Bill Frist, a cardiothoracic surgeon, made a fool of himself by diagnosing intact brain function in Terry Shiavo because of an old video recording. Frist ignored the brain imaging documenting sevee cerebral tissue loss. Bill Mahrer does not trust Western medicine and has apparently come across a dietary, exercise and marijuana coonsumption regime that keeps the satirist healthy.

During the SARS outbreak, Mahrer essentially said that those who had fallen ill became ill because of a lack of adnerence to the Mahrer dietary regime. The science indicated that the risk of infection during air travel was based upon seaing arrangement. Sitting in the row with a SARS infected person or three rows in front or three rows in back of a SARS infected person on an airplane created the greatest risk of infection. Mahrer chose to ignore the science in favor of his personal belief system.

On his most recent show, Mahrer discussed the H1N1 vaccine with Bill Frist. Frist pointed out that the science indicated that pregnant women were at high risk of death if they contracted the H1N1 virus. Mahrer stated that he would not advise a pregnant woman to get vaccinated. To defend his position, Mahrer quoted a decades old statement about live vaccines from the late Jonas Salk.

The data suggests that a pregnant woman who becomes infected with H1N1 is more likely to die of her illness than a person undergoing triple bypass surgery for coronary artery disease. It is curous that on some scientific issues, Mahrer is as much of a Luddite as some religious Fundamentalists.

Mahrer made Frist appear to be the only rational person in the interview..

http://crofsblogs.typepad.com/h5n1/2009/10/extraordinary-death-toll-of-h1n1-in-pregnant-women.html

I browse HipHop Republican periodically to see what some young mostly African-American and Latino Republicans are discussing. There is an interview with a Progressive Repblican candidate for the Senate from Montana, Dr.A.J Otjen. Read the discussion of gay marriage, abortion, and single payer health care.

It is very likely that Dr Otjen would face a great deal of pressure from her GOP senate colleagues, but doesn't sshe seem better on paper than max Baucus?
---

HipHopRepublican.com sat down with Professor Agnes J Otjen, a Progressive Republican and Candidate for US Congress. She is seeking a seat in the great State of Montana. Currently A.J. Otjen is a Professor at Montana State University.

 

EXCLUSIVE HHR INTERVIEW: A.J. Otjen

HHR Blog: Tell the readers of HHR Blog a little about yourself...where are you from...where were you born...where were you raised?

A.J. Otjen: I was raised in Enid Oklahoma by a Republican family. My grandfather William John Otjen was the Republican candidate for governor and senator for Oklahoma. I remember wearing "I like Ike" buttons as a small child and my mother being a "Bellmon Bell". My parents were divorced when I was 15. I think Mom was my hero as she paid for all of my college but always told me I was on my own the day I graduated and she meant it. She had the greatest friends that had parties and played bridge. The day she died I was able to tell her that she had been the best mom. That is all she wanted to know. That she could be proud of what she left behind. She also gave me a love of horses and a believe that I could do anything I wanted. Her name was Eva and I am named after her mother Agnes.

HHR Blog: How have your feelings about the City and the State you currently live in influenced you're r decision to run for office?

A.J. Otjen: The job I have of teaching has influenced me quite a bit. My students seem to ask me my opinions and what they think their future will be like. And Montana has such an incredible environment and so many resources that should be used to the benefit of all of us. The fact that we live in such a transformative age is staring me in the face and the current Republicans are not saying the right things or having the right influence. But I'm getting started a bit late. I fortunately have had deep principles developed over a long time, and just need to apply a few details to them.

HHR Blog: What is your current job and what are your duties in the current job you hold?

A.J. Otjen: I'm on the faculty of marketing at the college of business at Montana State University in Billings. I teach people how to make a profit in a market economy. I did it for 25 years, successfully. Then I retired to become a professor in God's country. I worked in agriculture, technology, sports, tourism, real estate, the marketing of those things. And now I have horse property. I understand the limits of water and pastureland. I think this should all be of benefit to Montana.

HHR Blog: What type of family were you raised in, and how has your upbringing shaped your political views?

A.J. Otjen: I grew up in a typical middle class difficult family. I made my own living immediately after graduating with a bachelors and paid for my own MBA at night, and eventually made it to the VP level of a fortune 500 company. I was the head of a household, and currently support myself successfully. As a woman this shaped my political views from conservative to moderate to progressive moderate. I would say that my parents were upper class in their child hoods or had upper class manners. But had middle class values. Two wars did that to them. I have extremely liberal views when it comes to human rights.

HHR Blog: Where did you attend College and what was the highest degree you attained?

A.J. Otjen: I have two graduate degrees or a terminal degree (doctorate). I attended Mizzou, University of Colorado for the MBA and back to University of Missouri but in Kansas City for the Doctorate. I worked for Sprint Corporation at the time. The HQ was right across the street from the KC campus so I seemed silly not to cross the street at night to study and go to class. It was writing the dissertation that was the hard part. I had been writing memos and emails for many years by then.

HHR Blog: What were your experiences like as a College Student compared to your experiences as a Professional in the work-place?

A.J. Otjen: I must confess it is easier to write an email than a term paper. And two of my degrees were earned before the invention of personal computers. The doctorate was much easier thanks to Microsoft. But I love the smell of a campus. I think it is the green grass. And great corporate moments are fleeting. Plus I love to sleep in late. But doing the job in real life is more fun than learning it in the classroom. I think that is why I try to give my student as much actual experience now that I teach. It took years to reach a level where I was experienced enough to be a good manager of people in the corporate world, where it took about three years to be a good teacher....granted after 25 years of working. Still, now that I'm a professor, there are times when I wish I could just pick the students I want to teach like I could pick the employees I wanted to manage. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.

HHR Blog: If you have traveled throughout the United States, please share with our readers what you were able to ascertain about the various cultures of The United States?

A.J. Otjen: I traveled the best way, working for the Potato Farmers of America, having them show me the land and the best historical sights in the area, or travelling for them and getting to eat at their expense. Food and music is usually the best way to experience the local culture. The best part about New York City, besides the theatre, is its different neighborhoods from Harlem to China Town. The South has the Cajun dancing and food, and architecture, Savannah and Charleston, and Jazz Jazz Jazz. I prefer the Gulf to the Atlantic in terms of the breeze. I like Main's lobster the best. And Pennsylvania's farm land is about the prettiest in the country. In Colorado, a hidden jewel is the San Luis Valley soaked in sunlight and brisk air and hardly a soul, where there is the international crowd in Vail just a hundred miles a way. If you really want to understand America, you need to meet our natives from the SW to Montana to Seattle and listen to the drums. I have friends on the east coast who have gone to Europe several times but have never seen our American west. As for California..,,,head north. No offense LA. But those trees will make you cry.

