What’s interesting out there today?
The Zimmerman acquittal continues to lead. It’s playing out much the way you would expect. The baiters gotta bait, the biased media has to show their bias, and the truth isn’t really a concern. The mob rules.
From the head of the NAACP, via TheOrlandoSentinel
“In remarks to reporters after his speech, Jealous, a father of two, said the George Zimmerman acquittal brought him to tears.
“When I heard that….the first thing I did was walk over to my son’s crib and lift him up, and I listened to him breathe,” Jealous recalled.
“And then I began to cry,” he said. “No one can explain to me how, if this young boy [Trayvon Martin] was white, somebody wouldn’t be in prison right now.””
He then goes on to call it a modern day lynching. Somebody’s being lynched, but it’s not who he thinks it is.
Next up, don’t anger the mob. And with a CONTENT WARNING!!! for language. From TheDailyCaller
“Christian Hartsock, a conservative journalist and filmmaker, says he was assaulted and beaten down to the ground by a mob with repeated strikes to the face while reporting at a Trayvon Martin rally in downtown Oakland Sunday night.
“I have interviews and I have footage of [Trayvon protestors] chanting ‘no justice, no peace—%$&# &%$ pigs in your sleep,’” Hartsock told The Daily Caller. “One of them was an elementary schooler chanting with his mom.”
Of course elected officials like Holder and Rangel are getting in on the act. From Mediaite
“Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) told MSNBC’s Martin Bashir on Monday that the outcome of the trial of George Zimmerman would have been different had the defendant been black and not Hispanic. If that were the case, Rangel said, the question would be whether the arresting officers would have “beat him to death” before putting him in handcuffs on the spot.”
Like I said, baiters gotta bait. Here’s more from the head of the CBC. From HuffPo
“Congressional Black Caucus chair Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) issued harsh words over the verdict in the George Zimmerman case, arguing that a “young black boy” was put on trial rather than the man who killed him.
“Mr. Zimmerman was found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, he was not found innocent. All of the facts I think that I know, that I’m aware of, is that there was a young man walking in his neighborhood, walking to his house unarmed, and someone decided that he looked suspicious,” Fudge said during an appearance on MSNBC.”
Wait, what?
Just a quick check of the definition shows that she’s misinformed.
in·no·cent
(
n
-snt)
Now that we’re done with the drama queens and assorted agenda driven fanatics, let’s try a little truth, which none of the above are even mentioning since it doesn’t fit their agendas. The jury is beginning to speak. From CNN
“One of the jurors who acquitted George Zimmerman of killing Florida teen Trayvon Martin said she believed Martin threw the first punch in their confrontation and that Zimmerman probably feared for his life before shooting Martin. The juror spoke to CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360” on Monday.
The juror also said she believed Zimmerman’s “heart was in the right place” the night he killed Martin, but didn’t use “good judgment” in confronting him.”
It was always self-defense. He’s not the monster they’ve made him out to be. Neither was Trayvon, but denying that his actions didn’t contribute to his death is dishonest.
____________________________________________________
And in other news……. A trial that should be receiving way more airtime, yet oddly isn’t. Gee, I wonder why?…. 🙄
Nope, no bias here, move along…. From HotAir
“These tweets from Karen Townsend and Elizabeth Scalia reminded me that we have at least one trial in progress in the United States that the media has failed to sensationalize. It has issues of terrorism, betrayal, mass murder, and religious extremism within it, so why do we hear so little about … Nidal Hasan?”
“That prompted me to do a little research into the Fort Hood shooting court-martial to see how much coverage it has received so far. The answer is … not much. The pre-trial voir dire has entered its second week, but the only news outlet interested at this point is the Associated Press. The three updates today I did manage to find all came from the AP:”
Shhhhhhh… It’s a secret……
____________________________________________________
Which brings me to this next one. Isn’t it time to stop with the charades and insistence of neutrality and just have them state the obvious and confirm what we already know? From TheGuardian/UK
“Are mainstream journalists dedicated to journalism? This may seem like a strange question, especially since I’m a journalist myself, though independent and not tied to a corporate news organisation.
