In the September 20 presidential press conference, CNN correspondent Suzanne Malveaux sought to blame President Bush and the GOP for a perceived nationwide deterioration in race relations. In doing so, Malveaux raised the plight of the so-called Jena Six, a group of black Louisiana teenagers charged in the beating of a white student.
Video (1:56): Real (1.41 MB) and Windows (1.18 MB), plus MP3 audio (904 kB).
Media outlets covering the controversy have generally skirted around reporting on the victim of the "Jena Six" assault, focusing more on the political dimensions of the controversy, particularly Thursday's Al Sharpton-led protests in the small Louisiana town. For example, in a separate post, NewsBusters contributor Matthew Balan notes how news outlets like CNN.com and USAToday are burying or ignoring details about victim of the Dec. 4, 2006 beating, Justin Barker.
Below are the questions Malveaux asked, as well as a separate "Jena Six" question posed by Michael Fletcher of The Washington Post, who the president referred to as "Fletch":
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN correspondent: Mr. President, thousands of people are marching today in Jena, La., in a racially-charged case involving six black students, the beating of a white student. Also not far from the White House recently there was a noose that was found hanging from a tree at a college campus. You have worked very hard to bring blacks and Hispanics into your party, but the fallout from the immigration debate and even some Republican presidential candidates' refusal to go to debates at Univision as well as Morgan State calls into question whether or not the state of race relations is deteriorating in this country and specifically in your party. Your thoughts?
MALVEAUX: Do you think this is a defining moment in race relations?
MICHAEL FLETCHER, WASHINGTON POST: What do you say to those who criticize you for not speaking out on the situation in Louisiana, particularly given your passionate remarks after Hurricane Katrina about race? People say you've fallen silent.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Who is responsible
September 20, 2007 - 12:55 ET by mattmWho is responsible for allegedly deteriorating race relations?
1. Race-mongering politicians. 2. Multiculturalists who enforce "group-ism" which is fascism. 3. Agenda-Driven Leftist media whores. 4. Rap "artists".
working splendidly - and
September 20, 2007 - 13:13 ET by TruthMongerworking splendidly - and all that's left is to blame conservatives via the MSM propaganda machine...
all too easy
these pondscum lying bastards are pro's:)!
Jena Six
September 20, 2007 - 13:10 ET by Dave RAll I am going to say about this is:
If this were six white students who had beaten a black student, white-guilt ridden racists (yes, I said racists) such as Suzanne Malveaux and the rest of the lilly-white MSM cabal, would be demanding they all be tried for a hate crime and be locked up for the rest of their lives.
Apparently among the lilly-white liberal MSM, it is now permissible for six black students to beat the crap out of a white student, and if arrested, the black students should be immediately released-all in the interest of maintaining good "race relations," of course.
I see no other possible interpretation here.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
While hanging a noose from
September 20, 2007 - 13:25 ET by drillanwrWhile hanging a noose from a tree is, at the least ... bad taste ... and at the very worst ... extreme insensitivity possibly bordering on threatening (since intent cannot be proven) ... somebody please tell me exactly who was personally physically harmed in the stupid act?
Now, someone wants that act given as much weight as six ganging up on and beating to a pulp one?
Intent?
September 20, 2007 - 14:10 ET by kdoliverWhat does intent or actual action have to do with anything? Its all about feelings.
http://thelazytriathlete.blogspot.com/
More importantly, it's not
September 20, 2007 - 14:17 ET by BruzillaMore importantly, it's not against any law in that state, which is why the state's attorney couldn't charge the noose hangers with anything.
Yes, but to the left,
September 20, 2007 - 14:37 ET by drillanwrYes, but to the left, especially the Al Sharptons and the MSM, that's beside the point ...
If this were six white
September 20, 2007 - 16:00 ET by mattmIf this were six white students who had merely been accused of subtly possibly threatening to beat a black student....
mattm,
September 20, 2007 - 16:18 ET by Dave RGood point.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Racists
September 21, 2007 - 08:16 ET by Sergeant ROCK..or merely hurting his feelings.
