90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
John Lewis And The 50th Anniversary Of The March On Washington

Civil rights icon and U.S. Rep. John Lewis joins us to talk about the 50 year anniversary of the March on Washington — and race in American today.

Public events don’t get bigger in American history than the 1963 March on Washington and Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” Speech.  Fifty years later, that day, that speech, can seem as monumental and rarified as the Lincoln Memorial that loomed over them.

But John Lewis was there.

At the podium, above the crowd.  He is the last living speaker from that epic moment.  A towering figure himself in the Civil Rights movement, with a gritty history and a grand, compelling view of what was and what is.

This hour, On Point:  Congressman John Lewis on the March on Washington and race in America now.

- Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Congressman John Lewis, Democratic representative for Georgia’s 5th congressional district. He was major leader in the Civil Right movement. Last living original speaker from the March on Washington in 1963. Co-author of the graphic memoir, “March.”

Ailey Pope, graduate student in theology at Southern Methodirst University in Dallas, Texas.

From Tom’s Reading List

The Washington Post: In the graphic novel ‘March,’ Rep. John Lewis renders a powerful civil rights memoir – “The congressman is scheduled to attend the anniversary ceremonies as the march’s sole surviving featured speaker. Which is why this graphic novel should be embraced as a gift to history; ‘March’ digs in with the compelling perspective of someone who lived it — who could see eventual victory even through the beatings and the jailhouse bars.”

The Huffington Post: March on Washington: John Lewis’ Speech – Then and Now – “Then, a passionate 23-year-old chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), John Lewis, was already a seasoned civil rights activist — with fractures and scars as evidence — and caused controversy when an advance copy of his speech was circulated. Denouncement from the Kennedy administration for its ‘militant’ tone resulted in two versions of Lewis’s speech: the original one he proposed to give; and, the other, the one he actually delivered.”

USA Today: Marching on Washington is an American tradition – “In an era when many indices of democratic activity, have waned, marching on Washington has waxed. Demonstrations have increased in each of the past three years, according to the U.S. Park Police. The National Park Service gets so many applications for political events on the Mall that it logs them on a giant wall calendar; it issues about 1,600 such permits a year, an average of about four a day.”

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • Ed75

    It’s wonderful that we’re learning so much about the civil rights’ accomplishments of 50 years ago. But at the same time there is a civil rights issue that cries out for attention today, the killing of the unborn. Let’s have civil rights for all.

    • 1Brett1

      Ed, are you in favor of voter ID cards for the unborn?

      Wait a minute…I thought conservatives were against civil rights laws?! Don’t those laws only serve to enslave people and make them dependent on government?

      • LinRP

        Touche, Brett! Nicely done. :)

      • HonestDebate1

        “I thought conservatives were against civil rights laws?!”

        Thats stupid.

        • 1Brett1

          “That’s stupid” is the new “that’s sick.”

          Conservatives (including you) are not against civil rights laws like they (you) are not against legal abortion laws, except that (they) you don’t have a problem with EVERY SINGLE ATTEMPT to throw out/undermine civil rights laws and with EVERY MANEUVER to restrict abortion rights…yeah, maybe you can make someone else believe that.

  • Yar

    John Lewis, you personally know the brutality of hostile and corrupt people. I have a difficult question for you. How can you subject undocumented immigrants to ten years of indentured servitude to this same hostile and corrupt system. Immigration or integration at “all deliberate speed” is wrong. Why should hard working people who lack documentation have to wait for boarders to be secured, or pay fines for below market wages stolen by corrupt employers? Why should immigrants spend ten years wondering about the possibility of corrupt police system before they have hope of citizenship. Who wants to live with fear they are one traffic stop away from deportation? John Lewis, I know you are aware of the many ways a people are oppressed. Will you advocate for an end to oppression for all? For people of color, for undocumented immigrants, for women, and for members of the LGBT community. Citizenship now for all Americans!. If you live in America and want citizenship, you are an American. Current immigration legislation is ripe for abuse.

    Oppression is wrong now as it has been over the last 50+ years. Oppression is perverse and pervasive, those who have been oppressed should stand with those who face oppression now. We should all stand together now to end oppression. I have a dream! What is your dream?

  • J__o__h__n

    Is Honest Debate going to respond “That’s sick.” when Congressman Lewis discusses that racism still exists?

    • HonestDebate1

      Out of an awesome respect for Mr. Lewis’ struggle I was avoiding this board but then you drag me in by making an asinine comment accusing me of thinking racism doesn’t exist. I’ve never said that, it’s stupid.

      • J__o__h__n

        You just object whenever anyone mentions any example of it.

        • HonestDebate1

          I object to the astonishing ease that the accusation of racism is thrown around willy nilly. It’s sick. The tea party is racist; the entire South is racist; requiring an ID to vote is racist; the birthers are racist; George Zimmerman is a racist stalking murderer; any legitimate criticism of Obama is racist. It’s sick and reduces the meaning of a serious issue to nothing. It disrespects the struggle of people like Mr. Lewis.

          • Yar

            Do you really want honest debate? Racism is a form of oppression. Oppression exists in many forms in our society.

          • HonestDebate1

            How could anyone disagree with that?

          • Yar

            Maybe you can understand that language is used as a form of oppression through emotional violence. Words have power, they can be used to lift others up or as a put down. “That’s sick” is a put down. Do you want an honest debate?

          • HonestDebate1

            “That’s sick” is honest debate.

          • Yar

            It is an attack on the writer, it explains nothing, it is simply a put down. It doesn’t promote honest debate. Is your goal to win the debate or to understand the person?