We are bombarded with details that claim to inform us about the world. From war and peace to politics and global affairs, reporters produce content that is consumed by the vast majority of the population. There are claims of holding power to account, questioning how governments, officials and businesses make decisions that affect us all. In reality, corporate and political interests too often influence what we see and hear.
Of course, profound failures regularly occur – not least during the global financial crisis, when most business reporters were far too close to bankers causing the lying and deceit. Or in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war, when too few in the media questioned the bogus rationale by the Bush administration and its allies about Saddam Hussein’s supposed WMD threat. More recently, many in the Washington media elite rallied around Barack Obama and his defence of mass surveillance after the explosive revelations of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.
But the media has singularly failed in holding itself to account. We, as journalists, should disclose for whom we vote and any other political affiliations that may affect our reporting. It’s the least we can do to restore trust in an industry that regularly receives low marks by its readers. A 2011 study by Edelman Public Relations found only 33% of the Australian public trusted the press, compared to an average of 49% globally. A 2013 study by Transparency International finds Australians rank political parties and the media as the most corrupt institutions in the state.”
____________________________________________________
Yes Please! 🙂
“The New York Times polling analyst Nate Silver believes that Republicans may have a shot at retaking the Senate.
“A race-by-race analysis of the Senate, in fact, suggests that Republicans might now be close to even-money to win control of the chamber after next year’s elections,” Silver writes on his “Five Thirty Eight” blog. “Our best guess, after assigning probabilities of the likelihood of a G.O.P. pickup in each state, is that Republicans will end up with somewhere between 50 and 51 Senate seats after 2014, putting them right on the threshold of a majority.””
____________________________________________________
If you’re a Republican, you resign in shame, if you’re a Democrat, sex scandals are resume’ enhancers. From HotAir
“Confession: It used to bug me when conservatives would dump on my hometown. I understood it wasn’t personal — red-state voters will obviously disdain a deep blue city. And there’s no disputing, whatever your feelings about NYC, that Bloomberg’s a cretin and the Yankees are evil. But still, you can’t listen to people dumping on the place where you grew up and not wince. It hits you where you live. Literally.
That’s how I felt. Until I saw this, and now, suddenly, I get it. I can finally watch “Cloverfield” and enjoy it without misgivings.”
“Strong support among black voters propels former Congressman Anthony Weiner to the top of the heap in the Democratic primary for New York City mayor and gives former Gov. Eliot Spitzer a 48 – 33 percent lead over Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer in the Democratic primary race for city comptroller, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today…”
Hey NY, you do realize that even California is laughing at you, right? I need a facepalm smiley.
____________________________________________________
Wandering Views 
meanwhile the Dem Party, the NAACP seems to be silence over the killing take place in Chicago.. Why is that?
LikeLike
AJ, Glad you get it, but the problem is broader than New York City. Hillary is certain to be the Yankee president from 2016-2024, and I would make Weiner the early favorite to be her successor.
LikeLike
Ricky, Hillary needs to get involved in a sex scandle to enhance her resume.
It’s a bit late for that.
LikeLike
Chas, You’re right. I think she gets some credit as an enabler for attacking the women her husband had molested.
LikeLike
To be fair let’s not forget about Mark Sanford.
LikeLike
I am very thankful for our governor, Rick Perry. Conservative and fearless, we will miss him when he is gone. I have a bad feeling that another member of the Wimp (Bush) family will bring his/her carpetbag to Texas.
LikeLike
KBells, the difference is that such escapades as Sanford’s do not enhance their political careers. For Democrats, it does. JFK was protected by the midia, as well as his brother Ted. But when Ted’s adulteries became known, it didn’t matter.
In the South, they generally don’t tolerate such things.
But Sanford had the advantage in that he didn’t have any acceptable challenge.
Under the circumstances, I would have voted for him.
