kimmy

A few years ago Ed Stelmach talked about reviewing royalties and the Calgary oil-money wing of the party mutinied against it. If the oil barons had listened to him at the time they could have had input into the process with a friendly government. It's their own short-sighted thinking that got the PCs thrown out of office and replaced with a government that isn't beholden to the oil companies. They dun goofed. -k

If you take the view that people should avoid doing stuff that makes other people mad, does that just apply to frivolous stuff like cartoons, or does it apply to weightier issues as well? What if it's cartoons about weightier issues (for example, political cartoons that excoriated the Catholic Church cover-up of child molestation? A lot of Catholics found those deeply offensive.) Who decides whether something is important enough to risk offending others? In 2004, film-maker Theo Van Gogh was stabbed to death in Amsterdam because of a film he had made on the issue of how women are treated in Islam. His film offended some Muslims, and Van Gogh was murdered as a result. Should the next film-maker who wants to do a documentary about women in Islam self-censor himself? Should he say "I think this issue is pretty important, but it might offend somebody so I should just keep my opinion to myself"? -k

That might be the slogan on the cover of the brochures, but if you actually read what's in the US constitution you find a great deal of it deals with holding the government accountable. That includes everything from elections to limits on how the police and military may conduct themselves. If you'll recall, the whole fracas with Britain started over complaints about taxation without representation. It would be really silly for someone to disagree that accountability of government to the people is a founding principle of the United States. -k

Gov. Abbott isn't talking about using the Texas National Guard to act as a liason. He used the word "monitor", and he is trying to walk the line between appeasing crazy constituents while not looking crazy himself. Tea Party-leaning politicians like Sen Ted Cruz and Rep Louie Gohmert have also had to pretend to take these kooks seriously. Senator Ted sent an official letter to the Pentagon regarding the exercise. He says while he himself has no distrust of the US military, he is asking because his constituents are concerned. He understands why they are concerned, because citizens find the current administration untrustworthy. Rep Gohmert says that Texans are scared because the administration clearly hates conservatives. Chuck Norris wants people to get worried. "“If you haven’t heard about Operation Jade Helm 15, you need to." -k

Whaaaaa? -k

Who investigates the politicians? Auditors, committees, special prosecutors, the RCMP... even when politicians are investigated by other politicians, it's usually at the hands of politicians who want their head on a platter. You don't think Jean Cretien was trying to do Brian Mulroney any favors with that Airbus thing, do you? You don't think the House Republicans are trying to help Hilary out with that Benghazi inquest, right? As for the premise that politicians have far more "direct power" over other peoples' liberty and life, no. That's false. Politicians have more indirect power. Politicians could make decisions that eventually cost someone their lives, or get someone arrested. If you're shackled in the back of a police van, the officer who has custody over you has direct power over you. He has power over you in a way that no politician ever could. That's an interesting report. Did you read the whole thing? Did you get to the part where they concluded that: "Per a recent analysis we published this year using data gathered by the NPMSRP from April of 2009 through December of 2010 we determined that prosecuting police misconduct in the US is very problematic with conviction rates, incarceration rates, and the amount of time law enforcement officers spend behind bars for criminal misconduct are all far lower than what happens when ordinary citizens face criminal charges." "Consequences" only happen if you get held accountable. And this has to change the officers' perception of their chances of getting held accountable. If you read the numerous articles that have come out about the "nickel rides" that have come out since the riots, you'll find that the "nickel rides" have been used because they're a "no touch" way for cops to rough up suspects. "I had to swerve to avoid another vehicle." "I had to slam on the brakes when a dog ran onto the road." As I mentioned before, Baltimore has settled their "nickel ride" lawsuits without admission of guilt. Prior to this Baltimore nickel rides have resulted in two dead, two paralyzed, numerous less severe injuries, millions of dollars of settlements, and no criminal charges in Baltimore. "I had to slam on the brakes because of a dog" isn't going to fly anymore. And one would think that in wake of this incident, cameras will be installed in the vans, both in Baltimore and probably elsewhere as well. So this might mean the end of the "nickel ride". The sympathy of the silent majority isn't what was required in Baltimore. Investigation by outside authorities is what was required. Scrutiny. Attention. It doesn't matter that the punks robbing liquor stores aren't seen as victims. It matters that Freddie Gray's death is not swept under the rug. -k