          • J__o__h__n

            There is nothing wrong with trying to win the debate but you can only do that by being more specific.

          • HonestDebate1

            Race baiters should be condemned, I don’t apologize.

          • jefe68

            That’s rich coming from a guy who’s posting racially charged comments.

          • jefe68

            No it’s not.

          • jefe68

            I think this guy is either unable to understand the idea of word usage and subtext, as in layered meanings, or he just does not care. Could be both.

            Been down this road few times with this chap. He thinks it’s funny and will try to turn it around so you’re the one with the race problem. I guess he’s going to the Rush Limbaugh summer camp for debating.

          • jefe68

            You just did before, and on countless other comments on this subject.

          • HonestDebate1

            BS, quote me, there’s only 56 comments. Find where I wrote anything that is in conflict with Yar’s comment and put me in my place.

          • jefe68

            You already mention the Trayvon Martin case twice in context to race.
            There really is something very wrong with how you view the world.

          • HonestDebate1

            Sure fine, I have a twisted view but I never said racism was not a form of oppression and doesn’t exist. Never. You should apologize.

          • jefe68

            Apologize for what? You really are not aware what you have posted today, and more to the point in the past, are loaded racially, and in a negative way. That by doing so you are using language and ideas that can be a form of oppression.
            You don’t openly endorse this idea, but you skirt around it in ways that are very clear where your ideology lies.

          • HonestDebate1

            My ideology is to judge people by the content of their character, to have the same expectations for everyone and to apply the same rules to everyone. Go right ahead looking at skin color first, using the soft bigotry of low expectations and treating blacks differently because you feel sorry for what you must consider their inferior selves as you call be the racist.

          • nj_v2

            Right, those “hating liberals” (DisHonestMisDebatorGreggg’s words, used often to generalize and stereotype an undefined group of people from a few comments he harvests off of some reactionary, right-wing Web site) go around all the time calling the “entire South” racist.

            Greggg looks so cute in his clown suit today.

          • jefe68

            Yeah, and he’s riding around in his wee clown car looking for a free internet connection so the government wont spy on him.

          • 1Brett1

            As long as you think racism still exists in America, what specific issues would you say still exist regarding racism today?

          • jefe68

            It’s amazing how deep you dig these ditches.

          • HonestDebate1

            I dig down to the bedrock truth, I’m on solid ground.

      • jefe68

        I think it’s a valid question given that you have posted a lot of racially charged comments.
        I don’t remember you using those words but I’m sure I can find some comments in which you are all but saying that. You fend this indignation and say you respect Mr. Lewis’s struggle. OK do you respect his notion that the voting laws past in your state of NC are regressive in terms of dealing with race?

        • HonestDebate1

          Only an idiot would say racism doesn’t exist and only an even bigger idiot would read my comments and infer that I ever implied so.

          No, I disagree that blacks are too stupid to vote. If you want to believe it, fine.

          I said I respected his struggle but I can’t say I have a ton of respect for him and that began when he falsely accused tea partiers of hurling racial epitaphs at him. As I recall it was actually his aide but that aide should have been fired, he wasn’t. I do think he is a hero, I put him in the same camp as John McCain. I also respect McCain’s struggle but I can’t say I respect his views.

          I do think Mr. Lewis did some good work regarding the IRS.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – let’s just say that if all of your comments that begin with “Blacks are …” were read by an NYPD officer, that officer might apply the “reasonable suspicion” standard, and “stop, question, frisk” you about racism.

            Don’t keep up the bad work.

          • jefe68

            So you think I’m stupid because I think your comments are racily loaded?
            Please, you are a real piece of work buddy.

            I never said anything about anyones intelligence, except yours, which time and again you prove to me that you are really not very smart on some issues. Case in point you say you respect him and at the same time you try to say the tea party is not about race on some level. Which it is, that’s pretty clear from anyone with enough common sense.

          • HonestDebate1

            I didn’t say that, where do you get this stuff?

            I never ever ever ever said racism doesn’t exist. I never implied it. I never hinted at implying it. Never. Anyone who concludes that from my comments is stupid. It has nothing to do with anything being racially charged, it’s about denying racism exists which is as stupid as saying the sky isn’t blue.

            I didn’t even direct my comment at you… but if the shoe fits…

          • jefe68

            You don’t even comprehend what you write. Amazing.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Unfortunately, with voter suppression back from the dead tnx to GoP and the Extreme Court, we’re gonna have to do it all over again.

  • PaulCJr

    Could the congressman speak to the growing population of multiracial Americans, and the growing amount of interracial marriages in regards to race in America and its implication on American attitudes towards race. In my personal life, I’m married to a black women, I’m not black, and have a multiracial baby. I feel it will be this growing section of Americans that will help America move past race eventually.

  • Wahoo_wa

    I think we’re at a very awkward point in race relations. The horrors of racism from the past are definitely in the past, but they are constantly brought up to explain current events that may have absolutely nothing to do with race or racism. It’s sad in a way that the specter of racism still looms in some people’s minds even when it’s not present. Seeing racism when there is none is just as bad as racism itself.

    • thequietkid10

      This, it’s a generational cluster**** made possible by the internet. You have most people, especially young people born 10, 20, 30 years after this all happened, who know racism is wrong, who don’t consider themselves racist. and are deeply offended by any possible accusation.

      You have an older generation of liberals/African Americans that lived through the experience and can never fully heal from the experience.

