Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktVital Statistics:
| Last | Change | Percent | |
| S&P Futures | 1679.7 | -0.9 | -0.05% |
| Eurostoxx Index | 2716.0 | -2.0 | -0.07% |
| Oil (WTI) | 109 | 1.0 | 0.90% |
| LIBOR | 0.265 | -0.002 | -0.56% |
| US Dollar Index (DXY) | 82.68 | -0.140 | -0.17% |
| 10 Year Govt Bond Yield | 2.52% | -0.01% | |
| Current Coupon Ginnie Mae TBA | 104.2 | -0.2 | |
| Current Coupon Fannie Mae TBA | 103.9 | 0.0 | |
| RPX Composite Real Estate Index | 200.8 | -0.2 | |
| BankRate 30 Year Fixed Rate Mortgage | 4.37 |
Markets are weaker this morning after a mixed bag of earnings. GE beat, while Mr Softee missed by a country mile. There is no economic data this morning. Bonds and MBS are flat / down small.
Liquidity has been drying up in the TBA market, with bid / ask spreads increasing to 7 ticks on the higher coupons. Yesterday, just over $3.2 billion worth of TBA traded, which made it the second lowest volume day of 2013. What does this mean for you? Thin markets can be volatile. We will likely see more re-prices during the day, and aggregators will fade their bids to account for lousier execution on their hedges.
Ever wonder how the government sets G-fees? Well, here ya go..
Wonkish piece, but sheds light on the labor force participation rate and why it isn’t coming back to previous levels. This has implications for the Fed, in that it won’t take much in the way of job growth to keep moving unemployment levels to where the Fed will start thinking about tightening. While the Fed pledges to use a holistic approach, we could be getting to 6.5% unemployment the hard way. Which means, don’t expect super robust recovery – the population is aging and that is a drag on growth and spending.
Filed under: Morning Report |
All Things in Moderation 
Tweet of the day.
@KennedyNation: Eric Holder won’t give George Zimmerman his gun back because he’s already sent it to Mexico. And lost track of it.
LikeLike
I think i might break down and get on twitter.
LikeLike
I usually like Ta-Nehisi Coates, but he needs to realize that the Obama who would nominate Ray Kelly as the new Secretary of Homeland Security is no different than the Obama who is currently fine with signature strikes.
There’s nothing new here in Obama going back on his “deepest commitments” that hasn’t already been done with his flip flops on the Bush administration’s anti-terror policies.
“Raising the Wrong Profile
By TA-NEHISI COATES
Published: July 18, 2013”
&
“Should Barack Obama appoint Ray Kelly to head the Department of Homeland Security the signal will be clear: Profiling is not, as Obama once claimed, “morally objectionable” and “bad police work,” but an acceptable tactic presently condoned at the highest levels of government. Such a development — in Obama’s second term, no less — would be a betrayal of African-American voters who endured long lines and poll tax tactics to elect this president. This should not happen. This can not happen.”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/profiling-comes-to-the-white-house/277943/
LikeLike
Technical question. Brent, TBA = ?
LikeLike
TBA = To Be Announced mortgage backed securities.. the basic benchmark from where mortgage rates are set.
LikeLike
Now, that’s just boring for you financial weenies to use the same acronyms as all of us. 🙂
LikeLike
Oh, and by the way.
I GOT THE HOUSE!!!!!!!!!! Yeah!!!!!!!
I’ve got a Baltimore address as of 8/1/2013!!
LikeLike
Congrats Michi.
LikeLike
No, the PPACA won’t be deficit neutral regardless of what the CBO said:
“Detroit wants to unload 19,389 retirees into Obamacare’s marketplaces
By Sarah Kliff, Published: July 19 at 2:51 pm”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/19/detroit-wants-to-unload-19389-retirees-into-obamacares-marketplaces/
LikeLike
This is a good read on Paul Krugman’s mentality and view of the world:
Every aspect of human interaction can apparently be reduced to a formula.
LikeLike
So the Krug wanted to be Hari Seldon. . . bit of hubris there, no?
Nice read, jnc, thanks!
LikeLike
No, there’s not going to be a Detroit bailout.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/19/we-have-to-step-in-and-save-detroit/?ref=opinion
LikeLike
jnc:
No, there’s not going to be a Detroit bailout.
A Michigan judge has ruled that Detroit’s filing for bankruptcy violates the state’s constitution. Even worse, one imagines, is that according to the judge:
“It’s also not honoring the (United States) president, who took (Detroit’s auto companies) out of bankruptcy.”
LikeLike
From Obama’s race speech yesterday:
Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.
The obvious question, if Obama had been willing to actually take questions, on the back of this statement is: How many people did you attack and beat up 35 years ago, Mr. President?
And for those who resist that idea that we should think about something like these “stand your ground” laws, I’d just ask people to consider, if Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk? And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman who had followed him in a car because he felt threatened? And if the answer to that question is at least ambiguous, then it seems to me that we might want to examine those kinds of laws.
This is either completely disingenuous or Obama doesn’t actually understand the law about which he speaks. This is the relevant language of the Florida stand your ground statute:
A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The law specifically applies to someone “who is attacked” and allows them to “meet force with force”. Following someone in a car is neither an attack nor is it the use of force. So no, Martin could not have “stood his ground” and legally shot Zimmerman for following him, but contrary to what Obama implies, it would have nothing whatsoever to do with Martin’s race.
LikeLike
Nick Gillespie talks about Teh Krugman.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/19/paul-krugman-s-nasty-and-inane-attack-on-libertarian-populism.html
LikeLike
Interesting take on the Zimmerman/Martin/Obama nexus.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/7/19/161153/926
LikeLike
McWing (from your link):
By the President comparing himself to Martin 35 years ago, is he saying he would have responded as Martin did, and physically attacked someone for following him?
I guess I wasn’t the only one to wonder this.
BTW, the more I think about it, it is actually quite a racist sentiment to think the “black experience” includes attacking and beating up people who treat you with suspicion.
LikeLike
Yer shittin’ me!
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE96H1GE20130718?irpc=932
LikeLike
Scott, sometimes one might be best served by keeping one’s mouth shut. If you can’t accept that a black president talking about black experience is not going to match what you’ve experienced as you’ve walked through life. . .
LikeLike
???
LikeLike
McWing:
???
Taranto is right. For a lot of people an “honest” discussion about race means “shut up and agree with me”.
LikeLike
Is the biggest problem in the African American community white racism?
LikeLike
The comments in response are fascinating.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/romany-malco/a-message-to-trayvon-mart_b_3612231.html
LikeLike
You two are disgusting sometimes.
LikeLike
Mich:
What is it exactly that you find “disgusting”? Is it the fact that someone dares to criticize Obama for pontificating on fhe Zimmerman case while disingenuously ignoring the central question about which it revolved? Or is it just criticism of Obama in general that disgusts you?
