Steve

I'm sure if I were a member of Trayvon Martin's family I would think differently, but the impartial part of me does not demand Zimmerman's arrest. If after looking at all the facts and the facts would make me conclude there were grounds for an arrest and a trial, then I would feel differently. However, what does an arrest serve right now? Even if he's arrested he could possibly post bail right away and be right back out. What purpose does it serve other than to give the family and supporters some comfort?

One thing about the Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman case. I don't necessarily think that if Zimmerman followed him because he was black that he's a racist in the sense that I understand a racist to be. I've heard it said he has black friends. If I was a neighborhood watch guy and I saw a black teenager wearing a hoodie walking around in a predominantly white neighborhood (assumng the area was this way), I would be suspicious as well. Fact is a lot of crime is conducted by black teenagers. Same as if I'd be suspicious of a white teen ager with tattoos, long hair or a guy that looks like a biker. Not excusing his actions, but I don't think it makes him a racist. Labeling and stereotyping, okay. But you can still have plenty of black friends and still label some folks. Same as I may label a guy that looks like a good 'ol boy and assume he's some redneck cracker and he may not be but it doesn't make me anti-white. Not sure if that makes sense. So even though Zimmerman may have and probably did follow him because he was a suspicious black teen, emphasis on black, it doesn't make him a racist in my definition of the word. To other folks, maybe and such is their right.

If I was Obama's campaign manager, I would do a lot of fear mongering to the seniors in Florida. Arizona will never go Dem despite the seniors there but Florida could so I would stir up the seniors in Florida and it could swing that state his way.

With regards to the Trayvon Martin shooting. This has so much scrutiny, I have no doubt we'll get all the facts. Whether or not all the facts will lead to a resolution some of us agree with is another matter entirety. As far as health care. If its voted against by the justices, I think it helps the Dems more than the Republicans. Just my thinking. It removes something the Republicans can argue about. They can say talk about it not being good anyway but it loses its steam because it will no longer affect anyone. Just like how Clinton's defeated health care plan lost its steam as a campaign issue in '96. Health care cost and the distribution of health care is still a matter of national crisis in my opinion. My issues with the Republicans is that if they get the White House they will not address it or only offer token legislation that has no real effect. Dems, good plan or no, at least are trying to address it and see the severity of the issue.

So, its okay to drink any amount of alcohol or take any amount of prescription drugs that can alter your mental state and have a gun but if you smoke pot you can't? Okay, makes sense to me.

As for as I know the background check only looks at ones criminal background. If you are seeing a psychologist they are not allowed to divulge who is under their care. In Pennsylvania you can have a concealed weapon. I have a childhood friend who is a recovering addict and he has one. Every so often he goes out on a drug binge. So far, he has not been arrested so his permit is still safe. I've pleaded with him for his own safety and others to get rid of his gun. Its amazing you can be a drug addict or technically mentally unstable and can own a gun. While waiting for the facts, it doesn't look good for Zimmerman in my mind. He went after the teenager after being told not to. People who are minding their own business don't normally get into a fight unprovoked. Martin may have been a hot head or a truant but had Zimmerman simply listened it all could have been avoided. Martin has a less than stellar background compared to most. Geraldo has come under fire for saying kids shouldn't be wearing hoodies as it makes them look like criminals. It does to some people but people have a right to wear what they want. My dad wouldn't allow the sagging jeans, tattoos, earrings (although I got my left ear pierced in college). When I went to HS in the suburbs those kids complained cops stopped them if their hair was too long and they wore black concert t shirts, torn jeans and army jackets and smoked cigs. What I think is too much for me personally are members of Congress wearing hoodies in protest.