      Then you have the occasional overt racist comment, which I believe causes some to think whites are all racist

      You have race baiters on all sides and all levels, from those who still behave and say overtly racist things to those in the media who believe that the Trevon Martin case turned out the way it did because Trevon is black and Zimmerman, to those who think any criticism of President Obama stems from some hidden or subconscious racism.

  • ThatDudeOnABike

    Congressman. Do you sense the racial backlash against the President? I feel so much hate in this country. I’m not imagining it. Maybe I’m too empathetic, but I feel it, and I feel like though the majority of the electorate twice elected Barack Obama, we are sliding right back to 1968 and before.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      There’s no “racial backlash” against President Obama.

      If it were “backlash”, it wouldn’t have been planned from the start by the political right. The phrase “raised seal birth certificate” wouldn’t be on anyone’s lips. Our press corps wouldn’t have interviewed Orly Taitz and The Donald without laughing in their faces.

      We’d have never reached the point where John McCain could get credit for going “high road” by having to tell some goober at a rally that No, Candidate Obama is NOT a Muslim.

      We’d have had a press who would have been investigating, not propagating the meme, on the “how did so many Americans think Obama wasn’t born in the USA, isn’t an American citizen”, rather than just bothsides it to some cracked form of “legitimate question”.

      • ThatDudeOnABike

        Semantics.Don’t miss the point. The backlash started right after election night and party at the park in Chicago. The hatred started boiling.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          I agree about the hatred, but the term “backlash” indicates something that isn’t planned.

          To analogize: At one point someone couldn’t turn on a radio without hearing one of the BeeGees’ numerous top-five hits. Then it all got too much.

          Nobody–not The Clash, The Ramones, the management at CGBGs, was planning the backlash against disco. It just happened.

          The “pre-backlash” against Obama started in the summer of ’08, if you ask me. NPR, ever the patsy, had to have some wheat-toast academics on to discuss the “debate point” that “Barack Obama is a socialist”.

          • thequietkid10

            For the record, I don’t think that President Obama is a socialist. He’s just the most liberal president we have had in a long time, if not ever.

            That being said, the accusation that President Obama is a socialist is not racist, nor is it slur, it’s a political label. There are lots of people who would be proud to call themselves socialist, it’s not like he’s being called a Nazi or a fascist.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            First, for the record, I care not that people who are socialists are proud of that label.

            Because in American politics it’s the kiss of death. When someone’s tarred as “socialist” and they are not, nobody in the mainstream of politics and media in this country is interested in a high-school forensics class.

            The meme that “Obama is a socialist” was nothing but a concerted effort to destroy his candidacy.

            It leads naturally into the idea of Obama being “Socialist”, “Muslim”, “not born here”, “foreign”, and other fun words. They all add up to a concentrated effort to label him as “the other”.

            Just a bit of real journalism, rather than lemming-like following of Fox, Rush and Drudgico, was all that was needed in 2008. And it was in very short supply.

          • pete18

            I bet you’re OK with the term “tea-bagger” though, because you consider that a accurate description.

          • nj_v2

            This

            [ He's just the most liberal president we have had in a long time, if not ever. ]

            a. Permanently disqualifies you from ever being taken seriously from here on,

            b. Demonstrates an utter lack of understanding of the spectrum of political philosophy,

            c. Displays a disturbing naivety,

            d. All the above.

          • thequietkid10

            So since the Carter (33 years ago, for the record) how many President’s have been more liberal then Obama? Curious to see your thinking on this topic.

    • Wahoo_wa

      I think those who make the news or who are in the public eye for racial remarks toward the President are in an extremely small minority that does not represent our culture as a whole. From my cultural subgroup I equate it with coverage of gay pride parades. More often times than not it’s the more colorful members of my community (drag queens for instance) that catch the eye of our culture as a whole. Drag queens are a very, very small subset of my cultural group. Racism is the same thing. We’re living in a post-racist society.

      • ThatDudeOnABike

        You don’t see the extremists and voter suppression laws as a broad attacks? The unprecedented and outright belittling of our president on the floor of Senate chambers? The hatred for ObamaCare? Do people really hate healthcare reform that much? The rodeo clown?

        “Post racial” is generations down the road, if ever. Don’t kid yourself.

        • HonestDebate1

          How can you dismiss all the terrible effects of Obamacare and say the criticism is all because Obama is half black? That’s sick.

          • ThatDudeOnABike

            An honest debate on the Affordable Heathcare Act would be fine. I’ll pencil you in as someone who just really hates healthcare reform and accept double-digit profit margins on people dying of cancer. Free country, man. But please don’t accuse someone of being sick because I don’t agree with your opinion.

            I love the way you vote your response up.

          • HonestDebate1

            Right off the bat honest debate is lost when you equate opposition to Obamacare with opposition to healthcare reform.

            You can disagree with my position all you want but it’s sick if you are going to scream racism when issuance premiums are going through the roof after we were told they would go down, when the part time employment rate is at record highs, when half of the implementation deadlines have been missed and others are being delayed by decree, when Congress exempts themselves, when even the labor unions want out, when doctors are retiring early, when the chief author calls it a train wreck, when health care will be rationed and people can’t keep their doctors as promised. And today we learn UPS is dropping spousal coverage and teachers are having their hours cut back because of Obamacare. It’s a disaster that has zip, zero, nada to do with the color of Obama’s skin. I do not apologize for calling out race baiting when i see it.

            I have no idea what you mean by voting my response up.

          • Sy2502

            It’s much easier, and requires a lot less brain power, to silence opposers by calling them racist than by actually considering your point and trying to come up with a valid rebuttal.