LikeLike
I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised, given the lack of empathy that you and McWing have displayed in understanding why abortion and contraceptive issues might resonate strongly with women, but now your utter inability to see that race issues resonate strongly with someone who is not white is just mind boggling.
Not everyone has walked this earth as a white man; maybe you could try to see what life looks like from a different viewpoint rather than judging it from yours.
LikeLike
Mich:
…your utter inability to see that race issues resonate strongly with someone who is not white is just mind boggling.
I have no doubt that “race issues” resonate with Obama. I am simply criticizing him for ignoring the central question at issue in order to pretend that the central question was a “race issue”.
For the sake of argument let’s take for granted that the very worst assumptions about Zimmerman’s motivations are true. Let’s assume that he doesn’t like black people, and that the only reason he took notice of Martin, called the police, and followed him was because of M’s skin color.
So taking all that as a given, do you think physical violence is a justified response to such racially motivated suspicion?
LikeLike
I think blaming a teenage victim for his own death because of the mistake he made while absolving the adult with the gun who made numerous mistakes in judgement is a pretty sad commentary.
I also think interpreting Obama’s reference to himself as being about reacting aggressively to being profiled rather than being profiled is another dodge to hide the fact that young black males are still being targeted in our society as being suspicious.
Both of our god children are, or were, black. My godson died in a car accident at 21, but I very well remember what he went through while being a solitary black teenager in a largely white community. And not only what he went through but what our daughters went through being his friend. It’s neither pretty nor something I like to talk about much.
LikeLike
Imsinca… yea, it’s very difficult for some, who have never really had to experience being the target/victim of racism to actually admit that racism is still very much alive today. And I still have issues that so many are so quick to jump to the assumption that Z was initially attacked by T. We only have the word of the one living.
LikeLike
Geanie:
yea, it’s very difficult for some, who have never really had to experience being the target/victim of racism to actually admit that racism is still very much alive today.
No one is denying that racism exists. In fact in my question I assume that it was in fact present. So, even assuming that Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin simply because of his race, and followed him only because he was black, does that justify a physical attack on Zimmerman?
And I still have issues that so many are so quick to jump to the assumption that Z was initially attacked by T. We only have the word of the one living.
It is true that we do not have definitive proof of who attacked who first. But it is not true that all we have is the word of Zimmeran. There is other evidence which suggests that Zimmerman was being attacked by Martin. But regardless, the question of who attacked who first is THE central issue, despite the efforts of “so many”, including the president, who seem dedicated to portraying the race of the actors as the central issue while ignoring the question of who attacked who.
LikeLike
lms:
I think blaming a teenage victim for his own death because of the mistake he made while absolving the adult with the gun who made numerous mistakes in judgement is a pretty sad commentary.
I don’t think characterizing a violent attack on someone else as simply a “mistake” quite captures the reality of the situation. Certainly it was a mistake, as the consequences have shown, but I think it qualifies as something more than just poor judgement. I also think it is perfectly reasonable to blame a teenager for his own death if in fact his actions caused it.
Again, I ask…even assuming the worst racial motivations for Zimmerman’s suspicion of Martin and his decision to follow him, does that justify a physical attack on Zimmerman?
I also think interpreting Obama’s reference to himself as being about reacting aggressively to being profiled rather than being profiled…
I think you misunderstand my point. I think it is obvious that Obama’s reference to himself was not about reacting aggressively to being profiled. Which is exactly why I criticize him, for he is dodging the central issue in order to make it seem that it was race, and not his own action, that was the proximate cause of Martin’s death.
LikeLike
Is the national conversation about race we are supposed to have really the biggest problem in the African American community?
As a side question, wasn’t Zimmerman “profiled?”
LikeLike
McWing:
As a side question, wasn’t Zimmerman “profiled?”
At the very least he has been profiled by the media, by race race hustlers like Sharpton, and even by the president of these United States. If Zimmerman was black, the national media wouldn’t have covered the case, Sharpton wouldn’t be holding rallies about it, and Obama wouldn’t be talking about how he could have been Trayvon Martin 35 years ago. All of this has happened for the simple reason that Zimmerman is not an African American.
LikeLike
Off Topic. I know I’ve mentioned on here before about the struggles my husband and I have been facing the past few years; outsourcing of my job, husband surviving stage 4 cancer, the city flooding and destroying our home (btw, we have learned that the damage is so great now, home has to be demolished and rebuilt), my being denied SS Disability and now having to fight and wait even longer….. I have even more troubles to add to all that now.
On June 13 I was going to take a little walk outside. I was leaving the house via the laundry room, into the garage and out into the yard. As I stood at the top of the little 3 steps down into the garage, the artery in my neck became comprised, again, and I instantly fell from the top of the steps onto the garage floor. This was the 6th time I’ve fallen from compressed artery, but only time I’ve actually been injured. I knew nothing was broken, but my left foot still took traumatic damage. I tried to get in to see my Primary doc, but the earliest date I could get is Aug. 9. So 4 days later on the 17th, I went to the ER. X-rays confirmed no broken bones. ER doc said I would need an MRI to determine the soft tissue damages… but since I am self pay, the ER took it as an “optional” treatment and sent me home instead.
Well, now 5 and a half weeks later, I have discovered that the huge hole across the bridge of my foot is necrosis. So is the large bruised looking area around the hole. Covers the entire top of foot, left side of foot and left side of ankle. The bruising is not a bruise, it’s more necrosis underneath the skin.
Only treatments available for necrosis are to surgically remove and graft over, or, depending on how much there is, amputation. Either way I am facing a very long, traumatic ordeal to get rid of the necrosis before it kills me. My biggest issue now is why in the world did the ER doc send me home without checking this out… especially since I have pics from that day and the pics show the existence of necrosis even then. They never should have released me when there was necrosis already in play.
Anyway, I’ll try to keep you updated on how this works out. I will be in my doctors office first thing in the morning. Appt or not, he WILL have to address my dead foot.
LikeLike
Scott
Again, I ask…even assuming the worst racial motivations for Zimmerman’s suspicion of Martin and his decision to follow him, does that justify a physical attack on Zimmerman?
I have no idea as I haven’t actually followed the trial but I have been wondering if Zimmerman clearly identified himself as a neighborhood watch person or if Martin assumed he was being stalked and acted first knowing his only weapon was himself.
All I’m saying is that racial profiling happens and implying that authorities also profile whites is stretching the realm of possibilities. Minorities, all of them, are profiled in this country by those in positions of authority. Whether that had much to do with the Zimmerman/Martin case I don’t know.
I don’t consider prejudices by various racial groups against other racial groups profiling. That’s discrimination.
