Thursday, May 31, 2007

Defending the Durham Status Quo

Last November, Durham’s black voters gave Mike Nifong around 95 percent of their votes. In recent weeks, however, the actions of Mayor Bill Bell, in particular, have made clear that the district attorney now enjoys scant support from the city’s African-American community. Bell also has made clear that he wants to see the truth about the police investigation’s errors.

It’s worth remembering, however, that the disgraced Durham district attorney is not still in office because of the black vote alone. Nifong also received robust backing from Durham’s far left—politically through the People’s Alliance, journalistically through Indy. And while neither the People’s Alliance nor Indy are any longer defending their onetime hero, they—quite unlike Durham’s key African-American leaders—still seem to see little wrong with the case that so tarnished their city.

Take the case of Diane Catotti, one of two People’s Alliance members who currently serves on the City Council; and the only Council member to have been endorsed by the Triangle branch of the Green Party. The P.A. and the Greens both fashion themselves as good-government organizations interested in reform; the P.A.’s website even sports an “activist calendar.”

Yet regarding possible police misconduct, no group has more aggressively defended the status quo than the P.A. Catotti seemed to have no problem with allowing the Baker/Chalmers report to stand as the final word on how the police supported indictments of three demonstrably innocent people without probable cause.

At the City Council meeting a week ago Monday, Catotti raised a host of objections to an outside review. Mayor Bell’s proposal, she complained, was too nebulous. It might cost too much. She would need more information before forming an opinion on the plan.

She also vigorously opposed calls for Mike Nifong’s resignation: “The district attorney is obviously an elected office and whatever our personal or professional opinions are, I don’t believe it’s our role to call for his resignation.”

Between last Monday and last Thursday, it became clear that the investigation would be a serious one, overseen by a group of police chiefs from around the state. That, apparently, was all Catotti needed to know: she was the only member of the Council to vote against authorizing an investigation.

Her rationale was extraordinary. The Council’s proposal would allow chiefs of what she termed “competing” and “rival” cities to examine how Durham performed. Most people would not consider a neighboring towns police department to be “competing” with the hometowns law enforcement agencies—both, presumably, have the same basic goals.

City Manager Patrick Baker and Police Chief Steve Chalmers, she implied, should be allowed to pick who they wanted to investigate them. Somehow, I doubt that an investigation of the DPD conducted by people who would fit Catotti’s specifications—basically Sgt. Mark Gottlieb and the Group of 88—would have much credibility.

Imagine if the situation were the reverse: a race-baiting DA, aided and abetted by a police force that routinely violated its own procedures, orchestrated the indictments, without probable cause, of three poor, black women. Does anyone believe that Catotti, as the representative of a so-called “progressive” organization, would denounce an outside inquiry on the grounds that it would allow “rival” cities to look into how the DPD performed?

Mayor Bell, appropriately, dismissed Catotti’s reasoning. “It’s almost like we’re trying to save the manager or the police chief,” he noted. “I’m not trying to do that. I want the truth.”

---------

The P.A.’s de facto media arm, The Independent Weekly, last week published a criticism of “Durham justice,” which led off with the following: “Reade Seligmann, meet Erick Daniels. He’s what happens to people without money when they’re railroaded by Durham police and the Durham district attorney’s office.”

Daniels spent more than five years in jail after being arrested based on a flawed ID, conflicting police reports, and an investigation that didn’t look into exculpatory evidence.

A reader of Indy editor Richard Hart’s column might have believed that Indy had been at the forefront of demanding due process and procedural regularity for all in Durham.

Not exactly. The paper endorsed the election campaign of the figure who personified “Durham justice,” Mike Nifong. The D.A., the paper proclaimed, “has approached his job in a hardworking and professional manner,” as “colleagues and legal opponents alike laud his sense of fairness and justice.” Those who wanted to make the election about a single case were wrong-headed, since Nifong “manages a supportive work environment where attorneys against the death penalty aren’t forced to try capital murder cases.”

In June, Indy ran a column by Hal Crowther ridiculing the (relatively few people, at that time) who had criticized Nifong’s behavior. “To imply that rich white athletes are unsafe in the North Carolina legal system,” Crowther fumed, “is like saying the Pope can’t get a fair trial in Vatican City.” The State Bar and the attorney general, it seems, came to disagree with Crowther’s analysis.

Crowther noted that while he had been in a fraternity, “I surely don’t remember raping anyone, or seeing it done, or hearing of it.” (So much for not rushing to judgment.) He did fear the prospect of “the best lawyers money can buy win[ning] them a reprieve they may or may not deserve.” And for those who were inclined to believe the players’ claims of innocence (claims which, by that point, were fortified by Reade Seligmann’s highly publicized alibi and the fact that no DNA matched any of the accused players), Crowther had some advice: “Catch a glimpse of your inner racist in the mirror.”

Two weeks after Roy Cooper dismissed all charges and declared the players innocent, Hart praised Crowther’s column for its revealing the “fundamental problems” of “student arrogance and exaltation of sports.” Hart also celebrated the work of the Group of 88 and hailed Crystal Mangum: “Though there’s no evidence of rape, she’s still a victim.” Such thinking would make most in the Group of 88 proud.

So, it seems, Indy doesn’t exactly have a track record of opposing prosecutorial misconduct; or of questioning the DPD’s actions when the police force breaks the rules to try and railroad innocent people.

