crap?
There were a lot of black talking heads on CNN and I think I only saw one who was supporting self defense.
Winchester, just to be clear, I was being sarcastic in my previous posts.
I listened to all of the Jeantel interview, and all of the Juror B37 interview. I knew immediately that discussion today would focus on the racism aspects of Juror B37's interview (btw, I have renewed respect for Cooper's interview skills). I have no doubt the jury came to the correct conclusion, but I also had no doubt people would focus on the remarks she made about Rachel. I checked my twitter feed early this morning and all people were talking about was what a racist she is. The fact that she had all her facts, timeline, etc. down cold was irrelevant. I don't think jurors should be allowed to give interviews.
Please notice how many black anchors and "analysts" and "experts" you see on CNN. How many of the black commentators supported the verdict?
What happened to the Hispanic and Asian commentators on TV?
I just watched black radio host Tom Joyner say he would pay for Rachael Jantel to attend college because of the way she was criticized and beaten up on the stand by Don West. That woman cannot even read (cursive). What college would take her? She is 19 and I am not sure if she has yet graduated from high school.
It was also funny to hear Tom Joyner say that is the way "they" talk. When the juror said on Anderson Cooper that was the way they talk, several black talking heads said the juror was a racist by using the term "they" even though she was referring to Jantel and Martin and not blacks just as Joyner was referring to Janel and Martin and not about blacks in general.
-- Edited by Razorsharp on Tuesday 16th of July 2013 06:31:10 PM
-- Edited by Razorsharp on Tuesday 16th of July 2013 06:31:56 PM
So many African Americans seem to miss the point. Martin waited for Zimmerman and then punched him in the nose and got on top of Zimmerman and was in the process of beating the daylights out of him. Zimmerman had the right under FL law to shoot Martin. I don't like FL law but that is the law.
I think many African Americans think that Zimmerman profiled Martin because he was black. Since Zimmerman did this, Zimmerman was the bad guy and could not kill Martin even if Martin was about to kill Zimmerman. I think many African Americans are being racist by choosing Martin because of his race and ignoring the facts of the case. The prosecutor said the case was not about race and that if the races were reversed he would be making the same arguments. On the other hand, I am pretty sure that if the races had been reversed and Martin was on the bottom and he shot Zimmerman who was on top beating him most African American would say Martin was authorized in shooting Zimmerman.
-- Edited by Razorsharp on Tuesday 16th of July 2013 05:06:33 PM
Razorsharp nailed both concepts of justice. Samurailandshark and hope illustrated part of what I see as further dimensions to this whole thing.
Samurai highlighted the difference between the legal process and the public reaction to it. That’s a fascinating (to me) juxtaposition. The legal process is about facts and logic and rational thought. The public reaction to it is about expressing our gut feelings.
Some of those gut feelings were illustrated on Anderson Cooper’s and Piers Morgan’s shows that hope observed.
I think that some part of the ignorance SL referred to is due to a general misperception of the relationships between these things.
Long story not to tedious: rational thought motivates human action a lot less than we like to think it does, and gut feelings a lot more.
Please bear with me and avoid the temptation to roll your eyes (I’m about to get nerdy, or wonky, or whatever) because this is relevant and a very real part of understanding what hope and SamuraiLandshark and Razorsharp all observed, and about politics more generally...…
For hundreds of millions of years humans evolved just like all the other animals. And just like all the other animals our actions are motivated mostly by our evolved instincts, intuitions, and gut reactions, all of which happen instantaneously without the need for conscious thought. The most well known instinct is “fight or flight.” That instinct also comes in milder forms too, like “approach or avoid,” and “like or dislike.”
Much more recently on the evolutionary time scale we humans developed language and reason. We live(d) in cooperative groups where the workload of basic survival is shared. Our ability for language evolved so we could express shared intent. But language by itself is not enough. We also had to be able to get others to go along with our intentions. And THAT, is the evolved purpose of reason.
Reason evolved to help us convince others that our own personal, instantaneous, instinctive reactions are the right ones. The chief purpose of reason is to act as a press secretary on behalf of what we already *feel* in our gut is the right thing. When reason came along the brain didn’t magically rewire itself to overcome hundreds of millions of years of evolved instinct and put reason in charge. Rather, reason evolved, reason exists, to be the servant of our intuitions.
This explains many of the so-called biases or flaws that reason is prone to, like the confirmation bias or the attribution bias. They are not biases at all. They’re features. They’re examples of reason doing exactly what it was designed to do by evolution: win arguments.
Sure, reason is also helpful in other ways. We used it to invent cool stuff like wheels, internal combustion engines, elevators, air conditioning, the George Foreman Grill, the Ronco SteamAway and the Thighmaster. But that’s only possible through the relatively rare application of reason in extremely controlled circumstances - like those found in engineering or in the scientific method – that are specifically designed to overcome or circumvent the “biases” that are built in to reason.
The point of all of this is to say that, to a very large extent, we humans are not who we like to think we are. We flatter ourselves and stroke our own egos with the self congratulatory notion that we’re logical creatures who make decisions based on abstract analysis of objective facts. But the reality is that we’re a lot more like all the rest of the animals than we admit, or even realize. We’re driven more by automatic, intuitive, instantaneous, instinct than we even know. And ironically, it’s our ability to “reason” which helps us to maintain the illusion.