The legal definition of racial profiling is:
The consideration of race, ethnicity, or national origin by an officer of the law in deciding when and how to intervene in an enforcement capacity.
Blaming an unarmed victim of gun violence for their own death, especially one who was being followed, seems to be a stretch in logic to me. From the little I’ve read I don’t believe the prosecution proved their case but I also don’t believe Zimmerman is exactly innocent.
LikeLike
lms:
All I’m saying is that racial profiling happens…
No one is denying that. What I am saying is that it isn’t relevant to the Zimmerman case. Or, at the very least, it isn’t relevant unless it is established that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation between the two.
The legal definition of racial profiling is:
If you want to use that strict definition, then Zimmerman was not capable of profiling Martin because he is not an officer of the law acting in an enforcement capacity.
Blaming an unarmed victim of gun violence for their own death, especially one who was being followed, seems to be a stretch in logic to me.
Well, you haven’t yet actually answered my question, but I take this to mean that you do think physically attacking someone just for following you is justified. Obviously I disagree, and this would be the crux of why we approach the issue differently.
That would be the central issue according to Scott and other conservatives.
No, it is the central issue according to the law. Zimerman’s legal defense was based on the legality of using deadly force in the act of self-defense. By following Martin, even if only because Martin was black, Zimmerman was not doing anything illegal. The legal case against Zimmerman was founded on the notion that the shooting of Martin was not justified as a matter of self-defense. I don’t see how anyone can claim to be making a rational judgment about that without first making a judgement about how the physical altercation that ended with the shooting was initiated.
LikeLike
Geanie, I hope things improve for you health wise.
LikeLike
Also Scott,
he is dodging the central issue
That would be the central issue according to Scott and other conservatives.
LikeLike
Lms,
Then what is the central issue?
LikeLike
Is racism in the justice system the central issue?
LikeLike
Is racism in the justice system the central issue?
http://m.nationalreview.com/corner/353864/post-zimmerman-poison-pill-heather-mac-donald
LikeLike
What I am saying is that it isn’t relevant to the Zimmerman case. Or, at the very least, it isn’t relevant unless it is established that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation between the two.
Of course he did. HE GOT OUT OF HIS TRUCK TO CONFRONT MARTIN.
But none of this addresses my original issue with your “take” on this. You display absolutely no empathy for someone who is not a white male. Why? You sit in judgement based on your life experience without ever considering that someone else’s is different. Why?
LikeLike
Mich:
HE GOT OUT OF HIS TRUCK TO CONFRONT MARTIN.
No, he got out of his truck to follow Martin. Following is not confronting, and indeed in many instances to follow someone is to specifically avoid confronting them.
You display absolutely no empathy for someone who is not a white male. Why?
Your premise is incorrect.
You sit in judgement based on your life experience without ever considering that someone else’s is different. Why?
Again, your premise is incorrect.
(BTW…it is rather ironic to be accused of this by someone who is sitting in judgment of Zimmerman while refusing to consider his own professed experience.)
My question still stands…do you think physical violence is a justified response to being followed by someone, even if we assume that the suspicion that motivated the following was strictly a function of race?
LikeLike
Scott
it isn’t relevant unless it is established that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation between the two
Maybe it’s relevant because he initiated the confrontation by following him and following him had to do with racial profiling. So yes, I think it’s relevant, how relevant we can only imagine.
I take this to mean that you do think physically attacking someone just for following you is justified
I didn’t say that and don’t believe that, but I do think that may have been what was in Martin’s mind when and if he attacked first. Do we actually know? No where did I say that Martin acted innocently based on the little I know from the case. Pretty much the only time I believe violence is justified is in self-defense which is why I also believe there was a reasonable doubt established by Zimmerman’s defense team.
No, it is the central issue according to the law
Okay, but I thought we were discussing racial profiling which is also what Obama was discussing.
I actually wasn’t really that impressed by Obama’s speech, although I didn’t hear it and only read the transcript late last night.
Perhaps since Zimmerman was acquitted the central issue for some of us has shifted to why this happened and what we can do as a society to change the dynamics of the life of young black males in this country, especially those from our poorer neighborhoods. If the Zimmerman case leads to dialogue and solutions then perhaps that has become the central issue. I don’t hold out much hope though when conservatives are still busy blaming Martin for his own death.
Zimmerman won the day and so we just go home I guess and don’t bother to address other issues that may have contributed to the tragedy.
LikeLike
lms:
Maybe it’s relevant because he initiated the confrontation by following him…
I don’t think following someone constitutes an initiation of confrontation. I think hitting someone, or at the very least actually confronting them, constitutes the initiation of confrontation.
I didn’t say that and don’t believe that…
So if all Z was doing was following M, and if M responded by physically attacking Z, then M is at fault for acting unjustifiably.
…but I do think that may have been what was in Martin’s mind when and if he attacked first.
Maybe. But if you do not think such a reaction is justified, then you must think Martin was wrong to react in such a way (if he did). And surely this must then be relevant to any judgement about Zimmerman’s own reaction upon being attacked (if he was).
Okay, but I thought we were discussing racial profiling which is also what Obama was discussing.
I thought we were discussing my criticism of Obama for suggesting that the Zimmerman events hinged on an instance of racial profiling.
(BTW, have we now agreed that “profiling” can refer to things other than law enforcement officers in the act of law enforcement? If so, then we should be able to also agree that Obama’s stance on Zimmerman is an instance of him racially profiling Zimmerman.)
LikeLike
A Bill Moyers interview which relates to something I said last week on the concealed carry laws and how someone like Zimmerman actually had that type of permit to carry.
Bill talks with author and gun industry analyst Tom Diaz about how a lethal combination of self-defense laws and concealed carry laws — championed by the NRA and the gun industry — makes us more vulnerable to gun violence. He warns that the genie is out of the bottle and we should be gravely concerned about the unrelenting marketing of guns.
http://billmoyers.com/segment/tom-diaz-on-dangerous-gun-laws/
LikeLike
My question still stands…do you think physical violence is a justified response to being followed by someone, even if we assume that the suspicion that motivated the following was strictly a function of race?
I’ve stated repeatedly that my preferred response to confrontation is to run away; I don’t think that generalized gun ownership/carry is a good thing.
In Trayvon Martin’s case, I would’ve just gone home. . . but I’m not a 17 year old black kid who’s been followed in suspicion most of my life. I have physically confronted people in the past when backed into a corner and hurt at least a couple.
it is rather ironic to be accused of this by someone who is sitting in judgment of Zimmerman while refusing to consider his own professed experience
WHAT professed experience? That these “fuckers” get away with it every time? You must be joking.
