Breaking-bad Baltimore mayor wants riot bailout

You knew it was coming and now Baltimore planners are back at the public trough looking for relief for the riot damage.

The mayor who told the police to give them room to loot is scheming with her cohorts (aka partners in crime) to get Federal coffers via FEMA to pay for at least 75% of the damage, they are now pegging to about 20 million. (for opening bid)

See Washington Times

The planners are named Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, and Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, a Democrat. They are the ones responsible for the calculations, and the signatories of the request.

The payees are red-blooded Americans who keep FEMA afloat for such natural disasters as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and Superstorm Sandy, and FEMA, as you may or may not know, is no tightwad.

Why should they pay for their own malfeasance when the Federal Government can pick up the tab?

On a dual track with the economic damage, Rawlings stand-down order and the following charges from the prosecutor, had the effect of neutering the police. Since the riots the skyrocketing crime and murder rate are the direct results. And right on clockwork, they are complaining about police’s reluctance to enforce the law. Go figure. What a tangled web of lunacy Baltimore concocted.

But the 20 million is just a proposed starting estimate on the riot damage. At the same time they are asking for de facto bailout from taxpayers, Baltimore’s financial officer says the fiscal shape of the city is very good and strong. But why worry themselves over the expenses?

Now that I know that I think I’ll start calling her “super cell” Stephanie Rawlings-Blake.

Ref: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/1/deborah-simmons-stephanie-rawlings-blake-larry-hog/

A word on business appreciation

(isn’t there a national holiday for that or something?)

It’s being reported that CVS will rebuild two locations in Baltimore following the nasty, ugly riots and fires that followed. Sounds like a good idea, no?

In a press report, they say they are going to also donate 100,000 to a United Way in Baltimore area, and the “Fund for Rebuilding Baltimore.”. They claim they are really obligated to people’s health, and this is an extension of their efforts to help people.


Truth Revolt

“Our purpose as a company is helping people on their path to better health,” [CVS Health CEO Larry Merlo] said. “There is no better way that we can fulfill that purpose than to reopen our doors and get back to serving the community.”

You don’t say?
Well, pardon this satire: (hopefully everyone knows how satire works)

It turns out that it’s a great sign of appreciation to get looted and burned out. Who knew? It simply means they like you, in urban lingo. So take it as consumer appreciation.

This is not the first time. In Ferguson they looted and burned auto parts stores. That is probably where locals buy all their fancy accessories, parts and brakes for their rides. Naturally those stores would be at the top of thugs’ list to loot, destroy and burn. It’s a sign of endearment. It’s urban speak, sort of like getting jumped into a gang. But once you are in, well, all those perks.

So this is seen by retail insiders as a wise business move.(and great for the bottom line) It’s what you do. Maybe, like some stores in Ferguson, they will have the privilege of being looted or destroyed multiple times? Hey, that means you have really arrived.

So quit being so hard on them, it’s the right thing to do. Seems the more they like you, the more they rob you. Don’t you get it? It makes sense.

See you next riot ‘business appreciation day’. And what a healthy community it will be!

H/T to Truth Revolt

Summarizing the bad news

So it comes down to logic and reading the tea leaves.

Society has gotten to the point we now have discretionary law enforcement, from the top. At the same time society has gotten so structurally fragile police cannot and won’t be able to protect people. Partly, that may be understood. But on top of those challenges, they also made the conscious choice not to try to protect individuals or private property. That decision comes from those in power and elected, not LEOs by themselves. So when push comes to shove, as it often does, they already made the choice.

This is understood by people who understand the law and purposes of government.

Bad enough they feel at a loss to protect a given person in a situation. Then they have made a bureaucratic decision not to protect you. This crystallized in Baltimore as a Fox reporter was covering the protests had a cop tell him that the reporter should know that if he got into trouble out there, the cops could not protect him. The police could not risk starting a riot to try to save or protect the reporter. It was a tell tale sign. There was a rational reason for the cop to say that to a reporter, but it reveals a larger problem.

As the Mayor of Baltimore and whoever else made the decision to stand down, it was equivalent to making a choice not to protect people or property. It swung the pendulum against protecting innocent citizens or victims. The burden was on innocent citizens.

When they made that conscious stand down policy, they reversed the purpose of government, which is to secure the rights and property of people… to ignoring and deliberately not protecting people. Now it is worse than defying their oath and obligation. They made a decision to forfeit your property, as if their name was on the deed.

Yet worse is motivations and who benefits. They made a choice to protect government, themselves, over your property. In fact, they are actively protecting government, while ignoring property and security. So the fundamental purpose of government almost exclusively is protecting itself. The job of LEOs is to preserve and protect itself.

