Obama handcuffs police

May 20, 2015

On February 28, 1997, Los Angeles police officers engaged in one of the most violent gun battles in modern law enforcement history. A foiled bank robbery and the lengthy exchange of gun fire that followed came to be known as the North Hollywood Shootout. Twelve officers and eight civilians were wounded. The two heavily armed bank robbers eventually were taken down. What makes this shootout involving nearly 2,000 rounds of ammunition memorable is the fact that the police were outgunned by the criminals who were wearing the latest in body armor and carrying military-level armaments. The battle gave police agencies a compelling reason to better equip patrol officers, arming them with semi-automatic rifles, rather than pistols and 12-gauge shotguns.

That was then and this is now.

Barack Obama has announced a ban on federal transfers of various types of military-style gear to local police departments.

“We’ve seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people a feeling like they’re an occupying force, as opposed to a force that’s part of the community that’s protecting them and serving them,” Obama said in a speech in Camden, New Jersey earlier this week. He said such equipment can “alienate and intimidate local residents and may send the wrong message.”

He announced the formation of a volunteer, “Elite Tech Team,” described as “data scientists, software engineers, and tech leaders, to assist law enforcement.” Obama absurdly says, “They’re going to work with the police department to troubleshoot some of the technical challenges so it’s even easier for police departments to do the things they already want to do in helping to track what’s going on in communities, and then also helping to make sure that data is used effectively to identify where there are trouble spots, where there are problems, are there particular officers that may need additional help, additional training.  All that can be obtained in a really effective, efficient way,” he claimed. 

Since when is it up to the President of the United States to decide how individual city police departments function and which officers may “need help or additional training?” Exactly how do volunteers fit into that scenario?

Through an executive order, Obama instructed federal departments to consult with police and civil rights groups to come up with restrictions on police use of military equipment. 

Obama also declared that he is launching what he calls “Promise Zones,” to combat “a sense of unfairness and powerlessness, to change the odds for communities because we’re providing job training, and helping to reduce violence, and expanding affordable housing.” 

Instilling the importance of education, respect, and working to lower the astronomical out-of-wedlock births in black communities —- which carry a near certain guarantee of poverty and accompanying high crime rates —- would be a great starting point. 

But don’t expect that to happen. The national media remains fixated on supporting Obama’s agenda of racial divisiveness, dutifully reporting on his betrayal of our dedicated law enforcement personnel —- blaming them for unrest and now severely restricting their abilities to serve and protect.


Double murderer a dreamer?

May 17, 2015

The Arizona Republic newspaper, short on news and long on far-left opinion, fills its pages with sports, vacuous celebrity-based entertainment coverage, oversized photos and a load of editorializing. News content is slim, often lacking facts. The staff that remains pushes, ad nauseam, the dual agenda of amnesty for illegals —- along with in-state tuition for their children, now affectionately known as “dreamers” —- and same-sex marriage. They pause only long enough to give yet another uppercut to the jaw of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio as part of the ongoing attempt to decimate the dedicated and lifelong lawman.

To plump up the scant weekend news, the newspaper has devised bit of trickery labeled, “The Week in Review.” Rehashed articles from each day of the preceding week are reprinted. Among those considered worthy of regurgitation is one titled, “For 20 years, cop killer ‘living the dream’ in California.”

The five-paragraph report tells of Ernesto Salgado Martinez, an Indio, California resident, sentenced to death for the Aug. 15, 1995 murder of Arizona Department of Public Safety Officer Robert Martin, 57, who had pulled Martinez over for a traffic stop near Phoenix. Later that same day, Martinez crossed into California and used the dead officer’s service revolver to kill Randip Singh, 43, in Blythe during a convenience store robbery.

Although the Arizona Republic mentions Martinez’ name seven times in the short article and identifies him as one of the most dangerous prisoners in Riverside County and member of a notorious prison gang, the names of his victims were omitted. We found them and the facts of the Arizona case with a Google search. What the newspaper deemed important to focus on were his words of bravado in speaking to a judge on April 17, during a recent court hearing. “I’m housed here in Riverside,” Martinez boasted. “All is well. Living the dream.”

He still has not been tried for the California murder or extradited to Arizona to face the death penalty to which he was sentenced.


“Reckless cowboys” stand up for free speech

May 6, 2015

First Amendment butts heads with violent Jihadists

In the warped world of the wizards at the Arizona Republic free speech should take a back seat on the politically correct bus. It’s incendiary, donch’a know?  On the other hand, they do purport to be journalists who value the protections granted in the First Amendment. Without a doubt they dance around the subject, weaving such differing opinions into the editorial that it’s not “difficult to imagine” heated debates surrounding the tone the message should take.

