ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

Friday Talking Points [317] -- Big And Little Brother

[ Posted Friday, August 22nd, 2014 – 17:06 UTC ]

A lot happened in the world of politics this week. People are still dumping buckets of ice water over their heads, for instance. There are actually multiple scandals happening to various governors right now, but since none of them involve sex, the media is mostly ignoring them (with the exception of Rick Perry, perhaps, since the media has been swooning over him ever since he put on a pair of glasses). But we're going to ignore most of it all this week, to focus instead on the aftermath and ramifications of what has been happening in Ferguson, Missouri for the past few weeks.

The news from Ferguson was the dominant story of the week. It even reached international proportions, as both Egypt and Russia got in a few digs at American police and protesters. I discussed this Cold War phenomenon way back in FTP [273] in more depth -- the old game America and the Soviets would play with each other, casually pointing out the bad things they did to their own citizens, on the world stage.

Putin's preposterous posturing aside, however, there seems to be one tangible proposal emerging from the chaos of Ferguson. Oh, sure, the nation is (once again) having that "discussion about race" which always happens after these events, but in the past pretty much nothing has ever really changed as a result. This time might just be different. Because there is a growing movement to require police officers to wear cameras all the time, while performing their duties. A new petition on the White House site calling for this change has (as of this writing) over 140,000 signatures -- well past the 100,000 threshold that is supposed to generate an official response. So we'll see what President Obama has to say about the idea soon, one assumes.

The idea is a simple one to understand, but it does have complexities. Enacting a "Michael Brown law" wouldn't be as easy as it first might appear. There are both technological problems (how long would the videos be retained?) and implementation problems (could the cops wearing the cameras ever turn them off?) to be considered before drafting any such law.

But the basic idea seems to be a sound one. It would turn the tables on "Big Brother," in a way. For years, I've been pointing out how the "Little Brother" effect has been growing (by which I mean citizens videotaping cops behaving badly, as well as wider geopolitical aspects of everyone now having a video camera/phone in their pocket). Here in America, citizens have a constitutional right to photograph or videotape police officers doing their jobs, as long as they aren't interfering with the officers' actions (standing in the path of a running cop, for instance). Not every police officer is aware of this, though, which has led to cops trying to stop people filming them and even confiscating cameras or forcing people to erase data. Hopefully, these incidents will become rarer in the future.

But why should the citizenry be responsible for taping police activities? Why shouldn't it be the government's responsibility to do so? As I said, this turns the camera around on the whole Big Brother concept. But while there might be technical or personnel issues to work out, there is one very important legal issue that needs addressing up front. Are the videos of police activities public record? San Diego doesn't think so, and have refused open records requests for such videos from journalists. The Washington Post ran a very interesting article on the subject, which cited a few other local examples in Maryland:

In the College Park case, a campus police surveillance camera was pointed at the area where Jack McKenna was beaten. But there's no security video of the incident. Campus police say the camera coincidentally malfunctioned at the time of the beating. A local news station reported that the officer in charge of the campus surveillance video system is married to one of the officers later disciplined for McKenna's beating.

This is not the first time a police camera in Prince George's County has malfunctioned at a critical time. In 2007 Andrea McCarren, an investigative reporter for the D.C. TV station WJLA, was pulled over by seven Prince George's County police cars as she and a cameraman followed a county official in pursuit of a story about misuse of public funds. In a subsequent lawsuit, McCarren claimed police roughed her up during the stop, causing a dislocated shoulder and torn rotator cuff. McCarren won a settlement, but she was never able to obtain video of the incident. Prince George's County officials say all seven dashboard cameras in the police cruisers coincidentally malfunctioned.

How convenient for the cops that all seven cameras "malfunctioned" at the same time! The article concludes with a radical suggestion (the "missing video presumption") as to how these "malfunctions" could be avoided in the future:

Currently, the courts generally treat important video that goes missing as a harmless mistake. They assume no ill will on the part of police. If you discover that the police were or should have been recording an encounter that would vindicate you of criminal charges or prove that the police violated your rights, and that video goes missing, you're simply out of luck.

Under the missing video presumption, if under the policy agency's police there should have been video and there isn't, then the courts will assume that the video corroborates the party opposing the police, be it a criminal defendant or the plaintiff in a civil rights lawsuit. The state could still get over the presumption by presenting other evidence, such as witnesses, medical reports, and so on. But if it's the police officer's word against his antagonist's, there should be video to validate one side or the other, and [if] that video mysteriously goes missing while in police custody, the police should have to pay a penalty in court. Otherwise, there's just too strong an incentive for vindicating video to be leaked and for incriminating video to disappear.

When police officers know they are on video that could be introduced as evidence in a court of law, it can be assumed that they'll likely behave a little better in the choices they make while doing their job. That is a good concept, and one that a Michael Brown law could fix, very quickly and very easily.

If video existed of what happened on the streets of Ferguson when Brown was killed, then there would be no wild claims by either side about what had happened (or, at the very least, they would be quickly disproven). Both Brown's actions and the police officer's actions would be caught on tape, and even though the tape might not clearly answer all questions, it would certainly answer the biggest ones about what really took place that night.

The Ferguson police department actually has cameras for cops to wear. They're sitting in a closet, apparently, because they haven't gotten around to making officers wear them. With a Michael Brown law in place -- backed up by a "missing video presumption" by the courts -- this situation would be a lot different.

While there are still important details to be worked out, I have to come strongly down on the side of turning Big Brother's cameras around, to film government officers' actions. In this day and age, the people deserve such a legal change. A video would clearly show who was at fault, and whose actions crossed the line, and would remove much of the doubt and distrust. Maybe making such a change could prevent weeks of future angry demonstrations in the streets, in some other small town in America. That would indeed be worth the effort.