HHR Blog: How do the various cultures of The United States compare to the dominant cultures in your home state?

A.J. Otjen: Many in Montana think you have to be born here. It is not true. Just like in all America. We are all immigrants. I'm a daughter of the American Revolution...can you believe that. And a first family of Virginia..what a snob. My nephew just married a Cherokee/Choctaw and I say it is about time we had some Oklahoma native blood in our family after having been part of the family that helped bring that state into the union. NUTZ I say.

In fact Cherokee and Choctaw are from Florida and North Carolina and part of the Five Civilized Tribes. We are all immigrants. Talk to the Crow and Cheyenne in terms of who belongs to Montana. The more we all mix it up the more beauty I see in our skin and hair and healthy figures. Maybe the dominant culture in Montana is farmers and ranchers. But there are Germans, and French, and natives and Mormons that settled this land. There is big money and poverty. I don't think anyone dominates here any more. We all want good things for each other if we think about it.

HHR Blog: What do you like the most about The United States?

A.J. Otjen: The constitution. The land. The history. The sacrifices made to get to where we are today. The potential of our future. The bravery of most of its citizens.

HHR Blog: What would you like to change the most about The United States and how would you accomplish this goal?

A.J. Otjen: I want to change the ugly rhetoric. I want the populace to be educated with the truth. I want the populace to be healthy. I want our economy based on green energy and technology that makes us more healthy and educated. I want information available to the entire world that is honest.

HHR Blog: What attracted you to your current political party? Did some occurrence in your life influence you in your choice of your current party affiliation?

A.J. Otjen: Yes, it was a part of my family when I was very young. Teddy was great. And now I want it to be good again. It makes me mad that everyone says there are no smart Republicans. It makes me mad that there are so many that make us look like fools.

HHR Blog: If you served in the Military which branch of the military did you serve in, and how has this shaped your views as a politician?

A.J. Otjen: No but my grandfather and father and nephew served in the army proudly. As a politician, it makes me want to stand up and fight for the constitution and not let fear tactics work in our politics. We are a brave nation. How dare we give up any of our rights in the name of fear of terror. Too many have died to protect our rights.

HHR Blog: What does your political agenda for both your constituency as well as the Nation consists of?

A.J. Otjen:I go into most of it on my website.

HHR Blog: What are your views on Gay Marriage?

A.J. Otjen: I am for it. I have many gay friends who deserve to be happy and have been together for a long time. I do not judge people based on their sex lives and I don't understand people who do. I believe that all people have a right to privacy and a right to pursue happiness. If I have a right to marriage than every one does. In fact, Republicans should agree on this issue as something with which the government should not interfere as it is our creed to protect individual rights.

HHR Blog: What are your views on abortion?

A.J. Otjen: I believe that a woman is a human that is being, a human being, and that she is the one with the right to privacy. The unborn is dependent on the mother. The government has no right to intrude upon this woman's right. The best way to reduce the number of abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancy in the first place.
In terms of third trimester medical terminations, I can't imagination that a pregnant mother wants to lose their child. It must be an incredible medical tragedy. A horrific situation. Has anyone ever known a mother that must lose their child in the third trimester, it is horrible. God bless the doctors still available to these poor mothers in those horrible private situations. Anyone who calls them killers is a disgrace.

HHR Blog: What are your beliefs and policies regarding Healthcare?

 A.J. Otjen: The plan should work on health first. Such as taxing products or industries with high fructose corn syrup or saturated fats first. And then giving that money to support inner city vegetable gardens and back paths and more recess in school systems. Then I want to keep the health care providers in a free market where users can see the prices and shop around. Once they shop for MRIs as an example, they choose the cheapest. If the doctor says the hospital costs $5000 but the clinic down the street costs $500, then they should get their MRI down the street. Then they can pay their bill via a collective payment system that is a single payer system supported by the public.

HHR Blog: What are your views about the economy and effective ways to pull the United States out of the current recession it is in?

A.J. Otjen: Like Richard Nixon, I am a Keynesian. I believe in government spending us out of a crises. I explain this much more on my website.

HHR Blog: What do you think about the United States' involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan?

A.J. Otjen: I want to get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan and go after criminal swith intelligence and law enforcement and allies. I only want to be in a war as a defense, not offense.

HHR Blog: What are your policies concerning housing, financial assistance, and education for the low-income poor of the United States?

A.J. Otjen: The problem with capitalism is that it concentrates where there is profit. There is little investment in the low income areas because there is little profit in these areas. Jack Kemp had a good idea about enterprise zones. We need to find a way to get a good return on investment in these areas. For everyone involved. People need to be able to buy a home, enjoy property gains, own businesses, educate children. How do we end the cycle: is it drugs and health that prevents a return on investment? The native Americans have said they need their own banking system. Maybe that would make a difference.

HHR Blog: What do you believe to be the future of education for our Nation's children and our youth (18-22 yrs. Old)?

A.J. Otjen: It must be great. We have to get it there. We have no option. I am for an expansion of public education. I am a professor. And I am against performance pay for teachers. I don't want teachers to compete against each other and there is not a good way to evaluate them.

A.J. Otjen: I see myself back as a professor. I am hoping to start a movement for younger progressives proving that we can win.

HHR Blog: If you were to run for President of the United States who would your ideal running mate be and why?

A.J. Otjen: One of you. Somebody young.

HHR Blog: Finally, Why do you call yourself a Progressive Republican? Is not progressivism an ideology more in line with the Democrat Party?

A.J. Otjen: No, look at Teddy. And Democrats are not very good at getting things done with the government in terms of the budget. They are good at passing social law issues but they usually mess up the end game.

HHR Blog: Who is your favorite Republican President and why?

A.J. Otjen: Teddy....saw the future of capitalism and tried to fix it and loved our national parks

HHR Blog: You voted for Barack Obama for President why did you do this?

A.J. Otjen: I think he is the right man for the right time. He has vision, he seems honest. And I think he will make the world love us again. I trust him with our foreign policy.

HHR Blog: Are there things in which you disagree with President Obama on?

A.J. Otjen: I am not sure anyone quite understands the banking finance issue. I have lots of degrees on this and I can't quite get what he is doing. Or what I would yet. I thought we should have input more cash instead of more credit into the market. And I don't get what any of them are doing on the health care plan. But we should give him a chance, it is early. I believe in a loyal opposition. And our Republican leaders are being really silly.