          • Wahoo_wa

            He does it because there are many people on the far left who cling to racism as a reason for every little thing. It’s truly sad.

          • ThatDudeOnABike

            So if someone is too sensitive, then the problem doesn’t exist?

          • nj_v2

            Name a few of the “people on the far left” who do this. Go ahead, i’ll wait.

          • Wahoo_wa

            Jackson, Sharpton to name two.

          • nj_v2

            Al Sharpton, far left. That’s hilarious.

        • Wahoo_wa

          There is no such thing as voter suppression. Everyone has access to government issued ID regardless of race. The belittling of Obama may have more to do with his policies and the stress of a recession hit economy than race. Same is true for Obamacare. The rodeo clown reference proves the point I made in my earlier comment.

      • nj_v2

        [[ We're living in a post-racist society. ]]

        I’m not sure where you’re living. Maybe in some well-off white suburb. Or just inside your own delusions.

        • Wahoo_wa

          Nope…I live in Somerville, MA and grew up in a very racially mixed housing project.

        • Sy2502

          Whites are the majority in this country and whites elected a black president TWICE. Racism is the minority, whether you like it or not. And people like you who are always drumming up the racial conflict, always seen racism everywhere are part of the problem, not the solution.

  • hennorama

    Thank you very much Rep. John Lewis!

    American society has made huge strides away from legal racism and oppression and toward equality for all. That is in large part due to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. These Acts came about in large measure due to the actions and words of activists such as Rep. John Lewis, and the suffering and deaths of many, many others.

    It cannot be surprising to anyone that those who personally experienced racism and oppression would be vigilant about these issues, and would communicate the necessity for such vigilance to others. The fact that progress has indeed been made does not obviate the need for vigilance, and for opposition to actions that can be viewed as reversions to the problems of the past.

    The following is meant only as an analogy, not as a comparison in any way.

    Imagine a child who was bitten by the first dog she ever encountered, and who often experienced unleashed dogs snarling and growling in her presence, and dogs chasing her. Such a child may be scarred and scared for life, and might maintain a hyper-vigilance about dogs for the rest of her life.

    Now imagine if she moved to an area where leash laws were strictly enforced, and dog owners were heavily fined for their animals being off-leash and for biting humans. Her fear might decline as she experiences more interactions with dogs that are under control, but she would still be very vigilant about dogs.

    Now imagine if she has a son, and the son is taught to be very aware of the dangers posed by dogs. The son grows up in an era and area where dogs are less of a threat, and has never been bitten, chased or attacked by a dog. The son still learns to be vigilant, but his personal experiences allow him much greater comfort about dogs.

    Now imagine if someone proposes that the leash law be changed, and that certain dogs should be allowed to be off-leash.

    One can imagine mother and son both opposing such a change, with mother being more adamant due to her personal experiences.

    Cheers again to Rep. John Lewis, a true American hero!

    • notafeminista

      Chris Lane would agree.

      • HonestDebate1

        No one around here cares and that assumes they even know about Chris Lane. I searched the NPR website and did come up with one item:

        http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=213705095

        There is no mention of race at all which is what I prefer. The problem is the taxpayer funded double standard (aka propaganda). Every story on Trayvon Martin introduced racial component.

        • hennorama

          Debates Not, He – what is the basis of your remark that “No one around here cares .. about Chris Lane?”

          What evidence do you have to support such a conclusion?

          Why is Chris Lane even relevant to this discussion, if, as the article you linked to stated, the prosecutor “said the three teens, from the grittier part of town, chose Lane at random…?”

          • HonestDebate1

            We’ll wait and see how many shows On Point does on the issue. We’ll see how many spinoff shows they do on Racism in America despite no evidence of racism. We’ll see how many weeks in a row the friday news roundup mentions Lane, there are to many to count regarding Trayvon Martin. We’ll see if the President weighs in. We’ll see if On Point covers the trial.

            As I said I prefer race is not reported and to be honest the first I saw of it was on The Blaze which did not mention race. The omission was one reason I figured the perpetrator was black but the bigger reason is the odds are overwhelmingly worse for a white person to be the victim of black violence. The last thing any black person needs to be worried about is being killed by a white racist. The odds are infinitesimally small. I didn’t here the show yet but surely no honest discussion of race and the equality Mr. lewis fought for would avoid the issue.

          • OnPointComments
          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – TY for your non-responsive response. Allow me to repeat (and edit slightly) my questions to you:

            What is the basis of your remark that “No one around here cares .. about Chris Lane?”

            What evidence do you have to support such a conclusion?

            Why is Chris Lane even relevant to this discussion, if, as the article you linked to stated, the prosecutor “said the three teens, from the grittier part of town, chose Lane at random…,” and foxnews.com reported that “Police Chief Dan Ford said Lane appeared to have been chosen at random…”?

            See:
            http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/21/police-say-teen-shot-australian-student-in-oklahoma-for-fun-it/

          • HonestDebate1

            I don’t do your homework assignments, schoolmarm. I have nothing to prove to you. Keep thinking whatever you want. How about pointing out the outrage expressed by you over the murder of Chris Lane. You are not worth my time.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – translating your post from Greggspeak to English:

            “I don’t do your homework assignments, schoolmarm. I have nothing to prove to you.” = “I, Gregg Smith, am unable to support my positions in any way. My position is so weak that I cannot answer even simple questions, and must retreat from challenge by trying to change the subject.”

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – Please defend your statement that “the odds are overwhelmingly worse for a white person to be the victim of black violence.”

