Gay Patriot Header Image

Bringing Athena into conversation on Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 10:41 pm - March 27, 2012.
Filed under: Mythology and the real world,Rule of Law

Sometimes you find someone who summarizes a situation so well, the nest way to comment on the story is to quote him. And so it is with this excerpt from Thomas Sowell’s piece in the National Review:

The man who shot the black teenager in Florida may be as guilty as sin, for all I know — or he may be innocent. We pay taxes so that there can be judges and jurors who sort out the facts. We do not need Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or the president of the United States spouting off before the trial has even begun. Have we forgotten the media’s rush to judgment in the Duke University “rape” case that blew up completely when the facts came out?

If the facts show that a teenager who was no threat to anyone was shot and killed, it will be time to call for the death penalty. But if the facts show that the shooter was innocent, then it will be time to call for people in the media and in politics to keep their big mouths shut until they know what they are talking about.

Playing with racial polarization is playing with fire. . . .Race hustlers who stir up paranoia and belligerence are doing no favor to minority youngsters. There is no way to know how many of these youngsters’ confrontations with the police or others in authority have been needlessly aggravated by the steady drumbeat of racial hype they have been bombarded with.

H/t: WSJ.com’s Political Diary (available by subscription)

Every time I check the blogs, I learn new information about the case, about the actual incident, about the young man and about the man who shot him.  The more I learn, the more complex the case becomes.  As more details emerge, I am reminded of one of the greatest plays of classical Greece, Aeschylus’s Eumenides which begins with the Furies seeking vengeance on Orestes for killing Clytmenestra his mother his mother.  Soon, the goddess Athene arrives and acknowledges that the Furies have a case.

Before the matter is to be resolved, she wants to hear both sides and wants to make sure the facts are weighed in a dispassionate manner — before a court of Athenian citizens.

So too should those who determine the fate of Mr. Zimmerman:  weigh the facts, all the facts, dispassionately. (more…)

Will Obama move to hike taxes (on middle class) when he has “more flexibility” should he win reelection?

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 10:02 pm - March 27, 2012.
Filed under: 2012 Presidential Election

Yesterday in speaking to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev, President Obama said that after his “election” he’d “have more flexibility” on missile defense, but Jennifer Rubin wonders if he’d also have more flexibility on other issues as well:

. . . is there anyone who thinks Obama, should he get a second term, wouldn’t run wild with policies and positions that the majority of the electorate oppose? Otherwise, he’d roll them out now, of course.

Over at the Enterprise Blog, James Pethokoukis asks a similar question, “Just what would President Barack Obama do in a second term if had maximum ‘flexibility’?

Well, a new budget proposal from liberal House Democrats suggests what Obama’s “dream agenda” might be.

. . . .

Officially, the CPC calls the plan “The Budget for All” — and it’s all wrong. Sure, the proposal would theoretically cut the deficit from $1.1 trillion (7.0% of GDP) in 2012 to $180 billion (or 0.7% of GDP) in 2022. But the CPC would accomplish this feat entirely through massive and economy-crippling tax increases.

. . . .

The “Budget for All” contains just about every sort of tax increase imaginable. . . .  The plan also contains a bank tax and a financial transaction tax.  [So, it’s not good when banks charges fees on such transactions to pay for their costs, but it is okay when the federal government taxes those very transactions?]

But it’s not just the wealthy and bankers who would get pinched. These Democrats would also raise income taxes on the broad middle. The CPC plan would “allow the 28% and 25% brackets to sunset once the economy is on solid footing, in 2017 and 2019, respectively.” That means higher taxes on families making over $70,000 a year — a big, fat, middle-class tax hike. And some of those families would also be paying more for energy thanks to the carbon tax that’s also in the CPC plan.

Read the whole thing.  (Via Powerline picks.)  Given what the president said to his Russian counterpart — and his record in his first term (remember that “net spending cut” he promised in the campaign), we know we have to take his rhetoric with a grain of salt.

Hey may now be dismissing the notion of a middle class tax cut, but who knows what he has up his sleeve his second term?