And this, on the heels of the Duke lacrosse debacle?
It's easy to point out who the racists are.
"...CNN correspondent
September 20, 2007 - 13:03 ET by Senior Chief"...CNN correspondent Suzanne Malveaux sought to blame President Bush and the GOP for a perceived nationwide deterioration in race relations."
Here we go again...GWB is the cause! He is the cause for this henous crime. Hey, he could be the cause for not acting like "white". He just can't get away with it. CNN and other leftoid media are to blame for inflaming race issues. Their negative remarks and lefty line of questionings regarding race-related incidents incites minorities to hate other groups of people so they could blame GWB, whom they say that he doesn't care about black people.
CNN and all you leftoid media, why don't you just report the crime- or the news for that matter- and let us sort it out? Or, let me, Senior Chief, US Navy, just take the blame for it would be easier. Maybe I can't, because I am brown...
Senior Chief -
September 20, 2007 - 13:36 ET by FastEdYou may be familiar with the hand signal, used on flight decks, where you place a fist into the other gripping hand, and pull it out - quickly. I would use this towards ALL the msm (Lsm) with the hope that they should "get their heads out of their assets"
Lest 'you forget though, they CAN'T blame you, goes against the agenda - but think it through, you can make a fortune if you make like a victim!
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
...hand signal, flight
September 20, 2007 - 15:36 ET by Senior Chief...hand signal, flight decks. You're taking me back to sea duty 3 months early, Ed. I can already smell the ocean breeze and the ship's stacks and afterburners and jet fuel and the 3' x 6.5' x 3' bunk. I can already hear my bunkmates loud snores. I forgot to mention: midnight underway replenishments, fire drills, engineroom drills, abandon ship drills, man overboard drills, General Quarter drills and all kinds of evolutions (besides our real work), cramped in a 24-hour period. But we all LOVE it!
I can't play victim, it's not in our clan's blood.
Bush Derangement Syndrome Much?
September 20, 2007 - 13:12 ET by monotonousboyIs there no end to the things that liberals in this country will blame on the GOP, and ultimately GWB himself? Saw a lady on the side of the road with a flat tire this morning, can anybody tell me where GWB was between 7:50 and 7:55 AM PST this morning? More importantly, where was Darth Cheney?!?!
BUSH RESPONSE: Okay,
September 21, 2007 - 06:45 ET by fosstenBUSH RESPONSE: Okay, Suzanne, let's see...[pulls out legal pad, starts scribbling]...you're blaming me for the attack of six African-American boys on a single white boy...let's add that to the list of all the other things I've been blamed for, including hurricane Katrina...what else?...Oh yes, global warming, the fact that Iran and North Korea hate us, all coal miner deaths, the Minnesota bridge collapse, 9/11, the Great Depression, the Genesis Flood (probably a Kyoto failure there too, right?). Did I miss anything?
MALVEAUX: [mouth open]
BUSH: Flies will get in there.
Forget 911, I dial 9MM.
The real story.
September 20, 2007 - 13:15 ET by Casey97http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/NEWS/70915030
Here is a local (liberal) paper, who has a FAQ about the Jena 6. This has less to do about racism, and more to do about 6 kids stomping another prone, knocked out kid in the face and head, until he bleed from his eyes, ears, nose and mouth.
/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-
With Democrat revisionist history and liberals guaranteeing the future (global warming, nuclear destruction, etc.) only the future is certain; the past is always changing.
See, as the ultimate
September 20, 2007 - 13:16 ET by AvatarSee, as the ultimate authority on justice and common sense, I don't weigh hanging nooses in a tree on the same scale as beating a student nearly to death. There is no comparison. Certainly the punk-asses responsible for the nooses should be punished (by the school and by their parents). These clowns savagely beat someone, and that's OK? What is it with these people defending violent people? First it was OJ, then Tookie "I want to reform gang violence, but i'm not sorry for using a sawed off on innocent people" Williams, now this? MLK Jr. would be beside himself seeing protests to save criminals from the just fruits of their actions.