LikeLike
Martin/Zimmerman — the juror felt Z feared for his life and so the killing was justified? Each time we fear for our life we are allowed to shoot to kill?? I would think its only justified if he had no other option and since he had the safety of his car, a cell phone and police on the way, he had options … “he didn’t use good judgment” and thus he killed someone… which is why manslaughter is an apt conviction. When you place yourself in a situation you are responsible for the results of that situation.
AJ — I’m amused you used a Guardian piece on media bias. The Guardian is about the most left wing daily in the English speaking world and the op-ed piece was speaking about corporate control of the news giving a pro-capitalist spin on the news.
And finally, lets face it, neither the right nor the left cares about sex scandals. We all like to pretend to be horrified about the immoral misdeeds of politicians but if he/she’s our guy/girl, we will vote for him, twitter pics and Appalachian walks will be forgotten.
LikeLike
HRW, how was he suppose to get to his car with Martin on top of him beating his head against the ground. and BTW, if you will look at the timeline of the phone calls you will see that Martin had options. He had more than enough time to get home without confronting Zimmerman. Seriously, did you actually see any of the trial?
LikeLike
From Wes Pruden:
“Why the all-female panel? Would defense lawyers think one or two men on the jury might make them more confident of a favorable verdict?”
I suspect the prosecution thought women would be sympathetic to the young black guy.
Turns out he had various drug offenses covered up by the school system.
He was not a good guy.
LikeLike
No, but he was (relatively still) a kid — going down what was probably not a good path.
I have a lot of confidence in juries who must set aside so much of what they hear — including aspects of a victim’s past — and focus quite narrowly on what can be known about the events at hand.
They likely were quite burdened with it all, and it sounds like they didn’t all agree at times, but were able to take a narrow look at the circumstances and the law.
Of course, it still strikes many as unjust, with emotions playing a big role.
I don’t know how Zimmerman will manage to resume any kind of a life unless this somehow loses traction over time or they find a way to get him on some other charge.
LikeLike
kbells, you say, in part “Martin had options. He had more than enough time to get home without confronting Zimmerman.”
But isn’t he, too, covered by the reasoning behind “Stand Your Ground”? If you are being followed by someone, and it is making you uneasy or fearful, have you not under SYG the right to confront that person, including to defend yourself using your fists, if that is the only weapon available to you?
Or do you only have the right to stand your ground if you are using a gun for defense?
LikeLike
When the whole trial is based on who started a fight I think both the background of both the victim and the accused matter. The is also true in a case where it is one person’s word against another. This is why I hammer my son on character, honesty and maintaining a good reputation,
LikeLike
Chas
“Turns out he had various drug offenses covered up by the school system.
He was not a good guy”
That is a classic “blame the victim”.
It’s possible, I think, to agree that there was insufficient evidence to convice Zimmerman of manslaughter, and even to agree that his actions (and probably Martin’s as well) were permissible under “stand your ground.”
It isn’t necessary to cast more blame on Martin, however. Other drug offenses, whatever they may be, don’t have bearing on what happened between Zmmerman an Martin that tragic night.
LikeLike
Character witnesses, however, and one’s background and past actions do give a sense of what may have happened when there is doubt. Also, the witnesses, some physical evidence and the phone calls give a picture of what happened. Most people seem to go more on what some media source is saying happened, than what was really presented at trial. Most of us could not see it all. Many saw a lot of it and realize it was not as many of the media painted it. It changed my mind and I believe the jury did what they had to do.
Those using this to rile people up and encourage more racial divide in this country are doing a grave injustice.
LikeLike
But isn’t he, too, covered by the reasoning behind “Stand Your Ground”? – I believe having someone following you, does not give you the right to jump the person under the Stand Your Ground Law.
LikeLike
that comment was from me
LikeLike
It isn’t necessary to cast more blame on Martin, however. Other drug offenses, whatever they may be, don’t have bearing on what happened between Zmmerman an Martin that tragic night.
—
if you can show that Martin has a history of attacking people..