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

We have to begin by marking the passing of former senator Jim Jeffords. Jeffords had left Congress by the time we started doing these columns, so he never won the coveted Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award. But in 2001 he became a Democratic hero by jumping the Senate aisle. For the only time in American history, one man switching parties changed control of the chamber (when Arlen Specter switched in 2009, he gave Democrats an effective supermajority of 60 in the Senate, but political control of the chamber didn't switch). Before the Jeffords defection from the Republican Party, Republicans had a razor-slim 50-50 majority (plus Vice President Dick Cheney, to break ties). When Jeffords turned his coat, Democrats held the chamber 51-49.

Vermont's Jim Jeffords was one of a dying breed -- a New England Republican who was moderate on social issues. Lincoln Chafee from Rhode Island was another courted by Harry Reid to switch parties at the same time (Chafee, currently the Democratic governor of Rhode Island, didn't leave the Republican Party until 2007, when he retired from the Senate). But Jim Jeffords was the one to make the big move, and he will forever be remembered kindly by Democrats for doing so.

Our weekly awards started long after Jeffords decided to leave the Republicans, and he never actually became a Democrat (he was an Independent who caucused with the Democratic Party). But we still feel he deserves a special, posthumous Most Impressive Party Switch Ever award, along with our thanks and condolences for his family.

Getting back to this week, our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week is none other than Attorney General Eric Holder. Holder did several impressive things almost immediately in Ferguson, including flooding the ground with F.B.I. agents to assure that everyone with a story to tell about what had happened was respectfully heard by a government official. Holder did not take over the local investigation, he instead launched an aggressive parallel investigation of his own. This week, Holder made a personal visit to Ferguson, showing the importance of what was going on there.

Now, some criticized Holder for merely swooping in for some photo-ops. We do not think such criticisms are valid. What Holder did was symbolic on one level, but the symbolism was pretty powerful, and can be summed up as: "The highest law enforcement officer in America -- and the first African-American ever to hold the post -- considered what was going on in Ferguson to be so important that he devoted his personal attention to the town, to the police officer in charge of keeping the streets safe, and to the family of the dead man." That is a strong and important statement to make.

The fact that the streets of Ferguson began to considerably calm down immediately after Holder's visit can't be completely credited to Eric Holder himself -- that would be overstating a very complex situation. Other events -- such as the opening of a grand jury investigation into the shooting -- were also happening simultaneously. The timing of Holder's visit may have been coincidental to the relative levels of rage of the protesters in the streets. But Holder's visit certainly helped the people see that their complaints were being addressed at the highest levels of government. That is a measure of respect which is often sadly absent in such cases. Holder has done a lot to rebuild the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice (after its neglect by the Bush administration), and this week was just one aspect of that shift in priorities.

For showing his personal interest and for making the trip to Ferguson, our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week was Attorney General Eric Holder. This is the eighth MIDOTW Holder has now won, we should mention as well.

[Attorney General Eric Holder doesn't have a public comment page, so you'll have to contact his boss via the White House contact page, to let him know you appreciate Holder's efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

Before we get to the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week, we've got two (Dis-)Honorable Mention awards to hand out.

First up is Senator Dick Durbin, who falls into the "trying to have your cake and eat it too" category this week. Durbin has been a pretty strong voice for reforming the way the government sends so many people to prison, in the past. However, at a recent local event, he praised a new prison in his home state for creating lots of jobs for his constituents. This is somewhat hypocritical, and more than a little tone-deaf. "Prisons are good when they employ people in Illinois, but otherwise we want to shrink the prison system" isn't exactly a high moral road to take, to put this another way.

Our second (Dis-)Honorable Mention goes to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who was attempting to be funny at a gathering of Asian-Americans. Now, when you listen to the video of his remarks, you can hear a lot of people laughing and you can tell Harry's trying to make an off-the-cuff joke or two. Also in his defense, he apologized immediately when he realized he had been offensive. Walking the tightrope of "politicians attempting to be funny in a targeted way to an audience" these days is fraught with danger, however. Reid needs to get a new joke-writer, at the very least, so that this sort of thing doesn't happen again.

But we have to reserve the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award for Hillary Clinton. Clinton has been awfully quiet as the events in Ferguson have played out. She is actually not alone in this -- pretty much everyone being spoken of as a possible presidential candidate in 2016 has also been completely silent for the past two weeks on the subject (with the notable exception of Rand Paul, of all people).

Hillary -- and all the others -- have not begun campaigning, nor even announced their intentions for 2016. She has the luxury -- for now -- of not jumping in with her thoughts on every event in American life. That's all fine and good, but at the same time, playing it safe and staying out of the discussion is another way of saying Hillary Clinton just missed a big opportunity to show some leadership on an important issue. Even a simple statement backing up President Obama's position (or even Eric Holder's) would have gone a long way towards showing that Clinton knows how important an issue racial relations are.

She didn't even do this, though. For refusing to break her silence, and for missing a big political opportunity -- and most of all, for playing it safe rather than show some leadership -- Hillary Clinton is our Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week.

[Hillary Clinton is currently a private citizen, and it is our standing policy never to provide contact information for such people.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 317 (8/22/14)

This week's talking points mostly come from out on the campaign trail, in various different states from around the country. They're a little more locally-focused than normal, as a result, just to warn everyone.

 

1
   Disgusting and completely inappropriate

This one is pretty unbelievable, folks.

"Only 12 percent of the people in Ferguson, Missouri voted in the most recent municipal election. Al Sharpton even castigated the people of Ferguson for this record, saying: 'You all have got to start voting and showing up. Twelve percent turnout is an insult to your children.' There's a reason why there is such a racial imbalance between the racial makeup of the town's citizens and the makeup of their elected officials and police force, in other words. But when some tried to constructively address this problem by launching voter-registration drives in Ferguson this week, the executive director of the state's Republican Party called the efforts to sign people up to vote: 'not only disgusting but completely inappropriate.' He went on to say: 'Injecting race into this conversation and into this tragedy, not only is not helpful, but it doesn't help a continued conversation of justice and peace.' So, according to the guy who runs the Republican Party in Missouri, we're all supposed to have a 'conversation' about justice, just as long as nobody tries to sign black people up to vote. Personally, I find his line of thinking to be 'not only disgusting but completely inappropriate,' and I call on the Missouri Republican Party to immediately fire Matt Wills. Because otherwise, they are essentially agreeing with what he said. So much for all that talk of minority outreach from Republicans, eh?"