LikeLike
Mich:
I’ve stated repeatedly that my preferred response to confrontation is to run away; I don’t think that generalized gun ownership/carry is a good thing. In Trayvon Martin’s case, I would’ve just gone home. . . but I’m not a 17 year old black kid who’s been followed in suspicion most of my life.
None of this actually answers the question.
WHAT professed experience?
The experience of being physically attacked including being trapped underneath the attacker while having one’s head repeatedly smashed on the ground.
LikeLike
Mich:
…but I’m not a 17 year old black kid who’s been followed in suspicion most of my life.
Is this something you actually know about Martin, or are you just engaging in a racial stereotype?
LikeLike
Lms, in regards the Moyer piece. Z claimed he was on the ground with no avenue of retreat. Unless you think lethal force should not be allowed in self defense, I don’t understand the point of the Moyers piece.
If your ultimate objection is a legal ability to carry, we might be having a debate over Zimmerman perhaps being dead and his being armed might have saved his life.
LikeLike
In Trayvon Martin’s case, I would’ve just gone home. . . but I’m not a 17 year old black kid who’s been followed in suspicion most of my life. I have physically confronted people in the past when backed into a corner and hurt at least a couple.
I don’t understand this. What am I to take away from this?
LikeLike
McWing
If your ultimate objection is a legal ability to carry, we might be having a debate over Zimmerman perhaps being dead and his being armed might have saved his life.
Or possibly they’d both still be alive, uninjured, and the call to cops by an unarmed Zimmerman who actually stayed in his car would simply have been another black teen being hassled by the cops.
I think concealed carry permits should be issued very carefully.
LikeLike
Would you require convictions to disallow concealed carry, or just charges?
Also, Z did have injuries.
LikeLike
McWing, he pled guilty to lesser charges and entered an alcohol dependence program on assaulting an officer and also had a restraining order against him for a domestic disturbance. I just think these things should preclude someone from carrying a concealed weapon. I’m pretty picky about that I guess. I don’t trust people with guns who can’t control themselves.
I realize he had injuries but we don’t really know how the physical altercation started do we? We have one version of events. As I said he may have been acting in self-defense, hence the verdict. EDIT: I’d also add that if he hadn’t followed Martin in the first place neither would have injuries. Don’t you wonder if sometimes having a gun in a pocket gives people a false sense of security?
I think the case raises a lot of tangential questions, which is my point really. And I think we should be able to have a conversation about some of these issues without assuming Martin is somehow responsible for his own death as the starting point of discussion. I object to that premise.
I’ve been willing to state that the jury probably came up with the correct verdict according to the law. I don’t understand why you guys can’t just admit there might be some culpability on the part of Zimmerman. I wonder if you truly don’t believe there is any or if it’s a political decision.
LikeLike
I have said I thought Manslaughter would be a reasonable verdict. And to me, the decision to charge was political. I think there is probably some level of rescuer/hero in Z that causes him to take interest in perceived injustice that causes him to take action. Those attributes are good and bad, and we all have attributes that are good and bad. I do think he was following Z so that the police could investigate, and I know the 911 operator said that he didn’t need to do that but so what? There had been robberies in the neighborhood and no apprehensions. Most neighborhood robberies, or a rash of them are generally perpetrated by someone living in the neighborhood, so following M makes a modicum of sense.
What was Martin’s reason for attacking Z? Jenteal, the “ear witness” suggested to Martin that Z was a pervert bent on assaulting him or his brother potentially sexually. That’s kind of interesting in and of itself. Perhaps M thought he was about to be raped.
In regards toZ and concealed carry, all charges were dismissed. What’s the point of having these programs then if they carry with them continued deprivation? Why would anybody do them? My question to you is who should decide who can carry a concealed weapon and what can go into that consideration?
LikeLike
I hadn’t read where you said that McWing. I’ve stayed away from most of the Zimmerman trial stuff and haven’t even read the comments for the most part. As a matter of fact, I don’t know why I’m even discussing it now. Boredom I guess….lol.
I think the states have the right to make their own concealed laws but I admit to being glad I don’t live in one of the states that seems to have less than ideal standards, IMO. I’m an anti-gun nut so I doubt anyone would want me in charge and I wouldn’t expect to be. I think lie detector tests would be in order personally.
LikeLike
Worth 10 mins on the Zimmerman case. I also think POTUS should refrain from commenting on ongoing investigations. If DOJ wants to bring charges it’s hard to get a fair trial once the president comments.
LikeLike
Scott
I don’t think following someone constitutes an initiation of confrontation
We disagree there. We don’t have the entire context of how this went down so I’m not willing to make assumptions about Martin’s state of mind or level of fear about being followed. I’ve been followed and stalked and it definitely gets your adrenaline pumping and can be interpreted as a threat.
So if all Z was doing was following M, and if M responded by physically attacking Z, then M is at fault for acting unjustifiably.
Already answered. As I said we don’t know what was in either of their minds as this confrontation went down. For some reason Martin may have felt threatened. Following someone can be interpreted as threatening and whether it justifies attacking first I suppose depends on the context, which we don’t really know. I probably wouldn’t attack someone for just following me, but if they got too close or moved toward me in a threatening manner I might strike first. Walking in the same steps as someone else nonchalantly certainly shouldn’t initiate an attack. But I think your premise is faulty because you seem to think you know that whatever Zimmerman did it couldn’t have been threatening.
I thought we were discussing my criticism of Obama for suggesting that the Zimmerman events hinged on an instance of racial profiling.
I didn’t realize that was what Obama was saying. It sounds like another “according to Scott” Obama was saying……………if you get my drift.
And BTW, no we don’t agree. Zimmerman seemed to believe he was acting with some authority as a Community Watch type entity. He certainly seemed to be a cop wannabe, so I think the racial profiling charge stands. He initiated the events by assuming Martin was suspect in some way and believed he had the authority to keep an eye on him by following him and perhaps even confronting him.
Also BTW, I did happen to see photographs of his injuries and having one’s head repeatedly smashed on the ground seems like a pretty wild exaggeration to me.
LikeLike
lms:
We disagree there.
Fair enough, but from a legal perspective I don’t think your view would find much to support it.
We don’t have the entire context of how this went down so I’m not willing to make assumptions about Martin’s state of mind or level of fear about being followed.
But you (along with Obama and a lot of other people) do seem to be willing to make assumptions about Z’s state of mind, re racially profiling Martin. I find that curious.
But I think your premise is faulty because you seem to think you know that whatever Zimmerman did it couldn’t have been threatening.
Nope. I don’t know that at all. I have said more than once that we don’t know definitively what actually happened or who initiated the physical confrontation. I have only said that that is the central question in determining whether Z’s actions were justified, and that whether or not Z had “profiled” M is not relevant to whether the shooting was justified.
I didn’t realize that was what Obama was saying. It sounds like another “according to Scott” Obama was saying……………if you get my drift.
