Showing posts with label Michael Brown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Brown. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Saturday, August 23, 2014
Friday, August 15, 2014
Darren Wilson, President of the Ethical Society of Police Identified as Ferguson Shooter (Updated: Wrong Darren Wilson)
Darren Wilson, six year veteran of the police force and president of the Ethical Society of Police has been identified as the Ferguson shooter in a press conference held by Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson.
Most news outlets covering this story declined to state Darren Wilson's race, as should be expected, this this was not about race but about criminal activity.
Perhaps the race hustlers in the White House will take note of the fact, that this was and is a police matter for local and state authorities to resolve and to ascertain the guilt or innocence of anyone involved. This did not require the president of the United States to comport himself as an ambulance chasing lawyer, taking sides before all the facts were in.
The moral of this story: If you are going to drag yourself away from your golf game, Mr. President, at least let it be to turn your attention to some national or worldwide crisis begging for your attention. Let Al Sharpton , Jesse Jackson and Eric Holder fall out of the clown car of race baiters. You sir, should rise above it.
Update: I am getting feedback that this is the wrong Darren Wilson. Will issue full correction after I can verify. According to Ethical Society of Police website, Sgt. Wilson is a St. Louis police officer, not Ferguson.
Update II: According to CNN, the Darren Wilson involved in the shooting was white. Like the groundhog seeing his shadow, expect the racebaiting, poverty pimp vultures to circle for the next six weeks.
Although my earlier source on the officer's race was wrong, I stand by what I wrote: This is not about race but about criminal activity. Actions have consequences.
Cross posted at LCR, Political Clown Parade
Rhetorical Sleight of Hand on Ferguson from the Weasel-in-Chief
Obama issued a statement about the "heartbreaking loss" of Michael Brown. He followed that up in a speech:
If this guy Obama was my butcher, I'd tell him to get his thumb off the scale while he's weighing my rib roast. "Heartbreaking", "tragic", "His family will never hold Michael in their arms again." Another case for your consideration: an elderly gentleman gunned down in his home without warning. Those who loved him would undoubtedly see this as "heartbreaking", and "tragic". And I can assure you, that his family will never hold Usama bin Laden in their arms again!
You see what I did there? More importantly, did you see what Obama did there? Staying true to form, Obama draws his conclusions without the necessity of waiting for the the benefit of any facts. This guy Michael Brown may have been an A-student choir boy, or just some thug resisting arrest. We don't know. While to his parents it's heart breaking, if this guy was terrorizing his neighborhood, then his death was far from "tragic" for his victims. Would it hurt the man who dithered for six years not approving the Keystone pipeline, to wait at least as many days before pontificating over the character of a man he did not know? Who died under circumstances yet to be determined? Or, at the very least, to use the neutral language of a statesman instead of emotionally charged weasel words, until after all the facts are in?
Assuming that Michael Brown falls somewhere in the spectrum between beloved Robin Williams, whose family will never hold him in their arms again, and Usama bin Laden, whose family will never hold him in their arms again, why should the president of the United States, who never seems to be able to find the time to perform the actual duties of his office, interject himself into racially charged local matter with emotionally charged language that could inflame those already given to riot and disorder?
Obama claims to "be a better speechwriter than his speech writers". Shall we infer then, that it was his intent to use such dishonest, emotionally charged rhetoric to subtly maintain the inflamed passions that sparked the looting and civil unrest of Ferguson, MO? Before you tug our heartstrings with the tale of a poor, elderly man gunned down in his home, whose family will never hold him in their arms again, tell us of the 3,000+ Americans he killed in a single day. Context is everything.
Next time, Mr. President, make the "gutsy call" to get all the facts before you weigh in on subjects both above and below your pay grade. Your followers will not hold you accountable, but history will.
Cross posted at LCR, Political Clown Parade
"Of course, it’s important to remember how this started. We lost a young man, Michael Brown, in heartbreaking and tragic circumstances. He was 18 years old. His family will never hold Michael in their arms again."
If this guy Obama was my butcher, I'd tell him to get his thumb off the scale while he's weighing my rib roast. "Heartbreaking", "tragic", "His family will never hold Michael in their arms again." Another case for your consideration: an elderly gentleman gunned down in his home without warning. Those who loved him would undoubtedly see this as "heartbreaking", and "tragic". And I can assure you, that his family will never hold Usama bin Laden in their arms again!
You see what I did there? More importantly, did you see what Obama did there? Staying true to form, Obama draws his conclusions without the necessity of waiting for the the benefit of any facts. This guy Michael Brown may have been an A-student choir boy, or just some thug resisting arrest. We don't know. While to his parents it's heart breaking, if this guy was terrorizing his neighborhood, then his death was far from "tragic" for his victims. Would it hurt the man who dithered for six years not approving the Keystone pipeline, to wait at least as many days before pontificating over the character of a man he did not know? Who died under circumstances yet to be determined? Or, at the very least, to use the neutral language of a statesman instead of emotionally charged weasel words, until after all the facts are in?
Assuming that Michael Brown falls somewhere in the spectrum between beloved Robin Williams, whose family will never hold him in their arms again, and Usama bin Laden, whose family will never hold him in their arms again, why should the president of the United States, who never seems to be able to find the time to perform the actual duties of his office, interject himself into racially charged local matter with emotionally charged language that could inflame those already given to riot and disorder?
Obama claims to "be a better speechwriter than his speech writers". Shall we infer then, that it was his intent to use such dishonest, emotionally charged rhetoric to subtly maintain the inflamed passions that sparked the looting and civil unrest of Ferguson, MO? Before you tug our heartstrings with the tale of a poor, elderly man gunned down in his home, whose family will never hold him in their arms again, tell us of the 3,000+ Americans he killed in a single day. Context is everything.
Next time, Mr. President, make the "gutsy call" to get all the facts before you weigh in on subjects both above and below your pay grade. Your followers will not hold you accountable, but history will.
Cross posted at LCR, Political Clown Parade
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