 

2
   Sewing up the human trafficking vote

Another one that is pretty hard to believe, this time from Florida.

"Seems like Florida's Rick Scott is having a bit of a problem vetting people in his political ads. After yanking an ad featuring someone who had to resign to fight charges of grand theft and corruption of his public office, Rick bounced back with an ad featuring -- are you sitting down? -- a convicted human trafficker. Yes, you heard that right -- Rick Scott ran an ad featuring a guy praising him who had been convicted of human smuggling in the Caribbean nation of St. Maarten. I guess Rick's going after every vote he can get, and trying to sew up the 'human trafficking vote' early in the race."

 

3
   Crazy onions in Iowa

Debbie Wasserman Schultz got in a great line, campaigning for Bruce Braley in the Iowa Senate race. The Republican running against him, Joni Ernst, has previously said some pretty wacky things (such as, earlier this year, stating that she still has "reason to believe there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," and calling for Obama's "removal from office or impeachment"), which Democrats are now gleefully pointing out. But nobody can turn a phrase like Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Here is her description of Ernst:

I know that this state is known for its wind energy, for corn, for soybeans, but that woman is an onion of crazy. Every time you peel back a layer, you find something more disturbing about her views.

 

4
   War On Women (continued...)

News from the frontlines of the Republican "War On Women," from last week.

"I see that Republican efforts to bamboozle women into voting against their own interests continues apace. In North Carolina, they don't have much to show for this effort, of course, as new polling shows that Senator Kay Hagan is currently running 18 points ahead among women -- a margin of 52-to-34 percent. I bet the gender gap will be even bigger up in Minnesota, where I notice that a guy just won a primary for a House seat who has previously called two Democratic senators, quote, undeserving bimbos in tennis shoes, unquote, as well as making plenty of other disgusting comments on gay people and Native Americans, back when he was a conservative blogger. It's like Republicans are competing with each other in a contest to see who can drive away more women voters the fastest."

 

5
   What would you do with the people Obamacare has helped?

Greg Sargent at the Washington Post has been documenting this phenomenon for a while, now. It seems that Republican candidates (especially for the Senate) are ducking a very basic question. So, every chance a Democrat gets, this question needs to be clearly posed to Republican candidates.

"You state that you are for full repeal of Obamacare. You have no answer as to what you would replace it with, other than fuzzy bromides about how you'd achieve the same goals in some magical fashion. There is a concrete question that I would like to hear you answer about this subject, though. What will you tell the people who have signed up for the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act? What will you tell the [insert correct number for each state] people who were able to gain health coverage as a result of Medicaid expansion in this state? If you are successful in repealing Obamacare -- as you've stated is one of your political goals -- then you will be dumping [insert number] people off their health insurance, and replacing it with nothing. So, to be absolutely clear: Do you support this state's Medicaid expansion? Or do you want to take away health insurance for [insert number] of people? No waffling, please, just a simple answer to that, for the thousands of families who won't be able to afford a visit to the doctor if you get elected."

 

6
   Rove's at it again

Another aspect of the fight which Sargent has been on top of.

"Actually, in general, Republicans seem to be running away from what was supposed to be their big strategy for the 2014 elections: hating Obamacare, all the time. Funny thing -- the closer we get to the election, the less money Republican candidates seem to be spending on anti-Obamacare ads. Some Democrats are even fighting back against the ad-wars. Things are getting so bad that it seems like Karl Rove is the only one still fighting this battle of the airwaves -- by, quite laughably, flat-out lying about which party can be more trusted to save programs like Medicare and Social Security. Maybe most Republicans have figured out that the public is well aware that they've got absolutely nothing to replace any of the benefits of Obamacare -- since they now seem to be reduced to Karl Rove trying to sell lies and scaremongering. Just a few short months ago, Republicans were bragging that Obamacare was the key to victory for them, but you don't hear much of that sort of talk these days, do you?"

 

7
   Even Krauthammer?!?

Foreign policy has been a big subject all year, and now that there is a smattering of good news, Democrats should point it out.

"There is still a lot of bad news on the foreign policy front, but we have seen several positive developments in the past week. Syria's chemical weapons have now been completely destroyed, for instance. The Kurdish fighters in Iraq are working with the Iraqi national forces -- something previously thought unimaginable -- and together with the support of U.S. airstrikes have taken back territory from the Islamic State fanatics -- including the most important dam in the entire country. I was even astonished, this week, to read some nice things about President Obama's foreign policy in a column by Charles Krauthammer, of all people."

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

79 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [317] -- Big And Little Brother”

  1. [1] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    #8 We're not really starting a war, but we have to.

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    But we're going to ignore most of it all this week, to focus instead on the aftermath and ramifications of what has been happening in Ferguson, Missouri for the past few weeks.

    I have to be honest and say I did NOT see that one coming.. :D

    You like to live dangerously, CW... :D

    Because there is a growing movement to require police officers to wear cameras all the time, while performing their duties. A new petition on the White House site calling for this change has (as of this writing) over 140,000 signatures -- well past the 100,000 threshold that is supposed to generate an official response. So we'll see what President Obama has to say about the idea soon, one assumes.

    For the record, speaking AS a former (if there really is such a thing) cop, I am fully, completely and unequivocally on board with the idea of collar cams for cops..

    FULLY... COMPLETELY... UNEQUIVOCALLY...

    How convenient for the cops that all seven cameras "malfunctioned" at the same time!

    No more "convenient" than 2 years worth of emails disappearing from IRS hard drives of ONLY the people that were involved in targeting conservatives..