Well, I get what you are trying to imply, although it isn’t true.
Why else would Obama say that he himself could have been Martin 35 years ago, and then go on to talk about how he was racially profiled, if he wasn’t trying to connect racial profiling to the shooting? But we don’t even have to draw the obvious conclusion from that, because according to Obama himself there is “a sense that if a white male teen was involved in the same kind of scenario, that, from top to bottom, both the outcome and the aftermath might have been different.” I’m not sure how else to understand what he meant by that other than that the event hinged on Martin’s race.
He initiated the events by assuming Martin was suspect in some way and believed he had the authority to keep an eye on him by following him and perhaps even confronting him.
As a private citizen he did have the authority to follow Martin on public property. And there is no evidence that he confronted Martin. He may have, but it is at least as likely (and I think more likely, based on the evidence I have seen) that Martin confronted Zimmerman.
LikeLike
Do you think Z shot him because he was in fear of his life?
LikeLike
Why is this difficult for them?
Edit: sorry, supposed to be ACLU link here.
LikeLike
Nova
I also think POTUS should refrain from commenting on ongoing investigations
I kind of agree with that actually. I don’t think his speech was worth it. If he’d made a really powerful case for or against something I might have been more impressed but as it is I don’t believe he did himself, or anyone else, any big favors and the appearance of interfering in an investigation is just that much worse.
I think the dialogue is valuable but I don’t think he should be the one to start it. And that’s even after agreeing with him for the most part. IMO, if you’re going to make a speech or issue a statement like that it needs to be really, really dramatic and somehow rise above the current situation that prompted it……………….if that makes any sense (doubtful with my record……….haha).
LikeLike
McWing
Do you think Z shot him because he was in fear of his life?
I think the defense made the case, from what I’ve read and heard, that he could have been. But then he’s the one who brought the gun, and I can’t really get past that fact. I think people who carry guns have the greater responsibility to act sensibly, but as I said, I’m not fond of guns. Zimmerman set the events in motion and so while he may not legally be culpable, I think he is morally culpable, by my sense of morality anyway.
Why is this difficult for them?
???
LikeLike
Here’s the link I forgot to add.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/for-the-aclu-george-zimmerman-case-is-awkward-deja-vu-94518.html?hp=t1
LikeLike
Scott
but from a legal perspective I don’t think your view would find much to support it.
HINT: You can always count on me to NOT discuss things from a legal perspective. That’s for the lawyers and participators in the legal system. I’m only a citizen subject to said legal system which I admittedly don’t always understand or even appreciate, but do accept as the final word. That’s actually why I’ve said based on the law, the jurors probably arrived at the “correct” verdict. Justice and the law are sometimes in conflict……………….don’t you agree?
But you (along with Obama and a lot of other people) do seem to be willing to make assumptions about Z’s state of mind, re racially profiling Martin. I find that curious.
Is there any way you could at least admit that it’s a possibility? I think I’ve actually stated several times that none of us really know what exactly motivated either one of them, so I’ll admit to speculation. Will you?
As a private citizen he did have the authority to follow Martin on public property.
Okay, that’s not an issue really. And still, we don’t really know what happened that night because one of the participants is dead. Whatever you think is more likely isn’t necessarily the case. Sorry, but it’s true.
LikeLike
lms:
Justice and the law are sometimes in conflict……………….don’t you agree?
Yup. But not with regard to this. Whether in law or common sense, I don’t think following someone on public property can be accurately characterized as initiating a confrontation.
Is there any way you could at least admit that it’s a possibility?
Sure, it is a possibility. But there is virtually no evidence for it. Certainly, in any event, not enough to justify the president of the United States in pontificating on how Trayvon Martin is just like he was 35 years ago because he, too, was racially profiled.
Okay, that’s not an issue really.
You are the one who brought it up. You claimed that Zimmerman “initiated events” by thinking he had the authority to follow Martin. He had just as much right to follow Martin as Martin had to walk around staring at houses in the rain. I think it makes just as much sense to say that Martin “initiated events” by doing something he had every right to do as it does to say that Zimmerman “initiated events” by doing something he had every right to do.
Whatever you think is more likely isn’t necessarily the case.
Of course. What’s your point?
LikeLike
This narrative has perpetuated the lie that Zimmerman’s history of calls to the police indicates obsessive racial paranoia. Thus, discussing the verdict on the PBS NewsHour, University of Connecticut professor and New Yorker contributor Jelani Cobb asserted that “Zimmerman had called the police 46 times in previous six years, only for African-Americans, only for African-American men.” Actually, only six calls—two of them about Trayvon Martin—had to do with African-American men. At least three involved complaints about whites; others were about such issues as a fire alarm going off, a reckless driver of unknown race, or an aggressive dog.
In this narrative, even Zimmerman’s concern for a black child—a 2011 call to report a young African-American boy walking unsupervised on a busy street, on which the police record notes, “compl[ainant] concerned for well-being”—has been twisted into crazed racism. Writing on the website of The New Republic, Stanford University law professor Richard Thompson Ford describes Zimmerman as “an edgy basket case” who called 911 about “the suspicious activities of a seven year old black boy.” This slander turns up in other left-of-center sources, such as ThinkProgress.org.
Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/07/21/how_media_lies_have_distorted_a_tragedy_119311.html#ixzz2ZjXZytZH
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
LikeLike
What I can’t figure out, Scott and McWing, is why it is so all-fired difficult for you to admit that there is a racial component to this case.
Yes, it’s ugly, but it happens to be true, like much of life.
LikeLike
Mich:
What I can’t figure out, Scott and McWing, is why it is so all-fired difficult for you to admit that there is a racial component to this case.
Because I cannot read Z’s mind. You (and Obama) are making assumptions about Z’s motivations based strictly on the fact that he is not black. Which on the same order as making assumptions about Martin’s motives based on his race. I guess some kinds of racial profiling are better than others.
As McWing points out, we don’t have to read Martin’s mind to know that he, at least, was thinking racially. So I guess there is that obvious racial component, although I guess that is not what you have in mind when you assert that there “is” a racial component.
LikeLike
I never denied Z didn’t know M’s race or that it might have motivated him to be suspicious of M. And M called Z a “creepy-ass cracker,” so race was obviously a factor for M’s behavior.
LikeLike
Scott
Whether in law or common sense, I don’t think following someone on public property can be accurately characterized as initiating a confrontation.
Maybe not, but since you weren’t there that night, I don’t think you can definitively say that. Feeling threatened or “initiating a confrontation” is most likely subjective. I guess that’s mostly what I’m saying. Sure the jury saw reasonable doubt, I might have myself if I’m to be honest. Honestly, I don’t think we know one way or another what actually happened.