The opening words of Tuesday’s editorial which ran under two contradictory headlines in the hard copy and online editions:

“It is difficult to imagine a more provocative, indeed reckless, event: A contest among irreverent cartoonists to see who could draw the best caricature of the Prophet Mohammed.“

The editorial concludes with these words:

“As foolish as it may have been to engage in such an outrageous act of Islamist baiting, we cannot lose sight of the principle that prompted the gathering. The First Amendment does not exist to protect polite speech. It is there to defend obnoxious, even mean-spirited speech with enthusiasm.

The American Freedom Defense Initiative and its artists too willingly put the lives of others in jeopardy. There are better ways to make the point. But when terrorists are quick to kill those with whom they disagree, we’ll stand with the reckless, nose-thumbing First Amendment-riding cowboys.”

The Republic editorialists must be dizzy from spinning.

Andrew C. McCarthy, author and  policy fellow at the National Review Institute, has written a fine analysis in “Islam and Free Speech: Missing the Point in Garland.”

On Monday evening, Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch and vice president of the American Freedom Defense Initiative, appeared on Fox News’ “The Kelly File,” discussing the jihad attack against the AFDI/Jihad Watch Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest in Garland, Texas.

This morning the New York Daily News reports ISIS terrorists —- dismissed by Barack Obama in 2014 as a “JV Team” —- have declared war on Atlas Shrugs blogger Pamela Geller who helped organize the event. An ominous online message claims ISIS has fighters across America ready to attack “any target we desire.”  They specifically target “Geller and anyone who hides or hosts her.”

Make up your own mind. You can do a much better job than those practiced bob and weavers at the daily. Are Americans supposed to cower in the face of this barbaric insanity?


Police sacrificial pawns in mob-based charges

May 3, 2015

Prosecutor appeases rioting mobs and looters in Democrat-run city

All six Baltimore police officers charged with homicide in the death of 25-year-old Freddie Gray who died in a hospital after suffering a spinal injury while in police custody have posted bail. They were released on bonds ranging between $250,000 and $350,000.

In a lightening speed rush to judgment, Maryland State Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced the charges ranging from assault to murder Friday. Mosby has been practicing law for less than ten years —- three of which were spent at Liberty Mutual Insurance, reviewing dubious claims.

Anti-police protests, driven by tech savvy anarchists adept at social media, have simultaneously erupted in cities across the country including New York, Denver, Seattle, Chicago and Portland, Oregon.  After the charges were announced, organizers billed their marches a “victory rally” and celebratory partying followed.

Charges against the Baltimore officers —- three black and three white —- are serious and  carry heavy penalties:

Officer Caesar Goodson Jr. was charged with second-degree murder, manslaughter, second-degree assault, two vehicular manslaughter charges and misconduct in office. 

Officer William Porter, Lt. Brian Rice and Sgt. Alicia White were all charged with involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault and misconduct in office. 

Officer Edward Nero was charged with second-degree assault and misconduct in office, and Officer Garrett Miller was charged with those charges plus false imprisonment.  

Goodson, facing the most serious charges, could potentially be sentenced to as much as 63 years of prison. The others face a maximum sentence of between 20 and 30 years.

Baltimore’s police union president, Gene Ryan, said none of the officers charged are responsible for Gray’s death. Michael E. Davey, an attorney who works with the union and is representing one of the officers, decried what he called an “egregious rush to judgment.”

Opposition to these charges transcend politics. Alan Dershowitz —- a nationally renown criminal appellate lawyer and self-described liberal Democrat who twice campaigned for Barack Obama —- noted that Mosley’s actions were motivated more by political expediency and short-term public safety than strong evidence. He called the charges “outrageous and irresponsible,” especially the second degree murder count filed against police van driver Caesar Goodson Jr. under a rarely seen legal principle known as “depraved heart,” which allows prosecutors in that jurisdiction to charge a person with murder without having to prove intent to kill.

“The decision to file charges was made not based on considerations of justice, but on considerations of crowd control,” Dershowitz said Saturday. “It’s a sad day for justice,” he declared. 


Baltimore an example of decades of liberal control

April 29, 2015

Law abiding citizens gasp once again as chaos reigns in yet another American city. This time it’s Baltimore, where lawlessness, rioting, looting, arson and the injuring of 15 police officers rolls over into yet another day. It’s a repeat, on larger scale, of the anti-law enforcement mentality that rocked the black majority small town of Ferguson, Missouri in the heat of last August following the police shooting of a black youth. The per capita income of $21,000 is indicative of too little education resulting in too little opportunity. Setting the town on fire and looting stores is strangely regarded as a catharsis.