Just my guess but I think the facts may play out where they BOTH share blame and it will be a kinda 'wash', which will presumably be acceptable to the Zimmerman people but not to the Martin people who will see anything short of Zimmerman spending a considerable amount of time in jail (not probation, not less than say 3-5 years) will be seen as an injustice.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/school-expels-student-swearing-twitter-during-non-school-230832581.html School expels student for swearing on Twitter during non-school hoursGarrett High School in Indiana expelled a high school senior for cursing over Twitter during off-school hours. The tweet in question dropped the F-bomb a number of times, but was otherwise non-threatening. It was posted at 2:30 a.m. — a time when the student in question was most assuredly not at school. Still, despite the evidence, the school stands by its decision to expel the student. How did the school discover that one of its students dared to tweet an offending word during the middle of the night? Simple: Garrett High School's computer system actively tracks the social media presence of its students. Because the student logged on to his account during school hours, the system was able to find and report the foul-mouthed tweet, leading to the expulsion. "I don't think the school or anybody should be looking at [my account]. Because it's my own personal stuff and it's none of their business," said the student, who will be attending an alternative high school to finish out his school year and earn his degree. Sad, very sad. America is probably the last bastion of civil liberties out there. Maybe there are countries with written laws that are as good or better than America. I've not heard of one. Not saying there isn't but I haven't. The only reason why I seem to have more freedom in some countries than in America is because they don't have the technological ability to invade my privacy as the U.S. does. My big worry is we are now raising a generation of kids that are used to being monitored and will accept it lying down. They haven't experienced anything different. Sad. So sad. We have lost our freedom.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/27/10889896-anti-same-sex-marriage-groups-racial-wedge-strategy-revealed Anti-same-sex marriage group’s racial wedge strategy revealedthe Human Rights Campaign released internal memos from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), the nation's largest and most visible anti-same sex-marriage group, calling for the use of a racial wedge strategy to fight campaigns for marriage equality. “The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks -- two key Democratic constituencies,†one of the NOM memos says. “The documents, marked “confidential,†were unsealed yesterday afternoon in Maine by court order, as part of that state’s ongoing ethics investigation into NOM’s campaign finances. The memo spells out specific steps to enact, including: Find, equip, energize and connect African American spokespeople for marriage, develop a media campaign around their objections to gay marriage as a civil right; provoke the gay marriage base into responding by denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots…†Here is an excerpt on NOM’s Hispanic strategy: "The Latino vote in America is a key swing vote, and will be so even more so in the future, both because of demographic growth and inherent uncertainty: Will the process of assimilation to the dominant Anglo culture lead Hispanics to abandon traditional family values? We must interrupt this process of assimilation by making support for marriage a key badge of Latino identity - a symbol of resistance to inappropriate assimilation." NOM also spells out its plans for the 2012 presidential election: "From a political angle," the NOM document says, "this strategy will require electing a pro-marriage President in 2012." Strategies for defeating, ("sideswiping," as the document calls it) President Obama include "expose Obama as a social radical," and "raise such issues as pornography, protection of children, and the need to oppose all efforts to weaken religious liberty at the federal level." I think I know where they got this strategy from. Same sex marriage got defeated in California largely because of Blacks voting agianst it one of the Propositions. Blacks registered to vote in historically high numbers. As some of you know, a lot of voter registrations involves the black churches. The way the proposition was worded most voted against it. Don't get me wrong, Blacks don't like homosexuality typically and as a culture we are homophobic. However, unllike white fundamental churches, its not a cornerstone of Black churches. If I had to generalize black sentiment its, we, collectively don't agree with same sex marriage but believe people have the right to do what they want to do. There is also a generational thing as well. Older blacks are against it on all grounds and young blacks have a live and let live attitude towards it.

As you guys said, I will wait to hear all the facts. There are facts that support both. The physical evidence, if true, of Zimmerman's clothing and injuries. That is countered by a phone call Martin made during the incident. Also, Zimmerman being told not to pursue Martin by the Neighborhood Watch leader but did anyway. We dont' know how confrontational Zimimerman was. If Martin was fighting him, did Zimmerman say or do something to anger him into a fight? If so, then Zimmerman created the scenario which led to his having to shoot the youth. Martin didn't arbitrarily go up to Zimmerman and start fighting. If I confront someone and I have a gun and that person starts attacking me physically to the point I fear for my life, am I exonerated from fault or guilt if I initiated the contact and in a confrontational manner? I don't know the legalities of it. Martin may be a hothead and reacted strongly to being confronted. He may have overreacted to questioning and it could be argued, at a minimum shares some of the guilt. Its a tough call and we don't have all the facts. I have a sad feeling that if the facts go against Martin he will still be a cause celebre. It could play into the wider political debate. Sad if that happens.