He had just as much right to follow Martin as Martin had to walk around staring at houses in the rain
Really? You’re going there? Martin’s father lived there. He’d just gone to buy candy and ice tea. He had every right to be there and actually NOT to be looked at with suspicion or followed.
As I stated earlier, Zimmerman initiated the exchange and while it may not have been illegal, I believe it was wrong on his part, perhaps not legally, but morally.
Anyone have anything to say about the responsibility of gun owners that I mentioned?
LikeLike
lms:
He had every right…actually NOT to be looked at with suspicion or followed.
I don’t think that is at all true.
As I stated earlier, Zimmerman initiated the exchange…
No. Following someone is not “an exchange”. I think you should stick with “I don’t think we know one way or another what actually happened.” That is closer to being correct.
I believe it was wrong on his part, perhaps not legally, but morally.
It is morally wrong to follow someone that you think is acting suspiciously? It might be poor judgement, but morally wrong? Really?
Anyone have anything to say about the responsibility of gun owners that I mentioned?
I think a person with a gun has a responsibility to act sensibly with regard to use of the gun. But I think the responsibility not to physically attack someone belongs to everyone equally, regardless of gun ownership.
LikeLike
Gun carriers have a responsibility. We do not know if Zimmerman used his irresponsibly.
LikeLike
You (and Obama) are making assumptions about Z’s motivations based strictly on the fact that he is not black
No, I’m going on what he said to the police dispatcher.
Why can’t you admit Zimmerman was using racial profiling?
LikeLike
McWing gave me an honest answer, Scott.
LikeLike
Mich:
No, I’m going on what he said to the police dispatcher.
The only reference to race on the 911 call was prompted by the dispatcher himself…”OK, this guy, is he white, black, or Hispanic?”
Zimmerman’s initial response suggests that he wasn’t even sure about the answer. “He looks black.”. Only subsequently, after Martin approaches Z, does he confirm that Martin is “a black male”.
The 911 call does not even lend support to the notion that he was racially profiling Martin, much less does it establish it as a fact beyond doubt.
McWing gave me an honest answer, Scott.
So did I. I really can’t read Z’s mind.
LikeLike
“The [man] doth protest too much, methinks”
Hamlet, Act III, scene II
LikeLike
BTW, the more I think about it, it is actually quite a racist sentiment to think the “black experience” includes attacking and beating up people who treat you with suspicion.
I’m late to the game here, but this comment is disingenuous because as some have admitted we do not know if Martin attacked and beat up Zimmerman, only that Zimmerman says he was.
And part of the black experience is being viewed with suspicion for undertaking activities (such as walking home from a convenience store) that draw no undue attention when white people do it. If you believe this is not the case there are dozens of black comedians being rather dishonest in their stand-up routines It’s such a standard joke as to be almost as cliche as airline food being bad.
It is interesting to remember that Barack Obama was a teen-aged dope-smoking hooligan who eventually got his act together and became president.
So just why did Zimmerman call 911 and decide that Martin was a ‘fucking punk’?
LikeLike
I find it extraordinarily telling that Scott seems to take Zimmerman’s story without questioning it. Why?
LikeLike
Zimmerman seems to be the least reliable person possible to detail what happened. Minor details of his account have been proven to be totally false (there were no bushes for Martin to hide behind) and his freedom depended on people believing his side of the story. The prosecution did too much heavy lifting for him in not necessary for him take the stand to present his alibi.
I have a rather conservative law enforcement friend who believes that releasing Zimmerman without an arrest and taking the evidence at hand to a grand jury was gross negligence on the part of the Sanford police/district attorney.
LikeLike
yello:
I’m late to the game here, but this comment is disingenuous because…
I think you missed my point.
LikeLike
Mich:
I find it extraordinarily telling that Scott seems to take Zimmerman’s story without questioning it.
I don’t know why it “seems” that way, given that I have repeatedly said we don’t know what happened.
I am, however, instinctively sympathetic to Zimmerman because of the dishonesty used to politicize the case, and the fact that his prosecution was largely the result of that politicization.
LikeLike
Interesting take from Shelby Steele:
LikeLike
I agree with much of what Steele writes here, but not the hyperbolic conclusion.
The verdict was the most likely correct one under the evidence and the law; agreed.
The problems faced by poor blacks, especially, dwarf the remaining barriers of vestigial racism, of course.
This does not lead to the conclusion that today’s civil rights leadership is corrupt and irrelevant.
***
There was the trial, which was focused in time on the events after Z. left his vehicle.
For that period we had some forensic evidence and some witness statements.
Then there is the period of time which was publicized beginning with Z. doing his weird neighborhood watch thing while the kid is peaceably walking to his destination.
Then there are the attempts to give Z.a racial motivation which are speculative. Then there are the attempts to give TM a racial motivation which are speculative.
Then there are the attempts to characterize various conduct as “profiling” which is probably less speculative [I do not accept that profiling is = to racism. From my own experience, I would be suspicious of teenage boys in my neighborhood whom I did not know by sight during times when my neighborhood suffered multiple petty auto burglaries. From my own experience as a former teenager I was suspicious of any man who followed me in a vehicle].
I did not take the Prez’s speech as validating anything about this tragedy except that black teenagers sense the fear of adults around them even when it is totally unwarranted, and the whole business of having to walk around on eggshells.
In my life, when I was a 16YO HS senior I tried to look menacing and I would have confronted a man following me if I were near his size. But when I was an 18 YO college sophomore I tried to look preppie and I would have walked the last 150′ to the door of my destination, gone inside, and watched to see if the pursuer were hanging around. If the weirdo hung around, I would have called the police.
So all I have to offer from my own experience in life is get smart enough to walk to the door and try to get smart before you are 18 YO, if you are a kid. And if you are an adult, know your limits of propriety and do not walk up to a teenage boy you don’t know because you are suspicious of his motives. And if you are black, know that racism against blacks exists and fight it, but don’t assign every unfortunate turn of events to it. And if you are white, don’t assume racism against blacks is a thing of the past, because it is not, and you need to call it out when you see it in your own milieu . That is all from my own experience, and not from the tragedy of Z. and TM.
LikeLike
One wants to scream at all those outraged at the Zimmerman verdict: Where is your outrage over the collapse of the black family?
I’ve heard and read a lot of people talking about this and I’m not sure it’s really fair to blame “today’s civil rights leaders”. I think we’re all to blame. One of the saddest things I read yesterday while I was getting more familiar with the case was some of the testimony of the girl who was on the phone with Martin right before he was killed.
She was identifying a letter she’d written about what happened and couldn’t actually identify it because she hadn’t written it but had dictated it to someone else to write for her. She said she couldn’t read cursive.
LikeLike
Lulu, in a much broader social context, there is this from the NYT.