Government has been engaged in this. It’s first and only priority is to itself. We now have government, of the government, by government, for government. Nothing more. This is why so many people question not only the purpose and intent of government, but much of its existence. Is it really just for itself, for the benefit of itself and nothing more?

RightRing | Bullright

Every which way…. but lose

This is probably one of the most painful columns I have had to write. Had to out of a sense of obligation. Someone should say it.

Ferg-us-soon and Baltimo’ have taught us something. They weren’t the first riots and won’t be the last either. No, that isn’t the lesson. Most of us are still alive to remember the 60’s riots. We remember Martin Luther King, too. Even that is not the real lesson in this stuff happening.

Like anything else, the real lesson about catastrophe or disaster is what you do about it that counts. Still not quite the lesson. Have we learned anything after the sixties’ riots? It was that people need to get involved in the political process to affect any change. But those were mostly civil rights issues etc, important stuff. Today it can be over one person being hurt or killed, not that it doesn’t matter but that is all it takes. (in truth it probably won’t even take that in the future)

There is a whole grievance industry built on decades of people having a chip on their shoulder. Sooner or latter it explodes. What do we hear about people who go out and commit mass murder or destruction? It’s that there were problems all along which manifest themselves, ultimately, in committing the acts. That’s what we hear anyway, like it was an unavoidable train wreck bound to happen. Someone should have stopped it somehow, before it was too late. Who can we blame? We’re told all this by psychologists, sociologists and professors in Ivy Towers, and finally by mainstream media.

So the potential is there for it to happen, maybe it’s always been there? You are always going to have a few disgruntled people etc. These are the lines we are fed over and over again, like a Christmas fruitcake.

No, I don’t want to ague that they don’t have a point. Sure there are always going to be crazies. We know that. There are always going to be problems, issues, disasters, “tragedies” — however they define the term. There will be broken people, humans, behind it. We may always have disgruntled people: have nots, you got yours I want mine, or whatever their grievance is. They live out an act of revenge. But this is not about that.

This is bigger, it’s about what is acceptable to do in society or not.

It’s about moral boundaries, decay, wanton destruction. It’s about disgust for our system, be it the political one , capitalism, or government writ large. It’s also about feelings too numerous to mention. It’s about a sense of who cares how much damage it takes? The reasons are no clearer than the violence or its objectives. It is becoming all too common. It goes from one event to the next like wildfires. It looks for an incident to justify itself and finds it with frequency. No, you cannot eliminate the causation because they will find it anywhere, anytime they want. You cannot beat them at that game. Find it — some justification — they will.

But we must look at the whole, too. We now have a political system with a win at any cost mentality, whatever it takes. Sound familiar? They take pride in that philosophy. If Alinsky tactics are bad, those are only the starting point and only a means. The real enchilada is in the ends. They can twist any issue into a banana peel to slide off into massive protests sparking riots and looting. We know there are professionals out there who do that. Whatever the last one was will be nothing compared to the next in their minds, progressing in damage and passion. They can plug in their formula to any issue and come up with the same answer and results — protests, rioting, looting, burning down and destroying neighborhoods, creating chaos.

As much as government or some in it try, they have no concrete answers to it. Oh, they say we need economic development, jobs and mo’ money to combat it. It’s always the same patent answers no matter the issues in question. Spend more is the prescription for everything. Meanwhile, our legislators and politicians continue on their own win at any cost campaign. They are not oblivious to what is going on, but which one is really the priority? It has to be their jobs and winning elections above all else. That’s just the way it has to be.

Look at the real problems with the protests and riots. They breed on themselves. And there is always some debate through it, in all the media attention, as to what the answers are. Even after, the debate goes on and maybe hearings or an investigation into the problems. How many grueling studies or whatever have been done? How many columns are written on the dynamics? How many “passions are flared” comments will come out of it all? Still the same thing happens over and over. Then there are the political racketeers who say the answer is voter registration to give people a voice, to affect a change. Yep, we’ve heard it all before. It’s as predictable as the taste of that fruitcake. That airbrushes a sense of legitimacy over the whole thing. “Now if you will only vote we can work this thing, or problems, out.” We just need their involvement in the system. Right?

We seem to forget.

We had the riots in the 60’s and they were told the same thing in the aftermath. Where did Bobby Rush come from, the only one who managed to beat Barack Obama? So they did get involved. Let’s call them activists now. They went into the influence game and made a difference. We’re seeing the results of it play out before our eyes. They have made an impact. And today the very same radicals from the sixties hold higher offices around the country. Look at Chicago, look at Baltimore, Elijah Cummings, Eric Holder, and countless others like Maxine Waters. And they also went into academia to influence society and culture. Then they got control and look what happened? We even got Obama in the White House. He set up a network administration of radicals. They got involved, no? Now we see the fruits — and that fruitcake is tasting worse and worse. (apologies if you like fruitcake — just a metaphor)

Flash forward to what we see now. Even before the riots ended they had the registration drive. Sign up, we need people like you in our process. I understand their ploy to make everything about voting and the process. Has it worked? Has it stopped the problems? Along the way, progressives and liberals have actually politicized every possible thing within reach. They complain about the process being so politicized or that the problems are so politicized. But that is what they have done with every stinking issue, politicized it.