LikeLike
I happened to be on a road trip during the trial. Almost every prosecution witness supported Zimmerman’s story. The fact that Zimmerman was charged shows that the State of Florida gave in to Mob pressure. Again the lesson for all people of all races in all states is simple: If you attack someone, break his nose, knock him down, pin him to the ground, and start to smash his head into cement, then you are likely to be shot if either your victim or a nearby Good Samaritan is armed.
LikeLike
If you will look at the transcript of the phone calls you will see that the dispatcher was asking him questions. He had to watch Martin to answer the questions. It is also obvious that Zimmerman got out of the truck before he was told not to follow and that he seemed to stop when he was told to.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/06/m-getting_the_facts_straight_in_the_zimmerman_case.html#.UeL8O3ftzB4.facebook
LikeLike
Anon,
Trayvon was on drugs when this happened, so yeah, his drug use is relevant.
“Martin’s autopsy shows he had tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is the active ingredient in marijuana, in his system, ABC News reported.”
Also, he was observed looking in the windows of homes he passed. It’s easy to see why the neighborhood watchman would think he was up to no good and possibly casing homes. Again, his past history of stealing is relevant.
http://www.ibtimes.com/george-zimmerman-trial-update-trayvon-reached-gun-zimmerman-told-sanford-det-chris-serino-1331747#
“Zimmerman said he “observed Trayvon walking between two sets of town homes and looking into a window of a town home. It was about that time that Trayvon and George made eye contact with each other,” according to Serino’s testimony.”
Even if he was found guilty, Zimmerman had numerous avenues of appeal to pursue, since the judge was so obviously biased in what she allowed and didn’t.
LikeLike
HRW,
Regardless of the Guardians motivations, it makes sense to me. They get to “expose” corporate interest in how the news is presented, we get to see when a leftist writer is just penning a hit piece for ideological reasons. Everybody wins, except those that are biased one way or another.
LikeLike
Good column by Thomas Sowell: :
http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2013/07/16/is-this-still-america-n1640987/page/full
LikeLike
No one but those in the courtroom heard and saw all the evidence. I don’t know what happened and whether Trayvon was an innocent little saint or not. I don’t know if Zimmerman was out to “bag a kill” or not. Only the jury got to decide. It seems to me that if there was any pressure put on the jury they would have found Zimmerman guilty to keep the riots from happening. Knowing that it must have been clear to them that the right verdict was innocent.
The Lady Justice has spoken. It isn’t up to any of us to second guess. I do know that attorneys I know watched part of the trial and said the prosecution had not case. I don’t have a law degree so I don’t know.
LikeLike
If Trayvon was looking into windows was that not trespassing. I certainly wouldn’t want a stranger looking into my windows.
LikeLike
Pastor Says Zimmerman Jury is Racist
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/pastor-says-zimmerman-jury-is-racist.html
LikeLike
The SYG law appears to me to be to a grown up version of the kindergarten chant I was here first. Anon raises a good point — who is covered here? Does not Martin have the right to push back when approached/followed/harassed etc by someone? Furthermore, the SYG law appears to be applied haphazard … a young women was denied the right to use the SYG when she fired warning shots at her abusive exhusband and instead the jury found her guilty in 12 minutes. (and as many will point out she was black)
Also, if Martin had so much control over Zimmerman that he couldn’t leave than how was he able to pull out a gun and with one clean shot kill Martin?
As for Martin’s drug use…. THC depending on how its taken can stay in the blood stream for over 24 hours and even more in body tissue and urine. Beyond the question if the marijuana was affecting Martin, he would have made him more relaxed not more prone to violence. As to how this illustrates his character …. 25% of all youth smoke marijuana at least once a year, it just shows he’s a normal 17 year old.
And if we boil this down to who is more dependable … we need to remember we are only hearing one side of the story and one in which there is very little collaboration. Finally, Zimmerman’s character doesn’t appear to be on the up and up also.
From what I hear on CBC, the jurors appear not to have known how big this trail was …. neither did I as it was barely a blip on Cdn news …. I think most Cdns assumed he was guilty. I though they would find him guilty of manslaughter and the judge would give him a slap on the wrist and he would be quietly paroled when the fuss died down.