            “Worse” than what, exactly?

            The vast majority of violent crime is in fact INTRAracial, sir. Therefore, it is FAR more likely that a white victim of violent crime was victimized by a white offender than by a black offender. The same is true for black victims of violent crime, who are far more likely to be victimized by a black offender than by a white offender.

            Please provide the facts and statistics and the arithmetic involved in your defense, as well as a discussion of odds and probability, reliabilities of statistics based on surveys, etc.

            Perhaps before you embark on your defense, you should answer the following questions:

            What is your fascination with crimes that have victims of one race and offenders of another race? Do you think such intraracial crimes are indicative of racism on the part of each and every one of the offenders?

            Here are a few data points for your consideration:

            According to the BJS’ 2008 NCVS, Table 42 “Percent distribution of single-offender victimizations, based on race of victims, by type of crime and perceived race of offender”:

            For the estimated 2,788,600 “White only” victims of “Crimes of violence”, the “perceived race of offender” was:

            White: 67.4%
            Black: 15.4%
            Other: 5.1%
            Not known or not available: 12.0%

            For the estimated 570,550 “Black only” victims of “Crimes of violence”, the “perceived race of offender” was:

            White: 15.9%
            Black: 64.7%
            Other: 7.3%
            Not known or not available: 12.2%

            “Crimes of violence” in this case were Rape/sexual assault, “Robbery, and Assault. The data are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which is an annual data collection conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. Since this is a survey of victims, homicide is not included as a “Crime of violence” in these tables.

            Please also note that “Attempted” and “threatened” violence together consistently account for roughly three fourths of the estimated numbers of “Crimes of violence” in the NCVS Statistical Tables. This means that these are not offenses that have been reported to authorities. Offenses reported to law enforcement are far fewer in number.

            Interracial crime is not in and of itself indicative of racism or bias. One would expect this to be obvious to all, but apparently it is not. There is a huge difference between crime that happens to be interracial, and crime that is racially motivated.

            If you’re interested in racially motivated crime, you should look at both the FBI “hate crime” data, and the DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics reports. Recent information from those two entities is available here:

            http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2011/tables/table-1 (Incidents, Offenses, Victims, and Known Offenders by Bias Motivation, 2011)

            http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/hcv0311.pdf (Special Report MARCH 2013 Hate Crime Victimization, 2003-2011)

            The BJS report above indicates that, “In 2007-11, whites, blacks, and Hispanics had similar rates of violent hate crime victimization.”

            And for the rare crime of homicide, let’s look at a very small and narrow cohort of victims and offenders, from FBI supplemental data in “Expanded Homicide Data Table 6, Murder, Race and Sex of Victim by Race and Sex of Offender, 2011 [Single victim/single offender]

            These are much smaller cohorts of Victims, Offenders, and Situations (Single victim/single offender), so considerable care must be used when interpreting this information.

            Repeating – considerable care must be used when interpreting this information.

            For 2011 “Single victim/single offender situations accounted for 48.4 percent of all murders for which the UCR Program received supplemental data.“ This was the most common known Victim/Offender Situation. This also means that 51.6 percent “of all murders for which the UCR Program received supplemental data” were NOT [Single victim/single offender] situations, and/or were situations where the Victim/Offender Situation or relationship was Unknown.

            Here are a few data points from this Table:

            For the 3,172 Single victim/single offender circumstances with White Victims, 2,630 Offenders were White (82.9%), 448 were Black (14.1%), 33 were Other (1.0%), and 61 were of Unknown race (1.9%).

            For the 2,695 Single victim/single offender circumstances with Black Victims, 2,447 Offenders were Black (90.8%), 193 were White (7.2%), 9 were Other (0.3%), and 46 were of Unknown race (1.7%).

            Again, no surprise, as the vast majority of violent crime is in fact, INTRAracial.

            See:
            http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6

            and also

            http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4

          • HonestDebate1

            Worse than the odds of a black person being the victim of white violence.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – You seem to be significantly arithmetically impaired, sir. How do you square your claim with the statistics from the FBI and BJS?

            Or is your claim yet another of the things you made up, based on your omniscient “forrest [sic] thing” viewpoint?

            “Schoolmarm Says” – do you know the meaning of “infinitesimal”? Your post indicates that you do not.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – why are you mentioning the Chris Lane case in the same sentence as the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case? They don’t seem comparable or connected in any way.

            In the Trayvon Martin case, the lone shooter/offender was known immediately and was released without charge after being questioned by police. The shooter presented a credible and defensible reason for his actions, which occurred after a violent confrontation. Only later was the shooter arrested, charged, tried, and acquitted. Initial press coverage was limited to Florida media outlets.

            In the Chris Lane case, the alleged shooters/offenders were captured by police hours after the shooting. They were quickly arrested and charged with murder and other offenses. According to press reports, the shooters did not present any reason or defense of their actions, other than boredom. There was no apparent confrontation that precipitated the shooting. Press coverage went national and international virtually immediately.

            What’s the connection?

          • HonestDebate1

            The connection is the disconnect in the accusations of racism.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – what a bunch of gobbledygook.

      • hennorama

        notafeminista – TYFYR. It is an absolute non sequitur, however.

        • notafeminista

          Obviously Chris Lane’s parents did not “teach him to be vigilant” – by any other name, known as profiling.

          • hennorama

            notalogician – TYFYR. I see. By your “logic,” Mr. Lane’s parents are responsible for his death, because they did not teach him to profile.

            What a bizarre train of thought.