    Goose... Gander... Get it?? :D

    The Ferguson police department actually has cameras for cops to wear. They're sitting in a closet, apparently, because they haven't gotten around to making officers wear them. With a Michael Brown law in place -- backed up by a "missing video presumption" by the courts -- this situation would be a lot different.

    Again, I am all for it.. But let's call it The Darren Wilson Law... Much more apropos...

    While there are still important details to be worked out, I have to come strongly down on the side of turning Big Brother's cameras around, to film government officers' actions.

    Not to nitpick, but doing what you suggest WON'T be filming the officer's actions.. Collar Cams will be filming THE CITIZENRY's actions. They will provide evidence that an officer's actions were (or were not) justified in any incident that goes down..

    A video would clearly show who was at fault, and whose actions crossed the line, and would remove much of the doubt and distrust. Maybe making such a change could prevent weeks of future angry demonstrations in the streets, in some other small town in America. That would indeed be worth the effort.

    I completely and unequivocally agree.. Having been there, done that and got the T-shirt, I firmly believe that 99% of cops in this country are brave, decent and honest human beings that are doing very dangerous jobs against impossible odds with very little to no support from the very community that they put their lives on the line to protect..

    Collar cams will show this to be true..

    Which is why I believe they will never be put into widespread use.. Because, like drones, they are TOO effective of a LEO tool. The communities WILL see that, more often than not, officers are justified in what they do, when they do it..

    In other words, collar cams will likely show that the good guys ARE the good guys and the bad guys ARE the bad guys..

    A lot of people in this country really really REALLY like to hate cops.. Give them proof positive that the cops ARE the good guys???

    Those lots of people won't like that...

    Michale

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    He went on to say: 'Injecting race into this conversation and into this tragedy, not only is not helpful, but it doesn't help a continued conversation of justice and peace.'

    Actually, the guy is right in this particular statement..

    This incident, like the Sanford FL shooting, had absolutely NOTHING to do with race..

    NO EVIDENCE has EVER been found that even SUGGESTED that race had ANYTHING to do with either incident.. Well, unless you count fabricated evidence and the Left Wingers ridiculous and contemptible idea to create a new race of people called "White Hispanics"..

    Getting out the vote is a laudable idea..

    But we see what happens when racist hucksters fan the flames of racial hatred solely for their own profit..

    I was even astonished, this week, to read some nice things about President Obama's foreign policy in a column by Charles Krauthammer, of all people."

    I'm not.. Chuck ALWAYS calls it as he sees it, regardless of politics... He is pretty much a me.. :D

    Michale

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    John From Censornati wrote:
    #8 We're not really starting a war, but we have to.

    It's become (painfully for my fellow Weigantians) clear that you have absolutely NO proof of your BS accusation that I ever called you a nazi...

    Being as it really isn't fair for one liar (you) to cause grief to everyone else I am going to let this matter drop, since I have fully and unequivocally vindicated myself of your ridiculous, bogus and completely uncharacteristic accusation..

    Michale

  5. [5] 
    LewDan wrote:

    It's become (painfully for my fellow Weigantians) clear that you have absolutely NO proof of your BS accusation that I ever called CW a racist...

    Being as it really isn't fair for one liar (you) to cause grief to everyone else I am going to let this matter drop, since I have fully and unequivocally vindicated myself of your ridiculous, bogus and completely characteristic false accusation..

    LewDan

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's become (painfully for my fellow Weigantians) clear that you have absolutely NO proof of your BS accusation that I ever called CW a racist...

    Actually, I do..

    But, as I mentioned in the previous FTP, you have a tendency to ignore the facts and questions that totally devestate your position..

    For example, you refuse to answer if you would care about Michael Brown if Michael Brown had been white instead of black.

    You called Bush a terrorist for his activities but have never answered whether Obama is a terrorist as well because he is doing things WORSE (at least from a Left Winger perspective) things then Bush..

    There are several more examples of you ignoring points that prove you completely and utterly wrong..

    I am not going to search thru 316 FTP commentaries, find the proof that you said CW made racist comments, only to have you revert to your Coward Of The County persona where you ignore things you can't address...

    If you state for the record that you will acknowledge what the facts show, then I'll be happy to provide the link that proves you said CW made racist statements..

    Ball is in your court as it always has been...

    Like I said to JFC who failed utterly..

    Put Up Or Shut Up... :D

    and completely characteristic false accusation..

    YOU calling someone racist is a false accusation???

    NOW look who is lying... :D

    Michale

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    YOU calling someone racist is a false accusation???

    NOW look who is lying... :D

    Let's face the facts, LD.

    You accuse ANYONE of being a racist at the drop of a dime...

    It's part of your charm.. :D

    Michale

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am also constrained to point out that you called into question my claim that you have referred to many others as racist..

    I proved you wrong there and you failed to acknowledge it..

    You have a track record of ignoring it when me or anyone points out you are wrong..

    Therefore, it's an exercise in futility to provide you with ANY facts, as you refuse to accept anything that contradicts your on little world-view..

    For the record, I was happy to leave this issue between you and I back in last weeks FTP

    Apparently, you had other plans.. :^/

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Besides...

    Being accused of committing a GODWIN is a VERY serious accusation with HUGE ramifications.. False accusations of GODWIN violations can haunt a person for the rest of their lives, making it IMPOSSIBLE to find gainful employment..

    Thanks to hysterical Wingers and fanatical Obamabots, being accused of racism is an everyday occurrence these days and is not any kind of big deal anymore...

    :D

    Michale

  10. [10] 
    TheStig wrote:

    M - (2)

    Every now and then, you and I end up in nearly complete agreement. This is one of those times. A little trouble with some of your sweeping generalizations, but hey, who among us haven't launched a few of those at this very site?