It surprised the researchers. Neither race nor tax and welfare policies were the primary bars to mobility. So what were the factors? Dispersion of the poor in mixed income neighborhoods rather than ghettoes, decent public schools, two-parent households, and membership in civic organizations or churches.
LikeLike
lms:
I think we’re all to blame.
I’m not to blame.
LikeLike
RE: TM and GZ… I will only say I do not agree with Troll or Scott. This was not as black and white (excuse the term, not meant racially) as they seem to think. There are a ton of grey areas which must be taken into thought (they clearly show GZ’s state of mind), and in doing so, it is clear that GZ initiated this entire event and whether found guilty or not by trial, should at a minimum be held accountable for his irresponsible actions resulting in the death of an unarmed teenager who had done nothing deserving of death.
RE: My Off Topic comment: I did not wait until this morning to call my doctor’s office. I called yesterday and spoke with his oncall nurse. As soon as I mentioned necrosis I was told to immediately go to the ER, she would notify the ER of my situation. Yes, it was necrosis… and happily, xrays showed it had not invaded any bones. It was all in a single mass in the center of the top of my foot. Sooo, they decided they could just dig it out and remove it, right there in the little ER room… and they had no options for providing pain relief during the “dig”. 2 words: GREAT PAIN. But it only took them a few minutes to get it all dug out. Now I have a healthy HUGE HOLE in the center of the top of my foot, but at least now, it has the opportunity to heal. I only wish the removal of this dead mass could have changed the diagnosis of how much, if any, functional use I will have of my foot once healed, but that has not changed. We will not know until the foot has completely healed. As of now, I still cannot move my toes and my ankle has only about at 30% functionality. And the healing process is still determined to be about 2 months.
LikeLike
Geanie:
This was not as black and white (excuse the term, not meant racially) as they seem to think.
I don’t think it is black and white at all. The lack of any real clarity is precisely why object to those who, like some here, proclaim/assume that racial animus was undoubtedly a key feature of what transpired.
LikeLike
Scott…. “The lack of any real clarity”.
You seem to have no problem with “proclaiming/assuming’ that GZ was as innocent as a new born baby.
I simply took GZ’s STATE OF MIND into consideration, something that should NOT be overlooked and tossed aside so one can defend his actions simply because it’s not illegal to follow someone else.
I believe his state of mind is what makes his following TM and eventually killing TM something he should be held accountable for. You, for some reason, can’t grasp the state of mind aspect at all. And I know you will stand your ground that GZ was actually an innocent hero doing nothing illegal. There is more to life than legal and illegal.
LikeLike
Geanie:
You seem to have no problem with “proclaiming/assuming’ that GZ was as innocent as a new born baby.
I’ve never proclaimed anything even remotely like that, and have in fact repeatedly said that we don’t really know what happened, especially at the pivotal moment that the confrontation occurred.
You, for some reason, can’t grasp the state of mind aspect at all.
What I cannot grasp is how you (and others) seem to be so sure of what Z’s state of mind was. As I mentioned earlier, I am not a mind reader. Others here apparently think they are.
LikeLike
Geanie, I am glad for your less than catastrophic result. Please let us know how you heal.
Are you near Ok City?
LikeLike
Mark, Thank you. And yes, this could have been catastrophic for me, but only if the necrosis had entered into the bones, and thank goodness it had not.
I live in a suburb (the biggest) of Tulsa, called Broken Arrow.
LikeLike
The misdirection over the apparent lack of outrage over the collapse of the black family is even wilder afield than the tropes about why there is no outrage over black-on-black crime that right wing media is suddenly so concerned about. There is no lack of things to be worked up about in today’s society.
LikeLike
Mark, none of that surprises me. My cousin was an English teacher and girl’s basketball coach at Fremont High in Los Angeles for 25 years. His biggest problem was the family. His primary goal was getting as many kids as possible out of the area and away from their families via college. He was constantly struggling to break the cycle he said.
LikeLike
The misdirection over the apparent lack of outrage over the collapse of the black family is even wilder afield than the tropes about why there is no outrage over black-on-black crime that right wing media is suddenly so concerned about. There is no lack of things to be worked up about in today’s society.
Black on black crime as a result of the destruction of the family has been a common right wing topic since the advent of the destructive Great Society. It’s amusing to the left I suppose to pretend that right wing concern started yesterday.
LikeLike
I take no blame either. Nor do I believe in collective guilt.
LikeLike
Scott
I’m not to blame
I must just have a guilt complex or something then because I feel responsible for what we do as a society as well as perpetually trying to improve my personal relationships. I lay in bed at night wishing I could change things I’ve said and done that day and hoping I’ll do a little better tomorrow.
All this time I’ve been thinking you’re the strange cat when all along it’s been me…. 🙂
LikeLike
LMS, you are not strange LOL
A HUGE problem facing our nation, and others, is the total belief by many that everyone must be responsible for his/herself, no matter what the situation. They do not believe in the “it takes a village” concept. I see that as a problem in such that if we ALL were to believe that way, the entire world would be encapsulated in pure chaos.
You are not strange in your ways of thinking.. but if some say you are, then I guess I would also be strange… and I know I’m not. I know I’m concerned for all of us living here on this small earth. One must care about the community, both local and worldwide, in order to avoid chaos.
LikeLike
lms:
I must just have a guilt complex or something then because I feel responsible for what we do as a society…
I don’t, not least because I actually object to much of what “we” do as a society, and I do what I can to stop “us” from doing it.
All this time I’ve been thinking you’re the strange cat when all along it’s been me….
I’m sure it is both of us.
LikeLike
Geanie, good luck and I’m glad you were able to get the care you needed.
LikeLike
I’m not to blame
Of course not.
LikeLike
I need to get to work catching up from being gone last week but I did want to share this.
I had an interesting conversation with a very conservative friend of my husband’s yesterday. They recently gave up their small group insurance because he couldn’t afford it any more for himself, his wife and his two employees. He’ll be 65 next year but his wife is five years younger than him. He called to pick my brain about the ACA and if I thought it would help them acquire insurance.
He had heart surgery in his forties and had a couple of small strokes last year and is willing to take his chances until next June when he’ll qualify for Medicare but he’s worried about his wife. All of a sudden Obamacare doesn’t sound too bad to him.
LikeLike
Geanie, what wasZ’s state of mind?
LikeLike
In his goal to not let “f*ing punks” get away, he blatantly ignored neighborhood watch rules (do not carry a weapon, do not follow, do not confront), requests made by those with experience to not follow and knowing police were on their way, ignored common sense to simply wait and let them do their jobs… he definitely wanted to do the job himself…. that was his state of mind, based on facts, not supposition… and sad to say, he succeeded.
Let me present this scenario:
Your 17yr old daughter is walking home from the neighborhood convenience store, just after dark.