---------

The People’s Alliance, Diane Catotti, and Independent Weekly: from Nifong enablers to the last people inclined to look the other way at the DPD’s misconduct. Quite a record upon which the Triangle’s far left can stand.

89 comments:

Anonymous said...

Durham's far left, many Duke professors, corrupt Durham police, a corrupt city — an embarrassment to Governor Easley's North Carolina. When will Easley demonstrate leadership and courage?

Michael said...

[She also vigorously opposed calls for Mike Nifong’s resignation: “The district attorney is obviously an elected office and whatever our personal or professional opinions are, I don’t believe it’s our role to call for his resignation.”]

He lied to a judge. How about that for starters? He's accused of unethical conduct. How is he going to perform his job with this cloud over his head? Same deal with Linwood.

Do these people realize how stupid they make their city look via their comments?

Michael said...

[Her rationale was extraordinary. The Council’s proposal would allow chiefs of what she termed “competing” and “rival” cities to examine how Durham performed. Most people would not consider a neighboring town’s police department to be “competing” with the hometown’s law enforcement agencies—both, presumably, have the same basic goals.]

These other cities probably want to avoid the "DPD-Effect" by cleansing Durham's Police Department.

Just as we have the Nifong Effect where defense attorney's can plant doubt about the DA's honesty in court cases, we may have defense attorneys point a finger at the Durham Police Department railroading people that they knew to be innoncent, releasing harmful emails to coerce and putting out wanted posters stating that a terrible crime had been committed when it hadn't.

gs said...

I wonder if she realizes how much Nifong and the DPD is going to cost Durham in the resulting lawsuits. They better get started raising taxes. They could call it the "Nifong's People Appreciation Tax".

Not just the 3 indicted players but all the players that were on that wanted poster.

Anonymous said...

Ah, the far, far left. Always giving the not-so-far left a bad name.

Emmett Kelly provides the appropriate context through which to interpret the behavior of these idiot-logues.

Anonymous said...

KC--off topic, but why do so many posters capitalize "lacrosse"?

I'm baffled.

Anonymous said...

Baffled enough to divert the discussion.

Anonymous said...

Hal is a dope. Does anyone know if he still has a jobe? With a major blunder like his June column, he should be pounding the payment? Did he write an essai after the AG declared innocent?

Anonymous said...

In all fairness, the new "NPAT" (Nifong's People Appreciation Tax)should be assessed only on those people who continue to appreciate Nifong and denigrate the lacrosse team. Catotti should be at the top of that list.... along with the DAMN Appreciation Week participants -- all 4 of them.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

re: anon 12:16

Sorry but the slightly left of the typical lefty described in Professors Johnson's post are NOT far far left and should give anyone who has not yet given up on the PC left pause.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...,

Sorry GS and 12:19, I meant 12:19 in my prior post not 12:16.

Joe T. said...

I think the Durham Peoples' Alliance is just a silly shabby little Marxist group in the long run. The one answer I got from an email to them re. the Duke lax situation was "Well, we wouldn't have supported Nifong if we knew...hindsight is 20/20..." Very vague. Then they said I can't change anything unless I JOIN them.

Anonymous said...

You are wasting your
time with the white liberals.

It is the NAACP and the
Committee that run things
in Durham.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

In my opinion, the African American community of Durham never supported Nifong - they only supported his attempt to jail 3 innocent white Duke students because it satisfied their racism and self-pity. Now that Nifong has failed to do that, the AA community of Durham is deserting him. Unfortunately, they have not deserted their hate.

Or is it perhaps that I'm misinterpreting the NCNAACP, Wahneema Lubiano, Solomon Burnette, the majority of students at NCCU, etc.?

Anonymous said...

Progressives are, in general, Stalin's "useful idiots". When will they ever learn. Apparently never.

bill anderson said...

Durham simply has the kind of political base that invites this kind of government abuse. While I am not a "good government" goo-goo, I do have some basic expectations of people in positions of authority, while people of the left do not.

When I was in college the hard left was going ga-ga over Mao and the alleged "economic miracle" he had rendered in China. Indeed, it was a reverse miracle, and there were millions of dead people in his wake, but they constantly were giving the "you must break eggs if you want an omelet" line.

To many of the Durham leftists, they are not outraged at the injustice of the case, but rather the fact that they believe Nifong "botched" it. The People's Alliance would have been quite happy for wrongful convictions, since those convictions would have fit their tortured worldview.

I am glad you pointed out the role of Durham's hard left, K.C. Those people richly deserve the criticism you laid on them.

Anonymous said...

If these far left people would turn around, they could shake hands with any other horrible extremist group from the far right. They are awful. They are a fringe of unfair arrogant corruptness that encircles the city of Durham and academia itself. They deny the very rights that they proclaim to defend . . . what frauds.

mac said...

Dinesh D'Souza's "The Enemy At Home"
doesn't seem so outlandish when
you consider Catotti's obscene
attempt(s) at reasoning.

Has Catotti been taking Rosie lessons,
or has her prescription for
Thorazine run out?

mac said...

