Crime & Punishment
This kid who was tasered at a John Kerry event…some people are saying the cops overreacted. Nonsense. If anything, they were too soft on this guy. Let’s be honest- idiots like this should be shot. And not with rubber bullets. Okay, I kid. But seriously- this guy is a pain in the ass child who threw a tantrum, resisted arrest for a long period of times, fought with the police, cursed at them, and did everything in his power to make sure he WAS tasered.
He deserved what he got- no doubt about it.
I’ve seen the tape, and the cops warned him repeatedly that if he continued to resist arrest and not put his hands behind his back that he WOULD BE tasered, end of story. He kept resisting, struggled with police, and he yelled curse words at them- if you do this, any sane person knows that the officers are going to follow thru with their threats of enforcement.
This is a petulant child who showed his ass- he got what he had coming, end of story.
Blogged with Flock
This is downright insane. An idiotic* woman (Brenda Nesselroad-Slaby) faces absolutely no charges for leaving her 2 year old daughter in her car for 8 hours while she went to work for the day.
Apparently (and I will have to read more info. to see if this is true) the woman returned to her car over 3 times during the day to retrieve donuts from the vehicle, and at one point the security camera video shows her actually moving the car to a different parking spot. Most of the stories I found are somewhat vague as to the exact timeline of events for the day, but one thing is certain- only a complete moron or someone who is guilty of a crime forgets about their own baby roasting in a car on a day with the temperature over 100 degrees (to forget about your baby in 70 degree weather is crazy itself.)
The prosecutor in the Ohio county where this took place said that he will not file any charges against the woman, and regarding the woman’s other child, a 5 year old, he said- “I have no reason to believe that she won’t take care of this child.”
I have to agree with others who have pointed out the clear fact of gender bias here. I have little doubt that if this had been a man, he would have been charged. If the reports are correct, you don’t get anymore negligent than this.
*forgetting you have a child and you left that child in a car that is probably roasting at around 115 degrees for 8 hours IS the definition of “idiotic”
Senator Ted Stevens (R- Alaska) is a jerk if you ask me. This pork-loving, big spender should be in a jail cell for fleecing the American taxpayers for so many years. Not sure of all the details of the investigation, but it’s related to bribery (will read more in a bit), but it seems his home (a very large home, from the looks of it) was raided by the FBI today.
Isn’t it about time we bring back some ethics to politics? Was it ever there to begin with?
I love it. The NAACP seems to think that it has to come out and have a press conference because a black man in America is indicted for a crime, yet he’s not yet gone to trial and been convicted by a jury of his peers.
Why did they decide to have a press conference? No idea. It’s absurd. Because he’s a black man, they have to come out and support him? And if Hitler were a black man? Of course I’m not comparing Vick (whether he’s guilty or not) to Hitler…but it seems that these groups (Al Sharpton is coming out to support him as well) go all out to support a person just because of the color of his skin. Why do groups like the NAACP do this? Is brutal dogfighting a new way to fight for the “advancement” of “colored people”?? They make themselves look foolish and useless when they come out for any black American simply because he or she is black.
Worse- do they only care about black Americans? Where were they when the Duke lacrosse players were wrongfully accused of raping a black stripper who completely made the story up? Why no press conference then? Why no calls for fairness, let’s wait to see what a jury says about the issue?
Would an organization that bills itself as a defender of “whites” come out to defend anyone in the spotlight, no matter how guilty the person looks, just because that person is white? Would a race-based organization that is connected to white Americans even be allowed to exist without riots outside the organization’s headquarters? Why the double standard? Why the obsession with race to begin with. When can we live in the world King dreamed of- one that didn’t see color, but rather character?
The dems are all up in arms. Bush commuted the sentence of Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby for obstruction and lying to a grand jury. The fine was left in place, the probationary period is still in effect…only the 30 month jail sentence was commuted.
Now- we know that Libby was not the original source for exposing Plame’s name. We also know that Plame and husband, Joe Wilson, have been exposed as frauds and liars. Joe Wilson was hired onto the Kerry campaign in 2004…when it came to light that Wilson and Plame lied about who sent Wilson to Iraq, and what conclusions could be made from his trip there, Kerry immediately dropped Wilson and erased all of Wilson’s webpages on the Kerry site. (Click here for the cache I saved of Wilson’s Kerry campaign webpage)
We also know that there was absolutely no underlying crime committed in all of this. Fitzgerald knew from the start that the original source was Armitage, yet he continued on with a bogus investigation. It was well known that Plame did not meet any of the specifications under the law in question. She had not been covert in years and giving her identity would in no way harm her or her position (as she was no longer going to be covert in any manner). The author of the law agrees with this conclusion- that Plame didn’t fall under the category of agents the law was written to protect.