    Police dash cams have been ubiquitous in my neck o' the woods for quite a while, hardly a week goes by when dash cam footage doesn't show on the local news. Area police seem to be very comfortable with them....precisely for reasons you stated.

    I'll add just one more thing. This technology is cheap. So cheap that Russian dash/security cams randomly caught so much footage that the path of a recent rogue meteor could be accurately reconstructed in 3D!

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Every now and then, you and I end up in nearly complete agreement. This is one of those times.

    I have my moments, few and far between though they may be... :D

    My personally feeling is that GOOD cops will be all for Collar Cams...

    Now, an argument can be made that CCs won't give the nuances, might miss important points that only the on-scene officer had noticed..

    Further, it can be argued that CCs won't indicate the physical and mental stress that officers are under when responding to incidents..

    Those are logical arguments. It's easy to nitpick and say Officer Smith should have done A instead of B.. And Monday Morning Quarterbacking is never welcome. It's easy to claim from the safety of one's comfy office chair that Officer Smith over-reacted..

    So, allowances will have to be made...

    But I think that Collar Cams will help a LOT more than they will hurt.. That incidents like Ferguson and Sanford (if Zimmerman had been a sworn officer) would be resolved quickly and with minimal hassles or destruction..

    Like I said though... It's BECAUSE these CCs will be so effective that communities, especially minority communities, will not welcome them...

    Cue YoYo, LD and Kev.... "RACIST!!!!!!"

    :^/

    Michale

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Like I said though... It's BECAUSE these CCs will be so effective that communities, especially minority communities, will not welcome them...

    Let me amend that to say:

    Like I said though... It's BECAUSE these CCs will be so effective that communities, especially scumbag racist agitators within minority communities, will not welcome them...

    To expand on that I mean racist agitators like that scumbag Al TAWANA-BRAWLEY Sharpton and Ben AMBULANCE CHASER Crump et al..

    Can you imagine how much they would be against a system that would totally and completely negate their lucrative FANNING THE FLAMES OF RACIAL HATRED FOR FUN AND PROFIT enterprises???

    Michale

  13. [13] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "But we have to reserve the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award for Hillary Clinton."

    Yes. If we get work now destroying The Inevitable One for the disappointing stuff she's not doing, maybe we can derail the old hag before she can do any real damage.

    If you quote me, you're lying.

  14. [14] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale [3],

    "He went on to say: 'Injecting race into this conversation and into this tragedy, not only is not helpful, but it doesn't help a continued conversation of justice and peace.'"

    How is registering voters "injecting race"? Its the racist claiming that registration of voters is "injecting race" who's "injecting race."

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    How is registering voters "injecting race"? Its the racist claiming that registration of voters is "injecting race" who's "injecting race.

    He was referring to injecting race into incidents such as the Ferguson and Sanford shootings.. Incidents that had absolutely NOTHING to do with race..

    If that is not what the guy was referring to, then I withdraw my critique...

    Michale

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, will wonders never cease!!!

    I actually agree with JFC!!!

    Who would have thunked it!!! :D

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    LewDan wrote:

    "Hell, the ONLY time I bring up race at all is in response to ludicrous, ignorant and self-serving claims from people like you and Kev and YoYo that everything is about race..."

    ...and yet after on one commented Michale is "bringing up race" in 3.

  18. [18] 
    John From Censornati wrote:
  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    ...and yet after on one commented Michale is "bringing up race" in 3.

    Are you really that dense???

    Seriously???

    Give it a rest, LD... No one appreciates you trying to make every commentary thread a race war...

    Jesus H Christ!!!

    Michale

  20. [20] 
    LewDan wrote:

    "And I can prove that you have referred to many MANY others and called them racists..

    Do you want a list??

    Darren Wilson
    All the cops of Ferguson PD
    All Republicans in the country
    George Zimmerman

    That's the tip of the list. There is a LOT more..

    So, I have proven that you have referred to many others as racist..."
    Michale [61]
    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2014/08/18/perry-case-complicates-boehners-lawsuit/

    I didn't know we were talking about people in the news! Yes there are stories of racists, and I have referred to them as racists. Even granting that. You ate lying. And you haven't proven anything. Another lie.

    Since searching 316 posts is too onerous for you, and no one every heard of Wilson two weeks ago, produce one time, even ONCE, that I said he was "racist!"

    Or, find one time I said "all the cops of Ferguson PD" or "all Republicans in the country" are racists.

    As for Zimmerman, he called the Police because a black kid in a hoodie was walking down the street.-- Hell Yes! He's a racist!--For the record. Yes, I admit that I've called racists "racist!" But I've never called CW racist. Never Wilson. Never Ferguson PD. Just demonstrable racists.--Like you, Michale.

    Your wild unsubstantiated claims are not proof of your wild unsubstantiated claims. They are just more lies.

    But, then, lying Michale is what you do.--Its ALL that you do.

    Your 'Heads I win. Tails You lose' demand that if I "admit" you're right you'll provide the proof is yet another example of you moronic lying.

  21. [21] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale [19],
    "...and yet after on one commented Michale is "bringing up race" in 3.

    "Are you really that dense???

    "Seriously???

    "Give it a rest, LD... No one appreciates you trying to make every commentary thread a race war..."

    Michale [12],
    "Let me amend that to say:

    "Like I said though... It's BECAUSE these CCs will be so effective that communities, especially scumbag racist agitators within minority communities, will not welcome them...

    "To expand on that I mean racist agitators like that scumbag Al TAWANA-BRAWLEY Sharpton and Ben AMBULANCE CHASER Crump et al..

    "Can you imagine how much they would be against a system that would totally and completely negate their lucrative FANNING THE FLAMES OF RACIAL HATRED FOR FUN AND PROFIT enterprises???

    "Michale"

    --Lying racist Michale.--Chronic STUPID racist serial liar Michale.

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    As for Zimmerman, he called the Police because a black kid in a hoodie was walking down the street.--

    No he didn't... Zimmerman called the police because A KID in a hoodie appeared to be casing houses..