HHR Blog: We wish you much success in your campaign it was a pleasure. Thanks for sitting down with HipHopRepublican.com

Thank you for your time.

To learn more about Dr. A.J. Otjen's campaign visit her Campaign site at http://otjenforcongress.com/

Interview from:

http://hiphoprepublican.com/feature/2009/10/02/exclusive-hhr-interview-aj-otjen-progressive-republican-for-congress/

An apology has recently been posted by a TPM blogger who had viewed the abode of another blogger using Google Earth. Hopefully the matter will settle down.There was much passion demonstrated in posts concerning the transgression.

The person who had his home viewed by Google Earth had discussed forming a group of moderates to take Republican Party the rabid Conservatives who have taken over the GOP. Despite the fact that no one can point to any of these so-called moderates, many who give out atta-boys for the deep thoughts expressed by the GOP revolutionary. His idea is simply brilliant-brilliant.

While the imaginary GOP invasion goes on in the blogosphere, the actual GOP is successfully destroying ACORN and is trying to destroy SEIU using bogus information. Pillars of the Progressive community are being attacked in the real world.and Progressive bloggers are concerning themselves with side issues playing political Second Life.

Where is all the passion generated by the blog post? The GOP can get their folks out at the townhalls, Where were the Progressives. Are progressives playing Halo3? The Progressives are blogging about outrageous things happening on the blogs. The Progressives are writing clever blogs taking pot shots at Obama. Progressives are fighting themselves online trying to prove who is more Progressive than the other. The Progressives are giving the real world to the Conservatives. The Consevatives are playing the real world version of Grand Theft Auto ACORN has already been carjacked and wounded.

Are progressives going to wake up and do anything? Anybody going to do something about Baucus, Ben Nelson, and Blanche Linoln and their action in the Senate today?

Anybody doing something to support ACORN or SEIU?

No!.

But like the blogger who is going to transform the GOP, we got high hopes.

Next real clever Obama bash in 5...4...3...2...1

Rep Seve King (R-Iowa) stood beside a painting of Barack Obama as King mumbled some gibberish on the House floor. The painting, with an American flag in the background, was a powerful image of Obama. Anyone know where I can get a copy or a t-shirt version of the painting? Or should I just contact King's office directly to thank him for displaying the patriotic image?

Why didn't Obama just mind his own business and not ask David Paterson to step down? Did Rahm Emanuel just have nothing better to do than to interfere in New York politics? It turns out that New Yorkers asked the Presdent and Rahm to intervene. the administration was asked to intervene by members of Congress and state legislators who raised serious alarms about a potential Paterson drag on the ticket in 2010. As Politico notes:

The issue is no small matter in a state with an appointed senator running statewide for the first time in 2010 and more than a half-dozen vulnerable House Democrats-- including five freshmen.

According to interviews with New York Democrats, the request for intervention came from both Albany and Washington, where Paterson's precarious political standing unnerved many officeholders who are worried about the prospect of running in a midterm election with a deeply unpopular incumbent at the top of the ballot.

"Clearly, the situation in New York is unusual and requires leadership at a greater level than anyone in New York can provide," said Rep Dan Maffei, a first-term Democrat who occupies a seat in upstate New York. "I, for one, welcome the president's involvement."

The request for Paterson to step aside and not seek a full term, multiple sources said, has been in the works for weeks.

"It's hard to argue that he can excite a lot of voters at this point," said one New York House member.

Two senior Democratic officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said members of the House delegation had sent a strong message to White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel in closed-door meetings that it was time for Paterson to move on.

These Democrats said their chief concern was that with Paterson on the ballot, the party would see a sharp drop-off in turnout across the state. 

"I think that the role that Paterson plays in all of this is that he can affect turnout," said Lee Miringoff of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion. "When you have the top of the ticket not running well, that affects everyone."

Freshman Democratic Rep. Mike McMahon, who won a Republican-leaning Staten Island-based seat in 2008, agreed with that assessment.

"I think, as a quintessential down-ballot candidate, as a freshman seeking reelection, I am, of course, concerned about the top of the ticket because the top of the ticket determines turnout," he said. "I am pleased that the White House is concerned about the issue."

"It's important that we as a Democratic team have the best team up and down the ticket, and that's what we're doing," said McMahon.

Tuesday brought more bad news for Paterson, with the release of a Siena College poll showing his favorability rating at just 29 percent and only 14 percent in favor of reelecting him.

Paterson isn't the only prominent Democratic officeholder whose election prospects are clouded. Polling on the reelection prospects of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) regularly generates highly unfavorable data. New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick are also in jeopardy of losing their seats.

But the rationale for intervening in New York is different. The fear among some legislators is that Paterson stands to affect the party up and down the line in a state with an unusually high number of recently elected members who have not yet locked down their seats. The list begins with Kirsten Gillibrand, the Democratic senator he appointed in January to fill Hillary Clinton's vacant seat.

Gillibrand's own poll ratings have been weak -- only 26 percent of voters participating in Marist's September survey approved of her job performance -- and there is concern in some Democratic circles that former Republican Gov. George Pataki could challenge her in 2010.

"The White House would consider it a huge disappointment losing a Senate seat in New York," said Miringoff. "It's not what you want as a party."

Gillibrand declined to discuss Paterson when approached by POLITICO off the Senate floor Tuesday evening. Her spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

Aside from Gillibrand, there are seven House Democrats who face potentially competitive reelection bids, including Rep. Scott Murphy, who won Gillibrand's old House seat in a special election earlier this year by roughly 700 votes.

"In New York, in as challenging a year as 2010 inevitably will be because of historical trends, you want to make sure that you are strong ... and that you don't have to focus on [it]," said Maffei.

"If the leader of the party, the president, has to worry about New York House seats, New York Senate seats -- not to mention the governor's seat itself -- then it will be a lot of resources ... that can't be used in other places where we will face a challenge in 2010," he said.

And there is also significant concern within the party that, should Democrats lose a host of state legislative seats next fall, it would significantly weaken their position in the upcoming fight over redistricting.

"If you have a weak top of the ticket, not only would we lose some of our House members, we would lose some of the state Senate seats, and if we lose the Senate, we lose control of redistricting," said the House member.

Publicly and privately, Paterson has resisted the calls from the White House to stand down. On Tuesday, he told reporters defiantly, "You don't give up."

