• nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 13:10:03View | Delete

    I’m not going to spend hours arguing with closed-minded idiots over this again. And, yes, I no longer owe it to you to be polite. You are unreasonable, are frequently rude, and you have no facts so you resort to personal attacks. Go fuck yourselves.

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 13:07:17View | Delete

    See my post #34. The evidence that you never had any use to learn, firmly establishes that Martin stalked Zimmerman, not the other way around.

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 13:05:13View | Delete

    I already did. I provided two: one about his assault on Zimmerman and another about his theft of jewelry.

    Look, Rachel Jeantel testified that when she called Martin back, he told her he was in back of his father’s unit. That makes sense because the last that Zimmerman saw of Martin before he lost sight of him was he was running south away from the sidewalk T. It is a straight line more than 300 feet from the sidewalk T to the back of TM’s father’s unit. Why, then, did the fight take place at the sidewalk T? Because TM went out of his way to confront and assault GZ.

    TM’s hands were free. His phone was discovered in his pocket after police arrived. GZ was carrying a flashlight and his car keys in his hands when TM ambushed and sucker-punched him. Those items fell from his hands as he fell to the ground. Police arrived shortly after the gunshot. They heard the gunshot. They found those items in the grass in the vicinity of the sidewalk T where the fight started. TM lay dead one unit over. Why? Because GZ staggered in that direction to get away from TM who then got on top of him.

    Acquaint yourself with the evidence, please.

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 12:57:52View | Delete

    He’s a juvenile delinquent because he vandalized school property, was caught with stolen jewelry and he went out of his way to assault George Zimmerman.

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 12:55:46View | Delete

    Some of what Obama said was fine. What bothers me is his claim that Trayvon Martin could have been him 35 years ago. (Well, like Martin, Obama liked to smoke weed. I didn’t know that Obama was also a burglar and assaulted people. Let’s be honest about who Martin was and open our minds to the possibility that Zimmerman was telling the truth about Martin acting suspiciously. Standing on someone’s front lawn in the rain apparently casing the house is suspicious.)

    It also bothers me that he sends his sympathy and prayers to the Martin family, but not to the real victims in this: George Zimmerman and his family. The Martin family is responsible for hiring a public relations man who very successfully promoted a false narrative in the irresponsible mass media, and that recruited attention whores Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to take up his cause. Of course, Al Sharpton has never been anything but a gullible, race-baiting clown, so it doesn’t surprise me that he wouldn’t bother to learn why the police didn’t file charges against Zimmerman, but there was a time when I respected Jesse Jackson. Anyway, that false narrative got a fair-minded police chief fired, ruined George Zimmerman’s life and threatened his freedom, has led to bands of marauding “protesters” beating pedestrians and a white jogger in Mississippi, and has further polarized the country and set back progress in race relations.

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 12:39:28View | Delete

    Obama is just being his usual disingenuous self.

    The reason I feel so strongly about my opinion on this case is that, unlike most people, I considered both sides of the argument. I did not reach a conclusion till I learned and objectively analyzed the evidence.

    Most people choose a side for emotional reasons and then filter out all evidence and logic that does not fit their preferred narrative.

    I need to change my screen name. I don’t want to call myself a liberal. I don’t want to be associated with any group of people, and especially not a group of people the majority of whom are every bit as prejudiced and closed-minded as the worst conservatives.

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 12:22:02View | Delete

    Something else to consider. George Zimmerman was not described by the mainstream media as Hispanic, even though that is how he describes himself. No, instead, Zimmerman is a white Hispanic.

    The lawyers said that one of the jurors could be described as black or Hispanic. Since then, I have repeatedly heard her described–not as black Hispanic–but simply as Hispanic.

    These are the subtle ways the media introduce bias to sustain a false narrative while the “justice for Trayvon” ignoramuses compare a juvenile delinquent to Medgar Evers, Emmit Till and Martin Luther King.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/28/trayvon-martin-jewelry-school-suspension_n_1384652.html

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Obama Comments On Trayvon Martin Case

    2013-07-19 12:14:36View | Delete

    The first sentence of that exposes the fact-averse bias of the article and I didn’t bother to read any farther.

    Try this on for size. An alternate juror, a black man explains why he agrees with the verdict.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/18/black_alternative_juror_for_zimmerman_trial_i_supported_the_verdict.html

    WARNING: Cognitive dissonance may cause your head to explode.

  • A black alternate juror in Zimmerman trial gave a televised interview. “I supported the verdict,” said Juror E54. “I agree with it.”

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/18/black_alternative_juror_for_zimmerman_trial_i_supported_the_verdict.html

    Of course, he has to be a “self-hating black,” right?

    He explains why he reached his opinion. He is well-spoken, so he is easy to follow. Though any fair-minded person would watch all of it, I urge you to pay special attention to the part that starts at around the 5:15 mark.

  • The bugs in this system deleted part of my post #12. Here is what I wrote before the link:

    Blacks are only 17% of Florida’s population, but have filed 33% of the stand-your-ground defenses. Also, blacks have a higher rate of success than whites when invoking stand-your-ground.

