home

Tuesday Open Thread

In the news:

  • Robert Gates' confirmation hearing as Defense Secretary is underway. He says we are not winning the war in Iraq.
  • Hillary reaches out to Dems in New Hampshire and Iowa. Will she announce before the end of the year?

What's on your news screen today?

< Posner's Pragmatic Realism: Why It Is Wrong | Tom Edsall: Not a Wanker Today, In Fact Pretty Darn Good >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Man, Bill (here kitty kitty) Frist just... (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Bill Arnett on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 11:22:15 AM EST
    ...spent twenty minutes ranting about filibusters again, which must mean that bush must have, once more, taken the kitty killer to the woodshed and ordered him to try and get as many radical judges appointed as fast as they can before the end of the lameduck session.

    It is simply amazing how the man can stand there in front of god and everybody with his bare face hanging out and endlessly repeat lie after lie after lie.

    Rethugs do believe "we the people" are too stupid to either know or figure out what is the truth.

    What a disgusting, slimey worm.

    Mr Gates, how is the Iraq war going? (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Al on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 02:27:47 PM EST
    "Mr. Gates, do you believe that we are currently winning in Iraq?" Mr. Levin asked.

    "No, sir," Mr. Gates replied

    He added that the United States is not losing the war, either.

    Guess it must be a tie, then.

    maybe Poppa Bush (none / 0) (#1)
    by scribe on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 10:34:31 AM EST
    realized (a) the mess his son's created, is all Poppa's fault - he "raised" The Unit and provided him with scads of advisers, too;  and (b) I wouldn't be surprised if he was drunk, too.


    Poppy Bush is 82. (none / 0) (#21)
    by clio on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 01:03:45 PM EST
    Possibly drunk.  More likely senile.
    (Emotional lability fairly common with early/mid-stage dementia.  Suppose could have had unrecognized stroke.  Emotional lability very common after frontal lobe stroke)
    Would account for some of his other statements lately also.

    Parent
    why am I on spam-block? (none / 0) (#2)
    by scribe on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 10:34:46 AM EST


    What's spam block (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 10:41:44 AM EST
    Can you explain what you mean?  I'll try to fix it.

    Parent
    spam, spam, spam, spam.... (none / 0) (#5)
    by scribe on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 11:07:39 AM EST
    emails come back undelivered, viz. (and I quote)

    A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

      talkleft@aol.com
    SMTP error from remote mailer after end of data:
        host mailin-01.mx.aol.com
    *
         (RLY:BD)
    EXPLANATION:

    This error indicates that your message has been blocked. The characteristics of your message match those of spam reported to AOL.

    SOLUTION:

    Please have your ISP or server administrator contact AOL for assistance. The mail administrator should request a feedback loop that will alert them to reported spam from their network.


    Parent

    Mister Gates (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edger on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 10:40:17 AM EST
    is full of it.
    President Bush's nominee to be Secretary of Defense said today that the United States is not winning the war in Iraq, and that an American failure there could help to ignite "a regional conflagration" in the Middle East.

    Their entire purpose there was and is to ignite "a regional conflagration" in the Middle East.

    big story on ghost air over at WaPo (none / 0) (#6)
    by scribe on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 11:11:26 AM EST
    page A01 of Sunday's paper.

    There are too many quotable quotes in it, so one should go read it in toto.

    Also, a couple good diaries on it, over at Kos.  (more links inside the linked diary)

    Obama / Clinton 2016! (none / 0) (#8)
    by jerry on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 11:30:40 AM EST
    In 2016, Barack Obama will be 56 and have been in the Senate for 18 years with a distinguised career.  Clinton will be 36, a bright young Mayor/Governor/Representative/Senator.

    Obama / Clinton 2016!!!

    Dennis Prager (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 11:45:28 AM EST
    Has responded on Townhall to his many critics from TL and elsewhere.

    A few snippets: (There is much more at Townhall including a pretty restrained smackdown of the left...considering the insults levied at him by same.)