Rep. Steve Israel, a Long Island Democrat, said he came away from a five-minute phone conversation with Paterson with the feeling that Paterson was "steadfast" in his determination not to back down in the face of pressure.

"He didn't give me any indication that he is packing his bags," said Israel.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E96F9377-18FE-70B2-A8218ECC24EDEEC0

It seems that concerned New Yorkers asked Obama for aid.

This is one of those moments where one is truly left speechless. HuffPost has a clip of Glenn Beck telling Katie Couric :1) That he might have voted for Hillary Clinton over John McCain and 2) That Barack Obama is better for the country than McCain would have been. We don't get to see all that preceded and follows but the comment is stunning? The entire interview will be broadcast tomorrow.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/21/glenn-beck-obama-better-f_n_294052.html

Is Beck using drugs? Does Beck suffer from delusional states, or is he really being honest? We have to wait until 7:00PM EST Tuesday to see the interview at Couric's new online news website

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/katiecouric/main504423.shtml

Jimmy Carter told Brian Williams that much of the hardcore dissent against President Obama was race-based. This sentiment was not uncommon in the African-American community. No one seemed to recall armed protesters arriving at Clinton or GW Bush meetings. One expects much fury on both sides of the issue to be heard in the MSM today.

I generally don't watch "Morning Joe" because  I don't learn anything new. But today, following Carter's comments, I was ready to be entertained. I wasn't disappointed. Joe Scarborough's panel consisted of by Mika B, Maria Batiromo, Mike Barnacle and Jonathan Capehart. What I have come to expect from "Morning Joe" is a detailed rationale of how crazy lefties had screwed something up. The segment I saw followed the expected pattern.

Joe told of being from the South and having been on an elevator when someone made a racist comment, all heads, presumably White, turned towards the offender in disgust. According to Scarborough, Carter lives in a bubble and does not know the modern South. I should point out that Carter did say that the racism was not just in the South, but throughout the country.

Mika B chimed in that Carter's comments turned back the clock on race relations and that discussion of race had no place in the political dissent that we were witnessing. It is amazing how fast the post-racial clock can go in reverse because one person's statement. The timing mechanism on the race clock must be pretty weak.

Maria Batiromo was visibly upset.. The financial reporter almost yelled while stating, "It's obvious that you can disagree with the President and not be racist. This is ridiculous". Capehart could borrow some of Bartiromo's passion.

Barnacle put on his sad face and said, "Am I the only one who is depressed that we are discussing race?"

Patrick J Buchanan's name came up during the discussion, reminding me of his "Thank Whitey column, his apology for Hitler's going to war, and the grief he feels because Robert E Lee is not as revered as MLK Jr. I'm supposed to take  show that employs Buchanan as a guidepost for disccusns on race. sorry for the sidestep, but I truly don't see how Buchanan remains employed by MSM.

Capehart, the only African-American on the panel used the calm indoor voice of a reporter and briefly noted that Carter was talking about a small vocal group of Obama protesters. Capehart then moved on to discuss how the politics of the issue would play out for President Obama. None of the passion shown by fellow MSM denizen Maria Bartiromo was present.

This segment confirmed my impression of how MSM is rigged against serious discussion of race. One, there was a lone black voice against four White  voices. Two, Capehart is a reporter who appears dedicated to seeing both sides of an issue. Scarborough, Mika B, Bartiromo and Barnacle have no problem giving you their opinion.

Black reporters insist on being reporters and are reluctant to give personal opinions. Placing black reporters in a situation where personal opinions are being requested, means that the viewpoint of members of the African-American community are not going to be heard. Thus, a number of black viewers are going to lose any sense of connection to parts of MSM..

I went from Scarborough to listening to "The Tom Joyner Morning Show" on radio. Joyner serves a largely African-American audience.In the segment I heard, there was a brief mention of Carter's observation followed by a comment by a co-host, "I'm glad Cater finally put that out there."  No more needed to be said during the town halls there had been discussion of just how outrageous some of the behavior had been, including the destruction of  a Rosa Parks sign being held up by  an African-American women. A White male at the town hall came over and snatched the sign from her hands, when the woman responded, she was escorted out of the meeting. The initial video of the episode just showed an upset black female being led from the audience. "Why are black people so angry all the time?", the camera appeared to be asking.

The MSM simply does not have enough on air minority voices to really let the country know how other ethnic groups feel about a given issue. It is not the job of black reporters to relate opinion, doing so would  give rise to charges of bias. Reporters like Bartiromo do not face that type of pressure. In the case of the woman with the Rosa Parks sign, the images were selected to reflect a story the news producer had in mind. The producer felt no need to delve into the facts of the case. The audience as a whole is not given the full story and African-American opinion in particular is stifled.

The image of the Black woman being escorted out of the town hall did not tell the full story. The images coming out of the Obama protesters may not be telling the full story, but the solution is to actually ask  why they bring a weapon to an Obama meeting, but didn't to Clinton or Bush? Carter just said what many are already thinking about protest on the Right,

Let the media actually talk to black people and the protesters.

Sep 14 2009, 12:09 pm by Max Fisher from tHe Atlantic Magazine

I'm just going to post this i it's entirety

The Other 9/12 Rally

Just how many people attended Saturday's 9/12 tea-party protest? Estimates by conservatives range from the hundreds of thousands to the millions -- numbers they say indicate a growing anti-Obama grassroots movement. Unsurprisingly, liberal pundits are pushing back, saying protesters came out in the tens of thousands. So far, the debate is hinging on photos of the rally, which appear to show the National Mall packed from the Capitol to the Washington Monument, 16 blocks away. A National Park Service map pegged to the 2008 inauguration appears to show that the Mall holds about a million people. Bloggers have overlaid the map with photos from Saturday. Case closed, right? Not so, as there's an important detail both conservatives and liberals are ignoring.

What no one has noted is that two-thirds of the National Mall was filled by an entirely separate event on Saturday that had nothing to do with protesting the president. September 12 just happened to be the 24th-annual Black Family Reunion, which ran from 7th Street all the way to the Washington Monument. I spent several hours on the Mall on Saturday, and there's no question that protesters numbered at least in the tens of thousands, but they were isolated to only a fraction of the area they're credited with having filled. The Black Family Reunion, a peaceful and friendly event designed around "healing and uplifting black families," featured mild-mannered African American families meandering through a series of promotional tables and large white tents scattered across the Mall. One crowd gathered across from the Washington Monument, not to protest health-care reform but to enjoy a Christian-themed R&B concert, where volunteers handed out free water bottles and bananas.