Of course there is going to be hypocrisy, they assert. So what? Well, remember when there were all those Tea Party rallies around the country. They were not burning down buildings, rioting or looting. Let’s not forget the answer in that case was not to register people to vote, or tell them to get involved in the system. No, in fact, it was the exact opposite. They called them racists and mocked anything they did. The last thing they wanted was them to get involved in the process. In fact, they resented them for doing just that. Of course then we had government’s jihad against them, whether they were business owners, running for office, or starting non-profits to make a difference. Remember it was all out war against them.

The very same people and government who now goes out to plead the case for these rioters and looters. We see an organized pattern of backing off the police and allowing rioters and looters to have their way. Then there is an attempt from mainstream media to refer to them as “mostly peaceful protests,” even while it is going on right in front of cameras. But police being stood down sends a sharp, disturbing message to protestors et al. The officials come right out to say let them riot and loot, it’s only property. Yea, who cares about that? The message is even worse and more profound than that.

If there is to be a fringe benefit or quid pro quo to the protestors, it this rioting and looting aspect. Someone gains and someone loses. I’ve said this is all part of Obama’s economic recovery program. It really is, it is redistribution in the most basic form. Sure it is a bit more crude than the the methods politicians and Washington uses. But hey, same effects.

Over the last few years we’ve heard an awful lot of talk about how communities have been militarized to the point of having the same equipment right here on our streets as they have in heavy combat war zones. Yes there is some undeniable truth to that. What do they use it on? Then there are countless no-knock raids carried out all over the country everyday.They incorporate some of the same military-style tactics. Whether it is federal agencies or local communities, the same rules or tactics seem to apply: explain later. And they use them on a multitude of issues. Swat teams practice their maneuvers for use on schools and public buildings. All communities have swat teams with much of the same military-type hardware.

Even so far back as the nineties military tactics were used to scoop up little Elian Gonzalez to ship him back to Cuba, authorized right from the justice department. They had military style deployments at Ruby Ridge and Waco run by Janet Reno’s Justice Department. Lest you blame this too on George Bush, this was alive and thriving long before he took office. Sure there were hearings over it, but so what? They also had hearings over baseball and steroids.

What’s the point?

Well, there are many points. It is an evolving landscape of militarized action on people when government deems it necessary. (subjectively and selectively) Now it has evolved again to the point of making a calculated decision, in the case of riots — racial et al — to hold back the police presence. There has been a calculation to let the looters loot, and let the rioters riot. They’ll stop eventually.

In the meantime, in the heat of the situation, the calculation has been made to let them have the private property — loot. So private property of people is now the bargaining chip for communities and federal government. Let them steal or destroy property to pacify the thugs. Let them have at your property if it can calm things down. It doesn’t buy that doesn’t matter, they’ve already made that calculation. “Why get involved and inflame the situation further? It’s only property.”

Yea, and it’s only private property.Your loss, but then who cares about that? If they are determined to loot, then let them loot. That business or home you worked all your life for, scrimping and saving, is now just a bargaining chip for government and communities. Criminals, thugs and looters know this. The principle is very simple and basic though, sacrifice private property for the greater good. Socialism has no better tenant. Your private property is on the chopping block, whether it is by eminent domain abuse, taxes, “civil disobedience protests” or riots. It is there for the purpose of sacrificing it to criminals and thugs to appease a situation. When we all just start realizing that we will be a long way closer to the truth. Just that they have finally codified that process.

To politicians and government it is every which way but lose. To private citizens and property owners, it is every which way at your loss. They win, you lose — fairly simple.

RightRing | Bullright

Answer to Baltimore’s woes: Mo’-Money

Whenever there is a question about conditions in Baltimore, the answer is always more money. Maybe that isn’t completely fair.

Well, the first answer is what is being spent is just not being “spread evenly”.

Trouble in Baltimore

So if you just apply more ointment (money) to the wounds (conditions), it will bring everything right up to standards. Or something like that.

That’s the sales pitch anyway. See right before the riots, Mayor Chaos-Blake was in the process of doing just that, asking (Republicans) for mo’ money for schools. (and stuff)

And darn it, now she’ll probably have to go ask for even more because the people are destroying the city. Not to mention the very students in those schools developed a penchant for chucking rocks and bricks at police. But never mind that now.