  • Oh, excellent. Thanks for the break down!

    Because you are so eager to dismiss me on the basis of an ad hominem attack. Even if what that asshole posted was true (and it is not), then that would still not disprove my points.

  • wynona skunk: All you’ve done is expose your own racial prejudice. You are so prejudiced that you cannot consider the FACTS without bias. Before the trial, thanks to misrepresentations in the media that originated with the Martin family’s PR firm, I wanted to see Zimmerman convicted. However, unlike you, once the trial began I opened my mind to the possibility that I didn’t know the whole story and some of what I believed might not be true.

    gannonguckert: What you said about me is completely false, but since you have no FACTS to defend your foolish position, you dishonestly and cowardly (because you lack the fortitude to admit a mistake) have nothing left but to denigrate the people that defend the verdict on the basis of the evidence. I have nothing but contempt for fools like you.

  • Other than the fact that you’ve established yourself as someone who views all African Americans with disdain, please tell me ONE thing.

    All you’ve established is that you view with prejudice anyone that does not share your delusions. No reasonable person would reach that ridiculous–and wrong–conclusion from my posts.

    By Florida law, the same one that found GZ innocent, Martin had EVERY right to defend himself. Yes or no?

    GZ could NOT have had his nose broken, etc. if he wasn’t close enough for Martin to grab him.

    If Martin had a gun, he would have been justified in shooting GZ, per Florida law.

    Martin would have had every right to defend himself had he been the one assaulted. Why was GZ close enough to be reached? Because Martin went out of his way to approach GZ and confront him. GZ actually did not even see Martin until Martin said something to him.

    Details of GZ’s reenactment are verified by the 911 recordings and physical evidence. Have you ever bothered to look at a map of where the fight took place? There is a sidewalk T. This T was a little over 100 feet east of GZ’s SUV. TM’s unit was less than 400 feet south. That is a distance TM could have walked in a little over a minute.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/14/2748048/interactive-map-of-trayvon-martin.html

    As detailed extemporaneously in the phone recording, GZ drove past TM and parked at the clubhouse and started the call after seeing TM acting suspiciously. When asked TM’s race, GM gave an uncertain, “He looks black,” and later, after TM walked closer, gave a positive identification, “a black male” in his “late teens.” After TM had walked past GZ, GZ drove his truck to where TM had walked and parked it there where it remained until police arrived.

    By the time GZ parked at the end of the street, TM was still ahead of him approaching the sidewalk T. If TM had kept walking home another 90 seconds, then he’d be alive today. Instead, as GZ detailed during the call, TM turned around and walked towards GZ’s truck and circled it. (He certainly was not afraid of GZ, was he?)

    Before reaching the sidewalk T, TM started running, then turned and ran south (towards his unit). That was the last GZ saw of Martin till four minutes later. What GZ did was exit his vehicle and started running to see where TM was going. You can hear his breathing change. He is asked if he is following TM, he says yes, he is told “we don’t need you to do that,” he replies “okay” and seconds later his breathing returns to normal. Upon reaching the T, GZ says he doesn’t see TM. If TM had run home, he’d be alive today. Instead, as he told his friend, he was in back of the units. In other words, away from the sidewalk, in the shadows where GZ could not see him.

    What did GZ do next? He did NOT walk south in the direction he saw TM running. He continued talking to the dispatcher. When the call was completed, he walked EAST to the street to get a house number because he could only see the backs of units.

    As GZ was walking back to his SUV and walking past the T, Martin came out of the shadows and verbally confronted him. The fight would start at that sidewalk T FOUR MINUTES after GZ reported losing sight of Martin. The evidence for where the fight started came from where police found GZ’s keys (why where his keys in his hand?) and flashlight after they showed up shortly after Martin was shot. Even TM’s friend testified that it was TM that started the confrontation with the “creepy ass cracker” he despised but, apparently, did not fear.

    The fight moved south of the T because GZ, after being knocked to the ground by a sucker-punch that broke his nose, staggered in that direction to GET AWAY from TM. Instead, TM got on top of his and began pushing GZ’s head against the concrete, trying to suffocate him, and throwing punches that GZ had to fend off with his arms.

    It was only after GZ called repeatedly for help with TM on top of him (verified by the testimony of John Good) that Martin was shot once.

    Injuries the coroner found on TM: a gunshot wound and an abrasion to TM’s knuckles.

    Injuries sustained by GZ: a broken nose, multiple abrasions to the head.

    If Martin had a gun, he would NOT have been justified in shooting GZ per Florida law. TM was never assaulted and he went out of his way to assault GZ.

  • See Stand Your Ground only works if you’re a citizen
    So that right isn’t his only whites benefit

    Blacks make up only 17% of Florida’s population, but have invoked 33% of its stand-your-ground defenses. Further, blacks successfully invoke stand-your-ground at a higher rate than whites.

    http://www.inquisitr.com/855138/stand-your-ground-law-invoked-by-white-and-black-defendants-in-florida-report/

    The lies are just piling up from the “justice for Trayvon” side. Trayvon got justice when Zimmerman stopped his assault.