6:43

You're right about that: maybe
Fred Phelps' group of protesters
who show up at military funerals
to mock soldiers' deaths could
join in with their lefty brethren,
who also cheer our losses.
Phelps' group is so far to the
right, they think Reverend Falwell
was a flaming liberal!
(I guess compared to them, he was.)
They regularly parade with signs that say:

"God hates fags!"

What a fine breeding pair if you
got Catotti together with Phelps!

rrhamilton said...

Note to amac,

My delayed reply to your challenge has been posted in the comments to "The Deutsch File".

Anonymous said...

The inbred thought of the left is truly baffling. Their concept of justice is along the lines of an equal sharing of misery.

gak said...

gs said...
I wonder if she realizes how much Nifong and the DPD is going to cost Durham in the resulting lawsuits.


I wonder if any suits will come of this? Is there a legal expert who has knowledge of timeframes and deadlines to file???

Anonymous said...

Expect the lawyers to wait until after Nifong's hearing.

If he shows up.

The Lax player's lawyers get to look through all the sworn testimony provided by Nifong, the DPD, and Meehan at the hearing when the bar lawyers ask tough questions.

Anonymous said...

8:05--
That makes sense. I don't know the statute of limitations in NC, but I assume there is still plenty of time for suits to be filed if they are going to be--especially since it's only a couple of months since the charges were dismissed.

And the bar hearing might provide a lot of very useful free discovery to determine whether a lawsuit is viable and how it should be approached--especially with respect to getting around prosecutorial immunity. As has been pointed out in this blog and elsewhere in the past, this could depend on demonstrating that Nifong did, in fact, assume control of the police investigation and, by doing so, stepped out of his prosecutorial role.

WannabeAnglican said...

Being Leftist means never having to say you're sorry.

Hman said...

I have absorbed the idea that a basic disconnect exists between the world of Durham politics and the wider world of Light and Truth simply because most all communication within Durham-Land is by word of mouth. There, dialogue about this case has all been a matter of over-the-back-fence sharing of rumors and innuendoes. "I heard from someone in the DAs office that ...".
In other words, Durham in Wonderland has been a place where folks are un-used to defending or even explaining their sourses or the exact wording of their own statements about even the most important matters. They are too much at home living and thinking in a fog of deniability; if they are for some reason required to make sense of their opinions, on the record, they are like a fish out of water.
Perhaps this explains the almost invariable tone of anger and defensiveness in their written/ on the record comments.

Anonymous said...

I live in Durham, and if am called for jury duty in a criminal case, there's no doubt in my mind what I will tell the Judge:

"I cannot serve, because the Durham district attorney is a known criminal and a liar. I am afraid that I might let a guilty person go free, because I cannot believe anything whatsoever that comes out of the DA's office, as long as Mike Nifong holds power."

If we get enough citizens saying similar things when called for jury duty, the Judges will make damn sure something happens.

Gary Packwood said...

WannabeAnglican 9:07 said...

...Being Leftist means never having to say you're sorry.
::
True and I will add...while writing the Book of Counted Sorrows.
::
GP

bill anderson said...

K.C.,

Remember, in challenging the charges against Reade, Collin, and David, you also challenged the deeply-held religious beliefs of Durham's far left. Remember, it was the left that drove this case in the early days, as the pot bangers and Sam Hummel and others already had organized a number of protests before the NAACP was involved.

Thus, the repudiation of these charges also was the repudidiation of the religion of the left. That they could not stand.

kenb said...

Phelps' group is so far to the
right, they think Reverend Falwell
was a flaming liberal!

Wasn't Phelps himself a liberal? I understand he was a Democrat who was heavily involved in the civil-rights movement.

Someone like him is the total antithesis of both true conservatism and true liberalism.

Anonymous said...

Is anyone else as appalled as I am that Mike Nifong is STILL the Durham DA?

It's unbelievable that this man continues to hold office with the support of the likes of Catotti. I'm looking forward to the proceedings on June 12 and I'm hopeful that Nifong will be disbarred but even then he can continue to hold office until he exhausts all appeals.

Someone please tell me I'm wrong.

Will Hudson rule on Beth Brewer's motion after the bar proceedings or after the appeals run out?

Nifong has to go!

Anonymous said...

So let's see... you have a DA who gives three different excuses for why he failed to disclose evidence, lies in open court, and is called a rogue by the AG....you have a Professor who accuses her students of being accomplices to rape in writing and then flunks a student who doesn't deserve it.....and you have a coach who just took his team to the National Championship game and his players have a party with strippers.

Who should be fired and who should keep their jobs?

I hope all the residents of Durham and the students, alumni, and parents at Duke realize what laughingstocks their city and school are due to their behavior in this case.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn-
You said it all perfectly!

Anonymous said...

Re:

"Imagine if the situation were the reverse: a race-baiting DA, aided and abetted by a police force that routinely violated its own procedures, orchestrated the indictments, without probable cause, of three poor, black women. Does anyone believe that...."


Various people have used this argument throughout the case, but for some reason it doesn't get much traction with people who are not already on board. I don't know why. Maybe it's because the argument, at its core, is an allegation of hypocrisy, and who wants to admit to being a hypocrite?

Does someone have a suggestion for another form of argumentation that might somehow prove the same point?

Ken Duke

Anonymous said...

Ken Duke:

Your wrote:

""Imagine if the situation were the reverse: a race-baiting DA, aided and abetted by a police force that routinely violated its own procedures, orchestrated the indictments, without probable cause, of three poor, black women. Does anyone believe that....""