One of the worst justices for some time. He rarely asks questions and pretty much votes whatever Scalia does. Not sure if he's even ever voted against Scalia. He's vehementally anti affirmative action and the sweet irony is that the elder Bush proposed him for the court for the sole reason he was Black. There was a story at the time that said when Bush was brought a list of candidates he told them to get rid of any of the names who were not black. He was the Black conservative replacement for Thurgood Marshall. That wouldn't be so bad if he was learned or offered some intellect to the court. Its hard to see what he offers. I'm not so much against him ideologically just his usefulness.

You know who keeps Rev Al and Jesse relevant? White media. They rarely get air time on major black hosted airwaves. Tavis Smiley, Oprah, etc. They are inivited by conservative black hosts to appear so they can be exposed but they never accept. I've said this before. Privately "we" (blacks) chuckle when we see Jesse spouting about something and Rev Al is laughed at outright. NO ONE I've ever met has ever openly supported Rev Al. None. They latch on to things that has wide black support like this current matter and the mass media thinks they are credible by association. The family in these matters are understandably distraught and desperate for justice and that is how Rev. Al and Jesse get involved. Jesse has always been known as a guy who supported things either for the notoriety and/or the payday. White America should be thanking Obama for marginalizing Jesse and Rev Al for them...lol.

Its no surprise to me that Rev Al was against Obama from the start. He made a statement very early on saying Obama had to prove himself and that he couldn't just take the Black vote for granted. Then there was Jesse Jackson's hot mic moment about wanting to cut Obama's nuts off for his speaking 'down' to Black folks at the churches he visited. Obama was not liked by Rev Al and Jesse for the right reasons. He was someone who was not going to play the race card. He was someone who did not need them. He was someone wouldn't play the victim card. The press never reported but back in '08 when Obama visited Black churches he would constantly tell them they need to start educating themselves and was on a self improvement message. I've said this several times in previous posts but Obama was not liked by the Black power elite in Congress and in state houses around the country. The black masses loved him but the Black pols had to come along kicking and screaming. They held out for Hillary as long as they could and Obama had the very rare honor of not being endorsed initially by the Congressional Black Congress. Other than Holder, which notable Black has had a prominent role in his cabinet? As far as this Trayvon Martin case, there are mixed reports. I sent online petitions by friends but I didn't sign them. I wanted to hear all the facts. I've heard some recent reports about his background and witnesses that supposedly said he was the agressor. However this is contradicted by the fact that physically Zimmerman had him by 100 pounds and he was on the phone during the incident with a female friend who contradicts his being the aggressor. I'll wait and see what the facts reveal. I totally disagree with the article saying that it will be used as a rallying cry in the election. I seriously doubt that. Its not Obama. Its not what he does. His comment aside, I don't think he'll use it.

Not disputing the legitimacy of the claim the Congress shouldn't constitutionally be able to force people to buy insurance but what worries me is the demonizing of any kind of national health care program. My view is its a crisis. I can't see any other way to put it. The Dems are the only ones willing to at least tackle the issue and what I don't like aobut the Republicans is their unwillingness to. I know why. Its the big money coming from big Pharma, the AMA, and the money from the health care industry that was poured into the anti Obamacare commercials was telling. You can almost bet that that just about anything that the health care industry as a collective is against or for is ultimately bad for the average American. Can't blame them. They are acting in their own best interest. I would were I in there shoes. However its up to the elected officials to act in ours.

I hope your're feeling better BT and you're not seriously injured. Speedy recovery.

Here's a question. Isn't social security something that the government forces us to buy into? And is the main difference is that its not forcing us to buy from a private company? Or can we opt out of SS? I've heard we can but don't really know but if we can't then its the same tihng in theory isn't it? I saw a news show on Obamacare. I didn't really understand it before so couldn't say I was against it or for it without really knowing the nuts and bolts. The person who presented seemed to be impartial and overall it seemed like an improvement on what we have now. Perfect? No, but it seems an improvement. My personal opinion about the opposition by it by the masses of conservatives and republicans was based partialy on the powers that be demonizing national health care and successfully having most Americans think its communistic, socialistic and makes us closer to a socialist state and the second is that it was hated simply because it was proposed by Obama. Any Democrat would get the same reception. Although I have no proof I am williing to bet had a Republican proposed the same thing it would be heralded. From what I understand no one has a problem with a state doing it (like Romney did in Mass) but not on a federal level. What's the friggin' difference?