    Look, it is true that blacks are sentenced more severely than white convicts. It is true that blacks are far more likely to be arrested for drug possession. Those are legitimate gripes. Don’t delegitimize them by making Trayvon Martin the poster boy for racial injustice.
    Also understand that the problem of unequal treatment by the legal system is not going to get better until black men stop committing a disproportionate amount of street crime. Refer back to my post #10, unless you think the problem is genetic instead of cultural. I want to solve problems, not excuse them.

  • Being black is not a crime. Neither is self-defense.

  • If you really want to constructively honor Trayvon Martin’s death, then you will address the problem of a hip hop culture that glorifies criminality as proof of being a man and a way to gain “street cred.”

    Why? Because of the evidence–not admissible in court–that Trayvon had come under its influence. Besides his crimes mentioned in post #9, there is the text exchange with a friend that said Trayvon was becoming a hoodlum. “Naw,” Trayvon replied, “I’m a gangsta.”

    There are the photos glorifying guns that he exchanged with friends. There is the photo of Trayvon with his gold grill. There are the multiple photos of Trayvon extending his middle fingers.

    Trayvon wanted to be a tough guy and it cost him his life. A lot is made of the fact that Trayvon was unarmed and Zimmerman had a gun, but fist fights can be lethal. After he sucker-punched George Zimmerman breaking his nose, he refused to relent after Zimmerman screamed over and over again for help. It was only then that Zimmerman used his gun. He fired it only once.

    Have you even watched the 12-minute video of George Zimmerman walking police through what happened? Are you even aware of the evidence–presented IN COURT–that confirmed multiple aspects of Zimmerman’s account and how there was nothing that refuted him?

    Watch:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reTp2pC7mxA

  • But according to Zimmerman, Martin drew his suspicion at least in part because he was walking too slowly.

    And what about the part where Martin had already walked onto someone’s front lawn to case the house when Zimmerman first saw him? How about his furtive behavior when Zimmerman, right after this, drove past him and parked at the clubhouse to call the police non-emergency number because of Martin’s suspicious behavior? Martin kept HIS eyes on Zimmerman as though he didn’t want to be noticed.

    Could Zimmerman have been onto something? Consider the excerpts in block quotes below from the following article.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/28/trayvon-martin-jewelry-school-suspension_n_1384652.html

    The Miami Herald in its Tuesday editions reported that it had obtained a Miami-Dade Schools Police Department report that showed the slain teenager was suspended in October for writing obscene graffiti on a door at his high school. During a search of his backpack, the report said, campus security officers found 12 pieces of women’s jewelry, a watch and a screwdriver that they felt could be used as a burglary tool.
    (snip)
    The Herald reported that when campus security confronted Martin with the jewelry, he told them that a friend had given it to him, but he wouldn’t give a name. The report said the jewelry was confiscated and a photo of it was sent to Miami-Dade Police burglary detectives.

    You are glorifying a punk whose final act on earth was to commit the crime of assault.

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Zimmerman Verdict: Stevie Wonder Boycotts Florida

    2013-07-17 21:11:51View | Delete

    Blacks are 17% of Florida’s population, but invoke 33% of stand-your-ground defenses. Further, they invoke it successfully at a higher rate than whites.

    http://www.inquisitr.com/855138/stand-your-ground-law-invoked-by-white-and-black-defendants-in-florida-report/

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Zimmerman Verdict: Stevie Wonder Boycotts Florida

    2013-07-17 19:47:01View | Delete

    I found a full transcript of the interview and she did toss out the phrase “stand-your-ground” when discussing jury instructions, but this is odd because Zimmerman’s defense team explicitly waived that defense before the start of the trial. So I have to wonder if she misspoke.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/15/3502047_p4/zimmerman-juror-speaks-out-transcript.html

    The link below backs up the claim that stand-your-ground was NOT part of the arguments presented in court, and it quotes lawyers for the prosecution and defense.

    http://reason.com/blog/2013/07/15/zimmermans-prosecutors-did-not-think-the

  • nonpartisanliberal commented on the blog post Zimmerman Verdict: Stevie Wonder Boycotts Florida

    2013-07-17 19:16:07View | Delete

    Florida’s “Stand Your Gun” law was part of the jury’s discussion.

    That’s not true. The article that links to blatantly LIED. I watched the entire interview with the juror and she never used the words “stand-your-ground.” Further, SYG was NEVER part of Zimmerman’s defense. His defense was strictly a traditional self-defense.

    Do you see how you get played by dishonest reporting? Can you begin to even consider that you’ve been getting played this way for the last 16 months? For a while, I was fooled too, thanks to incompetent, irresponsible reporters and commentators that parroted as fact the misrepresentations that a public relations man hired by the Martin family put out. However, I opened my mind to the possibility that I didn’t know the whole story and things that I thought were true were not. I considered the evidence presented at trial in an unbiased way. I became convinced, after applying some critical thinking to the evidence, that George Zimmerman deserved to be acquitted–not just because there was reasonable doubt about his guilt–but because I knew he was innocent.

  • Load More