    In addition, there was widespread coverage on left-wing blogs, which, with no exception I could find, distorted what I said, charging my column and me with, for example, racism (see below), when race plays no role at all in this issue or in my column. For the record, because I deem this a significant statement about most of the Left, I found virtually no left-wing blog that was not filled with obscenity-laced descriptions of me. Aside from the immaturity and loathing of higher civilization that such public use of curse words reveal, the fury and hate render the leftist charge that it is the Right that is hate-filled one of the most obvious expressions of psychological projection I have seen in my lifetime.

    I think TL can count itself in the small group that did not devolve into such childishness. Kudos.

    Response: I never even hinted that there should be a religious test.
    Even the vast majority of Jews elected to office have used a Bible containing both the Old and New Testaments, even though Jews do not regard the New Testament as part of their Bible. A tiny number of Jews have used only the Old Testament. As a religious Jew, I of course understand their decision, but I disagree with it.

    Keith Ellison is ending that powerful tradition, and it is he who has called the public's attention to his doing so. He obviously thinks this is important. I think it is important. My critics think it isn't.

    America derives its laws from its Constitution. It derives its values from the Bible.

    In fact, it is as a Jew that I am so aware of the fragility of all civilizations, including ours. I am therefore aware of how uniquely good America has been for all its citizens, including and especially its Jews. This uniqueness does not stem from secularism alone, but from an extraordinary Judeo-Christian value system that has been our civic religion. Europe is secular and is a failing civilization; one that is also increasingly judenrein [empty of Jews] because of its anti-Semitism.

    It is not I, but Keith Ellison, who has engaged in disuniting the country. He can still help reunite it by simply bringing both books to his ceremonial swearing-in. Had he originally announced that he would do that, I would have written a different column -- filled with praise of him. And there would be a lot less cursing and anger in America.

    I listened to Prager's show on the radio yesterday, he said that cares not one whit if Ellison brings the Koran however he cares very deeply that Ellison bring the Bible.

    Guys like this have bought into... (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Bill Arnett on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:06:39 PM EST
    ...the old Legend in Their Own Minds theme and are therefore entitled to insult as many people as possible with his radical religious agenda. It is, after all, strictly within the evangelicals, fanatic religious types, and people of their ilk's purview to make the decisions regarding matters of religion, and we peons and persons born of lesser stock and class are just incapable of comprehending his lofty goals and godly mission.

    He fancies that he represents everything good and moral in the world and that all us sinners are going to hell anyway, so why can we not accept that he (Prager), along with bush, talk with god and take their marching orders from Him, and by god, if Prager says something is "tradition", then that tradition must be the law of the land and god and violators should be held in and looked upon with derision, insults, contempt, and it should be further clarified that if Ellison does this, the world will end on January 4th.

    On the upside, at least we have a date certain by which to have our affairs in order.

    Parent

    Strongly Disagree (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:14:11 PM EST
    with this....
    It derives its values from the Bible.

    I think the US derives its values from the Enlightenment period...liberty, equality, all men created equal and all that.  The bible doesn't talk about these things....they were new, radical ideas of the 17th-18th century.  

    If our values derived from the bible, wouldn't the ten commandments be US law?  Wouldn't polygamy be acceptable?  Slavery?  Stoning?

    I'm of the opinion you don't need the bible to tell you killing is wrong, if that's what he's on about.  

    Parent

    Prager (none / 0) (#13)
    by Peaches on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:29:36 PM EST
    It seems to me that this might be one of the best thisng to happen to Prager. Imagine his ratings on his radio show if Ellison does accept his invitation.

    He sounds like a pundit to me attempting to be controversial to attract a lasrger audience.

    Parent

    A religious "Rush "? (none / 0) (#15)
    by Bill Arnett on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:36:04 PM EST
    Peaches (none / 0) (#16)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:36:26 PM EST
    He has Giuliani on today. I don't think he's at any loss for high-profile guests, although considering this bruhaha, it probably would be a rating coup to have Ellison on.

