Interesting opinion on the case: http://www.amsterdamnews.org/News/article/article.asp?NewsID=42218&sID=34
Wasn’t Maddox one of her lawyers? (Along with Sharpton)
Yes, he was.
I don’t know, that’s tricky. Murders happen during robberies all the time. Blacks commit alot of crime also. So it wasn’t necessarily a “racial” thing, just b/c the guy was black in the Chuck Stuart thing. Sure it was ugly after it came out that he was blaming the black man but it’s not like whites were ready to storm the black section of town in revenge.
Now, the accusation against the whites (and they were specific named whites to boot) was that they engaged in raping a black girl b/c she was black and they hated blacks. The words written on her were the “n” word, etc. So this could be logically seen as something that would enflame a whole community (the black community) against the white devils who are lynching and raping them. Thus the references to “look at all the shades of colors on the black faces in this room…that’s evidence that whites have been raping blacks for years!”. That’s deliberately racially indendiary rhetoric.
The Chuck Stuart thing was not really racial at all from the whites point of view, just another “crime gone bad” type of thing.
On the second page and nobody has mentioned that even after everything that Sharpton has done, he is still courted by the DNC? Golly, why would the DNC just sort of brush over his attempts at inciting riots and whatnot? One would think that if they had so much as a shred of integrity, they would distance themselves as far as possible from that damned weasel, but apparently not…
Are you done with the partisan crap, or do you need to hijack a couple more threads? What the hell was the point of this comment?
LOL. His point was obvious. Why would the Democrats court a race-baiting publicity seeking liar who used a hoax to create his career? A guy who indirectly caused the murder of people at Freddy’s Fashion; “burn it down!, burn it down!”.
Seems kind of odd. Kind of like the Republicans courting David Duke. But wait, they didn’t do that.
The answer to the question is that the Rev. Al is popular amongst many blacks. He also has that “pull no punches, say anything you please” style that pleases many progressives. He’s an effective speaker even though much of what he says (IMO) is nonsense.
I presume you had a point of your own to make? If so, you keeping it ultra-top-secret.
-
Sharpton is an asshat. He is racist. He is a blatant race-baiter, among other things.
-
Democrats fall over themselves to be seen next to him, and to be nice to him, even though (see #1 above), Sharpton is racist and race-baiter.
-
If the DNC was chock-a-block full of integrity, they would kick him to the curb. Yet they do not.
-
Ditto the above for Jesse Jackson.
Or, what kennybath said.
Interesting? Weird, disjointed, and divorced from reality is my take on it. Is “impliedly” a word? For a lawyer, he’s not much of a writer.
OK, one interesting point. Why hasn’t Tawana been charged? I would assume it is simply that everybody would like the whole ugly, sordid mess to just go away.
Of course Sharpton and Jackson should go away, and speaking as a loyal Democrat, I wish they would.
The problem is that, in tolerating Sharpton and Jackson, the Dems have made a deal with the devil. The party knows that the two can deliver huge blocs of voters come Election Day. In exchange for these votes, the Democratic Party has to put up with some obnoxious behavior.
It’s really no different from the Pubbies’ tolerance of extreme social conservatives; for example, single-issue anti-abortion activists. In exchange for the social-conservative bloc, the Pubbies occasionally have to put up with the embarrassment when one of them blows up a clinic.
Robin
Do you guys MIND? I did NOT start this thread to be yet another debate between left and right.
If you want a thread about Al Sharpton and the DNC, would you please just start your own? Thank you.
That would be a fair point, if the GOP was actively courting a clinic bomber, which to the best of my knowledge, they are not. It’s one thing to go after a particular voter block; It is another to court an individual who is beneath contempt.
Get over it. How many fine threads went the way of ‘Bush did it!’?
Sorry, Guin. One more post, I promise.
Brutus, the Pubbies may not actively court clinic bombers per se, but they do court extreme social conservatives, some of whom are anti-abortion activists, and a few of whom may participate (or have participated) in acts of violence against clinics. Witness Bush’s campaining to churches, and the marriage between the Pubbies and the Christian Coalition.
Robin
And this has what to do with the price of tea in China?
Just because you presume that a certain percantage of pro-life activists are clinic bombers don’t make it so. You are dealing in the realm of the hypothetical, when what we have here is a case of a known asshat, Sharpton, being actively courted by DNC leadership. Not a case of ‘may’ or ‘might’, but a case of confirmed asshat-ery.
Ahem. Re Tawana:
I will say that she was instantly believed by almost everyone, black and white, and it was a huge scandal and source of shame in predominantly white neighborhoods like mine before the hoax was revealed. And when it was, my friends and I didn’t think of it in racial terms, like “Another black criminal lying” but as “Another dumb girl in over her head lying.”
Any anger were reserved for Sharpton, Maddox et al. 
; the court officers in particular did not like the idea that they were all under suspicion as Klansmen rapists.
As for prosecution–I think people could tell that she was “not quite all there” and any value of justice that could be gained from making her pay for her lies was outweighed by the appearance of the state going after a girl who was, to say the least, overwhelmed with problems.