          • notafeminista

            An analogy is, by definition, a comparison.

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – TYAFYR.

            You wrote ”An analogy is, by definition, a comparison. ‘Tis a fine line between being viligant and assuming the worst of someone is it not?”

            A few points:

            1. Indeed ONE definition of analogy is “comparison based on resemblance in some particulars between things otherwise unlike.” However, if an analogy is prefaced by the words “The following is meant only as an analogy, not as a comparison in any way,” the reader is on notice that another definition is applicable. In my case, the intent was to not belittle racism and oppression by comparing them to a dog bite.

            2. You apparently believe that the Chris Lane case has something to do with race, despite the fact that both the prosecutor involved, and “Police Chief Dan Ford said Lane appeared to have been chosen at random…”

            Repeating: “Lane appeared to have been chosen at random…” If this is true, then what’s the connection to the topic of “Congressman John Lewis And The 50th Anniversary Of The March On Washington?”

            See:
            http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/21/police-say-teen-shot-australian-student-in-oklahoma-for-fun-it/
            http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=213705095

            3. Perhap to your way of thinking, there is “a fine line between being viligant [sic] and assuming the worst of someone,” but I disagree completely. There is a HUGE leap from being alertly watchful (per m-w.com) to “assuming the worst of someone.”

          • notafeminista

            Thank you for the typo correction. Are you suggesting that we be vigilant because dogs may bite or because they do bite? Just who is the dog?

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – TYAFYR, and YW. No worries – typos happen.

            Perhaps the word in my original post that’s tripping you up is “Imagine.”

            Please allow me to repeat my question:

            “Lane appeared to have been chosen at random…” If this is true, then what’s the connection to the topic of “Congressman John Lewis And The 50th Anniversary Of The March On Washington?”

          • notafeminista

            Perhaps that vigilance is key.

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – TYAFYR. If you mean vigilance about racism and oppression “is key,” then I agree.

            However, if you mean vigilance, about which you wrote, “by any other name, [is] known as profiling,” then I stand in vehement disagreement.

          • notafeminista

            It appears as though, for you, the choice to be vigilant or vehement is dependent upon the color of the dog.

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – TYFYR.

            Vigilance about racism and oppression is not dependent on anything other than the incidence of racism and oppression. The vigilance is in regard to reversions to past problems, as stated in my initial post:

            “The fact that progress has indeed been made does not obviate the need for vigilance, and for opposition to actions that can be viewed as reversions to the problems of the past.”

            Bringing up a random shooting that is indefensible is completely unrelated to this topic. Chris Lane was chosen at random, according to reports from both the Police Chief and the prosecutor.

          • notafeminista

            I stand by my response. For you, it depends on the color of the dog.

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – It matters not whether you stand by your response, as your claim is false.

          • notafeminista

            Really. Explain why “stop and frisk” is not vigilance.

          • notafeminista

            Pardon any possible duplication that may occur –
            Please explain how the policy of “stop and frisk” is not being vigilant.

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – TYAFYR.

            If I had made such an argument about stop and frisk policies, I certainly would be happy to explain it, but I made no such argument.

            You however, made the false claim that “It appears as though, for you, the choice to be vigilant or vehement is dependent upon the color of the dog.” You then went on to write “I stand by my response. For you, it depends on the color of the dog.”

            As stated, “Vigilance about racism and oppression is not dependent on anything other than the incidence of racism and oppression. The vigilance is in regard to reversions to past problems, as stated in my initial post:”

            You have yet to definitively answer my initial question to you, which still stands:

            “Lane appeared to have been chosen at random…” If this is true, then what’s the connection to the topic of “Congressman John Lewis And The 50th Anniversary Of The March On Washington?”

          • notafeminista

            I did answer the question – and I will again. Perhaps that vigilance is key. Now. Would you define “stop and frisk” as being reasonably vigilant as demonstrated in your “not a comparison” or as unreasonably racist and oppressive?

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – TYAFYR.

            Please note I wrote that “You have yet to DEFINITIVELY answer my initial question to you…” (emphasis added). Your use of the word “perhaps” indicates the uncertainty of your response.

            One suggests that you could alternatively make a definitive statement, such as

            “The Lane case is connected to the topic of ‘Congressman John Lewis And The 50th Anniversary Of The March On Washington,’ despite reports that both the prosecutor ‘said the three teens … chose Lane at random…,’ and foxnews.com reported that ‘Police Chief Dan Ford said Lane appeared to have been chosen at random…,’ because …”

            You continue to ask about the policy of “stop and frisk” despite the fact that I have made no argument about this policy related to the topic of this forum. You seem to have interpreted my initial post as being related to this policy. It was not. I did not have “stop and frisk” policies in mind at all when I composed my initial post.

            TYAFYR.

          • notafeminista

            I did note that. Another way to interpret your response is that you did not receive the answer you prefer.
            I asked about “stop and frisk” because it is you who opened the door to being vigilant did you not? When is it prudent vigilance sir, and when is it oppressive racism? Or does it, as I suspect, depend on the color of the dog?

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – TYFYR.

            If you insist on asking about “stop and frisk,” I’ll simply refer you to all of my posts that mention it. These are in chronological order, from the oldest to the most recent, including those in this thread:

            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/02/20/cost-of-prison#comment-805883232
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/16/week-in-the-news-cairo-frisk-merger#comment-1004246390
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/16/week-in-the-news-cairo-frisk-merger#comment-1004388128
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/16/week-in-the-news-cairo-frisk-merger#comment-1004795716
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/21/congressman-john-lewis#comment-1010657087
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/21/congressman-john-lewis#comment-1013812869
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/21/congressman-john-lewis#comment-1013839216
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/21/congressman-john-lewis#comment-1013920471

            As I have made no argument as to whether these policies are either “prudent vigilance” or “oppressive racism,” your question is not germane to the discussion.