You think there's any need for the white community, or the black community, or the cop community, to fear that this crime is going to be swept under the rug or not taken seriously by authorities? -k

Jon Stewart had a piece on this last week. -k

There's nothing revolutionary about the idea that the government and its agents are accountable to the people. That's a founding principle of the United States. -k

Most people also understand that the idea of police misconduct being investigated by their buddies is a failing proposition and that this "expectation that those involved will be punished when found guilty of committing crimes" is rather hollow. You're not seriously suggesting that police should be held to the same standards as politicians, bankers, farmers, and organized crime, are you? First off, unlike the rest of those people, the police have direct power over other peoples' liberty and life. And secondly, when the rest of those people screw up, they get investigated by an outside agency. That's not normally the case with police. We won't know whether it's successful or not, but at least there are criminal charges this time, which is a great start. That wasn't the choice you suggested. You weren't suggesting a choice between no cops and riots, you suggested a choice between tolerating police misconduct and riots. Nobody is suggesting getting rid of the police. We're just suggesting they be held accountable when they break the law. The suggestion was not that public shaming replace our system of criminal justice. The suggestion is that after this firestorm, these cops must now realize that there will be serious repercussions, and that their buddies at the precinct won't be able to shield them from the consequences of their actions. I never said he did. But after America saw those pictures, LBJ got a the Voting Rights Act pushed through congress in less than a week. The silent majority saw those pictures and said "this has to stop", but the first step was getting the silent majority to actually pay attention. Without those horrific pictures, the silent majority wouldn't have paid attention, and the Voting Rights Act would have happened at some later date. The riots brought national and international attention to this situation. A riot isn't a prerequisite, but it seems to be a strong motivator. I would suggest that devoid of the riots, business as usual continues for the Baltimore PD, which is pretty pathetic. -k

But why would people expect that? One of the things that was significant about the Braidwood Inquiry is that we got to see first-hand the lengths that the cops will go to stick up for their own and whitewash incidents. The "Blue Code" is real, and the chances of police being charged at all, let alone found guilty, are exceedingly slim. The situation is even worse in Baltimore, because of Maryland's "Law Enforcement Officer's Bill of Rights". Already in this incident we've seen that the "switchblade" was actually a legal pocket-knife, and we've seen the police produce a fake witness who supposedly claimed that Gray's injuries were self-inflicted, and know we know that this "witness" was on the other side of a metal partition and was only in the van for the final few minutes of the trip, long after Gray was already known to be in medical crisis. Do you doubt in the least that this was going to get whitewashed before the state prosecutor got involved? Why is it "versus"? It's not a choice between one or the other. It's not like police misconduct is what's keeping riots from breaking out. It's rather the opposite. By choosing to accept "cultural problems" within the police, you're choosing to accept riots as well. If people had any faith that police misconduct would actually be prosecuted, there wouldn't be rioting in the streets. What have they achieved? Well, they got outside investigators and prosecutors brought in to handle a situation that otherwise would have been whitewashed. They've got widespread media attention for "nickel rides" and the Baltimore PD's crappy track record in general, as well as for Maryland's "LEOBR". Will anything change? Well, I would think that the next time a cop thinks about giving somebody the "nickel ride", he might wonder to himself "Will I be the next cop with his face on the cover of USA Today? Will I be the guy who touches off riots that get this city burned down? Will I be doing prison time? Maybe this isn't worth it." This practice has been a big joke to the police, and clearly they're not laughing anymore. It wasn't happy black-people with signs that got federal troops sent to Alabama, it was gruesome photos of police brutality. And it wasn't the peaceful protestors with signs who got state and federal investigators sent to Baltimore either. Do you honestly think state and federal investigators would be involve if violence hadn't broken out? -k