    These are the facts...

    But, of course, YOU have to inject race into EVERYTHING...

    I say again..

    Give it a rest...

    Michale

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    --Lying racist Michale.--Chronic STUPID racist serial liar Michale.

    Translation:

    I have no logical or rational response and therefore I must concede your superiority by resorting to childish personal attacks and immature name-calling

    I accept your concession.. :D

    Michale

  24. [24] 
    LewDan wrote:

    I'm done here. Racist hate speech sites are not my thing.

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Apparently they are since you have been doing yer damnest to make Weigantia one...

    Michale.....

  26. [26] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "News from the frontlines of the Republican "War On Women"

    You've got to love that Fox "News" program Outnumbered (it's only when men are outnumbered that this outnumbering matters). They had this knuckle-dragging "doctor" Ablow on there and he called the FLOTUS a hypocrite for trying to get people to eat right and then he said she struggles with her weight (which he pulled right out of his fat ass).

    So they had him back on and he said his hosts needed to lose weight (except for that one chick in the tight red dress showing off her legs closest to the camera).

  27. [27] 
    TheStig wrote:

    M -(11)

    Marge: "You know, the courts might not work any more, but as long as everybody is videotaping everyone else, justice will be done."

    From a season 6 Episode of The Simpsons, Bad Homer (1994)

    Marge is often ahead of her time. Twenty years ago you needed a voyeuristic Scot and a bulky video camera. Now, your phone will suffice.

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Marge is often ahead of her time. Twenty years ago you needed a voyeuristic Scot and a bulky video camera. Now, your phone will suffice.

    Hell, a pair of Rick Perry glasses with an insert is all ya need.. :D

    Kudos on the TV/Movie quote...

    {{sniffle}} {{{sniffle}}}I am so proud

    :D

    Michale

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:
  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:
  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    “They’re not from Mexico, they’re coming from further south. We need to make sure that when we’re talking about these children we need to treat them like they’re our children or our grandchildren. If they’re gonna be refugees, which several of them are going to be, we need to make sure that we have—one, we take care of them, and we create a pathway for citizenship and set up education for them so they don’t become the same problem that we’re currently having in the Middle East—that they’ll be terrorists a generation from now.”
    -Democrat Pat Murphy

    Ahhhh... I get it now...

    Create new fresh minted Democrat voters so that they don't become terrorists...

    Makes sense to me.... NOT!

    Michale

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    A GOOD EDUCATION IS IMPORTANT.
    COLD BEER IS IMPORTANTER

    Words to live by... :D

    Michale

  33. [33] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    We're nowhere near Napa, thanks for asking.

    6.0 is BIG, though. That is a MAJOR quake.

    -CW

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Glad ta hear it... :D

    Michale

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    How Repealing And Replacing Obamacare Would Help Restore Booming Economic Growth
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2014/08/24/how-repealing-and-replacing-obamacare-would-help-restore-booming-economic-growth/

    I have to say... Eliminating the link between Employment and Health Care seems like a pretty good idea to me..

    The plan outlined in the link above seems tailor-made to solve our healthcare woes.

    My guess is, though, Democrats would hate the idea because it would require them to admit that TrainWreckCare is a farce and part of the problem, not part of the solution..

    And Democrats would rather see the country go down in flames rather than admit they were wrong about TrainWreckCare...

    Michale

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Currently, the courts generally treat important video that goes missing as a harmless mistake. They assume no ill will on the part of police. If you discover that the police were or should have been recording an encounter that would vindicate you of criminal charges or prove that the police violated your rights, and that video goes missing, you're simply out of luck.

    Under the missing video presumption, if under the policy agency's police there should have been video and there isn't, then the courts will assume that the video corroborates the party opposing the police, be it a criminal defendant or the plaintiff in a civil rights lawsuit.

    Deja Vu... ALL over again... :D

    It's funny.. I said the SAME thing with regards to the missing IRS emails and was resoundingly ridiculed...

    It's called 'spoliation inference' and it basically says EXACTLY what you outlined, CW, but it generally applies to ALL evidence, not just video evidence.

    Spoliation inference is a negative evidentiary inference that a finder of fact can draw from a party's destruction of a document or thing that is relevant to an ongoing or reasonably foreseeable civil or criminal proceeding: the finder of fact can review all evidence uncovered in as strong a light as possible against the spoliator and in favor of the opposing party.

    The theory of the spoliation inference is that when a party destroys evidence, it may be reasonable to infer that the party had "consciousness of guilt" or other motivation to avoid the evidence. Therefore, the factfinder may conclude that the evidence would have been unfavorable to the spoliator. Some jurisdictions have recognized a spoliation tort action, which allows the victim of destruction of evidence to file a separate tort action against a spoliator.[2]

    VINDICATION!!! THY NAME IS MICHALE!!!! :D

    Put another check mark in the 'WIN' column.. :D

    Michale

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hay CW...

    Time ta check the NNL buffers... :D

    Michale

  38. [38] 
    akadjian wrote:

    CW- I like the idea of cop cams. Hadn't heard of this before so thx for posting. I don't see why cop cams would be too much harder than dashboard cams from a technology standpoint. Both storage and cameras are cheap. And you could probably put an expiration timeframe on "boring" footage.

    Eliminating the link between Employment and Health Care seems like a pretty good idea to me.

    I'll be honest, Michale, and tell you I didn't read about the idea. It may be a good idea, it may not.

    I do know, however, that if Obamacare gets repealed, no other health care legislation will ever be passed (which is what Republicans know & want btw). This is why they are proposing it in 2 parts.

    Why not just "replace" if it's such a good idea? I'm all for better solutions. The problem is that Republicans really just want to get rid of Obamacare and they don't have the balls to simply say it.

    -David

  39. [39] 
    akadjian wrote:

    p.s. TheStig ... nice Homer Simpson quote!