Anyway, they are all only doing that because they don’t get or have enough money. If you will only give them more money, they will not be destroying their neighborhoods.(no proof but so what?) It’s so simple. Spend now, or spend more later…. or both. See video below.

Donna Edwards: Wealth needs to spread more in Baltimore.

Translation: Just spread that wealth like peanut butter and we’ll tell you when to stop. We can’t manage our city but we know when enough is enough, trust us.

Obama’s trust deficit and BS surplus

And the trouble with peaceful protests that are not so peaceful

Obama just said that “there is no excuse for the violence and destruction we saw last night,” in his presser.

Well, but there are excuses. The liberals make them all the time. As does Al Sharpton, Malik Shabazz and Louis Farrakhan. So liberals come out all the time to do exactly that, rationalize the behavior of criminal thugs who are in the streets wreaking havoc on communities. It’s partly why we’re at this point. If not directly making excuses, they are welcoming the behavior by the signals they send to would be rioters and looters.

Then we have naive or sympathetic politicians who let them run wild, or even issue stand down orders to police. (but that’s really a larger topic) In Ferguson, they made the decision to back off and allow the destruction, rioting and looting of businesses that have absolutely no part in it. Pacify them with your loot and property. This time in Baltimore we saw the police stand off at a distance, in lockstep, watching as they burned the city.

But before the fact, Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake actually said “We also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well.” Then claimed she never said it and blamed media for her own statement. The governor was calling the mayor to get her response on sending the resources like the national guard. She evidently did not want to bring them in or she would have been burning the phone line. (something she will also deny — it’s what liberals do) Let’s give credit where due to ilk like Mayor Ray Nagin, Mayor James Knowles, Governor Jay Nixon, Mayor Tom Barrett, and now Mayor Stephanie Blake as strident examples in stellar performances.

One burning building will be looped” on a news broadcast, but thousands of peaceful protestors who have been out there for days are marginalized, Obama said at his press conference. Then they always add that it is a few violent protestors. Since when do you need an army to create chaos? Is that the point the number of them? We’re always told you have a few bad apples. Well, they say bad apples in police departments taint the motives of the whole. Then they completely dismiss the violent protestors as just a few and that maybe they have good reason to be angry.

He referred to “a handful of criminals and thugs who tore up the place.” Again with the: “This is not new. It’s been going on for decades.” There is just a new awareness to these social problems because of technology and social media, Obama contends. Liberals all point back and say but we saw peaceful protests; in itself making excuses for and ignoring the currents of violent rioting. But that damage and cost is hard to ignore. Oh let’s remember long after the protestors and anarchists are gone the expenses are still very real. In fact, even more real than they were at the time because it is a constant reminder that cannot be covered easily. Reports are that Baltimore never really recovered from the 68 riots. Well, history does repeat itself.

The talking points are: there are some policemen who are not doing the right thing, like in every other sector. Then the nation must “do some soul searching,” Obama tells us. What kind of searching are they doing over accompanying violence and destruction to their message? Make excuses? That’s exactly what they’ve done by divert, deflect and deny.

Once again, my BS detector has exploded. The great, or strange, thing about the liberal “social justice” rhetoric is that they want to deny the chief ingredient in the movement is violence and destruction — sort of Darwinesque — along with personal attacks and smearing opponents, but that aside.

Every time one of these all too common episodes explode now, two things happen: People are outraged that this conduct is happening in our towns, on our streets. And Obama comes out to make a statement which ends up lending credence to protestors and the opportunist rioters who follow. Then we play this scientific game of trying to separate the protestors and their grievances from the rioters and their motives. And, in the meantime, some have gotten all too skilled at denial.

“Peaceful protests” and the looting must go on. It is far more than one or a handful of persons — a handful couldn’t do that much looting. More than one building was burned. And more than Obama is responsible for the problems as well. But suffice it to say that Obama promised unity in ‘hope and change.’ What he delivered was a nation of irreconcilable differences. That is whether you look at the national political level, or now within our towns and communities. If anyone’s chickens have come home to roost, it is those of progressives and Obama.

RightRing | Bullright

Whatever floats the boat

Or sinks it… whichever the case may be. I don’t know.

I’m going to take a blank sheet of (internet) paper and make a big mess. I don’t know where all this is going to go, or where it will end. It will evolve.

I could make a list of things and characters, then draw lines and arrows connecting them. That would be even a bigger mess. So I’ll try it in writing. It could cover a lot of ground.

Ferguson revealed a political tactic, or was it more of a law enforcement strategy to deal with protestors? It started with the governor. If you read the tea leaves, Gov. Nixon thought the answer to the protestor problem would be to let them riot and cede businesses and property to them, to do as they wish. That might appease protestors immediate needs. Rather than enforcing the rule of law and civility, just react to the results. Cops stand down and businesses and property owners are sacrificed, not to mention entire communities.