    Parent
    I had never heard of him (none / 0) (#18)
    by Peaches on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:55:22 PM EST
    until I read of his criticism of Ellison. I suspect I am among the majority who had never heard of him. Certainly his ratings have spiked since he went after him.

    Parent
    Peaches (none / 0) (#22)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 01:16:40 PM EST
    Fair enough. I've seem him on Larry King and other MSM in the past, but I agree, this would certainly seem to make his name much more recognizable.

    Parent
    Pompous Idiot (none / 0) (#25)
    by squeaky on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 01:38:49 PM EST
    No wonder Prager has suffered a hurl of insults. He is a pompous fool who makes sh*t up in order to reify his fantasy of America. Pathetic, that he even has a platform shows how low the level of discourse is in America.

    Parent
    Bill (none / 0) (#12)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:17:19 PM EST
    [Prager is] therefore entitled to insult as many people as possible with his radical religious agenda.

    Is there something(s) specific you can point to that is an example of "his radical religious agenda?" Or are you just venting?

    When someone alleges that it... (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Bill Arnett on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:31:50 PM EST
    ...will destroy America and irreparably damage our democracy because he wants to use a book other than the bible to swear in WHEN NO BOOK IS HELD AT ALL DURING THE ACTUAL SWEARING IN, yeah, I think that is a rather arrogant insult to the intelligence of thinking people everywhere. What book Ellison uses for the "photo op" AFTER being sworn in is up to him, there is no such tradition that even Jews ALWAYS swear on the bible and to so state and predict such dire consequences is truly arrogating himself to an undeserved position: Arbiter of all that is right and traditional.

    I consider that a "radical" religious agenda being pursued to malign the character of a good man because he is of a different faith.

    Prager is by no means the only offender.

    Parent

    Bill (none / 0) (#17)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:41:43 PM EST
    [Prager alleges that bringing the Koran insetad of the Bible] will destroy America and irreparably damage our democracy because he wants to use a book other than the bible to swear in

    It would be really helpful to actually see the quote(s) that leads you to summarize his position that way.

    Parent

    Here ya go! (none / 0) (#20)
    by jerry on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:59:16 PM EST
    He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

    So SUO, is there any reason anyone here should bother to discuss things with you when you are so ill-prepared?

    Parent

    jerry (none / 0) (#23)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 01:24:00 PM EST
    BA's summary of Prager's position does not equal your Prager quote in the least - although your emotional response to this issue will likely keep you from understanding that.


    Parent
    Did you even read what Prager wrote? (none / 0) (#27)
    by jerry on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 02:01:26 PM EST
    • Undermine America
    • Equates the Koran with Mein Kampf
    • Embolden Islamic extremists
    • Give Islamists the first sign of their greatest goal
    • do more damage to the unity of America and to the value system that has formed this country than the terrorists of 9-11

    And somehow you think this is in no way equal in the least to the shorter "will destroy America and irreparably damage our democracy"

    SUO, you're a troll.  Begone.

    Parent

    SOU (none / 0) (#28)
    by Peaches on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 02:25:23 PM EST
    and I have disagreed on many issues. Sometimes vehemently. But, he is not a troll. He has an opinion and he has been at TL for a long time offering valuable contributions to the discussions.

    Parent
    I agree with Peaches, SUO is a longtime... (none / 0) (#31)
    by Bill Arnett on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 03:13:53 PM EST
    ...poster and I wouldn't wish him gone for a minute.

    Ain't no harm in challenging someone's opinion, but if they just won't change their mind then, hey, they are absolutely entitled to their equally valued, though differing, opinion.

    Parent

    jerry (none / 0) (#32)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 03:14:15 PM EST
    Yup, "destroy" and "irreparable" are absolutes, they are not in any way the equal of "undermine" and "embolden," etc., whether you take those statements individually or as a whole.