Not even the most biased observer could have mistaken these people for anti-Obama protesters. So why did so many pundits conflate the cheery Black Family Reunion with the angry tea-party protesters? The answer, I think, is that they either weren't there or didn't bother to leave the protest's zenith on the Capitol steps. It's an institutional hazard of covering protests that reporters seek out the center of the action and don't budge, giving them great anecdotes from individual attendees but little sense of the event's overall scope. Similarly, it's easy for bloggers to just read after-action reports or browse a few photos before drawing conclusions. But these are both risky strategies for covering big events, and it's easy to see why people are so confused about Saturday's attendance figures.

Also see 1849's blog

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/1849/2009/09/how-many-people-where-on-the-n.php?ref=reccafe

Some parents decided to keep their children home rather than have the ids indoctrinated by President Obama. Jim Greer the head of the Florida GOP said that Obama was trying to advance a Socialist agenda. A GOP Representative from South Carolina yells out "lie" during a Obama speech on health care address to a joint session of Congress. Conservatives have been showing up at townhall  meetings and Obama speeches with weapons and wearing t-shirts with It's time to water the tree of liberty!" (a wingnut way of stating Jefferson's famous quote, "The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants.") . Michelle Bachmann talks of the need for armed rebellion from time to time and calls Obama a tyrant and Marxist. Governors Perry of Texas and Pawlenty of Minnesota talk of secession. Sarah Palin, Chuck Grassley and others talk of Death Panels in the health care bill. All of these actions have occurred with the support of GOP officials.

What is the overall goal of these maneuvers? Dan Savage says the following:  "I really do think that the Michele Bachmanns of the world and the Glenn Becks of the world are actively and consciously, or subconsciously, trying to get - I'm just going to say it, trying to get the president killed. That's why they're setting this up as kill or be killed arguments. He's going to kill your grandma, pull the plug on grandma, death panels that little children have to go in front of."

http://www.breitbart.tv/olbermann-guest-dan-savage-beck-bachmann-actively-trying-to-get-the-president-killed/

MJ Rosenberg has a TPM post wherein he details a book on a presidential assassination titled "Dark Horse: The Surprise Election and Political Murder of President James A. Garfield."  From the Rosenberg post:

 Garfield wasn't even a candidate for a President in 1880 (he was a Congressman) and went to the convention to support one of the anti-Grant candidates.

But, after 35 ballots of deadlock, the Republican convention nominated Garfield who had won it over with a spellbinding speech. The Grant people went crazy, frustrated at the lost opportunities to rob the government blind for four more years and sat on their hands in November.

Grant himself refused to acknowledge that Garfield was the nominee and then President. Even after the inauguration, he personally snubbed Garfield at every opportunity and his supporters spread word of Grant's contempt for Garfield far and wide.

The corruptionist wing of the GOP (similar to the far right crazies of today) spewed incessant hatred at Garfield. To them, he was utterly illegitimate simply because he wasn't Grant and because he refused to appoint crooks whose names they suggested for government positions. Garfield spent the first four months of his Presidency trying to defeat the Grant faction (known as the Stalwarts, meaning they were stalwart backers of Grant).

There are marked differences in the situations between Garfield and Obama. The level of political violence was much higher in Garfield's time, but as neoboho noted in a TPM post in response to a blog from Elizabeth2, "The Last Word On Race (IMO)", Obama gets 30 death threats a day - up 400% from GW Bush's average.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5967942/Barack-Obama-faces-30-death-threats-a-day-stretching-US-Secret-Service.html

Should we take comments like the "lie" shouted out by Representative Joe Wilson, as a mere moment of passion, or a part of a larger plan in which the GOP tries to delegitimize Obama's Presidency? Are the Republicans feeding red meat to the GOP base, fomenting secession and the bearing of arms at public meetings?

If that is the goal, aren't Republicans also placing Obama's life at risk?

A recent post addressed problems with the current two party system. Incumbents tend to remain in office. These incumbents have failed to confront major issues such as health care and have led us to bankruptcy. The solution proposed to solve our ills is for energized moderates of each party to wrest control from the idiots in charge.
.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/jasoneverettmiller/.
.
Other than tossing the bums out, it is unclear what issues these energized moderates would be rallying to tackle. Some may be energized by deficit spending, others by armed intervention in the Middle East. Still others may be upset about the health care debate. Both parties have done a poor job of executing a rational policy in all these areas. What makes moderates believe that their solutions will fare any better than what has come before? What is their rationale for existing? What is the rallying cry?
.
During the last election Democrats had to travel through minefields of that included being considered soft on national defense, being spendthrifts, racial animosity, gender bias. etc.
Democrats had to prove, that they were truly patriotic. flag lapel pins anyone? A female Caucasian Democrtic voter in Pennsylvania who was laid off from work and had a sick husband at home felt the flag lapel question was the most important thing to sk of Obama.
Democrats are always defending their patriotism. Even  John Kerry who served in Vietnam did not escape this fate. Republicans faced none of these minefields. The GOP got a pass on natonal security issues.
.
There was even a knock down drag out fight about race during the Democratic Primary. African-American voters were called racists for their high levels of support for Obama. The Clintons were called racists for remarks made during the run up to the South Carolina Primary. One Clinton supporter, Taylor Marsh, felt that Ted Kennedy was an embarassment because he supported Obama. Several women rights activist posted agreement on blogs. The internal strife was great. When the smoke cleared and Obama was declared the winner, African-Americans said that they could vote for Hillary Clinton as VP, despite the heat that occurred during the Primary. Female Democrats  found a way to vote for Obama in the general election despite the racism charge from Obama supporters and the gender bias shown by the media. Remember the Clinton cleavage question in the WaPo?  (Note: The WaPo has now moved on to question whether it is proper for Michelle Obama to wear shorts).
Latinos were not supposed to vote for Obama because Latinos were racists. I guess the election results of the perecentage support that Obama got from Latinos was a mirage.
.
The reason for pointing out the painful periods of the Democratic Primary is that many different factions got to voice their grievances. At the end of the day the factions pulled together to support a candidate. As messy and frustrating as the Democrats can be, I prefer them to the Republicans. Taylor Marsh posted a fond remembrance of Sen Ted Kennedy on the Huffington Post, she moved on. Seems like a moderate thing to do, just like the African-American voters. We had Whites, Backs and Latinos challenge each other. For someone to suggest that that didn't look like America is ridiculous.
.
There can not be a discussion about race in the GOP, because the GOP doesn't believe that race exists. Worse, the GOP is not above race-baiting. If grassroots GOP moderates are going to grab power from those in charge in the GOP, they are going to have to show me something more than a blog post. Confront the race-baiters and gun-toters, Male the GOP more than essentially a whitebread party The GOP lost the Latino and Afrcan-American vote by .
.
I watched Republicans applaud as Michael Steele told a woman who lost her mother to cancer partky because of insurance limitations that she was just looking for a photo-op. Black and White Republicans applauded. Have the GOP moderates done anything to address this?.
.
In the post mentioned above, when I pointed out that the GP fringe had some starnge beliefs, I was told not to focus on the fringe. When I said that the GOP leadership had similar starnge beliefs (Death panels to kill grandma), I was told that it was asinine to try to throttle the GOP leadership before deigning to speak to those at the bottom of the GOP. I suppose he meant the moderates. If the GOP fringe is doing the shouting at the townhalls and the GOP leadeship is stoking the anger, where are we to go to find these GOP moderates. Having a discussion on a blog is nice, but where is the beef? Is there anything required of the supposed GOP moderates, or are Democrats just suppossed to believe that some folks on a blog are representaive of a larger group?
.
Where are the GOP moderates in the current debate? Show me proof that the GOP moderates are actually adressing problems within the GOP. Actions, not just words
Democrats we are told, do not speak to real Americans. I guess the white, black and brown Democrati voters in the last electon were the fake Americans.