But then even that was not enough to satisfy the perpetual protestors. Wouldn’t they only want and demand more? Rational persons would think so. When they can let the public be overwhelmed by hordes of others, then protestors aren’t taking on police or governmental authorities directly. It’s a tradeoff to protect the powers that be from taking the brunt of it. Confrontation could be more controversial and costly, they reason.

And that fits right in line with the protestors’ goals who are all about some forced sense of equality between haves and have nots. Material property is a natural outcropping of their philosophy. So Nixon decides to give them what they want, let them run roughshod over other innocent bystanders. That would seem to divert the clash from being aimed at him and his fellow political class.

Is this becoming the default strategy for dealing with out of control protestors? In other words, to legitimize protestors’ concerns in word and, in deed, to let them have their way. Let them shut down communities and resources.There were early warnings of this with OWS. But can they let this go on and on? Though the public at large eventually gets tired of being sucker punched.

There’s that old saying that “you can’t make all the people happy all the time.” So why even try? But at what cost will they try to make some of the people happy, that’s the question?

Protestors got the message and responded in kind. They unleashed their wrath — over exactly what is debatable — on their fellow citizens and businesses alike. Make it as hard for people to carry out their daily activities as possible. Make their fellow citizens pay. Set up demonstrations in malls and storefront entrances; shut down bridges and travel; take over the streets of entire neighborhoods interrupting services and transportation. Make life a hell for their so-called neighbors who have nothing whatsoever to do with their grievances. That will get their message across, while chanting hate toward cops.

For law enforcement’s part, just let protestors continue in an attempt to avoid a clash between authorities and defiant thugs. Sounds like a plan, doesn’t it? That’s what people like De Blasio are doing under the guise of ‘feeling the pains’ of this movement and appealing to its violent undercurrent.

Try writing a letter to your elected representatives sometime expressing your grievances about something and see what result you get. It sort of feels like you are talking into a tin can and string. Even after a landslide election against political elites, they defiantly interpret the results however they choose. It’s as if they were elected to invent reality.

The left’s method has long been to get pols attention with chaos and temper tantrums, and they have. Their defiance cannot be ignored. So much so that some politicians made the decision that a sacrifice must be made on the part of some people, to try to satisfy others. But in extension, it’s the same thing they’ve always done by playing their class warfare. Have one group opposed to others, long as the infighting suits the objectives of the power-hungry ruling class.

Then look at libs reaction from major media to elected officials, to the Stalingrad leftist minions. Days ago they were talking about the situation on Fox. Juan Willams was schooling his colleagues on how “we love protests”… that we may not agree but “we’ll defend to death your right to protest”. But those are hollow words we’ve come to expect from the Left. Look at Tea Party protests and rallies. Defense was not their response.

After seeing emails about what was going on in the IRS, targeting conservatives and Tea Parties, and down through the ranks of liberal media, they were not at all sympathizing with “protests” — let alone defending them. They were all about shutting them down by any means, and using government to do it. Liberals objected and rejected permitting for them, saying they would be disruptive. Remember all that? Now Juan trots out his boilerplate talking point about the freedom of protests. Liberals’ allies in the media railed against the movement, painting them as bigots and racists. Let’s forget that.

Al Jazeera has an editorial that made a similar conclusion to mine but by comparing these protestors to the original Boston Tea Party. (more of a disservice to them and history but that is another matter) After making that analogy, it said we are a nation that has not experienced revolt and revolution — at least in modern times — that we tend to put faith in our constitutional system to avert such. So far it has worked, it continued, and we have solved problems through the rule of law. It characterized the current situation as so out of control, by people so distrusting of the very system, that it begs the question: what it will take to put Humpty Dumpty back together again? It theorizes this might be the storm that does us in, after pointing out popular revolutions frequently happened elsewhere. It was not hard to see where they were going, or how their readers might interpret their hypothesis. So the implication is this could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

What to say about such an extravagant theory… only it’s not so extravagant in the scheme of things. We have people dead set on getting their way, despite cost or means, who will call it justice if successful. I resent the comparison to the Tea Party though, but it was throughout the piece. Many of these Leftists have been hankering for a righteous revolution for decades. There are rent-a-protestors and communist sympathizers, who latch on to any popular protest movement. (not so much to Tea Parties…)

It even acknowledges the shortfall of Wall Street Occupiers to capture this much fervor. I had to think a little about that one. But it’s amazing what some good old racism can do for you. Two questions spring to mind: 1) was the tradeoff worth it; 2) do the protestors win and replicate this formula on all grievances? Precedent anyone? Are we in uncharted waters? Can their discontent do irreparable harm?