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    I don't see why cop cams would be too much harder than dashboard cams from a technology standpoint.

    Dashboard cams rarely get punched in the face, wrestled to the ground, doused with liquids or otherwise have violent acts perpetrated on them.. :D

    Why not just "replace" if it's such a good idea? I'm all for better solutions. The problem is that Republicans really just want to get rid of Obamacare and they don't have the balls to simply say it.

    That idea listed in the link IS a good idea...

    I can't see anything wrong with it.. But I am obviously not the most knowledgeable judge...

    My point is that Democrats have been trying to divorce health care insurance from employment for a while now, right??

    But to do it, they have to admit that TrainWreckCare is not working.

    And THAT is where they (EPIC) fail....

    They can't admit that ObamaCare is bad...

    Michale

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Dashboard cams rarely get punched in the face, wrestled to the ground, doused with liquids or otherwise have violent acts perpetrated on them.. :D

    For the record, I have endured all of those.. :D

    Michale

  42. [42] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Dashboard cams rarely get punched in the face, wrestled to the ground, doused with liquids or otherwise have violent acts perpetrated on them.. :D

    Heheh ... fair enough. They might have to be a bit tougher than dashboard cams.

    And sorry you had to endure these acts. That's not something I'd wish on anyone.

    -David

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    And sorry you had to endure these acts. That's not something I'd wish on anyone.

    "...the nature of the beast."
    -Col Hadley, THE FINAL OPTION

    Nobody chooses to be a cop for the money.. :D

    "Being a cop is not what we do, it's who we are.."
    -James Woods, THE HARD WAY

    Michale

  44. [44] 
    John From Censornati wrote:
  45. [45] 
    John From Censornati wrote:
  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://rall.com/2014/08/23/al-sharptons-sellout

    Congrats JFC..

    You found someone that speaks more inane and more gibberish than you do.. :D

    Michale

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's do the Substitution Test and see if Rall's statement is bigoted..

    If you’re for black people, you’re for racism and state oppression. Because that’s what they do.

    Yep, bigoted statement, through and through...

    But don't lose too much sleep over it..

    There is no dishonor in being a bigot..

    We're all bigots..

    Chris Weigant-Embracing Bigotry
    http://www.businessinsider.com/embracing-bigotry-2012-8

    :D

    The dishonor comes from denying it...

    Michale

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    “Rooting out a cancer like ISIL won’t be easy, and it won’t be quick.”
    -President Obama

    But.... but.... but..... How can that be, Mr President!??

    You said that ISIL was "just the J.V." and was nothing to worry about..

    WTF, dood???

    That's our POTUS.. Never met a foreign policy issue he couldn't screw up...

    Michale

  49. [49] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Barack Obama, whether senator or president, has NEVER been what one would call a foreign policy heavyweight, by any stretch.

    Ironically enough, he never seems to have understood much about Iraq except for the simplistically obvious. This despite the fact that Vice President Joe Biden has been at his side for the last five and a half years.

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Barack Obama, whether senator or president, has NEVER been what one would call a foreign policy heavyweight, by any stretch.

    That's the understatement of the century.. :D

    Michale

  51. [51] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Indeed.

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    His problem is that he thinks he knows it all and doesn't have to listen to anyone...

    And then, when things go sideways, he blames anyone and everyone but himself..

    I guess it is not ALL his fault.. The people around him keep feeding him the delusion that the is The Chosen One..

    Michale

  53. [53] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, of course, I don't buy into the "Chosen One" nonsense. But, I have been extremely disappointed by how Obama has handled many issues. Having said that, however, I still believe that he is essentially on the right track - just unable or incapable of getting much traction, for any number of reasons.

    You know, when Joe Biden was elected the 47th Vice President of the United States, I had irrationally sky high expectations for America and its global leadership role. And, I had certainly not expected that President Obama's 'style' of leadership would evolve - or devolve, as the case may be - into such a dead weight around the effort to move forward on several fronts, domestically and internationally.

    Granted, events - beginning no less with the most destructive and US-triggered global financial crisis since the Great Depression - have indeed conspired to stymie whatever grand plans this administration may have had to effectively lead the world. Add to that the relentless effort of its opposition to oppose, often for the sake of opposing and at any cost to the nation, and you have a pretty good recipe for dysfunction and stunted progress.

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    . Add to that the relentless effort of its opposition to oppose, often for the sake of opposing and at any cost to the nation, and you have a pretty good recipe for dysfunction and stunted progress.

    Opposing for the sake of opposing is a Left Winger created myth brought on by some out of context quotes and some really bonehead in the heat of the moment statements.

    Such bonehead out of context statements are NOT the sole purview of the Right, I might add..

    Republicans are simply doing what Democrats would be doing as the Minority Party. Obstructing the opposing Party in favor of their chosen agenda..

    It's like Protestants and Catholics, Shiite and Sunni without the bloodshed and explosions..

    I mean, step back and look at things..

    Democrats call Republicans terrorists and arsonists and hostage takers and criminals and then sit back and say, "Gee.. Why won't Republicans compromise with us???"

    Minority Partys obstruct. It's what they do..

    And when Democrats become the Minority Party in Congress in a few months, then THEY will be the Party that obstructs..

    And so it goes and so it goes...

    Michale

  55. [55] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Opposing for the sake of opposing is a Left Winger created myth brought on by some out of context quotes and some really bonehead in the heat of the moment statements.

    I think you're wrong about that, Michale. It has been quite obvious to me - especially with regard to issues surrounding the financial crisis - that the congressional Republicans had one thing on their mind and one thing only - opposing Obama at any cost.

    There is blind obstruction and then there is constructive criticism and opposition. The latter is what leads to effective and functional government.

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    There is blind obstruction and then there is constructive criticism and opposition. The latter is what leads to effective and functional government.

    Every group that opposes another group likes to think that they are on the side of the angels and that the opposing side is evil incarnate..

