Wednesday Night Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 08:53:56 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Is anyone following the new Big Brother season? I think Kathy (the Arkansas Deputy Sheriff) is the saboteur. Other possibilities: Lane or Matt.

My iPhone 4 dropped two calls today. My 3G never dropped one in two plus years. I still like the 4 better because the sound is clearer and the internet is so fast. But I'd give it up quick for the IPad which has become my favorite. Especially for reading books and magazines and watching Netflix and videos.

Whoever thought Ward Churchill and Scott McInnis would have something in common? The plagiarism story continues to escalate, with the Denver Post calling on McInnis to "throw in the towel" and Colorado Ethics Watch filing a complaint against him and asking for an investigation. But McInnis defused the second accusation somewhat today when the Washington Post columnist whose column he appropriated said it was with his permission.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< AG Holder Expresses Commitment to New Crime Fighting Policy | Water Engineer Surfaces, Says Scott McInnis Lied >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Wednesday Night Open Thread | 45 comments (45 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

As it is an open thread.... (none / 0) (#1)
by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:23:03 PM EST

Why has there been a (perceived) avoidance of the NBPP news item?

It definitely falls into the politics of crime theme of this site.

Who exactly were they supposed (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by andgarden on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 10:03:09 PM EST

to be intimidating? This is a serious question.

My recollection from two years ago is that they were present exclusively in overwhelmingly black neighborhoods. They had the kinds of precincts where McCain got 5 votes for Obama's 800.


What difference does it make (none / 0) (#11)
by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 10:05:11 PM EST

as to which type of neighborhood they may have been at?

From reading your posts here, that seems to be an odd question.


You allege intimidation (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by andgarden on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 10:07:40 PM EST

Where's your victim?

The reality is that almost everyone who would have encountered these people in person would have believed that they were making a show of protecting the polls.

Do you have any experience with how voting works in Philadelphia?


Would you argue the same point (none / 0) (#13)
by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 10:10:31 PM EST

if they were in my state of AL wearing white sheets?


Tell me, (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by andgarden on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 10:15:14 PM EST

do you have an example of blacks systematically intimidating white voters from voting? Anywhere in the United States?

(NB: I can think of just one--and it wasn't anywhere near Philadelphia)

But it's par for the course: in your world, white people are being oppressed. I mean, just look at Obama. Right?


: Not oppression but intimidation (none / 0) (#19)
by BTAL on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 07:48:34 AM EST

was the crime that was committed.

Two reasons (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by gyrfalcon on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:10:23 AM EST

First because it's simply a non-issue, big yawn.

Secondly because- and I can hardly believe I need to spell this out here-- the problem in this country, or anywhere, is not and has never beenu members of oppressed minority groups intimidating members of the majority. OK, so if it happens on very rare occasions, yes, of course, they should be dealt with, as I believe they have been in this case to the extent they actually did anything really wrong, which ain't much.

But it has zero to do with any kind of systemic problem that reflects major imbalances in society. Sorry of that bugs you, but it's a fact. Black folks intimidating white voters at the polls-- oh, please. It's a very rare, very isolated kind of thing, if it really even happens at all.

White authorities knocking themselves out to intimidate black folks from voting is endemic in parts of this country to this day, and results repeatedly in entire communities being effectively disenfranchised.

So don't expect me or anybody else here to get up in high dudgeon about this. Even if these people did what Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity say they did (which they didn't), it's utterly insignificant in the larger scheme of things.


Two wrongs majke a right? (none / 0) (#20)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 07:56:46 AM EST

White authorities knocking themselves out to intimidate black folks from voting is endemic in parts of this country to this day

And do you have any proof????


Here's one of many .... (none / 0) (#22)
by Peter G on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 08:46:39 AM EST

You don't have to go south for evidence. Less than an hour west of Philadelphia, white Republican officials conspired in 2008 to prevent African-American college students at Lincoln University from voting. Not an issue for Fox and its faux-hystericals.


First (none / 0) (#23)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 08:59:07 AM EST

How did the suit turn out? Was the allegation proven?

Secondly

I don't see intimidation alleged. There is a difference.

Thirdly

Why not a SP to investigate the claims of the whistle blower? The charges are toxic.