I tend to agree with some of Al Jezeera’s piece. For the most part, because of the mixed reactions and messages protestors have been getting. It’s something academia has aligned itself with. Race-baiters and racists have found a niche. Marxists found another vehicle. Why would any of its factions want to let go when it seems they are getting something in return? Do cops being executed bother them? Not in the least.

But many of these organizers always accused the Right or Tea Partiers of stirring up contempt and anti-government sentiments, holding them responsible for things like Gabby Gifford’s shooting. How quickly the Left and racists have come full circle to endorsing an anything goes, by any means strategy. I do mean anything goes.

The race and all the other interests are becoming mere factors of the whole, or turning into a means within a means. Is it life boat time?

Ref: The spirit of the Boston Tea Party returns – Al Jazeera America

RightRing | Bullright

It’s all politics, all the time

Bad enough that we have one ideologue politician in the White House, but we also have a politico, Attorney General running the DoJ.Why does that matter? Whenever credibility or trust is a factor, then it becomes an issue.

A week since the Grand Jury decision was released and we found out the details. No hands in the air, he assaulted the cop in the car and tried to get his gun. Then he bum-rushed the cop. Even the blood trail showed the direction he was traveling. So all that they had been saying was wrong. And race had noting to do with it. Those results are the backdrop.

Then we had the nasty riots and fallout of the decision. That night DeAndre Joshua was shot, who may have been a witness to the Brown shooting, and also friend to Dorian Johnson, is hardly getting covered. It’s being dismissed as is Louis Head’s incitement.

A week later Obama has a WH meeting with his race-bating buds. All the facts are out now and a lot of people have egg on their face. So that evening Holder travels to give a speech in Atlanta. Holder said the events in Ferguson were not unique to Ferguson but nationwide. Then he mentioned he was going to write policies on profiling.

But we scream that profiling did not have anything to do with Ferguson. Well, precisely the point. The issue of profiling is another poll-tested issue. They know it is a popular whipping post, with many people. So the subject and narrative on Ferguson is now bad. What to do? Change the subject almost as if Ferguson was about profiling.

Obama has a pow wow with his race-baiters. He decided lets change the subject to something that is popular, we can rally people to support. And it gets away from the losing, declining narrative about the Ferguson details. Face it, after the second round of riots and destroying much of the city, it has been stained. The narrative is now about the violence and the riots, and the lies flowing from there since August.

Time to change the subject.

Anything Holder does will be an attempt to start an argument about profiling and steer the attention right into that, as if it were the central issue. We’ll see how fast both media and race-baiters pick up on the narrative. It was already reported MSNBC was posing provocative questions on profiling.

“Like you, I understand that the need for this trust was made clear in the wake of the intense public reaction to last week’s grand jury announcement. But the problems we must confront are not only found in Ferguson. The issues raised in Missouri are not unique to that state or that small city. We are dealing with concerns that are truly national in scope and that threaten the entire nation.”

“Third: in the coming days, I will announce updated Justice Department guidance regarding profiling by federal law enforcement, which will institute rigorous new standards – and robust safeguards – to help end racial profiling, once and for all. This new guidance will codify our commitment to the very highest standards of fair and effective policing.”

This is a straight from the top, race power-brokers, an attempt to commandeer the Ferguson issue into a wider grievance issue. Holder stressed these were national issues. It was Ferguson, it was a local matter. But, as is typical, when controversy and trouble arise they broaden the issue.

Holder said: “Our police officers cannot be seen as an occupying force disconnected from the communities they serve.” Well, where does that come from?

He also said: “But the issue is larger than just the police and the community. Our overall system of justice must be strengthened and made more fair. In this way, we can ensure faith in the justice system. Without that deserved faith, without that reasoned belief, there can be no justice.”

Really? Most people have no trust in Obama or Holder, their cred on anything is MIA.

Holder told them: “As this critical effort unfolds, we will remain firmly resolved to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with you in driving this work into the future. And this commitment will also fuel our broader efforts to bring change – and meaningful reform – to urgent challenges far beyond the realm of community policing.”

Can you say politics?

RightRing | Bullright

Faux step-dad being investigated

Michael Brown’s stepdad investigated for comments

AP  By JIM SALTER — 12/2/14  | Yahoo News

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Police are investigating Michael Brown’s stepfather for angry comments on the streets of Ferguson after a grand jury decided not to indict the police officer who fatally shot his stepson, a spokesman said Tuesday.

Officials want to talk to Louis Head about his comments as part of a broader investigation into the arson, vandalism and looting that followed the Nov. 24 grand jury announcement, St. Louis County Police spokesman Brian Schellman said. Twelve commercial buildings were destroyed by fire. …/

Video widely circulated after last week’s grand jury announcement shows Brown’s mother, Lesley McSpadden, on top of a car and breaking down as the decision blares over a stereo. Head, her husband, comforts her then yells angry comments, including “Burn this bitch down!”