For an interesting case study on this exact phenomenon, you do not have to look much further than the former Special Narcotics division of the Los Angeles Police Department in the 1990s. Probably the picture perfect example of what you described above, and far more than 3 men were caught in that web of criminal activity by the powers that be (or, more accurately, that were before they themselves landed in jail).

Anonymous said...

Q: When will Easley demonstrate leadership and courage?

May 31, 2007 12:08:00 AM

A: When he announces his proposed new tax increase!

Anonymous said...

NPR, in their report about the NCAA grants waiver, also said the Duke lacrosse players were declared INNOCENT of all charges. Hard work from the blogs, etc. is changing the views of those who are slowly willing to listen. To be commended.

Anonymous said...

Ah yes, the imfamous "gangster cops" of the LAPD.

Doesn't take much research to find stuff on the web, like this small example:

"In 1989 patrol officers in the 77th Street Division in south central Los Angeles shot and barely missed killing John Shelton, a 30-year-old black man, in the course of an investigation of the theft of some beer and pocket change at a gas station parking lot. The officers claimed that they thought Shelton had pointed a gun at them from a shooting stance. Sergeant Stacy Koon, later infamous as the supervisor of the Rodney King beating, rolled up to the scene. The victims of the theft immediately told police that Shelton was not the man who had robbed them. Koon nevertheless ordered Shelton booked for the crime, and ordered coins planted in Shelton's pocket to falsely link him to the theft, while an ambulance took him bleeding to the hospital.

Not one of the dozens of officers at the scene protested. The OIS (officer involved shooting) investigation team whitewashed the shooting and Chief Daryl Gates and the police commission adopted its conclusions. Although the criminal charges against Shelton were eventually dropped, later an officer falsely testified at a parole violation hearing that Shelton had been positively identified by the victims, resulting in Shelton's incarceration for 18 months."

bill anderson said...

Given that post, I think we can be thankful that the DPD did not try to plant the players' DNA in certain places. All I can say about the previous post is that it leaves me nearly (emphasis on "nearly") speechless.

This is absolute depravity. No doubt, the police there claim to "protect and serve." Yes, protect and serve -- each other.

By the way, if the LAPD members have such little conscience that they would permit a man to wrongfully go to prison, is it any wonder that we have a "blue wall of silence" with the DPD?

Anonymous said...

Don't forget Seligmann's words when he was acquitted. "This case has opened my eyes to a world of injustice I never knew existed."

**** this idiot hack reporter.

Anonymous said...

***Don't forget Seligmann's words when he was acquitted. "This case has opened my eyes to a world of injustice I never knew existed."***

Yes, I remember this statement well. I admired their resolve throughout, but began to admire them more as quality men as time went on and you got to learn more about them. This type of statement -- rather than spewing vitriol and hate for those who wronged them after so much had been expressed against them -- is incredible and a testament to their character. Impressive that they think of broader injustices when so much had been done to them.

Anonymous said...

TO "mac" 6:48AM--

Dinesh D'Souza is brilliant, although he sometimes comes off as smarmy.

His take on the Far Left vs. the Far Right battle in America is quite interesting. His analysis is one from a very well-educated East Indian man who has vast experience with cultures around the globe.

Most Liberals can't stand him for many reasons. They can't use the same tired stereotypes with which to criticize......yet if D'Souza were not so brilliant and well-educated, he might have ended up coming to America and living like a parasite the way the Liberals would have liked.

East Indians like D'Souza are very much like other Asians who come to this country. Most work very hard and most are quite successful at the rigorous Ivy league schools. They have no intention of buying into the Liberal playbook just because they aren't considered "white".

A past acquaintance of mine with whom I would go to dinner on occasion when he was in the psychiatry department at Duke once made the comment that he had very little contact with black people. He spoke about the issue as if it were some far away, almost alien, topic to him.

I was a bit surprised. I don't think many Liberals understand that not all people of color from around the globe--especially the well-educated--identify themselves as a "minority" to be given victimhood status.

Antipodal, that.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

Embracing the status quo has always worked for Durham. Few of the left wing nuts--black or white--have any intention of catching another train until they are kicked off the wayward one they're on.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

"Liberal playbook"? What a joke.

Get over yourself Debrah. Liberals all over the US of A work harder than you, earn more money than you, are smarter than you, etc. Plus, Clinton drastically cut welfare.

What is this whole "liberals want people to do nothing and leech off the government" crap? Its one hell of a talking point, but in reality, the only arguments made about it are so theoretical that they sound like college professors in ivory towers:

"Liberals seek to perpetuate a system wherein the downtrodden remain so, in order that they may continue to advocate for such benefits and appear to be helping those who cannot understand the deeper issues, which will in turn secure their voting base in said communities."

Theoretical, conservative ivory tower crap. I know of no such reality. I'm a pretty liberal guy and I have no clue what Debrah is talking about.

As a matter of fact, Debrah herself and other conservatives are the only people I've ever heard say this idiotic stuff... perhaps its really YOUR idea?

Anonymous said...

Hey Debrah, sweet talking points!

I recently heard a few more extremely substantive talking points:

Freedom Ain't Free

These Colors Don't Run

America: Love it or Leave it.