Case Dismissed.
The Avatar,
Supreme Justice of Common Sense.
It reminds me of that
September 20, 2007 - 14:19 ET by sunandsteelIt reminds me of that episode of The Boondocks where MLK was only in a coma. He comes back and sees the mess that people of have made and proceeds to call them out on it in very colorful language. In the end they run MLK off. Its very annoying how these "reverands" Sharpton and Jackson continue to overlook what some of these people have done, just because they have a particular skin tone, they must be the "victims".
Texas has a population of nearly 21 million people, all of whom are ashamed to be from the same state as the Dixie Chicks. (IMAO.us)
Race Baiting???
September 20, 2007 - 13:29 ET by BarkerHas it been proven who put those nooses in the tree?
Reply.
September 20, 2007 - 13:36 ET by Dave in TexasYes. Check the link in Casey97's post. Thanks for providing that Casey97. As usual, it's impossible to get the relevant facts on this situation from the MSM.
Man, I hope the citizens of Jena are making a lot of money off this, because I'm sure all this stuff is really messing up their lives.
Fascinating, thanks
September 20, 2007 - 13:47 ET by sarcasmoIt's telling that the "mainstream" media wasn't able to tell me that, but even Casey97's link doesn't explicitly-mention the race of the perps. I think the principal's original decision to expell was a good one, though, regardless of race. I still find it odd and off-putting that the TV media are pretending that the noose-makers' identities aren't known. Why did I have to learn so-much from that link and so little from the more-highly-paid "journalists" covering the story???
For example, I'd also note the "mainstream" media has kept the hunting rifle suspension from us. It's a real pity gun owners don't get as organized as professional race-baiters. :( So what if a kid in Alabama wants a deer rifle in his car to kill Bambi after school -- sounds like a good idea to me -- but then, I love eating venison.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
No more
September 20, 2007 - 13:38 ET by sarcasmoThan it's been proven who recently defaced the Vietnam Memorial, but in both cases everyone seems to think they "know" who did it. I explicitly don't know or claim to know, in either case. (Personally, I'm inclined to believe videotape-only, in both cases, but that's sure to anger both sides which live to speculate!)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
No noose is good noose
September 20, 2007 - 13:40 ET by Casey97It has been proven in a court of law who hit the victim with a weight lifting bar, knocking him out, and then leading 5 of his cohorts to stomp the victim in the face and head. That person is Bell. Before Bell’s face dance on the victim, he was charged and adjudicated for 4 (FOUR) other violent felonies, within one year. The first offense Christmas Day 2005, and this attack happened December 4, 2006.
/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-
With Democrat revisionist history and liberals guaranteeing the future (global warming, nuclear destruction, etc.) only the future is certain; the past is always changing.
Understand
September 20, 2007 - 13:46 ET by cvgbuckeyeUnderstand one thing: When the liberals finally control the White House along with the legislature and then, in time, the supreme court; you had better get ready to see it legalized to half beat to death and nearly kill white people and ALL Conservatives. Of course Christians will be first to go, regardless of race.
If you think thats a radical statement, Al, Jesse and the boys are down there right now, wanting these beatings legalized.
By the way, do not ever think that this type of thinking just got started. It has been coming for 50 years and nobody seemed to care or were and are to afraid to speak up.
Racism is shameful and sinful but is not yet criminal; yet!
Just curious
September 20, 2007 - 13:38 ET by well99Did Malveaux speak out about this
http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2007/05/14/media-blackout-on-christian-newsom-murders/
I read this a while back.I thought it was interesting.
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/7170510
Talk about special interests ...