Family attorney Benjamin Crump has called the reaction “raw emotion,” but “completely inappropriate.” He did not immediately return messages seeking comment Tuesday.

Head has not yet been interviewed by police, and there is no timetable for when the investigation will be complete, Schellman said. He declined to discuss what specific charges Head could face. A message left with a spokesman for St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch was not immediately returned. …/

Ferguson Police spokesman Jeff Small said that department is not conducting a separate investigation of Head. …/

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that teachers joined the students and the Ferguson-Florissant School District provided buses to pick them up and return them to classes by mid-afternoon. It was their first day back in class after Thanksgiving break was extended a day due to bad weather Monday, when similar walkouts were staged across the country.

More: http://news.yahoo.com/michael-browns-stepdad-investigated-comments-204459408.html

Well, that took some time. They keep reporting him as the Step-dad. Crump made media appearances calling it an emotional statement. Oh, it was filled with emotion all right.

Because he was emotional does not negate his words or what he said. He repeated it enough times. You’d have to prove temporary insanity to say he didn’t know what he was saying. Most likely a planned response, IMHO.

I wonder if someone screaming fire in a theater can be excused because he was emotional? It was probably that emotion which lent even more credibility to his statements. We had a president elected largely on emotions. But when someone incites a riot, emotion is somehow supposed to be an excuse? Go figure.

PS: district school buses shuttle students and teachers from protest?

RightRing | Bullright

New terms for old protest

I saw an article today with the headline:

“Ferguson riots span 100 cities on second day” (splash page)

Protests against Ferguson decision grow across US
Though mostly peaceful, demonstrations grew coast to coast Tuesday, a day after the country learned Wilson won’t face charges.–AOL

Are we now calling riots mostly peaceful? Or, if these others were peaceful there is no reason to call them riots. Sound confusing? I’ll have to put that in my lexicon, ‘mostly peaceful riots’.

This from a protestor in Cleveland:

“The system wasn’t made to protect us,” said one of the protesters, 17-year-old Naesha Pierce. “To get justice, the people themselves have to be justice.”

Bad designing? I’m trying to dissect the last part. But If she is referring to the concept of self-government, it clearly has failed on them. Anarchy is sort of like that.

Talking about evolving terminology, maybe someone will think of a new term for looting, too? That sounds so last century.

In another report, two FBI agents were shot 5 miles from Ferguson. Though instantly they said that it was not “directly related” to the protests. How do they know that? How about this: a car is in the ditch off the highway, though it was not directly related to the 10 inches of snow on the road? No apparent connection. (don’t go conspiracy theorist now)

We’ve already heard reports that they found pipe bombs in a raid. But I guess we are too quick to jump to conclusions, that’s why they have to make those disclaimers all the time. Though media is quick to project spreading riots, aka demonstrations. Meanwhile, property owners are sacrificed to the expense of protestors. Fair tradeoff. Hmmm.

Also the demonstrators want to make rules for police officers. And they want them to wear name tags. So demonstrators wearing masks and those Guy Fawkes’ get-ups want name tags on cops. Maybe I should go slower, so not to jump to conclusions?

How about a pre-Thanksgiving laugh….for the road?

RightRing | Bullright

Ferguson: the ideo-mindset

A couple things strike me as odd about the Ferguson matter.

The disdain for police is only part of it. Then the mistrust of the police is probably the bigger part. They all expressed it, which seems to be at the heart of the discontent. The rally was a rail-a-thon against the police.

But as the solution, they want the federal government to take over the entire investigation. So do you not have trust in local police and prosecutors, local government et al, but you have complete faith in the federal government — especially this DoJ under Eric Holder? The answer of course is yes, yes.

Sort of leaves me scratching my head how they complain about the militarization of police. That is a very real problem, I can understand that. It is one thing many of us are concerned about. Then they are upset at the national guard being brought in. On the other hand, they are begging the feds to take full control over everything.

So feds don’t abuse their authority, don’t screw up, and don’t deserve our distrust? Right, I have a bridge for them. The federal government that has politicized and scandalized almost every department, and can’t manage our border, is the infallible super-hero.

Am I missing some dots or not connecting them? I just find that strange. I know their desire is to make it a civil rights case, but the exuberant trust seems very questionable.

RightRing | Bullright

Is anybody out there?

Dear diary,

Well, I’m writing to you today to tell you how pissed off I am….. er how depressed and pissed off I am. Now I don’t mean to bring you down — bad enough you don’t have a choice on listening. Sorry I can’t be more upbeat for you. Some friend I am.