So- no underlying crime, based on a case with two people who are exposed liars (Wilson and Plame), faulty memory, etc.
No one can reasonably make the case that this matter ever had national security implications, nor that it dealt with lies from the White House, as there’s no evidence that any lies came from the WH in this matter, and there’s no evidence that there were any lies in the runup to the Iraq war. The bipartisan committees have dealt with the issue and have agreed- these “lies” many liberals want to go on about just don’t exist.
Now- Cisneros, head of HUD under Clinton, was indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, obstruction, and lying to investigators. Forget the underlying story there. It was as serious as the issue involved with the Libby indictment.
Cisneros plead guilty in order to plea bargain. Libby stands by his innocence to this day.
Clinton (who was convicted of perjury himself and disbarred for it!) comes out swinging, saying that this represents the Bush tendency to reward those in the inner circles. Hillary goes on about cronyism and such. What’s the difference between Cliton pardoning Cisneros (and Marc Rich and the Puerto Rican terrorists, money laundering friends of Hillary’s brother, Bill’s own brother Roger! etc)…and the commutation of the prison sentence for Libby? I see very little difference outside of the fact that, when looking at the facts we know that Libby was caught up in a case that had no underlying crime, that the prosecutor know of this, yet still went after Libby, that two of the main people involved in the related issues are exposed frauds, and that Libby stands by his claims of innocence when Cisneros admitted he was a liar.
The liberals really need to stop trying to use this issue for gain. It makes them look silly when they stood by to watch Clinton do all the damage he did. He was convicted of lying to grand juries himself, so Clinton and the Mrs. need to stop the hypocrisy- you know you’re in trouble when even Dana Milibank is saying that your comments on the Libby issue are damaging your own reps.
A quick final note- Keith Olbermann was discussing the overall issue of the nuermous Clinton pardons and the Bush commutation of Libby’s sentence. He actually made the argument that Clinton was on firmer ground with this issue, because he was so abundant in his handing out of pardons, when Bush pardoned so few. How is this a sane argument? Clinton was giving pardons out to everyone, so that makes him a hero of sorts…Bush has kept the pardon power very limited (Wikipedia lists only 76- and on the main article of presidential parons, they even list Libby then explain he wasn’t actually pardoned, so who knows about their actual facts)..and because of that, he’s a bad guy because, in Olbermann’s mind this somehow equals cronyism?! I see why so many people call him “Krazy Keith”.
I’m sure that Tonya Reiman is a nice woman. I’m sure she’s sincere in what she does. But, I do have to say she’s full of bologna. Tonya appears weekly on the O’Reilly Factor in a boring, annoying, and foolish segment called the “body language segment”. Bill has Reiman in to discuss body language of various people in the news.
Body language stuff is, itself, nonsense. Every person isn’t saying particular things when they do particular things with their bodies, their hands, their faces, etc. This sort of nonsense only works with certain people. They’re made of metal, they need oiled, and they’re called robots. To try to pinpoint every facial move, every body tick, and all of this stuff down to a specific meaning…well, it just doesn’t work. People do weird things with their bodies all the time, and all of them do these things for different reasons…no matter what mumbo jumbo so-called “experts” give you about unconscious actions and such.
Reiman, who has (get this) a bachelor’s degree in “general studies” is an expert…how is she an expert? Well, according to her own website, she took a psych class in college, which got her interested in the subject. So, she read all the books she could find on the subject. Tada! Expert status! She has no science degree, she has no degree in anything related to body language, forensics, nothing that could be used to call yourself any type of expert in this “field”- if you can call it a field at all.
She actually makes her money giving speeches on self esteem, talking to people, and that sort of fluff. Great for people who make tens of thousands to speak to zombie people about common sense topics and issues they should already be well aware of, but give me a break.