September 20, 2007 - 14:08 ET by KC MulvilleIf the archidiocese of New York decided to stage a debate at St. Patrick's Cathedral, would you expect the Democrats to all attend? No. Why should they? Since when does the archbishop of New York feel he has the right to summon candidates to explain themselves? Frankly, that's pretty arrogant, and I'd write the cardinal to butt his butt out. Invite, but don't demand. When I see organizations usurping the right to speak for minorities, and then expecting candidates to show up at their beck and call, that's just as arrogant.
And if there is a strain in the relations between races, why is the majority race expected to accept the assumptions of the minority? The answer is, they aren't ... unless a reporter can use it to hammer a conservative.
MICHAEL FLETCHER, WASHINGTON
September 20, 2007 - 14:22 ET by TEMICHAEL FLETCHER, WASHINGTON POST: "What do you say to those who criticize you for not speaking out on the situation in Louisiana, particularly given your passionate remarks after Hurricane Katrina about race? People say you've fallen silent." "People say you've fallen silent"? Translation: Race baiting leftists like Michael Fletcher "say you've fallen silent."
Wait a minute...There is no
September 20, 2007 - 14:31 ET by JerWait a minute...There is no question that "race hustling" has been and continues to be a troubling and divisive phenomenon in America, that it is often enabled by a compliant media, and the "Jena 6" incident may very well represent examples of both.
But, I have read and reread Ms. Malveaux's questions and cannot find where she "sought to blame President Bush...for a perceived deterioration in race relations". Indeed, the only direct statement about the President consists of a favorable reference to his efforts to bring blacks into the Republican party. Perhaps I overlooked something. Have I?
Thanks, Jer
The tie-in
September 20, 2007 - 15:02 ET by KC MulvilleIt's in the premise of the question. The GOP candidates are all white, of course, so Malveaux's assertion is that the GOP was making a racial statement by not attending the debate - which is crap. It's the same accusation they used against Bush for not attending the NAACP conventions over the years. It isn't racial; it's political. These are politically liberal organizations, most of which have displayed outright hostility and financial opposition to the GOP.
I reject the idea that these organizations "represent" blacks and hispanics, and that by refusing the demands of these organizations is - in any way - an insult against blacks and minorities. That confuses the distinction between political representation and ideological advocacy. As we all know, the one person who is supposed to represent the interests of all citizens, minorities included, is the one person elected by all citizens: namely, the president. Blacks and hispanics shouldn't be considered separate constituencies, but that's what these organizations promote, because it gives them the veneer of political legitimacy.
Interesting analysis,
September 20, 2007 - 16:08 ET by JerInteresting analysis, KC...and one with which I don't entirely disagree. Perhaps we can discuss it further sometime. Now, back to my question: Exactly where does Malveaux seek to "blame President Bush...for a perceived deterioration in race relations".
Thanks, Jer
The president leads the party
September 20, 2007 - 17:31 ET by KC MulvilleMALVEAUX: "calls into question whether or not the state of race relations is deteriorating in this country and specifically in your party."
She doesn't directly blame Bush through her words, but the premise of her question forces Bush to take the blame. As president, Bush is the leader of the Republican party. Malveaux portrays the GOP refusal to attend a minority debate as a racial decision. She clearly implies that the GOP refusal aggravates racial tensions, meaning she blames the GOP for causing the deterioration, and since Bush leads the GOP, she wants Bush to answer for it.
Her question requires that premise, so to ask the question is to assert the premise without saying it openly.
So KC, when Newt Gingrich
September 20, 2007 - 18:38 ET by JerSo KC, when Newt Gingrich stated a couple of days ago....
"For Republicans to consistently refuse to engage in front of an African American or Latino audience is an enormous error....by avoiding such debates, [Republican] candidates could further alienate minority voters"...
was he (as well as former RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman who echoed his remarks) blaming George Bush, the Republican party, all Republicans, just the Republican candidates, or exactly whom?