The great thing is that you don't have to serve or contribute to the War effort in order to say the first two slogans. The third one, however, is problematic, because liberals and Democrats can now say this to conservatives and Republicans.

Anonymous said...

Diane Catotti is the "white" equivalent of Victoria Peterson (only more "educated"?). The People's Alliance is just as dangerous as the Durham Committee for the Affairs of Black People. I totally agree with anon 9:56:
"I cannot serve, because the Durham district attorney is a known criminal and a liar. I am afraid that I might let a guilty person go free, because I cannot believe anything whatsoever that comes out of the DA's office, as long as Mike Nifong holds power."

Anonymous said...

Der Fonger a "known criminal"? Well, not just yet. I do think the speech would work to free yourself from jury duty though.

Anonymous said...

1:47 I don't even know Debrah's last name. How do you know what she makes or how smaret she is?

Gary Packwood said...

Diane Catotti has earned a masters degree in public health - health policy and administration...from UNC.

Also, her council seat is At-Large.

Public Health people with an emphasis area in health policy and administration are about as left of center as you can get.

She should know many of the G88 at Duke.

As a policy person she is going to be concerned about any investigation of the Durham PD because of the connections that will be made by the investigators ...back to Duke University.

We'll want to know much more about her involvement with this case, I would think
::
GP

Anonymous said...

This Hal Crowther Indy issue is quite amusing to me considering big Hal's history commenting on sports.

I recall as if it were yesterday a long and tedious article---(think mint julep-esque writing by the syrupy lisper, Allan Gurganus)---which Crowther wrote for the Indy about Jim Valvano.

Although the article was drawn out and much too long, I totally agreed with it and called Crowther by phone to praise his efforts in support Valvano at the time.

Many were critical of Valvano because of recruitment methods---admitting lots of guys who did not remotely meet academic requirements, etc....---even as they reveled in the successes Valvano pulled off for his university for many years.

Crowther's approach was much different then. He didn't lambaste the team or the coaches or the entire "brutish" nature of college athletics as he has done with such vitriol when writing about the Duke lacrosse players.

Very curious.

What's with big bad Hal these days?

Early onset? Is his "inner" aging hippie calling?

A need for the attention he was getting by going along with those in Nifong Land? After all, in the beginning, Mike Nifong and his salivating janissaries in Durham were set to be known around the world as heroes....riding on the Soul Train of justice against three "rich" Dukies who had a bad "misogynistic" attitude. And let's not forget this: They were racists!!!!!!!!

Has big Hal become disillusioned with athletics in general, or does he just have a vendetta hard-on for lacrosse players? Did a lacrosse player steal his girlfriend when he was at university? That would not have been difficult as the most attractive feature about Crowther is his usual ablilty to write well.

Does big Hal owe Duke administrators more loyalty than he did Valvano's N.C. State at the time? Duke must have poured a little more gravy on his summer "writing class" funds.

What was it Hal?

Why would you have written something so vile last year, months after the hoax began.....when by then any intelligent person who knows how to read knew all about the total lack of evidence.

Yet you bulldozed on like a maniac after a mule and 40 acres.

What do you see in your mirror these days, big Hal?

I have no idea what your "inner" self reveals; however, your "outer" is quite clearly one of a journalistic whore.

Debrah

Gary Packwood said...

anonymous 12:08 said...

....Durham's far left, many Duke professors, corrupt Durham police, a corrupt city — an embarrassment to Governor Easley's North Carolina. When will Easley demonstrate leadership and courage?
::
I think Easley crawled way out there towards the end of his political limb with the innocent declaration.

It is up to Durham, Duke and Duke Alumni now to pull out the power washer and start cleaning the hard to reach places that they all have been avoiding all these years.

Easley has done enough.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

TO 1:47PM--

FYI, I'm not a "conservative". I'm still a registered Democrat, if you can believe that, and vote a la carte...for the candidate, not the party.

I just allow any of you to jump to your Liberal stereotypical conclusions because I literally don't give a damn.

I have always been socially liberal--(pro-choice and pro-anything you want to do if you can pay for it). I literally don't care what other people do. It's their business.

What I and many others are against are the fascist methods of a poison element of the Democratic Party.

I won't abide reverse racism and using other people, harming them, for a polical agenda.

I'm always attacked for my panoramic candor. It's just a part of my personal charm. No one who tries to do harm is spared.

Nor should they be by any of us.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

Make that political

Debrah

Anonymous said...

I do not think the Judge would let you get through your speech - they are not big into lecturing. It would sure brighten the day of the folk in the court room.

Anonymous said...

"What I and many others are against are the fascist methods of a poison element of the Democratic Party."

The "poison" element you refer to comprise a very, very small portion of the Democratic party at large. In case you haven't realized, most people on both sides of the aisle can be characterized as "normal", and aren't zealots.

Liberal college professors obviously are a part of the fringe. But what is lost on you, Debrah, is that the total number of those who comprise this looney fringe do not exceed the number of those on the right.

The equivalent of the "white men and America are evil" crowd are those who don't believe in evolution and think you'll go to hell if you voted for John Kerry because of his stance on abortion.