A man follows her in his vehicle.
The man exits his vehicle to follow on foot.
In fear, she stops, turns and knees him, or uses some self defense move she learned, or sprays with pepper spray, etc.
He pulls his gun and shots and kills her.
So I guess he would also be innocent and the girl asked for her own death.
It’s really the same story, but she’s a girl.
LikeLike
Geanie:
It’s really the same story, but she’s a girl.
No, because as I have repeatedly said, we don’t actually know what happened. It is remarkable that I get accused of accepting Z’s story unquestioningly by people who then go on to reject his story without question, speculate about what might have happened, and then assume that their speculation is fact.
LikeLike
what wasZ’s state of mind?
In Zimmerman’s own words, Martin was one of the ‘fucking punks’. He was determined to not let Martin get away. Which he succeeded at.
LikeLike
Geanie, if you haven’t figured it out already, Scott is the perfect embodiment of Manichean philosophy.
LikeLike
Michi… Oh I know, and I know it’s useless to even respond to any of his comments.. even if he were proven wrong, he’s not the kind to surrender…. I really just wanted LMS and others to know that they aren’t the only ones who do not believe as Scott or Troll.
LikeLike
Corked by Geanie.
Geanie, I am glad you are getting the medical treatment you need.
LikeLike
I think you missed my point.
The point was…? You believe Zimmerman’s version of the events where Trayvon Martin attacked him entirely unprovoked and that this is not behavior the president should be endorsing or sympathizing with? Or that the president is fucking punk who always gets away?
LikeLike
yello:
The point was…?
…not worth belaboring.
LikeLike
“They do not believe in the “it takes a village” concept. ”
there is no village. there are individuals and there are families. and there are those who attempt to coerce individual/families b/c they think they know what’s best for them.
LikeLike
Yello… I am getting the treatment I need… as a self pay who cannot afford to pay… I am becoming one of the 47%, not by choice. I only hope I don’t end up losing my home over crap such as “free trade medical care”.
Scott… none of us are attempting to be mind readers… we are using our own common sense in conjunction with the actual words spoken by GZ and the actual actions he took to ignore neighborhood watch rules and regulations and requests given by those within and/or ACTUALLY associated with police enforcement.
LikeLike
The best commentary on the Zimmerman situation that I’ve seen was from a link that Shrink posted on PL which argued that the facts of the case don’t support the narratives that both the right and the left are trying to place on it.
For the left, the narrative starts and ends with Zimmerman following Martin because Martin was black and then Martin was shot and killed. End of story.
For the right, the narrative starts with Martin assaulting Zimmerman and Zimmerman then shooting Martin in self defense to stop the ongoing assault. Any previous events are disregarded as irrelevant.
The argument boils down to whether or not it was Martin’s race or behavior that was determinative in why he was shot by Zimmerman.
I side with the right narrative on the subject of criminal liability because I don’t believe that being followed grants one a license to assault the person following you, but I would still probably find in favor of Martin’s parents in a wrongful death lawsuit under the premise that but for Zimmerman’s actions that night, Martin would still be alive.
Arguments that the facts of the case as presented at trial are 100% wrong and in fact Martin was shot in the back, etc hold little weight with me. The Martin defenders who are arguing that are ignoring the entire body of evidence as argued at the trial and inventing their own version of the facts out of whole cloth.
With regards to President Obama’s statements, I find his concern over profiling to be disingenuous given his embrace of signature strikes in the drone program and also his consideration of Ray Kelly for the post of Department of Homeland Security. The same thing applies to his concern over the prospects of black males in America. If he’s truly concerned with black males, then he should immediately pardon all non-violent drug offenders and work to repeal or mitigate the drug laws which are the primary driver of violence in black communities and also the cause of the felony convictions which are the most limiting factor in terms of future employment prospects. I find it disingenuous for the President of the United States to be rhetorically positioning himself against “the Man” when he is “the Man.
LikeLike
“The legal definition of racial profiling is:
The consideration of race, ethnicity, or national origin by an officer of the law in deciding when and how to intervene in an enforcement capacity. ”
If so, then that’s a bad definition in that it basically encompasses all actions based on judgement and experience.
LikeLike
JNC… I did not consider race in GZ’s profiling of TM. I did consider “f*ing punks” as GZ’s profiling of TM… punks come in all races, colors, creeds.
LikeLike
there is no village
That’s why you guys are the Libertarians and the rest of us aren’t.
LikeLike
“Troll McWingnut or George, whichever, on July 21, 2013 at 12:41 pm said:
In Trayvon Martin’s case, I would’ve just gone home. . . but I’m not a 17 year old black kid who’s been followed in suspicion most of my life. I have physically confronted people in the past when backed into a corner and hurt at least a couple.
I don’t understand this. What am I to take away from this?”
Read these pieces.
http://www.theatlantic.com/personal/archive/2010/10/a-culture-of-poverty/64854/
LikeLike
Geanie
Oh I know, and I know it’s useless to even respond to any of his comments
I don’t believe that’s true. At the very least he will challenge the way you state your case which can be a valuable lesson in itself. I also don’t think talking about someone as if they’re not here is very helpful……………….we are a little society ourselves here…………….hahaha
LikeLike
LMS… you are absolutely right… whether anyone falls over to “your” side or not… debate is always good… and I’ve always loved debating… and occasionally I have been won over… usually not though LOL
LikeLike
lms:
I don’t believe that’s true.
Thanks.
LikeLike
I’m not saying there’s no such thing as community. but when someone like clinton is talking about the village, she’s saying “this is how it’s going to be.”
LikeLike
The villiage is a scam.
LikeLike
JNC, please read my post called “This is Insane” and comment. Please?
LikeLike
I do have to add though, that many times, the way Scott… and sometimes Troll… form their comments/questions…. one can feel like they must reach out to a mind reader or fortune teller or someone/something to dissect what was said in order to form a response…. or perhaps I’m just not as educated or knowledgeable in some areas to understand what I just read. LOL
LikeLike
I’m too stubborn to be won over but I will concede the occasional point. Only when I can’t avoid the obvious though.
LikeLike
“markinaustin, on July 22, 2013 at 9:09 am said:
JNC, please read my post called “This is Insane” and comment. Please?”
I saw it. I’ll comment in a few minutes.
LikeLike
In pretty sure there’s not enough derision directed at Scott.
We can do better people!
LikeLike
While I truly enjoy reading and responding here at ATiM… my foot needs tending to (cleaning OUCHIE), and with all the typing I’ve done on here today, my neck, right shoulder/arm/hand aren’t happy right now. So regrettably I must bid adieu, until another “good” day.
Keep up the good debating, but remember, be kind to one another as we are our own little community 🙂
LikeLike
feel better, Geanie.
LikeLike