Black Panther Case Dropped by Obama

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
tom63 wrote:
FrankNStang wrote:

So these guys were at a polling station in Philly with a night stick threating whites and some blacks entering the station.

The ring leader had Democratic polling station observer credentials and was a law graduate from Howard.

Career justice dept attorneys worked the case for voter intimidation and Obama’s political appointees ordered them to drop the case.

One of the thugs told a white voter “You’re about to be ruled by the black man, cracker”

A well known civil rights activist from the 50s actually directy observed this intimidation and said it was worse than anything he ever saw in Mississippi in the 50s.

Why would they not prosecute this?

Why do you think? Minorities never do anything wrong, it’s all due to white racism.

The only person who would think this is a non-minority wanting to inflame peoples passions and already ingrained prejudices.

While what you say would make perfect sense if dealing with people without mental issues, in fact many people have a mental disorder that among other things affects them on this subject.

Seriously, there are places such as universities that teach that BY DEFINITION racism is a phenomenon only existing in whites. I recall a news story not long ago about a university that not only taught this in classes, but had an indoctrination program (of course it was not called that) where dormitory residents were counseled in this and expected to agree with it.

Of course that is insane. But there are people dedicated to insane propositions.

I assure you that bizarre as it sounds, there are people – both white and black as well as probably other races – who absolutely do believe no act or thought of a black person is ever racist. No evidence can persuade them to the contrary. It is part of their (mentally-disordered) belief system.

wow really? what school was this?[/quote]

It’s been probably six months or so, maybe longer, since I read it and it wasn’t one of the relatively few schools that stick in my mind. I’m not saying this as a specific because it could well be wrong. But it was a school such as for example the University of Michigan. Might not have been that specific school, don’t recall, but it was a substantial school such as that, not some rinky-dink podunk place.

22

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Bill…

We could go on FOREVER talking about all the individual bullshit that people believe. I’m right along with you if there is someone who actually believes that anyone is “not” capable of being racist and/or a hate mongerer.

However, I also don’t support that there has been some great “paradigm shift” of rampant, institutionalized racism that is denying white males of their fundamental rights and freedoms, OR of gainful employment. [/quote]

Not to that extreme, most certainly not. While it’s probably a large number – as in, in excess of one million – white men that have been denied jobs out of people making decisions based on skin color, race, or ethnicity (that is to say, racism but of the liberal-approved “reverse” sort) the great majority of these have had plenty of other opportunities and so the individual event was not all that tragic.

However, that is not to say that it is right. Which I see that you note and agree with, so there is no disagreement here.

It is a remarkable hypocrisy that some, in particular those who spend the most effort decrying racism (and well enough they should), themselves are often the most active of anyone in making decisions about people, for example what should be done in their cases, based on their skin color, race, or ethnicity. But it’s funny, somehow they think it’s perfectly fine or even admirable when they treat people differently according to race, so long as, of course, it’s their own race being favored.

One would have hoped we would have moved past that by now.

Seems to me like there’s three roads, so to speak, here:

  1. The high road of NOT treating people differently according to their skin color, race, or ethnicity

  2. The low road of thinking it’s fine to do so and being equal across the board: holding that since (supposedly) it’s fine one way, then it’s fine the other.

  3. The even lower road of thinking it’s fine for oneself to do, and making it even perhaps a life profession to do it, but condemning others for doing likewise, and being really loud and moralistic about it, too.

Anyway, 'nuff on that topic. I probably shouldn’t even have touched it.

23

They dropped the case because the DOJ would have won it - it was a cut and dried case of voter intimidation and then the NBPP and groups associated with them would have been pointed out as the criminals they really are (ie
acorn)

24

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Bill…

We could go on FOREVER talking about all the individual bullshit that people believe. I’m right along with you if there is someone who actually believes that anyone is “not” capable of being racist and/or a hate mongerer.

However, I also don’t support that there has been some great “paradigm shift” of rampant, institutionalized racism that is denying white males of their fundamental rights and freedoms, OR of gainful employment.

Not to that extreme, most certainly not. While it’s probably a large number – as in, in excess of one million – white men that have been denied jobs out of people making decisions based on skin color, race, or ethnicity (that is to say, racism but of the liberal-approved “reverse” sort) the great majority of these have had plenty of other opportunities and so the individual event was not all that tragic.

However, that is not to say that it is right. Which I see that you note and agree with, so there is no disagreement here.

It is a remarkable hypocrisy that some, in particular those who spend the most effort decrying racism (and well enough they should), themselves are often the most active of anyone in making decisions about people, for example what should be done in their cases, based on their skin color, race, or ethnicity. But it’s funny, somehow they think it’s perfectly fine or even admirable when they treat people differently according to race, so long as, of course, it’s their own race being favored.

One would have hoped we would have moved past that by now.

Seems to me like there’s three roads, so to speak, here:

  1. The high road of NOT treating people differently according to their skin color, race, or ethnicity

  2. The low road of thinking it’s fine to do so and being equal across the board: holding that since (supposedly) it’s fine one way, then it’s fine the other.

  3. The even lower road of thinking it’s fine for oneself to do, and making it even perhaps a life profession to do it, but condemning others for doing likewise, and being really loud and moralistic about it, too.

Anyway, 'nuff on that topic. I probably shouldn’t even have touched it.[/quote]

Great points, Bill!

I don’t think we disagree at all.

Mufasa

25

[quote]lixy wrote:
I knew HH was right all along.[/quote]

Lol. Nicely done lixy.

26

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
They dropped the case because the DOJ would have won it - it was a cut and dried case of voter intimidation and then the NBPP and groups associated with them would have been pointed out as the criminals they really are (ie
acorn)[/quote]

Would have won it? Hell they already did. None of the defendants responded to the DOJ complaint. All the DOJ had to do was move for an entry of default judgment. They didn’t. Instead the dismissed the complaint as two two of the defendants. One of which had democrat credentials.

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/05/29/top_stories/doc4a1f42b32c161287079901.txt

27

So a non-black shows up at a polling place in uniform with a nightstick on Oct '10, and gets a case against them in court, but does not show up. If the DOJ does not dismiss the case, can said non-black win a suit against DOJ for violation of Equal Protection?

Not that I would advocate that. This whole thing is more f’d up Chicago style politics.

But for debate’s sake whaddya think?