On both sides, these elements are referred to as "the base", but as we see with Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton being the frontrunners for their respective parties this time around, both parties seem to have abandoned their fringy bases, paying only lip service to their ideals (suddently war-hawk Hillary doesn't like war and Rudy can't talk enough about how much he hates abortion).

Yes, I realize that in the Duke case, the bad guys were largely professors of the liberal variety. Understood. But Debrah, the problem isn't that you made this observation... my big problem with most of the posts here is that they try and drag in everyone who might be labeled as a "liberal" or "Democrat" with the looney fringe that is the functional political and percentage equivalent of Jerry Falwell's church.

Keep in mind that on both sides, these fringy elements do have substantial voting power and a ton of money... but also keep in mind that the moveon.org crowd and George Soros are just similar figures to money-men on the right. O'Reilly likes to rant and rave about Soros, but if he did his homework and wanted to be "balanced", he'd find plenty of our enemies had donated substantial sums of money to the Bush admin., including business interests in the electricity and power grid lobbies from Iran. And this liberal guy who criticizes America is the dangerous one?

Just keep in mind most people are normal. Maybe those on the right jumped to defend the lax players before the facts were in and those on the left thought it probably happened before the facts were in... but the normal people were all capable of changing their opinion as the matter unfolded... as I'd expect those on the right to have done if the facts unfolded differently.

Just remember, most people are normal and a lot of these posts turn them off because they are in essence being attacked for not being conservative or Republican.

mac said...

1:47 pm

Leave Debrah alone.
She made a good point,
and you took a snippet
and made it into a
cause.

Dennis Miller said he was
a liberal until he got tired of
saying: "yeah, but..."

Many of us were liberals when
we were younger, but got tired
of making excuses for people
(of all races) who expect us to
care more for their well-being
than they're willing to care
for themselves!

I work in a "helping profession,"
and I won't waste my time with
people who not only won't help
themselves, but couldn't be
bothered to help anyone else
if someone else - God forbid -
should ever need their assistance!

Anonymous said...

TO 3:05PM--

I can agree with much of what you're saying. There are extremes in every group, especially inside the political arena......however.....

.....I don't think I will ever get over watching the indifference of the liberals and those who identify themselves as Democrats as they watched these three Duke guys be railroaded....as they watched in Durham as their lives were threatened by the New Black Panthers.....as they watched and verbally contributed to the hoax as the residents in Trinity Park did.

Why didn't Mayor Bell and the council come out and denounce the tactics and the threats made by the NBPP?

Why did they not come out against Chan Hall, Solomon Burnette, and the other strange students at NCCU who made Charles Manson's insanity look almost benign?

Let me tell you one thing: The only people who have ever tried to muzzle my opinions are the rabid Liberals. Not the over-zealous fringe of the conservative right.

Although they do not agree with me, they have never employed such fascist tactics that we see from the loony Rosie, Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, and Soros fringe.

There is a kind of indecent sense of entitlement that the Liberal fringe feel they have. They preach that they are "do-gooders", and by G/d, you had better listen and accept what they say! Otherwise, they begin the kind of rampage that we saw from Duke's Gang of 88.

It's scary, actually. And George Soros isn't even an American, yet with his billions he tries to destroy the country.

If you want to know where I really stand on most all issues, just listen to Dennis Miller. That's where I am.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

To 3:24PM--

So funny that you bring up Dennis Miller at the very same time and used him to illustrate my viewpoint.

Indeed, you understand this dilemma. Many of all political stripes will have to re-examine themselves and what they truly stand for after this Duke lacrosse case.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

I actually do recall conservatives trying to get various books banned from public school libraries and to ban the teaching of evolution, or force the teaching of religion in biology classes.

I also recall that churches informed their parish that supporters of John Kerry may not take communion there.

I recall Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson telling people that they'll burn in hell for being different (i.e., gay).

And as for telling people to shut up, perhaps you don't remember the post-9/11 climate in America. Perhaps you don't remember how terrified wimps in Congress were to criticize the President or vote against the War. Perhaps you forgot that legitimate dissent against the administration during the build-up to the War in Iraq was called treason by the most popular conservative commentators out there.

Anyway, as for "watching the Duke guys get railroaded", that would certainly be wrong... but it seems that many here haven't even heard of the "LA ganster cops", and I'm not sure why liberals should be expected to care so much about the Duke 3 if conservatives don't seem to care about an entire decade+ of extreme abuses by the LAPD against thousands of citizens who didn't have the means to protect themselves.

When you defend the Dukies, it is virtuous... when liberals decry the activities of the LAPD, they're apparently linquini-spined liberals who hate cops.

Anonymous said...

Again, Debrah... if this Duke case made you re-think who you were politically, you must really need to read more. This is a very big country and the EXACT type of behavior exhibited by Nifong and his cronies has been exhibited constantly throughout the US.

Those who criticized the law enforcement activities were not considered heroes like KC, but liberals who only wanted to attack cops and prosecutors.

Legal Eagle said...

Re: jury duty - Upon hearing your objections, a Durham judge would threaten contempt. Better to phrase your concerns about the DA as questions, or just keep quiet.

Ultimately, it's better to serve, this is where your experience will do the most good. Otherwise, you wash your hands of the court's corrupt devices, followed by another innocent person going to prison.

Anonymous said...

TO 3:36PM--

Both the now-dead Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are too extreme for me. I have never listened to them except when they have appeared on various political talk shows.