            Please feel free to expound on the topic, and to make declarative statements as to its relevance to the topic at the top of the page.

          • notafeminista

            As I suspected. It is the color of the dog.

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – repeating your false claim over and over does not make it any less false.

          • hennorama

            notafeminista – just out of curiosity – are you aware that one of the suspects in the Christopher Lane case is white, one is black, and the third has parents from two different races?

          • nj_v2

            Some people’s train of thought never leaves the station.

          • hennorama

            nj_v2 – indeed. And others fall on the tracks and get run over.

      • OnPointComments

        Haven’t you been reading the liberal media reports? Chris Lane’s murder is the fault of the gun, not the thugs.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      I’m afraid all the battles that I thought were ancient history will have to be fought again. It must be very sad for Mr Lewis to see voter suppression coming back after their great efforts. But we also have to build unions again, rein in the plutocrats again, build great free public education again, build great muni services and infrastructure again, defend SS again….It is horrible how many victories for average Americans have been reversed by the plutocrats and their pawns.

      • hennorama

        TomK_in_Boston – TY for your response.

        The battles against racism and oppression, and for equality for all have been going on for thousands of years. I was reminded of this last night while watching the excellent PBS documentary film ‘Muhammad: Legacy of the Prophet’ which was shown in three parts. The last part, ‘Holy Peace,’ recited Muhammad’s Last Sermon from the year 632 CE, which reads in part,

        “All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action.”

        The video of ‘Muhammad: Legacy of the Prophet’ is available here (click the [WATCH VIDEO] link in the toolbar at the top of the page):

        http://www.pbs.org/muhammad/

        See also:
        http://www.introductiontoislam.org/prophetlastsermon.shtml

        • TomK_in_Boston

          hennorama, yes, the battle never ends.

          In “The Great Wealth Transfer”, (unfortunately my link to Rolling Stone) doesn’t work anymore) Krugman describes going for drives with his parents as a child, past the mansions from the ‘gilded age’, and having no doubt whatsoever that they were relics of the past, maybe suited to museums. We had cracked the problem of a capitalist system that worked for all and there was no going back to aristocrats and sweatshops.

          I’m more or less a contemporary of Krugman and I grew up with the same assumptions. It’s been a shock to see the “past” come back with a vengeance, in the form of “the great wealth transfer” to the top. Maybe it’s a bigger shock to see so many of the victims defend it.

          Oh well, I thought after the Gulf of Tonkin lies and the Vietnam disaster we’d never fall for gvt war propaganda again.

  • jefe68

    Being that the other show was on John Coltrane I thought this
    piece by him, Alabama, which was written in response to the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing on September 15 1963, by the Ku Klux Klan in Birmingham, Alabama that killed four girls, would be worth a listen.

    It’s a live film of the quartet as well.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEMrnT98TUQ

    • jefe68

      Wow, someone voted a down arrow for this wonderful piece of music. It shows me how regressive some are on this forum. You know who you are.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Hey, I don’t know who did it.

        But sometimes there’s just no talking to some Kenny G fans.

        • jefe68

          I never thought about the Kenny G fans…
          I wonder what the percentage of Kenny G fans are Republicans?
          (a joke…)

          • Steve__T

            I grew up listening to Coltrane and love every note but I also happen to like Kenny G.

          • HonestDebate1

            I have no patience for musical snobs, I appreciate your comment.

          • jefe68

            I have no patience for idiots.

          • jefe68

            Kenny G is elevator music. But each to his own. I’ve never liked smooth jazz.

            Now Jazz Funk is another story. Love the Yellowjackets and Steps Ahead. But then again the late Michael Brecker and Bob Mintzer are/where still is, the pinnacle of sax playing. Kenny G, not so much.

          • Steve__T

            You need to check out Keiko Matsui, and Fourplay then get back to me.

          • jefe68

            I can’t stand that kind of music.

            It does nothing for me. I don’t care that she has chops, Kenny G has chops.

            It’s what you do with them counts.

            Fourplay are great musicians. Nathan East is a master. Not my cup of tea but miles above what Keiko is doing.

            Do you listen to Chick Corea’ Five Peace Band with John McLaughlin, Christian McBride, Kenny Garrett, Vinnie Colaiuta?

            Now there’s a band and then some.

            Also Jeff Beck’s band also with Vinnie Colaiuta is more to my taste.

          • Steve__T

            Jeff I understand and Yes I love Chick and the rest of the musicians you have posted.

            We could take up an whole lot of time discussing the merits of thees wonderful artist. I just happen to be very eclectic in my choice of music. And I will close out with something I find hauntingly beautiful, by Keiko and her Husband, Light above the Trees.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lftV5-1Oh0A

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            No offense intended.

            I really enjoy Chet Baker, almost the grandfather of the style of “cool jazz” from the 50s.

            However, the “smooth jazz” leaves me cold. I sorta checked out of that except for the sorts like Spirogyra, Chuck Mangione, and Bob James.

    • hennorama

      Such a soulful and mournful piece. Another example of Coltrane’s genius.

      Thanks for bringing this to our attention, jefe68. Well done.

      • brettearle

        Wir haben unser Gedanken ein bischen geandert:

        Wir nicht mehr glauben dass du zwei Menschen bis.

