Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

[innocentbystander]

Happy Easter everyone

[Professor Tiger]

Easter? Pshaw...

The true and correct Easter is NEXT Sunday.

[It's me Karen]

Happy Easter or Happy Sunday. Whatever fits.

[Professor Tiger]

Here's a good article for Easter, especially if you subscribe to Newsweek like I do.

http://www.realclearreligion.org/articl ... 06468.html

[bluetick]

This is like pitting the tree hugger bluetick against union mob boss DSL...

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wir ... -bin-laden

Appears as though natural gas is kicking coal's ass wrt being the fuel of choice for new power plants. What's wrong with that?

[bluetick]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomani ... -movement/

Interesting take on John Derbyshire's recent racist meltdown and all of the fallout about him getting canned by the National Review. Derbyshire has been a pnn feature through the years, of course..

[puterbac]

This is like pitting the tree hugger bluetick against union mob boss DSL...

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wir ... -bin-laden

Appears as though natural gas is kicking coal's ass wrt being the fuel of choice for new power plants. What's wrong with that?

Got no problem with it as long as its due to normal market forces such as natural gas becoming more plentiful hence cheaper. Have a big problem if its due to the EPA/Govt artificially increasing the cost of using coal.

[bluetick]

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/12/abu ... ecord.html

Natural gas trending UP UP UP!

[puterbac]

Looks like T Boone knew what he was talking about.

[puterbac]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomani ... -movement/

Interesting take on John Derbyshire's recent racist meltdown and all of the fallout about him getting canned by the National Review. Derbyshire has been a pnn feature through the years, of course..

Well I have to say that was a very weird article by Derbyshire. Apparently he has cancer. Is this a bedside confession? Is cancer and chemo affecting his brain?

--------- I am not (let me repeat not) arguing that the conservative base is uniformly racist. Far from it. But the conservative base does have a much higher tolerance for harsh rhetoric provided that that rhetoric comes from other conservatives.------------

Wrong. First harsh rhetoric can be on any subject and is no indication bigot/racist etc. Frankly I prefer to see someone on the left slam their own such as Cosby slamming "black" culture for equating education to acting white etc.

----------------This “us versus them” mentality is very much a basic part of human psychology, but does seem to be particularly well developed among contemporary American conservatives who will countenance almost any sort of conduct provided the person is part of their team.---------------

What a load of crap that last sentence is. The political left and right both are more lenient with those that are of the same political stripe. Both in responding to what someone might say and what actions they have taken. Of course I do believe conservatives punish their own more often than libs.

As far as the Derbyshire's original article even responding to that and trying to pick it apart and sort thru what makes sense and what doesn't is political suicide.

I think what bothers conservatives are the double standards such as: if a black woman is walking down the street or in her car and sees a group of young black men coming in her direction and she either crosses the street or locks her doors its considered nothing but being smart and aware of your surroundings. If a white chick does it, it would be considered racist.

What is certain is that Johnson and the great society has done more damage to black families than an army of racist SOB's could have ever have done.

[Jungle Rat]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/09/us/florid ... ?hpt=hp_t1

[puterbac]

Good stuff...

O'KEEFE VOTER FRAUD INVESTIGATION: YOUNG MAN OFFERED HOLDER'S BALLOT

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... der-Ballot

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has declared that there is no proof that in-person voter fraud is a problem. He's about to see proof that even he can't deny.
In a new video provided to Breitbart.com, James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas demonstrates why Holder should stop attacking voter ID laws--by walking into Holder’s voting precinct and showing the world that anyone can obtain Eric Holder’s primary ballot. Literally.

The video shows a young man entering a Washington, DC polling place at 3401 Nebraska Avenue, NW, on primary day of this year--April 3, 2012--and giving Holder’s name and address. The poll worker promptly offers the young man Holder’s ballot to vote.
The young man then suggests that he should show his ID; the poll worker, in compliance with DC law, states: “You don’t need it. It’s all right. As long as you’re in here, you’re on our list, and that’s who you say you are, you’re okay.”