    Also, in no way, did he "equate" the Koran to Mein Kampf, as in: "the Koran is the same as Mein Kampf." or, "swearing on the Koran is the same as swearing on Mein Kampf."

    Surely you can see that. To say that he did is to either be a liar or be ignorant. (Right Peaches? ;-))

    He did ask, though, how you decide which books are OK for someone to be sworn in on and which are not.

    Do you have any answer for that?

    Parent

    Which books are okay.... (none / 0) (#38)
    by jerry on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 05:28:55 PM EST
    Well SUO, how about this as a starter: if the book reflects a faith listed on this page (plus Wiccan) than it can be used.  

    Also, in no way, did he "equate" the Koran to Mein Kampf, as in: "the Koran is the same as Mein Kampf." or, "swearing on the Koran is the same as swearing on Mein Kampf."

    Sure he did, he said that if one could choose the Koran, one could choose Mein Kampf indicating the two books were morally equivalent.

    Here is what the ADL had to say: Prager presents intolerant, ugly views.  His comparison of Ellison's desire to "choose his favorite book" to that of the right of a racist elected to public office to use Hitler's Mein Kampf is outrageous.

    Others here consider you not a troll.  Obviously you are.  Begone!  Swish and flick!

    Parent

    jerry (none / 0) (#39)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 06:05:18 PM EST
    Methinks you thinks questions are challenges. Perhaps that is exactly the case elsewhere, but often not here on TL...at least not in the conversations many of us here have.

    Anyway, you have answered Prager's question (not a challenge) quite well. Well enough, actually, despite your aggressive unpleasantness, that I agree with you. Kudos.

    However what he said regarding Mein Kampf was explicitly not equating the two books, but rather was part of his point about deciding which books should be allowed and which should not, and how to decide among them.

    imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds will those defending Ellison's right to choose his favorite book deny that same right to a racist who is elected to public office?

    For an otherwise intelligent sounding guy, you either miss this entirely or are so wedded to your position that you are incapable of rational thought.

    fwiw, the ADL is not the final arbiter of Jewish opinion - or any opinion for that matter.

    Lastly, the day Jeralyn asks me to leave I will do so. If you really have a problem with me, please let her know. Link her to the threads and my comments that offend you so. She's the final arbiter on this website. Until then, newbie, I will remain.

    Parent

    Newbie? I've been here far longer than you. (none / 0) (#40)
    by jerry on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 06:09:47 PM EST
    n00b?  You really are uninformed aren't you.  I've been posting here and at the old site for years.

    Parent
    jerry (none / 0) (#41)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 06:19:44 PM EST
    Fair enough. I didn't recognize your name, I'm sure I will in the future. I retract that word, the rest stands.

    Parent
    Language Not Appreciated (none / 0) (#42)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 06:48:10 PM EST
    Jerry wrote:

    Others here consider you not a troll.  Obviously you are.  Begone!  Swish and flick!

    Jerry, TalkLeft does not allow name-calling and degrading insults other commenters.  Please email me if someone has offended you.

    I used to edit out the insults in comments.  Since the move to Scoop, I no longer have that ability.  I can only delete comments in their entirety.

    One of the distingishing features of TalkLeft is that people of very disparate views feel comfortable commenting here.  I intend to keep the site free of name-calling and degrading insults.

    Please try to conform.

    Parent

    Sure, my apologies then.... (none / 0) (#43)
    by jerry on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 07:16:00 PM EST
    Sorry about that Jeralyn, I didn't intend to get caught up in a name calling match.

    Not to sound like my kids, okay, sounding like my kids, if you read through, you will find SUO calling me a liar (or ignorant), saying that I am not capable of rational thought, saying that my responses are so emotional I cannot comprehend what he is saying, and worse, calling me a n00b!

    My point being that SUO's contention in the face of evidence that Prager didn't equate Ellison's desire with the destruction of America was disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.  I.e. the behavior of a troll.  He seems more like the TL TBrosz and the TL Al.