 

Harry Turtledove writes alternative history novels that are always entertaining. Watching the disruption of Town Hall meetings and noting the death threats some Democratic members of Congress received, my own version of altered history story came to mind. Suppose that during the GW Bush Presidency it had been decided that since government intervention was bad. Medicare and Medicaid would be dropped. Suppose that ACORN was as influential as the insurance and BigPharma backed anti-health care organizatons. Imagine that Black radio stations were telling their listeners to get in the face of the GOP legislators supporting the change in health care. Black radio hosts would  charge that the GOP was trying to kill Grandma and Grandpa, Black activists would be enraged..

Would MSM characterize those Black protestors as grass-roots people with legitimate concerns about the impact on their health care, or would the protestors be dismissed as unpatriotic people who shout down other citizens trying to have a civil discourse? If Black militias were forming, how much time would MSM devote to educating the country about the threat?

If an African-American man arrived outside a GW Bush town hall with a visible weapon would the Secret Service have allowed him to remain, even if the state law said the act was legal?

I'll let you write your own stories.

 I watched the televised snippets of Sen. Claire McCaskill's town hall meeting yesterday. The Senator did as well as could be expected in handling the questions.

 

My Afro-centric radar was triggered by the televised image of a Black man and woman being escorted out of the event by uniformed men. What had occurred? There was no explanation, just the video. It was left up to the viewer to create a story. Was the couple picked out of the crowd because of police bias?. How had the couple disrupted the event? What was the political position taken by the couple pro- or anti-health care reform?

 

My question was answered today by YouTube. The woman had entered the event with a sign depicting Rosa Parks. Many in the crowd booed. The woman rolled up the sign and put it away. A reporter came over to see what that poster said. When the woman unrolled the poster, a man standing behind her snatched the poster. When she responded and tried to retrieve the sign, she and her companion were escorted out of the building.

 

I think the media needs to understand that by showing that image without an explanation, they are doing a disservice to the woman and the viewing public at large.

 

 The video with more details can be found at the link below:

 

http://hatingnotdebating.blogspot.com/

 

 

Now comes the news that CNBC contacted Tea Party Patriots for information on where the most "heated" town hall meeting would be occurring. The group's spokesperson says that they did not respond to CNBC's request. One Teabagger apparently did offer an event suggestion to TPP but not CNBC.

 

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/email_tea_baggers_hoping_for_riot_at_rep_scotts_to.php

 

If all MSM is capable of is providing good video without context, then the media has failed in it's responsibility to the public.

The old Confederacy was based on the right of individuals in slave-holding states to be able to maintain slavery and the right to profit from the sweat of an enslaved person. In that fight, the GOP fought against the Confederacy and it's characterization of Blacks as sub- human.  The current Confederacy is based upon perceived excesses of government power along with the loss of power to racial minorities.

Pat Buchanan tells a story of standing in the Wade Hampton Hotel in Columbia, South Carolina in 1966 with Richard Nixon. The crowd was whipped into frenzy with talk of patriotism and law and order. Law and order was Nixon's code words for keeping Blacks in their place. Nixon realized that the GOP's future was going to be based in the South.  Nixon was anti-abortion, but could accept the procedure if the offspring were the product of sexual intercourse between a Caucasian and African-American. Lyndon Johnson was correct that the Civil Rights Act signed by a Democratic President had delivered the South to the GOP. Nixon took full advantage.  The Dixiecrats found a willing home in the party of Lincoln. Barry Goldwater managed to chase African-Americans out of the GOP with his strong support of state's rights. Goldwater's state's rights were another code for keeping the Blacks in their places. Integration would only come when the Whites in power felt the need for change enter their hearts.  Martin Luther King Jr. advised against voting for Goldwater because of his stance on state's rights. In his autobiography, King opined that Goldwater himself might not be a racist, but that Goldwater would support racists in the South to gain political capital.

Goldwater is a GOP hero, but is at the core of the ethnic problem that the GOP faces. Goldwater and another GOP hero William F Buckley supported the right of individuals to associate with whomever they pleased. If this meant that Whites refused to serve Blacks in restaurants, so be it. Both men served to give moral support to segregationists.  Goldwater told Georgia activists in 1961, ought to stop chasing the votes of African-Americans and "go hunting where the ducks are." And the ducks in 1964 turned out to be white Democrats in revolt against integration. Goldwater's campaign slogan, "In Your Heart You Know He's Right," was an arrow aimed directly at them. It was a clear allusion to a prejudice that dared not speak its name. The stain on the Republican Party has never been erased. In fact the modern GOP readily embraces the Confederacy of old.

The current GOP's ties to the Confederacy are easy to find. Former GOP Senator Trent Lott is famous for his 2002 statement that segregationist, and father of an unacknowledged Black daughter, Strom Thurmond would have been a great President. Lott did face a great deal of heat for this statement, and lost his GOP leadership position. Regarding Thurmond, there is the delicate question of whether a Black servant in a White Southern household has free will to refuse the advances of a young White male who by default wields significant power over her employment.  Thurman illustrates the double standard applied by the Confederacy.  A Southern White male can take sexual pleasure in Black female. A White Northerner who was involved in a loving relationship in with a Black female is a degenerate.