Now it’s Baltimore. Another death, this time a man in police custody, leads to more rioting, seemingly condoned by those who are supposed to be in charge.  Baltimore’s Democrat  Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake said she instructed police officers to allow protestors to express themselves saying, “we also gave those who wished to destroy, space to do that as well.”

These reckless words were spoken as stores were looted and set ablaze, police cars torched and a flaming metal garbage can was hurled toward a line of police officers in riot gear as they tried to push back the violent crowd. Some officers were hit with bricks.

Later the mayor denied ever saying the words that were captured by news cameras. She unashamedly blamed the media for twisting her words and misleading viewers.

The actual misleading message was the one that echoed in the months preceding the 2008 election of Barack Obama. We were told electing the first black U.S. President would be historic. That it would be a balm for race relations.  In fact, they haven’t been worse since the days of the 1965 Watts riots which left 34 dead, more than 1000 injured and caused over $40 million in property damage in the predominately black section of Los Angeles. Over 2,000 National Guardsmen joined the police trying to maintain order on the streets at the time.

According to 2013 Census figures, Baltimore has a 63.3% black population. with 23.8 % living below the poverty level. It’s long been reported that well over half of the high school students in Baltimore City Public Schools are “chronically absent.” The connection is clear.

Race relations in America under Barack Obama have descended to levels most of us never lived through. Rather than healing, he has inflamed. Yet after four years of his failed policies, he was reelected by a stunning 87.4 % of the Baltimore City vote. In nearly 60 years, there have only been only been two Republican governors in the state of Maryland. 

Democrat policies are the root cause of the unrest. Liberalism fosters toxic government dependence. Cronyism, union corruption and the tragically failed schools (video) that follow in their wake, have run amok in Baltimore for over a half-century. 

Fifty-three percent of Americans polled by Bloomberg say race relations have worsened under the man who was supposed to usher in a golden era of “post-racial” relations.

Read Arnold Ahlert‘s “How Obama Poisoned Race Relations in America.” Though written in 2013, it remains relevant.


U.S. invasion exposed by British press

April 18, 2015

The Daily Mail reveals shocking images from cameras on the Texas-Mexico border capturing a steady stream of illegal aliens sneaking into the United States with packages of drugs and guns. Among the included videos is one showing a sophisticated undercover drug tunnel hidden in a closet.

Steven McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety is quoted in the article saying, “Every day, sheriff’s deputies, police officers, Border Patrol agents and state law enforcement officers in the Texas border region risk their lives to protect Texas and the entire nation from Mexican cartels and transnational crime.”

Arizona, also a border state, endures the same criminal activity.

Take time to enlighten yourself. Our gratitude to the U.K’s Daily Mail for providing more in-depth coverage of the indefensible situation than our local press, which continually pushes for amnesty and an array of taxpayer-funded perks for illegals. 

The Daily Mail assess the situation correctly with these words: “The startling images have been revealed as President Obama continues to fight to push through an executive order to shield illegal immigrants from deportation.” 

Don’t look for such candor to be found in the pages of the Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) newspaper.


Brnovich flies under radar as he caves on illegal enforcement

April 6, 2015

It’s all about $aving taxpayer dollar$, doncha know?

Unless you’re an eagle-eyed reader, you might have missed the latest news from Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich. It was tucked away and hugging the bottom of Page 3 in a travelogue sounding section called “Around Arizona.”.

The Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) couldn’t be more gleeful to report that Brnovich filed a motion on Friday asking a U.S. District Court to dismiss the Ninth U. S. Circuit appeal of a policy charging illegal aliens as co-conspirators with their well-paid coyote transporters as they smuggle themselves into Arizona.  By pulling the appeal, Brnovich will let stand an injunction against enforcing the statute.

In a statement to the newspaper, Brnovich says he is “committed to defending Arizona from federal overreach and enforcing our immigration laws.” Then comes the “but,” which in legalese morphs into “however.”

“However, I also have an obligation to be responsible with taxpayer dollars and defend the state where we are most likely to prevail. That is why I filed for the dismissal of the state’s legal challenge to the human-smuggling portion of SB 1070 today.”

Karen Tumlin, a lawyer with the far-leftist, pro-illegal invasion National Immigration Law Center in California, cheered, “The chapter of the smuggling law is now officially over.” But she noted that litigation continues on others, including the “Show me your papers” statute that requires law-enforcement officials to inquire about the citizenship of people they stop and statutes regarding day laborers and impounding the vehicles of people harboring illegal immigrants. “This is a sign that the state may move away from this litigation,” Tumlin hopefully added.

In an astonishing double standard, The Republic evidenced no reluctance to use scare tactics in editorials and news reports including declaring citizens would be unable to board an airplane without an intrusive national ID card as it promoted legislation on a “Show me your papers” law for American citizens.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 365 other followers