    However, I understand your desire to keep TL free of name calling, so let me apologize to you and to SUO.

    Parent

    jerry (none / 0) (#49)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 10:45:23 AM EST
    Apology accepted, please accept mine in return.

    Onward and upward!

    Parent

    Thank you, sir, it gets so tiresome... (none / 0) (#24)
    by Bill Arnett on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 01:27:03 PM EST
    ...having to "prove' something to someone that has been out in the public domain for a while now.

    Parent
    Radical Religious Agenda? (none / 0) (#19)
    by jerry on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 12:56:26 PM EST
    Yeah, as a Jew that is probably less religious than Prager, I take great offense at the SOB telling me that he disagrees with Jews that use only the old testament for their non-legal, ceremonial only vow.

    For ratings and to keep from having to admit his mistake he is now cramming Christianity down my throat.

    I also take offense at YOUR placing TL in some value spot because we didn't call Prager a f*tard.  By doing so you buy into his smearing of the left.

    Prager is an idiot, he is wrong on the issues, and he cannot admit that, so now he is cramming religion down all of our throats.

    Just remember SUO: Separation of Church and State -- It's a Good Thing!  Say it with me now: "Separation of Church and State -- It's a Good Thing!" "Separation of Church and State -- It's a Good Thing!"  You did it!  You did it!

    Parent

    New Testament (none / 0) (#51)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 04:13:21 PM EST
    I have never heard of a Jew, besides Prager, who considers the new teatament part of the Jewish Bible.

    Here is a bit from the Holocaust Museum regarding Prager:

    The Holocaust Memorial Museum has now issued a statement distancing itself from Prager. The museum emphasizes that Prager "speaks solely for himself," and that his statements "do not reflect the position of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum."

     The statement also points out that the museum does not have the authority to remove Prager from its board, since he is a presidential appointee.

    think progress

    Parent

    squeaky (none / 0) (#54)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 04:34:12 PM EST
    I have never heard of a Jew, besides Prager, who considers the new teatament part of the Jewish Bible.

    Huh?

    Prager wrote:

    Even the vast majority of Jews elected to office have used a Bible containing both the Old and New Testaments, even though Jews do not regard the New Testament as part of their Bible. A tiny number of Jews have used only the Old Testament.

    The Holocaust Memorial Museum has now issued a statement distancing itself from Prager. The museum emphasizes that Prager "speaks solely for himself," and that his statements "do not reflect the position of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum."

    He is indeed a man besieged.

    Parent

    Thanks SUO (none / 0) (#55)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 04:40:26 PM EST
    Thanks for clearing that up, it seemed too weird to be true. Next time I will pay more attention.

    It is hard to concentrate when the text is so disagreable, no excuse though.

    Parent

    squeaky (none / 0) (#57)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 05:05:53 PM EST
    Here are some Jews that must use the New Testament...they probably want nothing to do with Prager either.

    Parent
    right (none / 0) (#58)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 05:11:18 PM EST
    Guess that they do not want to be left to burn when the rapture starts. I would call them converts.

    Parent
    I donâ€<sup>TM</sup>t see it (none / 0) (#26)
    by chemoelectric on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 01:39:23 PM EST
    Obama praises Hillary in New York. Once again, I see a Hillary-Obama ticket in our future.

    I have my doubts on the viability of a ticket that I would oppose until it was inevitable, especially after it turned out my similar attitude towards Howard Dean for Prez so dramatically held the day.

    (Howard Dean for DNC chair was a great idea, however.)

    An NBA player, tasered by Miami police (none / 0) (#30)
    by scribe on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 03:00:58 PM EST
    acquitted of all charges.

    The linked article, from a sports blog, recounts the tasering, arrest, trial and acquittal of Dale Davis, an NBA player:

    After a two-day trial, Dale Davis was acquitted of all five misdemeanor charges levied against him following an August 1 incident in Miami Beach.

    Read that one more time.