This isn't "a few bad apples", this is a cultural problem within the police. I was referring specifically to the "nickel rides", not violent crime in general. Not counting Freddie Gray, there's two dead, two left crippled, numerous less severe injuries, ongoing lawsuits, and millions of dollars in compensation paid out to victims by the city of Baltimore. And no police have been charge or disciplined for any of these injuries. These lawsuits have all been settled without any admission of liability by the cops. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say. Are you actually in agreement that unjust authority is worth of a revolt? As for crapping where they eat: look, I'm not arguing that a great deal of thought and planning went into the decisions by some portion of the protesters to loot and destroy. Just the opposite. It was a result of blind rage, not carefully planned strategy. What I'm arguing is first off, that that rage is completely justified. The cops have been doing this crap for a long time with no remorse and no consequences. How can people not be angry over this? And secondly, that violence seems to be the only thing that gets results. They've had peaceful protests, nothing changed. They went to the polls, nothing changed. They went to the courts and won, and nothing changed. They smashed and looted and burned, and suddenly the whole country was paying attention. There's only one reason we're talking about this. There's only one reason news cameras from all over America were in Baltimore. There's only one reason the state investigators and the federal government got involved. It's right there in the thread title. People saw the picture of the burning store on the news and it shocked them into action. 50 years ago, people saw these pictures and it shocked them into taking action. -k

You're alleging that a couple of angry mooks in Texas attacked a "draw the prophet" contest because they were angry about US foreign policy? No, I think that's quite a leap. -k

True dat! One assumes she's used her Red Witch magic to look into Jon's brain or his past. Either that or it was a shout-out to a popular internet meme, but I expect it's the former. They also talked more about the Rhaegar + Lianne story. I think it's already been hinted that Lianne wasn't an unwilling captive of Rhaegar, despite Sansa's angry assertion to the contrary. -k

What's your argument here? The rapers keep raping, and the murderers keep murdering, so why shouldn't the cops keep killing people in custody? Is that what you're trying to say? Aside from the obviously hilarious aspect of holding Baltimore cops up to the lofty standards set by rapists and killers, I think it should be pointed out that when rapists and killers get caught, they get prosecuted. Not so with cops, up until this week. These winners are the first cops who've actually been charged for this in Baltimore. Clearly all of this was a big joke for the cops, and clearly they're not laughing anymore. So hung up on the looting. So you conservative types are ok with revolt against unjust authority provided that certain rules of etiquette are followed? Like, the Boston Tea Party was ok, provided that they threw creme and sugar in after the tea? The Colorado Coalfield War was ok because the miners just burned everything to the ground and didn't take home any coal for themselves? -k

What's happened in Baltimore isn't an "isolated incident", it's an ongoing pattern of behavior. You neglected to mention the part where the brutal attacks on demonstrators by state agents provoked massive public outcry that shamed the federal government into taking action against states that refused to accept LBJ's Civil Rights Act. -k

We've got a police force with a proven history of maiming and killing people in their custody with these "nickel rides", but you don't see this as an abuse of state power? That's how you think it happened? MLK Jr and friends marched around with signs, and the world changed? That's funny. -k

Why do you put "state killings" in "quotation marks"? Do you have an alternate theory to offer as to what happened to Freddie Gray? I doubt a lot of research went into the exercise. Nonetheless, the precedent has been established. If you don't want anything to get done, stand there peacefully and hold a sign that says "I am a tad upset". If you want something to be done, burn stuff to the ground. -k

There's nothing mysterious about why he's on her hit list! That would be sweet if she collides with him when he gets there. But it's Arya Stark who has a vendetta against Ser Meryn, and now that she's "a girl", isn't she supposed to leave all of that behind? In his favor, I don't think Cersei knows the hand he played in Joffrey's death. She may want his assistance in planning against the Tyrrells. I think Grey Worm is still kickin', because they've been nursing along this little romance angle with him and Dany's handmaiden. But I think we've seen the end of Ser Barry. -k