LikeLike
AJ — I found your use of the Guardian ironic. The economic left posits that mass media is inherently right wind and corporate driven (with the odd exception — the Guardian and Toronto Star) . The examples of left wing bias provided by those on the right who scorn the MSM are usually examples of liberal social policy question. The American economic spectrum is very narrow whereas its social policy discussions have a larger range and thus the MSM appears to have left-right bias but in actuality its usually questions on social issues not economic. As the Guardian rightly points out, corporate interests rarely allow for any questioning of economic policy.
LikeLike
Oh a good article from American Conservative
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-monty-burns-republicans-food-stamps/
LikeLike
HRW – Zimmerman actually did not use Stand Your Ground as a defense. There was a lot of talk about it as the case was unfolding in the media, but it was ultimately not used as his defense.
LikeLike
hwesseli, I’ve read your posts from yesterday and today on the Zimmerman verdict. You’re not familiar with fundamental facts of the case. It’s weird. You were even corrected on a few points yesterday by Cheryl. You’re arguing straw men. Why?
LikeLike
So much of the reaction in the aftermath of this trial is purely emotion & even rage driven. People in the streets, saying it was all rigged, unfair. There’s no point in even trying to discuss the trial with people who are so incredibly wound up right now.
Maybe things will settle down; I’m hopeful the jurors will speak out more (and that people will be willing to listen and not just want to string them up). But they are probably mortified at this point and would rather not be in the limelight. I don’t blame them. The country is having one big tantrum right now and there’s really no reasoning possible in that atmosphere.
This is really disheartening.
A teenager is dead and that is absolutely tragic. So young, his parents left to grieve for the rest of their lives. Yes, Trayvon used drugs and was having problems, but very often that goes with the territory of being an adolescent in our culture, unfortunately. Teens are still molding their character and have a fair chance of getting turned around as they mature. Trayvon never had the chance.
In hindsight, I think we can all say that perhaps Zimmerman erred on the side of being overzealous. But frankly I can see why his suspicions were raised especially after they’d had break-ins in the complex. I don’t think he was being paranoid or racist. It’s not my style to be a neighborhood watch type, but he was doing what he thought was best in protecting residents.
The entire thing took a bad turn and wound up in the worst possible scenario. But I think both individuals were culpable in that. And I do believe that Zimmerman feared for his life at the time the shot was taken.
I’m not a lawyer, but it just seems to me that the jurors did what the law called them to do in this case.
We’ve all been disappointed and upset at the outcome of various trials, but that’s the system we have; it’s not perfect, it’s prone to human error. But I don’t think any of us would say it ought be changed. The jury was selected by both sides. They seemed to take their role seriously.
It’s time for everyone to accept and respect the outcome, even if they don’t like it.
LikeLike
A very good piece from Slate:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/07/trayvon_martin_verdict_racism_hate_crimes_prosecution_and_other_overreactions.html
LikeLike
Thanks for your comments, Donna. I am literally only reading about this on this blog, so it is interesting. Kind of a good time to be away from the US media.
LikeLike
HRW, here is the truth behind the poor lady who shot a “warning shot” at her abusive husband. The incident happen in his house. There was no restraining order at the time. He had already let her leave the house, when she got her gun from her car and returned. His children were in the adjoining room, right behind the wall she shot into.
http://mediatrackers.org/florida/2013/07/16/no-marissa-alexanders-conviction-was-not-a-reverse-trayvon-martin-case-in-florida
LikeLike
From powerline:
“Zimmerman’s lawyers did not invoke Florida’s stand your ground law. They did not rely on it; they did not argue it to the jury; they did not ask for a “stand your ground” pretrial hearing, which, in cases where the statute applies, can lead to dismissal of the charges against the defendant. There is no reason why anyone should ever mention Florida’s stand your ground law in connection with the Zimmerman case.”
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/07/in-zimmerman-post-mortems-confusion-reigns.php
Although it is being mentioned (a lot), of course:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/07/obamas-doj-demagogues-the-zimmerman-case.php
LikeLike