    Davis had the misfortune of being arrested and Tasered in the dog days of summer when there was little else to cature the attention of NBA fans. That, combined with the the fact that someone being Tasered is inherently funny in a twisted Jackass/Three Stooges/Tom & Jerry sort of way, resulted in everyone in the media (including myself) having a good deal of fun at his expense. It was wrong, and Davis should feel vindicated.

      Key to the defense was a surveillance video which, uh, gave the lie to the police version of things:

    In any event, what's important is that Davis was cleared of any wrongdoing. From the Freep:

    Surveillance tape from the incident that took place in the Miami Beach Marriott -- obtained by Davis' defense attorney, Scott Kotler -- was key evidence during the trial.

    "I truly believe one particular officer was baiting him, and as soon as Dale got under his skin, he Tasered him and that put them in a real predicament," Kotler said. "They had an issue because he was an NBA basketball player and they had just used 50,000 volts on him. The officer had to legitimize what he did and then all the charges came raining down. ... I used the video to basically set up my whole defense."

    Nice work, counsel.

    There you have it: a young man + a baiting cop + a response = Taser => the "oh sh*t he's someone prominent" moment => the natural cop response:  Legitimize misconduct in a flurry of charges....

    How many times does that happen to others, who can't use the advantages Davis has?  More than anyone might like....


    Peaches and Bill (none / 0) (#33)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 03:17:07 PM EST
    Thanks.

    NP, Sarc :-) (none / 0) (#34)
    by Peaches on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 03:39:58 PM EST
    You are welcome. Post on! (none / 0) (#50)
    by Bill Arnett on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 02:18:41 PM EST
    Groom shooting (none / 0) (#35)
    by Slado on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 03:42:10 PM EST
    Here's an interesting take on the shooting.

    Haven't seen it in the news much lately.

    http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2006-12-04hm.html

    Not all that interesting..... (none / 0) (#36)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 05:07:03 PM EST
    to me Slado.  I've heard all that before from police abuse apologists....it's a tough job, people make mistakes, all incidents are fully investigated, they are rare...yada yada yada.

    Still no sign of the 4th "mystery man", still no weapon...still one cop's word against two shooting victims as to whether the cop identified himself.  I do think the race of the victims played a part in their car getting riddled with bullets, absolutely.  I think 3 white dudes would get more benefit of the doubt, and more hesitation before clips get emptied.

    Are Shapton and Jackson sincere or merely opportunists?...I don't know and really don't care, as long as somebody is rabble rousing.  That is the only way to ensure it doesn't get swept under the rug.  The worst response from the community would be silence.

    Parent

    come on kdog (none / 0) (#44)
    by Slado on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 09:34:35 PM EST
    All the article is pointing out is that the facts often get left at the door when a PC rush to judgement is offered up by the usual suspects.

    Was Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on target when they rushed to judgement in the Duke Case?

    Are they correct when they paint the NYPD as out of control when the facts don't back it up?

    You don't deny any of the facts you simply gloss over them with your "apologists" tagline.

    The facts are not known.  If you choose to pre-judge the officers then choose to do so.   If a cop had been killed by a drug dealer would you pre-judge him or do you only save your scorn for the police?

    Just asking.

    Parent

    Pre-judge? (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 08:46:09 AM EST
    I don't think I'm pre-judging.  As of today, there is no 4th man and no gun.  3 unarmed men were on the receiving end of 50-odd bullets.  Calling this unjustified is pre-judging?  Isn't it obvious? If new facts come to light, I will consider them.  But as of now, this was a savage unjustified shooting in my book.

    There are facts about NYPD police tactics that don't show up on stat sheets....you have to be on the street to see it...and feel it.  

    Granted....I've been on the receiving end of NYPD-style policing, so I readily admit my bias based on personal experience.  I've had the guns drawn on me for simply being in the "wrong" neighborhood by some officer's estimation.  Lucky it was daylight and I saw the badges dangling from the plainclothes' necks, or I would have thought I was being jacked too.  Right or wrong...I can't get past what I've seen with my own eyes.