Jer
I love this kind of discussion - thanks
September 20, 2007 - 20:25 ET by KC MulvilleVery clever, Jer. I admire your rhetorical skill. However … logic must intrude … time for some distinctions …
Let’s start with the distinction between race and political ideology. Race should be utterly separate from ideology, but when it comes to minorities in this country, they’re not. The organizations that claim to represent minorities are overwhelmingly liberal. That puts the GOP in an impossible position. The liberals in those organizations create hostile environments for GOP candidates. The candidates correctly calculate that they get very little return for their efforts. So why waste precious resources to go into a hostile liberal environment? The GOP skips these debates because of the hostile ideology of the hosts, not their race.
Malveaux’ question doesn’t make that distinction. Her question presumes that the GOP refusal was a racial insult. Her question presumes that the GOP is skipping the debates because they’re black and Hispanic. She completely ignores the ideology involved, and that’s why her question is unfair.
Gingrich believes that conflict should provoke political conversation, not prevent it. Recall his Cooper Union debates with Mario Cuomo. He wants the different ideologies to talk to each other, because they’re at odds. Our conflicts are precisely why we should be talking. That’s why Gingrich advocates reaching out to every segment of the electorate, especially minorities.
Blame is a pejorative word. It implies a wrong. But Malveaux and Gingrich don’t use the concept in the same sense, univocally. Malveaux’ question portrays the GOP refusal as a racial insult and moral wrong. Gingrich’s argument is that the GOP refusal is a political wrong.
How can you test and prove the difference? Consider this: if we had a legitimate, conservative organization to advocate for minorities (or even a neutral ideological group), and they invited the GOP to debate, do you think the GOP would attend? In a heartbeat. What does that tell you?
Why Dims Won't Debate on Fox!
September 21, 2007 - 06:56 ET by PawpawNSo we can assume that Dims won't debate on Fox because they hate the majority of cable news viewers, a fair and balanced viewpoint, fair and balanced news, the Black Caucus, since they were the sponsors, and the list goes on and on! See how it sounds when one puts the HSU on the other PAW!!
Media is making it worse
September 20, 2007 - 14:40 ET by american-americanRace relations problems have been a black-eye in our history for as long as there have been black and white people in our country.
Their community has to find a way to solve this problem themselves. Activists and racially charged news coverage is only adding fuel to the fire they are living in. I fear that this will become much worse of a problem if the media and the talking heads continue to swarm those people.
Yes, it was a "hate crime" and they should be punished. But the boys that beat up the black kid (instigating the problems... ) that crashed the all-white party should also be charged with a hate crime, but they were not.
The three boys that hung the nooses, they were suspended from school for their ignorant stunt. But the race issue existed long before the nooses... hence the "white tree" where the nooses were hung.
I have never heard of
September 20, 2007 - 15:01 ET by drillanwrI have never heard of someone being beaten beyond bloody out of love ...
I'd say hate crime is pretty much redundant.
I agree with you
September 20, 2007 - 15:43 ET by american-americanI agree with you completely. I was dumbfounded when the "hate crime" laws were established.
But, people fought for that title for race-related crimes, and got it.
I've got a real problem
September 20, 2007 - 14:53 ET by MightyMouthI've got a real problem with the term "hate crime". This is a PC concept that I think is dangerous. If this idea were uniformily applied then half the congress would be thrown in jail for BDS and Bush hate.
The truth is I can hate anyone I choose and for any reason I choose. But crossing the line between hating and commiting an actual crime should not be blurred. A crime should be punished because it is against the law not because of my motivation for doing it.
As dispicible as it was, hanging nooses in a tree may have been hate, but NOT a crime. There is nothing in the constitution prohibiting hate. Nor should there be. Kumbya y'all.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
It's all about marxist control.
September 20, 2007 - 16:04 ET by c5thenThe "hate crimes" were put on the book to indoctrinate people into thinking that there are bad thoughts and that a crime commited because of the "wrong" intent is worse then the same crime commited because of a different intent. The next step is to make "hate speech" a crime. This means that the State can prohibit certain speech because of it's content and arrest anyone who disagrees with their way of thinking.