The young man replies: “I would feel more comfortable if I just had my ID. Is it alright if I go get it?" The poll worker agrees.
"I’ll be back Faster than you can say Furious,” the young man jokes on his way out, in a reference to the Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal that has plagued Holder’s Department of Justice.

Holder has maintained that voter fraud is not a major problem in the United States, and that voter ID would not curb voter fraud in any case.
As Project Veritas has proven, voter fraud is easy and simple--and may be increasingly common in the absence of voter ID laws.
Project Veritas has already shown how dead people can vote in New Hampshire, prompting the state senate to pass a voter ID law; they’ve also shown people can use celebrity names like Tim Tebow and Tom Brady to vote in Minnesota, prompting the state legislature to put voter ID on the ballot as a constitutional amendment.

[puterbac]

Why We Need Voter-ID Laws Now

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... -fund?pg=2

Voter fraud is a scandal, and the attorney general can’t look away anymore.

By John Fund

Attorney General Eric Holder is a staunch opponent of laws requiring voters to show photo ID at the polls to improve ballot security. He calls them “unnecessary” and has blocked their implementation in Texas and South Carolina, citing the fear they would discriminate against minorities.

I wonder what Holder will think when he learns just how easy it was for someone to be offered his ballot just by mentioning his name in a Washington, D.C., polling place in Tuesday’s primaries.

Holder’s opposition to ID laws comes in spite of the Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision in 2008, authored by liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, that upheld the constitutionality of Indiana’s tough ID requirement. When groups sue to block photo-ID laws in court, they can’t seem to produce real-world examples of people who have actually been denied the right to vote. According to opinion polls, over 75 percent of Americans — including majorities of Hispanics and African-Americans — routinely support such laws.
One reason is that people know you can’t function in the modern world without showing ID — you can’t cash a check, travel by plane or even train, or rent a video without being asked for one. In fact, PJ Media recently proved that you can’t even enter the Justice Department in Washington without showing a photo ID. Average voters understand that it’s only common sense to require ID because of how easy it is for people to pretend they are someone else

Filmmaker James O’Keefe demonstrated just how easy it is on Tuesday when he dispatched an assistant to the Nebraska Avenue polling place in Washington where Attorney General Holder has been registered for the last 29 years. O’Keefe specializes in the same use of hidden cameras that was pioneered by the recently deceased Mike Wallace, who used the technique to devastating effect in exposing fraud in Medicare claims and consumer products on 60 Minutes. O’Keefe’s efforts helped expose the fraud-prone voter-registration group ACORN with his video stings, and has had great success demonstrating this year in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Minnesota just how easy it is to obtain a ballot by giving the name of a dead person who is still on the rolls. Indeed, a new study by the Pew Research Center found at least 1.8 million dead people are still registered to vote. They aren’t likely to complain if someone votes in their place.

In Washington, it was child’s play for O’Keefe to beat the system. O’Keefe’s assistant used a hidden camera to document his encounter with the election worker at Holder’s polling place:

Man: “Do you have an Eric Holder, 50th Street?

Poll worker: “Let me see here.”

Man: Xxxx 50th Street.

Poll Worker: Let’s see, Holder, Hol-t-e-r, or Hold-d-e-r?

Man: H-o-l-d-e-r.

Poll Worker: D-e-r. Okay.

Man: That’s the name.

Poll Worker: I do. Xxxx 50th Street NW. Okay. [Puts check next to name, indicating someone has shown up to vote.] Will you sign there . . .

Man: I actually forgot my ID.

Poll Worker: You don’t need it; it’s all right.

Man: I left it in the car.

Poll Worker: As long as you’re in here, and you’re on our list and that’s who you say you are, we’re okay.

Man: I would feel more comfortable if I go get my ID, is it all right if I go get it?

Poll Worker: Sure, go ahead.

Man: I’ll be back faster than you can say furious!

Poll Worker: We’re not going anywhere.

Note that O’Keefe’s assistant never identified himself as Eric Holder, so he was not illegally impersonating him.