Just saw a CNN special on the cost and distribution of health care in America v. other places in the world. Lot of it makes sense and it just seems that we haven't seriously considered certain things. I think its because of the stranglehold the health industry (big Phara, AMA, etc.) have on the Congress. Consider lasik. I had it done about a dozen years ago and it cost me about 4k. The technology has gotten better and the cost have dropped considerably. Why? True competition. We don't have it in the medical industry. I don't see why we can't have a truly independent and knowledgeable panel that makes a report for the President and the Congress. We can make great changes to make it better but it won't happen as long as the powers that in that industry are left out of the decision making.

Just finished seeing 'Chronicle'. Not bad. A bit formulaic but not bad.

The Tottenham game? Yeah, I saw it too.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/03/23/wisconsin-lawmaker-you-are-being-beaten-just-remember-things-you-love-about-your Wisconsin Lawmaker: If You Are Being Beaten, Just Remember the Things You Love About Your HusbandInstead of leaving an abusive situation, women should try to remember the things they love about their husbands, Representative Don Pridemore said. "If they can re-find those reasons and get back to why they got married in the first place it might help," he told a local news station. Pridemore -- who, coincidentally, is a co-sponsor of Republican state Senator Glenn Grothman's "being single causes child abuse" bill as well as a controversial voter ID bill that was ruled unconstitutional earlier this week. So, God forbid his son in law is beating his daughter's ass and she comes to him he's gonna say to "re-find those reasons and get back to why they got married?" I once left a church when a pastor admitted in a private convo with me and a couple others that there was a guy once who was a pedo and they prayed for him and 'spoke' to him but didn't tell the police. So, how do you explain to the kid and the next kid that you had a chance to alert the authorities and didn't tell anyone? If I knew who the guy was I'd have went to the cops no problem at all. If it was my kid or someone I knew I couldn't live with myself. If it was a friends kid, I'd help him beat the guy's ass. Sorry, its not pc to say that but I would.

All I can ask for in that case is a thorough, unbiased investigation and if that happens, then whatever the result is fine. I heard the tape and the alleged racial slur by the guy (isn't he latino and not white? even though his name is Zimmerman or was I mistaken by news reports). No way I'd accept what I heard as conclusive. Maybe voice experts can make a better assessment. If it is then it changes things a little. The march thingy is a bit too much for me. Especially the re-appearance of Rev. Al. It wasn't even one of his better diatribes. Obama commented on it and I have to say its okay to be sympathetic to the family to the slay boy but I thought 'if I had a son he'd look like Trayon' is just a wee wee bit racially tinged for a President. I may be making too much of the comment. I will stay this on a personal level. As a black kid you experience being questioned by cops and others when you're not in your neighborhood. I can understand that there is a certain amount of fear if not suspicion. With so much crime committed by young blacks its a valid concern. Here's a secret. Other blacks are scared of young blacks. However, be that as it may we all have personal rights and libertries and public sidewalks and streets are just that: public. I can't tell you how many times I've been stopped by cops and told to leave a neighborhood. Neighborhoods I had every right to be walking in. I may have been taking a short-cut. I may have been visiting a friend. It could have been for any number of reasons. Whatever they were I had a right to be there, I was certainly not the type to talk back to cops. My mom was very very fearful of her sons being shot by cops. If I talked back to any cop I'd get a beating....by my Mom. Years later I learned she witnessed a cop in our neighborhood wailing on a kid with his baton for what she saw as an overuse of force. As for clothing. The problem with the hoodies and such is that the clothing is popular with everyone. When I was a kid the thugs and the good kids wore the same style. It was a style of oru culture. I was an A student and wore the same style as the kids that were in Juvy hall. Cops that had years on the force understood that. Some new cops who grew up in the suburbs didn't and hence a lot of the problem. Its the same everywhere. I spent time at schools where the pot heads and suburban trouble makers wore the same black rock concert t shirts and ripped jeans and long hair as the good kids. it was the style of that nieghborhood. Anyway, its a tragic case and a suspicious one. Neighborhood watch with a gun and demanding information from someone who doesn't legally have to answer. We'll have to wait for the investigation to be completed but my guess is the kid responded verbally to being questioned about his reasons for being there. The adult should have called 911 if he feared for his life or thought the kid was too suspicious.