Falwell had a humble and respectful personality--so Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have said. Both liked him even though their views were 180 degrees apart. I also recall that Falwell had the sense to apologize for his over-zealous statements.

You will never hear Pat Robertson, Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton apologize for anything.

There's something about the dog-eared Pat Robertson that makes my skin crawl. The shocker is that he has a university with a law school. One can imagine the losers who graduate from there.

Lawyers working for the Lord

I despise these religious frauds.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

Debrah:

"Although they do not agree with me, they have never employed such fascist tactics that we see from the loony Rosie, Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, and Soros fringe."

So do you stand for the proposition that this administration, substantially backed by prominent politicians and the most popular conservative commentators -- almost uniformly Republicans -- did not attempt to root out any and all dissent through labeling dissenters as "traitors", "un-American", etc., and that they didn't use fear "mushroom cloud" to shut people up?

I certainly remember this period differently than you do! Hey, remember when Bill O'Reilly called people who disagreed with the Iraq War "bad Americans"? That was truly an invitation for reasonable, sensible debate.

Sean Hannity did the same thing (remarkably, he still does). As does Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. Granted, these are just commentators, but the anti-dissent attitude was absolutely rampant during the buildup to the War in Iraq.

I cannot think of a better example of shouting those you disagree with down than conservatives during the Iraq War buildup. Issues of war and peace compising the most important decisions a society can make, this attitude was particular egregious. No?

I can't stand Dennis Miller, just as an aside. Its not his politics, but his sense of humor I find offensive. The whole Monday Night Football gig was a fiasco from the start (the comparisons to mythical figures and the ancient Greeks/Romans were lost on almost all football fans). Talk about an ivory tower guy... talks just like a professor or something. I can't find humor in that.

mac said...

3:36

True enough: there've
been lots of people wrongfully
accused. Some have actually
been sentenced to death without
benefit of a trial, and innocent
children died with them.

Can any self-decribed "liberal"
name these incidents?
Can any self-described "conservative"
name them?

mac said...

Hint: there are two of them.
2nd hint: whacko Soros
named his organization
similarly.

Anonymous said...

mac:

I'm an ex-firefighter and an attorney. There is a concept called "flashover" that is now generally accepted and occurs when a room is engulfed in flames.

It was not generally accepted in previous decades and many men were put to death because the naturally-occurring phenomenon of "flashover" makes the ground in a home or taxpayer building look exactly like someone dumped gasoline on the floor and lit it up.

Dozens of convictions were overturned, and more than a few death sentances were already handed down and meted out before flashover theory became generally accepted.

I can name many other instances were injustices were committed, as I was forced to take criminal law, criminal procedure, advanced criminal procedure, constitutional law I and con law II, etc., during law school, and take a general scholarly interest in due process, overreaching, criminal protections, rights of the accused, 4th Amendment, etc.

mac said...

4:08
Getting warm...(another hint)
I was thinking of 2 specific instances
where agents of the government
("agents" in the sense of
carrying out any duty or
obligation) were either directly
or indirectly involved in
the demise of the occupants.

mac said...

OK. No bait bitten.

The Move House in Philly,
and the Branch Davidian compound
in Waco Texas.

Wonder if Soros used the "Move"
from those folks for his organization?

Anonymous said...

TO "mac"--

You and the poster "Spook" are very funny.


Debrah

Anonymous said...

Spook and Amac,

For a $5 glass of white wind and a Big Mac (pun, that), I can be yours.

Me, that,

Debrah

mac said...

Debrah,

Thanks.

"Clowns to the left of me,
jokers to the right:
stuck in the middle with you."

Anonymous said...

TO "mac"--

Obviously, you know that the (4:56) post is the mental case and stalker Polanski.

He never gives up his tired Sybil act.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

Legal Eagle said...

"Re: jury duty - Upon hearing your objections, a Durham judge would threaten contempt. Better to phrase your concerns about the DA as questions, or just keep quiet."

--------

Admittedly my post was a bit flamboyant, if not over-the-top in its specific language.

But I doubt that a judge would hold me in contempt for expressing my doubt, during jury selection, about whether I can "give a fair trial to the State," in view of what we now know about the Durham District Attorney.

And although it would be more fun to make a raucous speech out of it (which would force the Court to dismiss the entire panel of veniremen), I think I could say whatever I wanted about Nifong, short of obscenity and abuse, if I first politely ask to approach the bench to describe my "concern" to only the Judge and counsel.

This could put a serious hurtin' on the criminal justice system in a big hurry, and something would have to give -- and it would be Nifong.

Besides, it's just being honest. But thanks for your thoughts.

Anonymous said...

Debrah @ 5:09

That goddam idiot Polanski continues to hang around on KC's blog all day and night. He's written stuff like 4:56 all over the place.
This thread was enjoyable and the people here had a very productive dialogue. Polanski saw that and he did what he always does.
I wish there was some way to ban that idiot and put his goddamn ass in jail somewhere. He's probably a child molester by trade.

mac said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

3:05 says..

my big problem with most of the posts here is that they try and drag in everyone who might be labeled as a "liberal" or "Democrat" with the looney fringe

Problem is, all the institutional "Paid" liberals represented in Durham supported this frame-up; the NAACP, the mayor, the DA (obviously), Police Chief, the detectives in the DPD, the local reps in Congress (ie Price), the judges, and so on. These are people representing and supported by the so-called "normal" Democrats you applaud. This is an alarming and frightening abuse of power by the majority (as opposed to the underdog) .