Nor did he attempt to vote using the ballot that was offered him, or even to accept it. O’Keefe has been accused by liberals of committing voter fraud in his effort to expose just how slipshod the election systems of various no-ID-required states are, but lawyers say his methods avoid that issue. Moreover, he has only taped his encounters with election officials in jurisdictions that allow videotaping someone in public with only one party’s knowledge.

As for the D.C. Board of Elections, its loose practices are a matter of record. Last year, a community activist uncovered the fact that Andrea Pringle, the new deputy chief of staff to Washington, D.C., mayor Vincent Gray, had voted illegally in the district even though she admitted to living in Maryland. She resigned in the face of the criticism.

Nor is she the only example. State Senator Harold Metts of Rhode Island got a photo-ID law put on the books in his state last year after he was told by several constituents of a pattern of voter fraud in his home town of Providence. Indeed, his own state representative and her daughter had their votes stolen by someone voting in their names in one election. “The old system was not set up to readily weed out fraud, and it would be very hard to prove,” he told the Woonsocket Patch newspaper. Metts, the state senate’s only African-American member, says that he took a lot of heat from national Democrats for getting the ID law approved by an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature. But he says party loyalty only takes him so far. “It’s time to stop crying wolf and make the voter-ID law work for those on both sides of this issue who want to ensure the integrity of the system, while guarding against disenfranchisement.”
Several of the state laws that require photo ID also make new provisions to enhance security for absentee ballots, the tool of choice for many fraudsters. Last year, Lessadolla Sowers, a member of the NAACP’s Executive Committee in Tunica County, Miss., was sentenced to five years in prison for fraudulently casting absentee ballots for ten other people. “This crime cuts against the fabric of our free society,” Judge Charles Webster said at the sentencing hearing.

Scandals such as that one helped convince 62 percent of Mississippi’s voters to approve a photo-ID law last November. The measure passed in a clear majority of counties that are majority-black. As with other ID laws, a free state-issued photo ID is available to anyone who says they can’t afford one.

But the groups opposing voter ID won’t let the facts get in their way. James Clyburn of South Carolina, the third-ranking member in the House Democratic leadership, compares voter-ID laws to “Jim Crow” provisions that blocked people from voting in the last century, and said he is “very, very anxious” that the Supreme Court “as it is presently constituted” will support the new laws. But as previously noted, the Supreme Court already has supported voter ID, with its opinion authored by its most liberal member at the time.

Some criticism of voter-ID laws has morphed into intimidation. This week, Color of Change, co-founded by former Obama special adviser Van Jones, threatened a boycott against Coca-Cola and Walmart because they financially supported the American Legislative Exchange Council, which has helped state legislators draft some of the voter-ID laws. Within hours, Coca-Cola resigned its membership in ALEC. So far Walmart is holding out by arguing that ALEC is involved with dozens of issues, many of them of direct concern to Walmart shareholders.

There is something surreal about the voter-ID issue. As James O’Keefe demonstrates, it is comically easy to commit voter fraud in person, and, unless someone confesses, it’s very difficult to ever detect. With absentee balloting, there is a paper trail that makes it easier to uncover fraud, making it a problem that even some critics of photo ID will admit.

Other than hypotheticals, there are very few cases of legitimate voters who were unable to have their vote counted because they lacked ID. People who show up without photo ID at the polls are allowed to cast a provisional ballot that is counted after proof of identity is offered.

“From voter fraud to election chicanery of all kinds, America teeters on the edge of scandal every November,” says Larry Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia and author of a comprehensive survey of voter fraud called “Dirty Little Secrets.” The fact that so many people want to thwart legitimate and prudent efforts to improve ballot integrity has become a scandal in its own right. Attorney General Holder is unlikely to agree with that, but after what happened at his polling place last Tuesday, he should at least understand that voter fraud itself is a scandal worth investigating.

— John Fund, a writer based in New York, is the author of Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy.

[puterbac]

This whole shooting thing in FL is f'd up on both sides.

Encompassing everything that happened to how the media has tried to portray things.