Getting back to Trent Lott, in 1984 Lott called the Civil War the war of aggression in an interview in the pro-Confederacy Southern Patriot magazine in1984. Lott appeared as a speaker at the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) in 1992. The Council is a successor to the Jim Crow era White Citizens Councils. Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour wore a Confederate flag lapel pin during his gubernatorial campaign. Barbour appeared at a CCC BBQ in 2003.

Former GW Bush AG john Ashcroft gave an interview to the Southern Patriot in 1988 in which he praised the magazine for defending Southern patriots like Jefferson Davis, Robert E Lee and Stonewall Jackson. Missouri Governor Matt Blunt ordered the Confederate flag to be flown for a day in 2005 during a Confederate Memorial Service in Higginsville, Mo.

The above examples reflect the stance that modern Confederates in the GOP have taken, just like their hero, Barry Goldwater; these government officials have no problem associating with organizations that have a history of racial bias. Despite this fact, they will be at the forefront condemning Obama for associating with Jeremiah Wright and Sonia Stotomayor for belonging to a Hispanic organization as demonstrating racial bias.

The Confederacy viewed the Union as the aggressor. Modern GOP leadership does little to hide their views that support this Confederate ideology. National government is a monster that has to be controlled.  Government intervention is what caused the Civil War. Government intervention is also why the status of Blacks has improved. Ending slavery and ending Jim Crow was not a primary issue for the Confederacy. Life has become more difficult for Confederates because of the action of the federal government. Only a government that is weak on ethnic issues will maintain the status quo and this government is what the Confederacy prefers.. It is likely that also in the background is a concern that if minorities ever come to power, they would do the same thing to Whites as Whites did to minorities.  

As a defense, Confederates now view minorities as racist and throw the term out repeatedly. Glenn Beck calls Obama a racist. Limbaugh says the President is an angry Black man.  Sonia Sotomayor is also called a racist merely for being Latina. The racism that Conservatives see is racism against oppressed White males. In the wake of the Ricci decision which provided aid and comfort to Confederates who were tired of losing jobs to "unqualified minorities comes a decision by a NY judge that testing used by the NYC Fire Department to hire recruits, had nothing to do with how well the candidates would perform as firefighters. NYC has altered it's testing procedures and currently 38% of recruits passing the new test are minorities. Under the old test only 105 of those who passed were ethnic minorities. The judge noted that other large cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia and Houston had much higher percentages of ethnic minority firefighters using different testing techniques. Ricci may provide a brief respite, but minorities know how to adapt. Confederates will again be in an uproar as they see jobs that they take as their God given right in the hands of minorities

http://www.blacknews.com/news/nyc_unfair_to_minority_firefighter_recruits101.shtml

While believing in limited government, Confederates are willing to play aggressor to any real or imaged threat. Diplomacy is not their strong suit.  Curiously the region that fought against the United States now views itself as being super-patriotic. People who attempt diplomacy first are said to place the country at risk. Southern Confederates, always willing to fight are super-duper patriotic. McCain thrilled the crowds with his "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb...Bomb, Bomb, Iran. Confederates gorged on the message to fight another war. The rest of the country recoiled.

In the 2008 Presidential election, we saw a regional divide. The majority of Southern White voters could not cast a vote for Barack Obama. Some Southerners just could not accept an African-American Commander In Chief. The birthers have found the South to be a region that willingly accepts the belief that Obama was not born in the United States of America, A poll by the Daily Kos noted that while 87% or more of those in the East, Midwest and West believe that Obama was born in the United States, only 47% of Southerners believe that Obama was born in the US. 30% of Southerners are not sure if Obama is US born.

Outgoing GOP Senator George Voinovitch (R-OH) said that the problem with the GOP is that there are too many Jim DeMints (R-SC) and Tim Coburns (R-OK). The problem implied by Voinovich is that Southern Republicans come across as ignorant and disconnected from the rest of the country.  By being seen as too Southern and too ignorant, the GOP becomes marginalized. Demint, by the way, is a staunch supporter of the Confederate flag and felt that the state capitol was an appropriate place for the symbol.

Kathleen Parker agreed with Voinovitch's sentiments in a recent column in the Washington Post.  Joe Scarborough also worries about the regional disconnect between the modern GOP and the non-Southern parts of the country. The recent spectacle of mostly Southern White Republican Senators chastising Sonia Sotomayor repeatedly over her "wise Latina" snippet didn't help the GOP's image with Latino voters. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) who was denied a federal judgeship because of racially biased comments was allowed to be the GOP's point man in trying to derail Sotomayor's appointment. Rush Limbaugh and Pat Buchanan, who proudly points to Confederates in the Buchanan family, throwing red meat to the GOP base by saying that the GOP doesn't need the Hispanic vote continue the ethnic gulf.

http://townhall.com/columnists/KathleenParker/2009/08/05/them_dang_southerners

Republican Texas Governor Rick Perry raised the ultimate threat of the Confederacy. Perry mentioned Texas's right to secede. Approximately 50% of Texans are ready to bolt if they feel offended by the Obama administration. How patriotic can Confederates be if they are so willing to leave the Union?

The town hall bullies who shut down discourse over heath care and occasionally threaten violence bring to mind South Carolina Representative Preston Brooks who attacked anti-slavery Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner from behind with a cane on May 22, 1856. Brooks was responding to a verbal lashing that Sumner had delivered to SC Senator Andrew Butler about Butler's support of slavery.  Brooks and Butler were relatives. Brooks could attack Sumner in such a manner because, Sumner was of lower station and therefore not worthy of the challenge to a duel. The double standard for chivalrous behavior demonstrated by Brooks appears to echo in the actions of SC Governor Sanford. Sanford can boldly state that President Clinton should have resigned because of adultery, but that he (Sanford) can remain in office.  Clinton is unworthy. Sanford is like King David.  Sanford and his C Street brethren are not bound by rules for mere mortals. Just as Strom Thurman could take advantage of a Black servant and face no repercussions, Sanford and the C Streeters feel equally privileged. The double standards for moral behavior and civil discourse are glaring. The hypocrisy is lost on the Confederates who follow in the footsteps of their forebears; rules are for the riff-raff not for the chosen.

The White South that the GOP is appealing to is the worst of the past. The GOP can continue its march towards the Confederacy at its own peril. Other White Southerners are faring rather well among African-Americans. President Bill Clinton was recently inducted into Phi Beta Sigma, a national African-American fraternity.  For all the racial temper flares between Obama and the Clintons  during the Democratic Primaries, Bill is back in the fold.