HH, there is soooo much we can cut out of the government entirely or divert those cuts to other programs. There are a ton of agencies and sub agencies we either don't need at the federal level (and can be done at the state level---Education Dept perhaps) or should be greatly decreased. We should at least start with the waste, make the cuts and then and only than look to revenue increases aka tax increases. Part of the cuts would be loopholes in the tax code for rich people and corporations. I also think there are certain cuts that we should do to encourage domestic spending. For example, encourage people to vacation internally and not travel outside the country to spend your vacation dollars. Work with the states and have a maortaorium on state and federal park fees or at least greatly reduced for families and couples. If they make a reservation, charge them only so much. Cut the visa amounts and red tape for foreigners who wish to vacation in America for example. As for as a budget deficit, its usually not a good thing but in these tough times I would be okay with a moderate deficit depending on the reason. For example, infrastructure. Shovel ready projects as well as tech projects. I would have no problem if a trillion or two is spent on those types of projects because we reap the benefits by putting people to work. Americans going to work, in America and these jobs can't be exported. Same with if the states and the federal government agree to convert all or a significant portion of their fleet of government cars to 100% American company made hybrid cars. Hundreds of thousands of cars needed and a ready market for detroit. Good, union, blue collar jobs and the suppliers as well. It will also get the environmental folks on our side so they co-sign.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-marine-critical-obama-faces-charge-012104515.html The Marine Corps on Wednesday notified a sergeant who has been openly critical of President Barack Obama that he is violating Pentagon policy barring troops from political activities and that he faces dismissal. Camp Pendleton Marine Sgt. Gary Stein started a Facebook page called Armed Forces Tea Party to encourage fellow service members to exercise their free speech rights. He declared a few weeks ago that he would not follow the unlawful orders of the commander in chief. Stein also criticized Defense Secretary Leon Panetta for his comments on Syria. Stein, a nine-year member of the Corps, said he did nothing wrong and planned to fight the charges. He had applied to extend his service, which was set to expire in a few months. "I'm completely shocked that this is happening," he said. "I've done nothing wrong. I've only stated what our oath states that I will defend the constitution and that I will not follow unlawful orders. If that's a crime, what is America coming to?" The Marine Corps said in a statement Wednesday that Stein's commanding officer ordered a preliminary inquiry on March 8 after receiving allegations that Stein posted political statements about Obama on Facebook in violation of the Pentagon's directives. "After reviewing the findings of the preliminary inquiry, the commander decided to address the allegations through administrative action," the Corps said. Stein said in addition to being discharged, he would have his rank reduced to lance corporal if he is proven to be in violation of the rules. He said he was removed from his job at the Marine Corps Recruiting Depot in San Diego on Wednesday and given a desk job with no access to computers. Normally, I'm a free speech guy. I know the military is a unique institution though. If this type of posting was applied to Bush and others as well, then I'll agree he shouldn't. Traditionally, high level military officers are publicly non political. No one knew officially what party Ike or Colin Powell supported till they did.

HH, I'm no big fan of big government programs. I like the idea of states taking a bigger role or even all of things like affordable health care and education (basically lessen the federal government's involvement). Every state is different. They each have unique needs. Florida could fashion its state wide program that's heavily focused on the elderly. Hawaii, I believe is the 'youngest' state or it was years ago and so they can focus on pediatrics. The states are incapable. Not the federal government's fault but they are worst spendrifts than the federal government. There is money for major projects. You could amply fund so many things by halving the defense budget and that thing is very, very bloated. Corporate welfare is three times as big as social welfare when you add in subsidies, tax abatements, etc. That's a few hundred billion easily. Earmarks, pork barrel stuff are at least in the tens of billions if not hundreds. The rich do not pay the tax rate that is for their tax bracket. The rich have enough loopholes to pay a lower rate than middle income families. I'm not saying I'm in favor of a high tax rate. I just want it fairer. I have no problem lowering the top tax rates for individuals and corporations as the Republicans suggests but ONLY if they take away the loopholes. They won't. Anyway, as I said, I am not advocating big government programs but the money is there to fund them. We're just wasting it/spending it elsewhere. Another source of an extra few hundred billion a year is a national lottery. Weekly pots would be in the billions (Ben Franklin originally proposed one) and it only taxes the williing. My main problem with the Republicans is they are as much as hypocrites as anyone. I know you're not a huge social conservative guy but many of your fellow Republicans are. They don't want the government to force people to buy something but they want the government to force people to accept or deny people social conservatism things that are rooted in religion: marriage. abortion. prayer. drugs/pot. etc.