Sounds like the guy followed him and quit. The 17 yr old confronted him which I have no problem with. As in WTF are you following me man. Then it sounds like the 17 yr old decked him and was slamming his head on the ground. Was he justified in doing this? I don't know. Did he see the guy had a gun and thought he was in danger and that is why he hit him? If so, he could be claiming self defense and the stand your ground law would be in play for the 17 yr old. If he just hit the guy because he was a "bad ass" in his own mind, then Zimmerman can claim self defense and the stand your ground law.

Then with both on the ground and Zimmerman could have felt the 17 yr old was trying to get the gun from him or the 17 yr old could have thought Oh shit he has a gun he is going to shoot me. You could easily argue that both sides felt their lives were in danger at that point and both acted in self defense and stand your ground applies to both. Damn crazy situation with no good outcome.

Then you throw in the media intentionally trying to inflame this as a racial issue with the "white" hispanic crap and then several outlets editing the 911 tape making it appear that Zimmerman was focused on the 17yr old being black when in fact the 911 operator is who asked what color the person was and Zimmerman only said it because he was asked.

Fucked up all around. I know the easy thing is to indict and try and convict of something, but what? Physical evidence seems to back up story that he was attacked, but he was following the 17 yr old in the first place but that isn't illegal either. Nothing good will come of it.

[bluetick]

Sounds like you are saying the Martin kid also had the right to "stand his ground," puter. A fair point that many miss.

145 lbs vs 240 lbs. Skittles vs gun. MYOB vs stalking &confronting. The known facts lean heavily toward arrest... maybe all the facts aren't on display..?

[Jungle Rat]

I like how they used pics of the two from years ago instead of current ones.

[puterbac]

Sounds like you are saying the Martin kid also had the right to "stand his ground," puter. A fair point that many miss.

145 lbs vs 240 lbs. Skittles vs gun. MYOB vs stalking &confronting. The known facts lean heavily toward arrest... maybe all the facts aren't on display..?

Tick,

I think he probably did. If I am walking home in an area I am supposed to be, and I feel someone is following me and eyeing me in weird way my spidey sense is going to be tingling. He may have felt threatened and confronted Zimmerman due to that. But the physical evidence backs up Zimmerman in that he was punched in the face and fall backwards and the kid was on top of him and slamming his head in the ground. You can't see cause your nose just broke and you are getting disoriented as your head is smashed into the ground, if not concussed. 145 vs 240 doesn't matter at that point. You could easily say Zimmerman was 5'11 and kid was 6'3" and "towered" over him.

Once the confrontation occurred all bets were off because both could have felt threatened and acted in what they were thinking was self defense. Once the physical starts then the gun is in play and BOTH could feel their life was in danger. Fucked up all around.

What I consider most likely is that the kid saw him following, Zimmerman had then turned and walked back to his car (maybe because he knew the kid was getting his guard up), the kid confronted him and then hit him (maybe because he felt threatened cause he saw a gun or he was gonna teach the "white" hispanic a lesson...probably the latter but we don't know), then Zimmerman is on the ground with his nose broke and his head being banged into the concrete and the now feels in mortal danger (and with your head getting banged into the ground it is hard to argue against that thinking IMO) so he is then able to get his hand on the gun and fire the shot.

IMO that is most likely what happened. Did Zimmerman commit a crime or was he defending himself? IMO it sounds like in the end he was defending himself, BUT he helped precipitate the situation by following but that isn't illegal either. Crazy.

Rat,

Yeah I forgot the pictures of both being manipulated so show the kid as an actual 12 yr old kid and the "white" hispanic being shown in a jumpsuit and sinister.

[10ac]

I haven't been following this but was the hoodie dissed? Did the white hispanic have his over sized cap on sideways? Did anyone flash gang signs? What brand shoes were they wearing? The facts will come out!

[Jungle Rat]

If the kid attacked him then the game is over.

[sardis]

Clearly, tick must have accidentally deleted the email from his tree hugger buddies that natural gas is no longer a friend of the environment. The solar gestapo will be on his door step unless they see him revise and resubmit...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html