The only meaningful difference I see, (none / 0) (#42)
by Peter G on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:07:12 PM EST

in terms of interference with the right to vote, is that potential "intimidation" by less-than-a-handful of individuals is much less serious than partisan manipulation of the location and equipping of polling places, so that hundreds of African-American voters wind up standing in lines, in the rain (ok, the local politicos didn't make it rain), for hours, at a polling place that has been moved intentionally -- that is, notwithstanding objections to the move saying that the result would be exactly what happened (ok, not necessarily including the rain) -- far from the campus address where the students were registered to vote, and equipped with an inadequate number of voting machines (that is, one or two). There were dozens of (very wet) eye-witnesses and victims. The prior protests against the move of the polling place are in writing. Has the allegation been "proven"? Yes. Proven in court? The case is in mediation, aiming for settlement. The accuracy of these facts is not in question. I wasn't there that day, but I was made aware that day of the crisis as it unfolded. This is the kind of thing that had Philadelphia voters upset. Not the isolated and ultimately meaningless incident that you are fixated on, which had no impact on anyone's actual right to vote.


you mean like Obamas (none / 0) (#43)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:19:03 PM EST

people did during the primaries.

soooooorry

never mind. back to our regularly scheduled bickering.


I have no idea what you think you are (none / 0) (#44)
by Peter G on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:29:16 PM EST

referring to, Howdy. But no, nothing I described in factual detail is anything like anything I have heard of "Obama's people" doing "during the primaries." Nor am I "bickering" with anyone. I am countering snide and glib propaganda with concrete, serious facts. How about you?


: I admire the effort (none / 0) (#45)
by Capt Howdy on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 03:39:18 PM EST

but it is so wasted on Jim

I remember reading about it (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by Cream City on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 12:20:24 AM EST

at the time of the election and seeing some really appalling photos and video -- and reportage with interviews with African Americans who said that they were intimidated, apparently not planning to vote for the candidate of the BP's choice. . . .

I wondered then why the story rose and died so fast. I still wonder today. I have to agree with the poster here who writes that the behaviors (and guns at a polling place!) in the photos and videos would have gotten attention if by whites in the five Southern states still under DoJ supervision.


Because its an invented scandal? (none / 0) (#3)
by Raskolnikov on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:47:12 PM EST

There's a reason only the far right is talking about it. Here's a good summary of where the accusations fall flat. A couple snippets:

-The Bush administration's Justice Department -- not the Obama administration -- made the decision not to pursue criminal charges against members of the New Black Panther Party for alleged voter intimidation at a polling center in Philadelphia in 2008

-The Obama administration successfully obtained default judgment against Samir Shabazz, a member of the New Black Panther Party carrying a nightstick outside the Philadelphia polling center on Election Day 2008


With all due respect (none / 0) (#4)
by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:49:23 PM EST

Media Matters is not a reliable and unbiased source.


Sure (none / 0) (#5)
by Raskolnikov on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 09:54:34 PM EST

But neither is Fox News, Limbaugh, or Atlas Shrugs. Still, if you have any good links about it, I'd be happy to read them. When I searched I couldn't find anything entirely impartial from either side.


: Didn't cite any of those sources. (none / 0) (#8)
by BTAL on Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 10:02:58 PM EST

All one needs to look at is the video of the events at the Phil. polling location to reach an honest decision.
As for other sources, the DOJ record of the summary judgment, assigned penalty (no polling presence until 2012) then the subsequent dropping of all investigation is clear even for any non-partisan.
I'm not attempting to play hardball politics here, as I would be just as adamant in pursuing any group regardless of political bent.
Someone standing at the entrance to a polling location with a night stick is voter intimidation - don't care what color they are or what they are wearing.

The issue is (none / 0) (#21)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 08:04:36 AM EST

that a whistle blower says that after the DOJ obtained injunctions they were dropped/reduced and that an Obama admin political appointee directed that no voter intimidation allegedly done by blacks will be pursued.

That's the problem.

The dropped/reduced is factual. The whistle blower names a person.

If this is not a criminal matter, what is?

A Special Prosecutor should be appointed.


man (none / 0) (#24)