But hey, since you are a captive audience I thought I’d let it rip. I know most people probably complain about last night’s dinner, or that last electric bill, or that traffic jam on the way home from work after they stopped off to buy their Chunky Monkey ice cream. I kind of wish I had those problems.

You probably don’t know what its like to talk to someone for 3 minutes until you realize they don’t know what the hell you’re talking about, much less care. Or when you mention some current event only to realize they don’t have a clue about it, so you end up being the bearer of bad news. Then you feel guilty for messing up their otherwise beautiful day. So they blame you, the messenger! No, you wouldn’t know about that, would you?

We have a pretender in the White House but we are surrounded by a circle of truth-challengd activists who actually do his/their bidding. You probably saw my sock puppet criticism. A nation of sock puppets. Those of us with some sanity left are just livid at what they have done to our Republic. It was by no means perfect before but what they have done defies reasoning. Yet we are considered the crazy ones, extremists, the problem, the wackos, the trouble makers, the nut-jobs. Funny how they can pull that off credibly.

So that is the situation here, not very comforting. That’s been the condition for the last six years. The future is no less bleak. Now, with only 2 years left in this regime, they are doing their damnedest to make sure we have no more choice in our situation then than we have at present. Not very encouraging, I know.

Did I forget to mention, they want to destroy any sense of individuality at the voting booth? They have people voting on their skin color, or the ethnicity, or their sexuality, or their income, even reproductive organs. But anyone else who refuses to be pigeon-holed is marginalized as a bigot, extremist, or a hater. And Christians, well, if they don’t fit the mold of the “liberal” orthodoxy and the emerging church, they are discarded as heretics.

On a positive note, if there is one, I’m starting to see more and more people awakened to all the political failures. So far its more of an elephant in the room, but people cannot put their finger on what the nasty smell is yet. They seem to think it must have always been there… just that they haven’t noticed it before.

Surprisingly enough, Islam and Muslims have hijacked our political system and public debate in the country. Meanwhile, more people are being murdered around the world for their Christian faith in the name of Islam. Seems they never learned anything from Jefferson. In fact, they just announced a new caliphate, and even that did not cause much of a reaction in many places, and others rushed to join. I guess they figure its a new social networking tool. ( #hashtag – like us on facebook)

Even as bad, this political caliphate in the US has everyone believing energy is some kind of evil. Anything involving energy has to be run through a P/C decoder in order to approve it. And elsewhere, we’ve even found hospitals that were burning aborted babies for fuel.(at least we think they were aborted) They didn’t appreciate that being exposed. I don’t know if they considered it green or not? Though it could be Sharia compliant, but we’re still waiting for word on that.

The new trend is social justice. It seems that riots in the streets and violence to property is the definition of social justice. There sure is a lot of it being meted out. I haven’t seen so much justice since the 60’s. Well, I don’t want to bring you down, but this sure is not the paradise they claimed it would be. We all waited to see “hope and change” only to hope it changes. It’s not very hop-y if you ask me, but they don’t so I don’t tell them.

I guess I have to close now to leave plenty of time for prayer. These days there is a whole lot to pray about, for, and relief from. Mostly though let’s just pray we can fix the damage being done — with only divine help from above because our attempts aren’t cutting it.

I’ll keep you posted. Maybe I can bring you a little positive news next time. I know you could use some too.

Until then, Love and Blessings… ’cause the world isn’t handing out those.

RightRing | Bullright

Inquiring reps want to know

Committee Chairs Want Answers on Blind Sheikh Release

IPT News
September 20, 2012

 

Eight House committee leaders have written to Obama administration officials asking about reports the administration is considering an Egyptian request to release blind Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman from prison.

“If these reports are true, such considerations would be extremely disconcerting as release of this convicted terrorist should not happen for any reason,” the letter from U.S. Reps. Lamar Smith, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., Mike Rogers, R-Mich., Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., Peter King, R-N.Y., Hal Rogers, R-Ky. , Frank Wolf, R-Va., and Kay Granger, R-Tex., said. Each chairs a significant House committee.

The query was prompted by a story published Monday by The Blaze and discussed by talk show host Glenn Beck. A Blaze staffer said an unnamed Obama administration told him Abdel-Rahman’s release was being “actively considered.”

Abdel-Rahman is serving a life sentence for plotting a series of bombing attacks on New York tunnels and landmarks. And he is considered the spiritual influence behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed six people. His imprisonment has become an obsession for some in Egypt, with new President Mohamed Morsi promising to lobby Washington for Abdel Rahman’s release when he meets U.S. officials.

It was Abdel Rahman’s imprisonment, and not alleged offense to an anti-Muslim video, that triggered violent protests outside the American embassy in Cairo last week, U.S. intelligence officials say.

[…/]

http://www.investigativeproject.org/3754/committee-chairs-want-answers-on-blind-sheikh