    The afore mentioned Shiite/Sunni Catholic/Protestant conflicts prove that beyond any doubt..

    As fervently as you believe you are in the right, there are those Republicans who just as fervently believe that THEY are in the right...

    That's the part that you can't see...

    What makes Democrats right and Republicans wrong??

    Because from where I sit, they both are frak'ed up beyond all belief...

    NEITHER Party is on the side of the angels...

    Once that is acknowledged then, and ONLY then, can progress be made..

    Once Democrats can say to Republicans, "yes, you make some good points and have some good ideas" and Republicans can say the same thing to Democrats, THEN this country can get back on track..

    But Democrats calling Republicans terrorists and Republicans calling Democrats communists???

    No one can see past their own hatred, their own bigotry.

    And we'll all be as we are right now. Stuck in the middle with no one looking out for OUR best interests..

    Michale

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Once Democrats can say to Republicans, "yes, you make some good points and have some good ideas" and Republicans can say the same thing to Democrats, THEN this country can get back on track..

    That's what I'm taking about and hoping that it will come to pass ...

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's what I'm taking about and hoping that it will come to pass ...

    You and me both...

    But until it DOES come to pass, it meaningless to castigate the Republicans and praise Democrats..

    Both are equally guilty of poisoning the well and refusing to work with the other...

    Michale

  59. [59] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Damn, Michale ... you're wrong again. There is nothing equal about it at all.

  60. [60] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Damn, Michale ... you're wrong again. There is nothing equal about it at all.

    michale may be incorrect to assign equal responsibility, but the dems are not exactly innocent. it's a bit like the schlemiel-schlimazel relationship. the republicans are always the ones spilling the soup, and the democrats are always the ones getting the soup spilled on them. it may not be equal, but both are responsible.

    JL

  61. [61] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Did I say the "dems" are innocent?

  62. [62] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Actually, Joshua, the congressional Republicans have, over the course of the last five years, behaved extremely irresponsibly.

    Take issue with that imbalance!

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz & JL,

    Maybe I am wrong and responsibility is not equal..

    Or maybe I am NOT wrong and the only reason ya'all think I am wrong is because your sympathies lay with one Party over the other..

    Ya'all must at least concede the possibility...

    As an aside, CW?? Did you change the posting font?? It looks different...

    Michale

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    Actually, Joshua, the congressional Republicans have, over the course of the last five years, behaved extremely irresponsibly.

    Democrats calling Republicans "terrorists" and "arsonists" and "hostage takers" etc etc is ALSO extremely irresponsible...

    Michale

  65. [65] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Let me put it this way, JL ...

    Give me one example where the congressional Democrats put the country at risk through their irresponsible actions.

    Take your time, I've become extremely patient. :)

  66. [66] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hostage takers was a pretty apt description, under the conditions it was used.

  67. [67] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Or maybe I am NOT wrong and the only reason ya'all think I am wrong is because your sympathies lay with one Party over the other..

    Speaking for myself ... no, I don't think so. That's not how I roll. :)

  68. [68] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Put, it this way, Michale ...

    I have long thought that the Republican thinking on the economy is wrong and has been proven wrong. But, Republicans have not always acted so irresponsibly over that issue as to literally put the entire nation at risk of economic failure just to irrationally obstruct the White House.

    I can name many Republicans I have followed over the years and have great respect for: Senator Warner, Senator Lugar, Senator Cohen for three examples.

    Unfortunately, these men or men like them are no longer in the Senate and that body is a far lesser institution for their absence.

  69. [69] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Name calling is one thing, Michale - and, as we in Weigantia know very well, that sort of thing has been part of American politics since this side of forever - but actually putting an entire nation at risk of economic failure for crass political reasons is quite another and defines irresponsibility for me.

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Give me one example where the congressional Democrats put the country at risk through their irresponsible actions.

    How about when the sided with Al Qaeda against President Bush over the Patriot Act...

    We could have gotten OBL a LOT sooner and prevented a LOT of grief and loss of life if Democrats had supported Bush in his CT policies HALF as much as they supported Obama...

    Michale

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    Name calling is one thing, Michale - and, as we in Weigantia know very well, that sort of thing has been part of American politics since this side of forever - but actually putting an entire nation at risk of economic failure for crass political reasons is quite another and defines irresponsibility for me.

    And a case can be made that it is DEMOCRATS who are putting the nation at risk by their policies (immigration amnesty, etc etc etc) and Republicans are fighting against that..

    You see my point??

    It's all spin...

    Michale

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    Name calling is one thing, Michale -

    But if that name-calling prevents compromise and co-operation???

    Then it's extremely irresponsible...

    No???

    Michale

  73. [73] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Oh, OBL could have been put out of commission A LOT sooner but that has NOTHING to do with the Patriot Act.

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes, he could..

    IF Democrats had supported the POTUS with the '-R' after his name as much as they supported the POTUS with the '-D' after his name..

    It's all part and parcel to the entire Counter Terrorism concept and policies..

    Democrats fought Bush and demonized Bush over the CT policies..

    Under Obama Democrats rubber stamped everything..

    They put the country at risk SOLELY and completely for their partisan agenda.

    And THAT, I can never forgive or forget...

    Michale

  75. [75] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Give me one example where the congressional Democrats put the country at risk through their irresponsible actions.

    Liz,

    Every national education initiative since the millenium has put the country in danger. Although both parties endorsed the legislation and presidents from both parties signed it, most of the harmful legislation that passed originated from the democratic side.

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    Core Curriculum???

    Michale

  77. [77] 
    nypoet22 wrote:
  78. [78] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    and bobby fracking jindal is leading the vanguard against this monstrosity. can you see me scratching my head in abject confusion?

    JL

  79. [79] 
    Michale wrote:

    and bobby fracking jindal is leading the vanguard against this monstrosity. can you see me scratching my head in abject confusion?

    It's enough to make one a political agnostic, eh!!! :D

    hehehehehehehehehe

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.