So, to get to the “peculiar thing” SamuraiLandshark talked about; the legal process is precisely one of those rare, extremely controlled, circumstances that is specifically designed to overcome the biases that are built in to reason. And the public reaction to it, and the things hope saw on Anderson Cooper and Piers Morgan, are examples of basic human instinctual reactions of like-or-dislike, approach-or-avoid, and fight-or-flee, things that “feel” wrong to us.
And part of the ignorance that SL talked about is that so few of us know about all of this. We cling to the comforting delusion that we’re driven by reason, and that therefore the only reason somebody disagrees with us is that they suffer from some sort of mental or emotional dysfunction like, oh, I don't know, racism, for example. Thus, the political divide.
-- Edited by winchester on Tuesday 16th of July 2013 11:09:55 AM
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
That may be so, razor, but in an interview with Anderson tonight the juror said she felt sorry for Rachel and that she was uneducated, or words to that effect. So she's a racist. That's the important thing here.
And Rachel on Piers Morgan explained that the jury was just made up of old white people, so what do they know.
Anderson Cooper had an interview with one of the jurors. It sounds like the jury did what it was supposed to do. They reviewed all the evidence and then looked at the law, some of which they found confusing and then asked questions of the judge.
Blacks make up about 13 percent of the population but 41 percent of the prison population. It's never right to stereotype anybody but there is some rational behind having a greater sensitivity to African Americans who look out of place in a non African American neighborhood.
It's such a peculiar thing, this legal process we have here in the USA.
You are innocent until proven guilty.
Except when you are not and people are tweeting death threats and angry that justice wasn't done.
The media is to blame, ignorance is to blame and people who have not actually read more than sound bites are protesting.
Yet - so many kids out there who look like Trayvon who will go to prison because they didn't have a good legal defense and their case didn't garner publicity from the media.
I am having a hard time hearing pundits repeat facts that have been retracted because of shoddy or intentional editing and reporting.
There are two concepts of the term "justice" at play here.
The first concept is that justice is a process. The process is the rule-based legal system; the trial process, rules of evidence, rules for conviction, jury of peers, etc. Justice means following the process. Follow all the rules and justice is served. This amounts to a system of laws, not of the whims of men and women in positions of power and their own personal outlooks and opinions.
The second concept is that justice is an outcome, specifically in the form of some combination of compensation for the victim and/or punishment for the perpetrator. Justice means "satisfaction" for the victim. A pound of flesh. Outcomes are judgment-based, depending on what some person(s) believes the victim and perpetrator "deserve" or "earned" or "have coming to them." This amounts to a system of the whims the outlooks and opinions of men and women in positions of power, not a system of rules.
People who think justice is an outcome are generally the ones who riot in the streets (or camp out in Zucotti park and march on the homes of the "perpetrators," or, if they have the strength in numbers to believe they can get away with it, guillotine whomever their outlook and opinion determines to be a "perpetrator." )
__________________
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” – Mark Twain
Rioting in streets over Zimmerman verdict is ridiculous. Every day young black men are charged and tried for crimes and goung to prison in huge numbers for ALL f the reasons you suggest.
Young black men have much more to fear from prosecutors who succumb to vigilante political pressures to prosecute despite a lack of evidence; grossly overcharge; withhold exculpatory evidence from less agile defense attorneys (e.g., young overworked public defenders); and offer dramatized, emotional speculations, in lieu of evidence; than they have to fear from random neighborhood watchmen like George Zimmerman.
Just spoofing, geeps. I've seen you mobbed to the point there wasn't even a toe sticking up from the pile... one of yours, I mean, and all I can recall you saying when you crawled out was that "they're a little nuts."
No, hayden was working on some kind of moral... cultural... no, behavioral relativism angle for who was responsible and I thought I'd help her out a little. Next time, I'll volunteer myself.
"On the other hand, maybe geeps got tired of being called a hater and complained to the authorities... who can ever know?'
ha...me complain to authorities? not a chance. I was banned for a week for calling the Boston marathon bomber a Muslim extremist scumbag..I guess Islamic extremist is OK..lol I get a kick out of CC...I've never experienced such a large group of bleeding heart liberals in my life..It's almost comical, they refuse to even consider other possibilities.
..and when you take the opposing side, they tell you to stop because the thread will be shut down...too funny...
Walt had been known to keep weapons, I can't remember if he ever showed the revolver(?) to the Cambodians/Vietnamese. He did make a threatening move. At best the DA could get manslaughter but a good lawyer could get the Asians acquitted, afterall the sidewalk is your property but is public access, so SYG defense is possible.
Walt was the loser in his purpose. The "bad" guys won big time, with untold bad repercussion to the good kids and neighbors.
So was this the message that Clint wanted to give to the audience?
It is "open season on black men and boys" according to one MSNBC commentator. Van Jones is very very worried about vigilantism-- people preparing to run out and shoot black teenage boys because they've been given permission by virtue of this verdict. In fact, according to another MSNBC commentator, all black people have to be more fearful after this verdict.
Question for anybody - was the prosecution allowed to bring in witnesses to testify to GZ's alleged racial bias? If they were, why didn't they do so? Because without those testimonies, all I see for Melissa Harris-Perry, Reverend Al, Toure, et all, to label GZ a racial profiler is "f*** punks," "a*******." Am I wrong?
The prosecution could have brought in anybody they wanted to testify regarding GZ's racial baias. They didn't because no such person exists. "****ing punks" is different from "****ing black punks". GZ said the former not the latter. Those who claim racism are actually the racists. They are stereotyping GZ because of his race and assuming he must have acted out of race because he is not black.
O'Mara mentioned that GZ had tutored african american children and took a black girl to the prom. That isn't the look of a racist.