As per typical liberal discourse, you choose to argue this is no different than supporting the LAPD and evangelical anti evolutionists and whatever. Sounds like sophistry and non-equivalence to me. In any event, it sounds like youve lost interest in this case and think theres nothing exceptional about it; possibly becuase it makes certain of your allies look bad. That says it all right there.

Anonymous said...

Now we have prospective jurist requesting "bench conferences" with the Judge. What jurisdiction do you live in?

Anonymous said...

6:17...

I didn't realize it was amateur psychologist day!

Anonymous said...

Debrah,

5:09 is not Polanski. It's me. I find your prose brilliant while managing to be highly erotic.

I'm shy. Have we met?

Tumescentus Maximus

One Spook said...

Debrah opines ...
Spook and Amac,

For a $5 glass of white wind and a Big Mac (pun, that), I can be yours.


OK ... so where can I buy "white wind" ... same place where I buy White Rain, perhaps?

One Spook

Anonymous said...

7:26
Try to keep up. That post was Polanski pretending to be Debrah. He's the village idiot and retard.

miramar said...

i can't believe that the indy really thinks that their comments on erick daniels are in any way original

months ago professor coleman noted on 60 minutes that if this is the way nifong treats rich white defendants, you can just imagine what he would do to poor black ones

instead of using this simple fact to dump on seligman, they should use it to reconsider their own position

Anonymous said...

6:17--

Insightful, indeed.

rrhamilton said...

anonymous @ 3:05 said:

First, quoting debrah as saying,]"What I and many others are against are the fascist methods of a poison element of the Democratic Party."

The "poison" element you refer to comprise a very, very small portion of the Democratic party at large. In case you haven't realized, most people on both sides of the aisle can be characterized as "normal", and aren't zealots.

Liberal college professors obviously are a part of the fringe. But what is lost on you, Debrah, is that the total number of those who comprise this looney fringe do not exceed the number of those on the right.


From what I've noticed, this is true as far as it goes: The percentage of loony-lefties in the Democratic Party does not exceed the percentage of raging-righties. Indeed, it may be slightly smaller.

However, the difference is that the fringe of the Dem Party dominates its upper echelons, whereas the same cannot be said of the fringe of the Republican Party. For instance, after Bush got probably 1/3 of his total 2000 vote from Christian fundamentalists, how many of them did he appoint to his cabinet? One. And look at how high your credentials have to be to get a seat at the cabinet table if you're a Christian fundamentalist: Former attorney general, governor, and senator of the most non-fringe state in the union. Moreover you have to have been elected president of the national associations of state attorneys general and state governors -- at a time when your party is in the minority. I'm speaking of course of John Ashcroft (and I rank Missouri as the "most non-fringe state in the union" on the basis that it has a better record than any other state, by far, of voting for the winner of every presidential election since 1900). With the departure of Ashcroft, the conservative Christians now have no "seat at the table"; meanwhile, the talking heads' new "symbol of rightwing extremism", Cheney does photo-ops with his out-of-wedlock grandchild.

Now look at the top echelon of the last Democratic Party administration. Donna Shalala, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Lani Guinier (Clinton tried to appoint her as Asst AG for Civil Rights(!)). Try to imagine a major Republican candidate appointing someone like Amanda Marcotte to a high-ranking campaign position.

So yes, there are lunatics in the GOP asylum, but once in power, the GOP tends to ignore them. The lunatics run -- at least a significant portion of -- the Democrat asylum. That's why so many of us here, including yours truly, are former Democrats.

R.R. Hamilton

Anonymous said...

8:21pm Hamilton

Re: The Cheneys. For me, what stands out about the "caring" liberals are people like John and Elizabeth Edwards. I feel sorry about her cancer, but millions of Americans get cancer and don't have the kind of money the have from suing the very medical system that is giving Elizabeth such good care. I hope she pulls through, but she has a very cancerous persona.
Edwards and his wife might be even more artificial that the Clintons. Forget about him getting $400 haircuts. Forget about them building a tasteless 6 million home. What reveals their true character is the way both of them continued to bring up Mary Cheney's lesbianism during the 2004 campaign.
Mary Cheney is not a public figure and the Edwards used a daughter of a rival as political fodder. I find the both of them repulsive and artificial. John Edwards will go nowhere.

rrhamilton said...

to anonymous @ 8:34 PM

I had forgotten that both Edwards and Kerry raised the issue of Cheney's daughter's lesbianism to try to make political hay in 2004. Good point.

Anonymous said...

I thought that Prof. KC Johnson himself is a liberal, so it's quite amusing to me reading all the liberal-bashing going on here. I'm a liberal, too, but I'm just as incensed at Knifong, the DPD, and the Group of 88 as much as the next fair-minded person. Oh well. Anyway, I was disappointed when the Indy endorsed Knifong for DA during the Nov elections. I certainly didn't vote straight ticket that time.

A Giving Person said...

How can I help defend Durham status quo? Being a giving person, I'm there to help.

AGP

Anonymous said...

10:59

Oh, hello Mikey.
Thanks, but no thanks.