On tonight’s show, Reiman talked about Paris Hilton walking as she was released from jail. It’s obvious that most people, when uncomfortable- keep their arms close to their body. I do it often myself (I think most people do it to cover their bodies because they’re not totally confident in them)- I would never say that everyone does this for a certain reason. The fact is, Hilton probably wanted to look tame and innocent, which is why she walked like this.
Reiman’s “expert” assessment? When Hilton walks out looking innocent (with her hands over each other, hanging in front of her pants)- Reiman says that Paris feels vulnerable (wow- she’s being released from prison and there are cameras all over the place- she’s feeling somewhat vulnerable? Thank goodness we have an expert to tell us this, or we’d all be lost!) She goes on to say that Paris is “covering her private part”. Nonsense. She has her arms in close to her body and her hands are over each other. How you gather that this is somehow covering her vagina, I’ve no idea. And how covering your vagina is somehow a sign of being vulnerable, I also have no idea.
I do have to say- I guess it helps bring in the money and the “expert” status if what you make up sounds totally absurd.
I so do wish Bill would drop this woman and the segment from the show altogether. It’s complete bunk.
Apparently, in the United States, an evil young woman can murder 2 babies and there’s absolutely no punishment for her crimes. California judges can just toss the cases out. Who the heck cares about defenseless babies anyhow? What sane people actually value life anymore? I mean, what an antiquated idea!
Seems like Holly Ashcraft is going to be free. Free to kill another baby in the near future, I can assume. She apparently had a child in 2004, showed up at the hospital, claimed the baby was stillborn and they never found a body. No big deal, right? Apparently not, as it seems she was never charged with any crime for that action. So, she has another baby…she claims it was stillborn as well. What does she do? She puts the body in a box and puts the box in a dumpster.
Two acts like this- only a crazy person will claim she’s innocent of murder. No one, and I mean NO ONE, has this happen to them twice! No one who isn’t evil (this woman IS, in fact, evil if the facts are as they seem) tosses their baby into a box and into a dumpster. That’s the act of an evil person.
I guess there’s often times no justice in this country. As the culture of death continues to be spread by secular forces around the nation and the world- we’re only going to see more of this. I see a day in the future where unwanted babies are simply murdered by their mothers who are ‘burdened’ by these infants…and the law won’t do anything to stop them.
Finally- how evil is Mark Geragos? This guy will try his best to get any murderer off as long as he can rake in the dough! What a despicable human being.
The Sheriff of LA County gave some remarks late today about his decision to release Paris Hilton from jail after a mere 3 days. According to the AP story, part of the reasoning was an unnamed medical condition and “overcrowding”.
Can someone explain the logic of this? I don’t think anyone on earth can. You break the law, a court/jury/whomever decides that jail time is the appropriate punishment…you get out in days because it’s too crowded? Why would any police force on earth even want to use “overcrowding” as an excuse. It seems to me, being no expert in legal or police matters, that this is sort of like saying, ‘we’re really bad at keeping crime down to a minimum…because of this inability to control the criminals in our county, our jails are literally overflowing with perps.’
Why would anyone admit that? To heck with the politicians and their excuses as to why the system can’t keep criminals in check- the excuse is just downright absurd. What if the prisons got REALLY overcrowded? Once they let all the small time offenders out, what next? Do they start letting rapists and murderers out? Why even send a person to jail if you’re just going to release due to some lame excuse? Isn’t part of the point of a jail to keep people from committing crimes because they won’t want to go to jail?! If they all know the jails are so crowded that they’re going to be released early no matter what they do (as long ass we’re talking smaller crimes), then doesn’t the sort of destroy part of the very reason we have jails?
Isn’t Hilton proof (she looked fairly calm to me arriving at the jail in the first place) that people understand that the element of fear is sort of diminished, since they know no matter what jail sentence they’re given, it’s going to be lowered?
Related- I’ve never understood the idea of cutting someone’s sentence. They always talk about how a person gets 5 years, but it’s not SO bad, they’ll be out in 2-3. Umm okay? Why the hell do we give them 5 years if we’re going to let them all out early?! “Good behavior?” What does that even mean? We’re rewarding criminals for behaving well in a building where they’re literally locked behind metal bars (or massive metal doors- depending on the jail/prison)…??? What other choice do you have- you’re locked in a room you can’t possibly get out of, and they’re are lots of guys making sure of that and they just happen to have weapons. There are rooms in the prison that are packed with firearms to make sure that if someone DOES somehow get out, they won’t be out for long and they will shoot to kill if they have to.