Lennin and Stalin would be proud.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
It's already happened.
September 20, 2007 - 18:37 ET by UndercoverConservativeGroup of self-described gay guys beat up a 'straight" guy who was in the wrong part of Castro Street, IIRC. Charges of Aggravated assault were reduced because they claimed the victim fired off an epithet first. Like, geez, people won't lie to save their skins? Even tho witnesses couldn't verify this at all?
At the same time, another case was going thru, where the "orientations' were reversed. Plenty of witnesses saying the victim was being a total arse and threw the first punch. The (I forget how many) group defended their friend and pounded the guy and threw him out. All were convicted of "hate" crimes, even when the "victim", to his credit, admitted he'd started the whole thing but CA DA's had too big of an agenda going to allow him to drop the charges.
It happens often where gangs of punks pick out their mugging victim and claim the victim called them racial epithets before assaulting and robbing them. It's pretty funny because the PC winds shift and now Hispanics are the favored child, so the african american gangsters find their old tactic doesn't work as well. Now the cholo's are using that tactic. It's even been applied for turf wars against Asian gangs, but as LE insiders tell me, it only works if there's no criminal record on the "victim" gang.
It's so bizarre sounding, it makes me think CA is the land beyond the looking glass.
Justice is supposed to wear a blindfold. But there are many cases on the books where the leftist thought police have changed that. Did it do a darned bit of good? The thought police experiment has failed. But the agenda'd folks just keep it going.
I understand the Al Sharpton
September 20, 2007 - 16:21 ET by c5thenWants blacks to be immune from prosecution when they commit crimes against whites. But whites have to be prosecuited for having illegal thoughts.
Can someone explain why he thinks that a Congressional commitee has jurisdiction over a State District Attorney? And why the MSM are not calling him on such a stupid and moronic idea?
Free the "Jena 6" because they are black. Hang the Duke Lacross players because they are white.
My my, Rev. King would be so proud.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
Uhh, c5,
September 20, 2007 - 20:57 ET by Dave RAnd why the MSM are not calling him on such a stupid and moronic idea?
LOL-I think we have a bit of an oxymoron going on here. A slightly disconnected one, I'll grant you, but an oxymoron just the same.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
When the liberal media
September 20, 2007 - 16:28 ET by msh1973When the liberal media refers to "people" what they really mean is "we".
Pleasantly Surprised
September 20, 2007 - 16:52 ET by CaringwhiteguyI didn't see the entire news conference, but I did see the interchange between the President and Malveaux. I must say from what I saw the President handled himself pretty well. He seemed more confident and focussed. I've had my days with the President and expressed plenty of frustration here about both policies and communications. Today I'm giving the guy high marks.
Racism
September 20, 2007 - 17:00 ET by seejay98% of interracial rape victims are White women.
98%!
How's those race-relations workin' out so far?
Remember,
September 20, 2007 - 17:22 ET by SlicksterIt's only a hate crime if committed by whites. I have zero sympathy for minorites, I lost any I had long ago.
I wait for the day when some high profile liberal is beaten, robbed or raped or killed by muslims.
President Bush was reading a
September 20, 2007 - 18:29 ET by jdhawkPresident Bush was reading a book to school children.
"Darth" Cheny was in a undisclosed secret location . . .
"You have worked very hard
September 20, 2007 - 20:01 ET by Conservative_in_mass."You have worked very hard to bring blacks and Hispanics into your party," AND INTO HIS ADMINISTRATION...
Yes he has Suzanne and the MSM types like you have done everything you can to tear those people down. Two examples; Condi Rice (the complimentary Aunt Jamima cartoons on Editorial page) and Alberto Gonzales (talk about a media lynching over nothing). Where was the media concern over "fairness" there?
Want to talk about "race relations"? OK lets...
Where's the apology over the Duke lacrosse case? Your cohorts in the media had those kids tried and convicted before any evidence was presented. How about the murder of three blacks in Newark by illegal aliens? Where's your inquiries, your curiosity, your outrage?