The South, per se, is not the problem (see Florida and North Carolina in the last election). The problem is the lingering aspects of the Confederacy in the South. That mentality has found a home in the former Party of Lincoln. The actions of the Confederates are chasing away moderates, ethnic minorities, and even some Conservatives. 

The Republican Party needs to reclaim its dignity and reject the Confederacy.  Take off the grey suits of the Confederacy and rejoin the Union.

From Sgt Crowley's police report regarding a conversation with Ms Whaley:

She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch of Ware Street," the report says. "She told me that her suspicions were aroused when she observed one of the men wedging his shoulder into the door as if he was trying to force entry." http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/27/gates.arrest/index.html

From Wendy Murphy Ms Whaley's  lawyer:

On CNN the caller's lawyer says she never stated there were any black men and she said she never talked to Sgt. Crowley. So why in the police report did it say Sgt. Crowley talked to the caller??? http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/27/gates.arrest/index.html

Tonight on CNN's Anderson Cooper, Ms Murphy said that Crowley approached Whaley and told her to "Wait there". there was no further conversation. How did a report of a detailed conversation end up in his report?  Did he fabricate this conversation? Did the conversation occur with another officer? Were police notes combined?

Crowley's police report is an official document and would be included at trial. Shouldn't there be a clarification of this apparent discrepancy?

If Crowley's report is in error, can we trust his version of the conversation at the door to and inside Gates' house?

MSM told us that there would be a national discussion on race following the speech that Obama gave in Philadelphia last year. MSM lied. Burdened by mostly White prime tie and nightly news anchors who are often ill-equipped to deal with issues of race, there is often very little discussion of the issue, Michael Jackson not withstanding.

Charges of racism were leveled at the arresting officer in the case> The sergeant is now giving interviews to get his side of the story across.  For those who argue that a charge of racist is worse than rapist, murderer,or pedophile, that does not appear to be the case here. Gates gets media. The sergeant gets media. (The chief of the Miami PD, who was deputy chief in NYC, and the previous cheif in Phildadelphisa says that it is up to the maoyr or cheif of police to put the brakes on the media in high profile cases-Morning Joe 07/24/2009).

Henry Gates got arrested after having been determined to be the owner of the home that supposedly was burglarized. Most in the Black community feel that Gates arrest was ridiculous and gain support from the apology of the mayor of Cambridge, Mass and the fact that the disorderly conduct charge was dropped. A question exists that Gates may be able to take legal action.

Many Whites  don't understand why Gates would have gotten upset by police presence. Jim Sleeper has a post  here at TPMCafe that includes the following statement: Gates' Harvard colleague Charles Ogletree, who is black and a professor in the law school that Barack Obama attended, has said that whenever he changes from his jacket and tie to an ordinary ski parka and stocking cap, he goes from being a law professor to being "a probable cause".

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/24/both_were_wrong_but_one_was_wronger/#more

Depending on the area in which one lives the impact of that statement is felt at varying degrees. News articles have mentioned the fact that Harvard established a commission to investigate racial profiling of ethnic minorities on the Harvard campus. African-Americans hear that statement and, as a matter of survival, internalize the message. Be cautious in Boston and Cambridge. Give your college bound child the same message. Many Whites will see the same piece of news and find it interesting, they can  wait for the results of the investigation.
The situation is similar to the pig and the chicken in making ham and eggs for breakfast. The chicken is involved, the pig is committed to the meal. Blacks need to know about law enforcement as they travel, for Whites stories of possible profiling are only of interest. For Whites, profiling has no impact on their lives Two groups seeing the same set of data from two different perspectives.

Whites tend to respond to Black's concerns about law enforcement in one of two ways. Some will give valid reports of abuses they, or White family and friends have suffered at the hands of police, thus negating racial bias. They may suggest  post 9/11 overly aggressive policing.  Blacks will remember the pre-911 shooting of an unarmed innocent Black man trying to enter his NYC apartment in an attempt to get away from a bunch of guys with guns running in his direction, losing his life in a hail of police gunfire. The NYPD actually said that it was un unfortunate event, butit could happen again in the future. Blacks got the intended threat. Blacks feel that Whites just don't get it.

The other response is for some Whites to admit that, yes, there is bias in policing, but....
The But means that somehow in an aberration of normal human psychological behavior, Blacks are supposed to ignore these facts when confronted by police officers. Good luck with that.

In one post concerning the Gates incident some of the comments were amusing. One post described how a White gentleman, upset about traffic being blocked by police, got out of his car and angrily strode towards police. The man was told to get back in his car, which he did. The post went on to say that A Black man would have likely wound up in handcuffs. Black men especially realize this. Many people admit police bias is occurs and is not uncommon. Some may even cite personally observed examples.

Amazingly, another post characterized Gates as ranting like a homeless person. The same poster mentioned Martin Luther King Jr and Rosa Parks as examples of how well mannered Black folks shouldact when shackled by police. Gates should have followed their standard.
Jackie Robinson who was thick-skinned and ale to tolerate physical and verbal abuse was also mentioned as a model for Black behavior under duress. That Jackie Robinson reference provided the humor that got me through the day.

Blacks, in general, do feel that there is a difference in the way that they are treated by law enforcement. Getting data on racial profiling is difficult, because you sometimes have to figure out what the police officer is thinking. Juvenile court data in many cities does suggest that at least in juvenile courts, there is a tendency for disproportionate charges for similar crimes between Black and White youth. NYC and Baltimore have instituted corrective programs. The Jena 6 controversy arose mainly because of a sense of differential charges in a case incited by the presence of a segregated tree in Jena La. That's correct, Blacks had to ask permission to sit under a tree. Jena residents wondered why they were being considered racist by the African-American community. The citizens of Jena wondered why their system of justice might be suspect.

Gates was upset by being challenged in his own home by law enforcement. He was the owner. Until Gates has as much right to be an a-hole on his own property, and until disparities in treatment of African-Americans are erased at all levels of the justice system, there will continue to be flare ups in interactions of Blacks with law enforcement officials. The Jackie Robinson model of if your feelings get hurt, just rub some dirt on it and carry on, may have worked 50 years ago. It's not going to happen now. The Gates arrest was a farce. Address the underlying bias in law enforcement, then call Gates' outburst idiotic

Wattree had a post on TPM Cafe that gave instructions on how to behave if you think that you are being profiled. Survival instructions that one would expect in a police state are being handed out in The United States of America and people are upset at Gates reaction? Please!.