It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. None of it does. If overcrowding is such a big problem in so many places- here’s an idea, do what Sheriff Joe Arpaio does in Maricopa county and put them in friggin tents. I’ve never understood the concept of spending massive amounts of money on jails and prisons and such. Murderers are bad guys- you want to make sure they’re somewhere they can’t get out of. But don’t tell me that a $100 million building with 3 full meals a day, cable tv, and workout rooms are the only way to go. That’s just a big load of you know what. We’re all getting hosed in the process, and it’s not right.
Let’s fix the system. Let’s hold politicians and law enforcement to account when there are so many criminals that the jails overcrowd at all. Let’s hold these same people accountable when they spout off lame excuses for releasing someone who flaunts that law after a mere 3 days in jail. Let’s hold them to account for the piles of money they spend on putting these people away, then letting them go for acting like civilized human beings (as if acting like a sane person is something to be rewarded for!)
And finally- let’s make sure that the law is consistent for ALL people, no matter how much money they might have.
This stuff is actually sort of a joke…ten candidates on a stage is absurd. I was sort of torn on this- why allow only the top candidates? I feel the media is partly responsible for the top spots as it is…they push a few candidates all the time, no wonder they have the most support in current polls. All should get a chance to give their opinions and share their views. But, when you see them all together- you see this just doesn’t work.
A few thoughts- Giuliani…don’t much like him. The fact that he’s on his third marriage is upsetting to me personally. The fact that he’s pro-abortion is another aspect of his views I dislike a lot. I don’t think I can vote for a supporter of abortion. I also find his evasion of questions annoying. McCain and Romney are guilty of this as well. Sadly- the most open and honest candidates are those on the bottom of the polls. I’m sick of seeing a question asked and the top 3 guys dancing around with their answers.
Ron Paul- this guy is out of his mind. He doesn’t want us to lead the world basically…that’s the feeling I got from him. He wants an America that doesn’t intervene in international fights? Too bad our actions doing just that in WWII lead us to the spot as super power! I’d never support an anti-war “conservative.”
McCain- he just looks like a zombie to me. He’s constantly got this weird stare on his face- looks as if he’s staring at one spot or something. It’s a bit creepy. That and I forgot he voted against Bush’s tax cuts twice.
Tancredo has good ideas on immigration.
Personally- I think the best bet would be a Fred Thompson candidacy.
The top 3- McCain, Giuliani, and Romney are stepping over each other whining they wall want 30 seconds. Ugh…
I’m not very impressed at all. Out of this group- I’d vote for tough talking Tancredo.
UPDATE: I should mention I find Giuliani’s adoption blathering stupid when asked about abortion. He refuses to be clear and straight on his support for abortion, instead going on a tangent about how adoptions in NYC rose when he was mayor. I see that in the May 3 debate he claimed a 70% increase- I think tonight he said it was a 130% increase. It turns out, he’s full of it either way. FactCheck.Org has more info.
Note to Rudy- when asked about your support of killing soon-to-be-born babies…don’t go on and on about fictional adoption rates! ‘I support mothers killing babies, but hey- I’ll claim adoptions were up when I was mayor!’ Insulting.
Al Sharpton “debated” Don Imus’ radio producer on Hannity & Colmes tonight. No shock- he refused to answer any questions about his own racist or anti-semitic remarks. He refused to defend any of his own actions (he somehow thinks he’s the epitome of moral greatness, yet when asked about his many racist remarks- he dodges the question.)
Sharpton also refused to take on rap artists. Well- Imus’ producer asked Sharpton if he’d tell Hillary Clinton, who recently took $800, 000 from rap ‘artist’ Timbaland (who says “nigger” 24 times in one of his songs) to give Timbaland’s money back, what was Sharpton’s reply? He refused to tell her to give the cash back. Instead, he turned it into an attack on President Bush, complaining that Bush met with Puffy Sean Combs. Sharpton was asked again to stop dodging the issue and give an answer, but he proved himself the hypocritical coward we all know he is. Sad when you debate Don Imus’ radio producer and he makes you look like a coward.
Sharpton won’t ever take personal responsibility for his own racism. He’ll never give you a straight answer on his neverending race-baiting and hustling. He’ll always be a coward with a double standard. That’s the Sharpton we’ve known for so many years, why change now?