You people (yes I said you people) in the media are the race baiters, formenters of racial unrest and architects of racial intolerance. You are the ones who skewer stories to fit your political agenda. And you could care less who gets ground up in the process.
And you want to put it all on this President? Yeah, right.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
What the President should have said
September 20, 2007 - 20:19 ET by nkviking75MALVEAUX: Do you think this is a defining moment in race relations?
What I wish the President had said: "Yes, it is. It's a low point in what's left of the civil rights movement. Martin Luther King, Jr., would never have been involved in a demonstration like this. As awful as those nooses were, and they were despicable, there is no more excuse for six young blacks to beat up one white young man than there would be for six whites to punch out a single black person. It's a shame that so many African-Americans are defending these people rather than condemning them. Blacks won't advance in this society until they demand more of themselves."
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Let them keep
September 20, 2007 - 20:27 ET by ConservativeRexLet them keep protesting...they're all in one spot then....reckoning...
Where the hell was the lying liberal MSM when this happened?
September 21, 2007 - 02:40 ET by Dave RWhere was Al? Where was Jesse? Where was Suzanne Malveaux?
Where was the bleeding-heart liberal outcry over this?
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
The local media here in LA
September 20, 2007 - 20:40 ET by rbosqueThe local media here in LA are going nuts over this. If this were a case where 6 white kids beat a black kid up, they'd be screaming for justice for the one black kid. The only racism I see here is on the streets protesting.
Hold the phone...
September 21, 2007 - 02:05 ET by CooltomI haven't looked into the details of the case until now when I read the linked articles. One thing immediately stood out:
The noose incident happened on Sep 6, 2006...
The three guys who put up the noose were punished within a week...
The beating occured on Dec 5, 2006... The white student involved had nothing to do with the noose hanging..
How is it that the two events have been confabulated together?
Silly question... Jesse and Al are in town...
THE JENA SICK JOKE JERK-A-ROUND
September 21, 2007 - 07:01 ET by reelman46THE JENA SICK JOKE JERK-A-ROUND
What is the story here? The unreasonable charges against the black assaulters were properly reduced…
so why the drive-ins to protest? Six black boys seriously beat a white
boy… is the drive-in to protest black youth violence? One black
involved has 3 prior arrests-charges… is the drive-in to protest poor
black parenting? Ever wonder how any oppressed group finances these
long drive-ins? Wonder how they can leave their job-classes?
Nobody had a white drive-in to Knoxville when some criminal blacks
carjacked a white couple on a date, raped, tortured, burned, cut them
up… where was the white drive-in? Black youth commit crime 13x their
pecentage of the population… where is the character
teaching-fornication family protest drive-in? Ohhh, Bill Cosby tried
that, not much luck in those areas.
We have a Civil Rights Commission, CR attorneys, CR rules galore so
why do people have to drive-in from hundreds of miles for days? When
Jesse and Al show up its to promote Jesse and Al, make $$$ and never
ever to apologize when they are very wrong and it ruins other lives.
The (black) Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson recently spoke about the despicable
uncaring race pimps Jes$e (serial adulterer) and Al (Tawana).
Maybe he and Bill Cosby can do a drive-in for morality and parenting. Quick, get them a map to Jena.
Never mind, I forgot, there is no money or victimhood glory for personal responsibility or character.
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish)
Mr. President. My
September 21, 2007 - 08:10 ET by USA4freedomMr. President.
My question is.. With all the global warming and their hurricanes
hitting and destroying our cities, children starving, cats and dogs living together,
the racial tension, the war that is killing billions of people every hour, and
the price of gas going to $50 a gallon, to fill the pockets of your rich
friends and Halliburton, that is also helping the rich get richer, as the Republicans
are caught up in yet another scandal, and at the same time, we hear that Laura
Bush did not tell us every thing that happed at the doctors. Could you answer
that (question)..for us Mr. President??
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day