By "conservatives" I am referring to the self-styled conservatives, everybody from the Fox and Breitbart set to Shady and Derek. While philosophically I don't support rioting as a legitimate political action, I'm at a loss as to what else could be done at this point. There have been protests, and it has not resulted in change. The police have been successfully sued for this bullshit in court, and it has not resulted in change. The city of Baltimore has paid out millions of dollars in damages over this bullshit in court, and it has not resulted in change. The voters have elected officials who were supposed to be sympathetic to their concerns, and it has not resulted in change. A couple of days of rioting, burning stores, and smashing cop cars has resulted in world-wide media attention, and criminal charges being laid against the cops involved. Surely there's a lesson to be learned here. For the record, I'm not one crying racism. I feel like that's over-simplifying the situation-- it fails to explain why cops seem equally happy to beat the shit out of white victims when the opportunity arises. As for what happened in the van. Certainly none of us were in the van with Freddie Gray, and we can't know for sure what happened. But by this time I'm assuming you've read about the Baltimore PD's history of maiming and killing people with "nickel rides". And by this time I'm assuming you've also looked at the route the van took to the police station, taking a 40-minute drive to reach a police station that was just 2 minutes away from where Gray was arrested. Taking those two pieces of information into account, I invite you to offer an alternate theory of what happened to Gray that anybody with an IQ over 60 would find believable. Go ahead. Be as inventive as you wish. -k

I'm just trying to figure out why a bunch of rednecks helping out a withered old deadbeat who doesn't feel like paying his grazing fees inspires Sean Hannity and the Breitbart crew to have freedomgasms, while revolting against extrajudicial killings by government agents is causes those same people shock and revulsion. Surely standing up against unlawful use of force by the state is far closer to the spirit of 1776 than some wealthy rancher welching on debts. Perhaps they couldn't find an East India Company ship loaded with tea on short notice. There's a well established precedent for this: the powers-that-be don't care until well-off peoples' shit gets wrecked. -k

...right after relating the touching story about Rhaegar going out to sing in the streets. You might be on to something. Kind of like how Oberyn had that wonderful, tear-inducing talk with Tyrion, and was dead 2 episodes later. On a completely unrelated note, I enjoyed the events at the Wall this week. The talk Stannis gave Shareen got me right in the ... uh-oh. Indeed. A guy whose power has come from preying on peoples' greed and vanity is about to find himself face-to-face with an adversary that has neither. Gotta hand it to Cersei. Every time it seems like she's washed up, she finds a way to stay relevant. She's kind of like Madonna. That is an interesting theory. However, it seems to me that the last time we saw Syrio he was about to fight Meryn Trant with a wooden stick. To get out of that bind, it seems to me he'd have had to either killed Ser Meryn, or duped Meryn into thinking he was dead. We know Meryn is still alive, which leaves us wondering how Syrio could have escaped that situation. Speaking of Ser Meryn, I'm so stoked to see him back on the show! The long-awaited return we've been hoping for! I'm sure the GoT online community is all abuzz over this. It seems to me that Jaime, the Hound, and Ser Barristan have all made jokes about what a shitty swordsman Meryn is, and now I can hardly wait to see him in action. It's getting to like Beck's music video for "The Devil's Haircut", where you never actually get to see his haircut because he's wearing a cowboy hat the whole time. -k

Pam Geller may be a crazy demagogue, but she has the right to host a meeting, and people have the right to attend her event without being attacked. -k

People make funny drawings of Jesus all the time. Nobody ever gets shot at over it. Sounds like the world will be none the poorer for the loss of these two clowns! Good for the police, preventing what could have been a horrible tragedy. -k

I was speaking of Canadian boomers. The tab American boomers left behind is far larger than a half trillion dollars. -k