    Sad to say...if it wasn't for Al and Jesse, would the story still be the lead on the local news every night?  I don't think so.

    Parent

    Interesting (none / 0) (#37)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 05:23:31 PM EST
    "Interesting" takes also on Diallo: basically, he asked for it; and racism amongst the police: "a   myth." Dont tell me, the author doubles as a boot camp nurse.

    come on jondee (none / 0) (#45)
    by Slado on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 09:39:32 PM EST
    Why argue the points when you can just call people names.

    The article listed facts and arguments.  If you don't want to accept just say you don't care about facts just reinforcing your preconceived notions about the police.

    I for one am glad the police have cleaned up NYC during Gulliani's and Bloombergs tenior.   If the PC crowd still had their way there would be more murders and more black on black crime.  It's not the rich liberal crowd that pays when the police don't do their job.   No it's the poor people that suffer more.

    Doesn't matter to the PC crowd though.  They don't pay the price for thier high minded ideals.

    All that said if the victims did nothing wrong then the NYPD officers who were black, white and hispanic should be punished.   But to use an isolated incident as a reason to judge the entire NYPD seems odd for a group that prides themselves on being open minded.

    Parent

    Wow what was I thinking? (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Tue Dec 05, 2006 at 11:25:14 PM EST
    No it's the poor people that suffer more.

    Had no idea that so many rich white people were being gunned down by the police in NYC.

    Why aren't they marching?!?

    And... (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 09:08:20 AM EST
    the "rich liberal" crowd weren't getting arrested and summoned in record numbers over little petty crap either.  They could sip there wine on their high-rise rooftops free as a bird....but we can't drink a beer on our front stoop without getting harassed.  

    Parent
    Mars (none / 0) (#52)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 04:23:46 PM EST
    Mars Spacecraft Finds Evidence of Water
    WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 -- Pictures of Martian gullies taken years apart strongly suggest that liquid water still flows on the surface of the planet, scientists announced on Wednesday.


    Comstock (none / 0) (#53)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 04:27:45 PM EST
    New Garbage Service:
    The Washington Post reports that, "just as the Hill is staffing up...to investigate administration officials," former Justice Department spokespersons Mark Corallo and Barbara Comstock are forming a law/PR firm -- Corallo Comstock -- to help defend Bush administration aides.

    think progress

    And this:

    "Important Bush Administration officials

    are ready to leave the government rather than undergo two years of hell from Democratic committee chairmen in Congress. Leading the exodus are officials of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), fearing investigation by two chairmen, Representatives Henry Waxman (D-CA) and John Dingell (D-MI)," according to the Evans-Novak Political Report.  

    think progress

    The EPA exodus is not surprising (none / 0) (#56)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 04:40:44 PM EST
    80% of Human Diseases, 1/4 of Human Disease Deaths Caused by Environmental Degradation in Some Form

    EPA's Latest Crop of Phony "Science Advisors"

    Bush Administration Sued over Plans to Turn National Forest into Oil Field


    More environmental news


    Parent
    doj tough on torture (none / 0) (#59)
    by squeaky on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 07:09:13 PM EST
    Rather than look in its own closets the US is ponting fingers elswhere:
    The US Department of Justice today took a major step against impunity for atrocities in bringing its first-ever criminal charges for torture committed outside the United States, Human Rights Watch said today.  The Justice Department indicted Charles "Chuckie" Taylor, Jr., son of the former Liberian president and currently in custody in Miami, for torture committed in Liberia.

    link

    Good that the DOJ is prosecuting him, bad that the  DOD, et al are torturing people with impunity

    Robert (none / 0) (#60)
    by Edger on Wed Dec 06, 2006 at 07:47:20 PM EST
    Gates was confirmed by the Senate today (95-2) as Defence Secretary, and the Jerusalem Post is already slamming him in editorial. The Israelis are not happy. Time for them to start leaning?