        Aber, wir denken, statt, dass du Siamese Doppelganger an Kopf verbundene bis.

        Ist es deine Strategie zu verweigern diese?

        Das wurde schlect beraten sein:

        Der Teufel wird auf dich Howard-kurz, wenn du nicht die Wahrheit sagst.

        ********

        Nicht korrekt mein Deutch.

        Will nicht behaupten, dass meine Meinung droll oder weit hergeholt ist.

        Ansonsten, der Teufel wird mehr als Howard-kurz auf dich tun.

        • hennorama

          brettearle und Lieblings-Mädchen – Vielen Dank für Ihre Antwort, und für die kommenden wie ein langer Weg für eine so kurze Howard Kurtz Witz.

          Wir leugnen alles und nichts. Es ist nie und immer uns.

          ==========

          In Bezug auf Ihre deutschen, das ist nicht ganz richtig. Wir korrigiert Rechtschreibung, nicht die Sprache. Wir sind “die Schoolmarm.” Deshalb müssen wir alle Fehler korrigieren. Rechtschreibung zählt. Deshalb müssen wir darauf hinweisen, dass das Wort “schlecht” mit zwei “H” s geschrieben wird.

          Wie wir wissen, ist der Teufel im Detail.

  • skrekk

    I want to commend Congressman Lewis for recognizing in 1996 during the debate on DOMA that civil rights are civil rights, and that all Americans deserve equal civil rights. Very few of his colleagues understood that at the time. He made a truly great speech opposing DOMA:

    http://www.gaprogress.com/john-lewis-hero-against-doma/

    http://www.wsbtv.com/videos/news/the-1996-testimony-that-should-have-stopped-doma/vw2Jm/

  • HonestDebate1

    Mr.Lewis is truly an icon of the civil rights movement. I was struck by his recounting his college days and the emphasis on studying, his emphasis on church. He married in 1968 and remained married until his wife died less than a year ago. Anyone who has followed him and witnessed him chairing or co-chairing congressional committees can instantly see the fruits of his disciplined efforts to excel. Study hard, be non-violent, marry until death do you part and strive for excellence, what a novel concept. My how times have changed.

    Today disciplined efforts to excel are frowned upon in the black community. Today instead of being forced to sit in the back of the bus, affirmative action puts them in the front of the line. Is trading one discrimination for another an improvement? Today the prey has become the predator. Today the n word is common discourse in the black community. Today the two parent black family is the exception. Today black men go to jail instead of college. Today blacks want to be judged by the color of their skin instead one the content of their character. They get more stuff that way. Today, and especially on this blog, Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Southern Baptist preacher.

    It breaks my heart. Is this what Mr. Lewis fought for?

    • RobertLongView

      You forget that Paul Ryan and Mitt Romeny are the role models for the Republican party. How can that be? Does Ronald Reagan and Ayn Rand and Joel Osteen suit you better? Big love they call that crap. But for you it is bitter love, I fear. Here is a verse to help in your revival, young Rocky Raccoon. Luke 21:28.

      • HonestDebate1

        I’m not sure I get your point but thanks for calling me young. I do stay on the channel after Fox News Sunday long enough to hear Osteen’s joke but then they chant allegiance and it creeps me out. Click.

        • RobertLongView

          You got a KJV Holy Bible? Read that thing young Rocky. Faux News is of “The Devil.” Maybe you can find a Rev. Barber YouTube video.

          • HonestDebate1

            I’m not a Christian dude.

    • nj_v2

      Words fail at describing what a dissembling, weassely smarmy, intellectually bereft jackass you are.

      You try to appropriate the life’s work of a truly great human being, a seminal figure in the ongoing positive transformation of the sad history of racial repression and bigotry, and try to use it in service to your regressive, right-wing ideology of Limballs, Beck, and other racist reactionaries. It’s shameful and disgusting, even for a clueless dolt like you.

      http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/july98/lewis.html

      Peter Handler of Ann Arbor, MI asks:

      As a supporter of affirmative action, what is your response to those who contend that affirmative action contradicts the spirit of the civil rights movement and makes overcoming race and racism in this society impossible?

      John Lewis responds:

      Affirmative action is a necessary public policy designed to affirm the inclusion and participation of people in workplace and at our educational institutions who have been left out and left behind. We have had an affirmative action policy for many, many years that benefited white men primarily, while minorities and women were not given the same opportunities. Affirmative action only a means a tool or an instrument to compensate, amend, make up, and correct the wrongs of the past. Over the long term, we want to achieve a society where affirmative action is not necessary, but we have not reached that point yet. We are not yet a color-blind society. We are still in the process of becoming one.

      (excerpt)

      • HonestDebate1

        Affirmative action cannot possibly work without judging by the color of skin. It just can’t. I respect Mr. Lewis but I don’t agree with him. I stand by everything I wrote.

        • nj_v2

          Thus demonstrating that DisHonestMisDebatorGreggg has no idea what affirmative action actually is; yet another public display blurring the distinction between ignorance and stupidity.

        • jefe68

          Wow.

          • HonestDebate1

            Let’s pretend the world is colorblind and no one knows the race of anyone else. Explain how affirmative action can work. It can’t. Affirmative Action judges by the color of skin without regard to the content of character, pure and simple. I do not accept that blacks cannot succeed without do-goody whitey’s sympathy and money. I do not accept they are inherently inferior. You can if you want to.

          • jefe68

            You are one sad excuse for a human being.

        • notafeminista

          That’s pretty much what Mr. Lewis said in his quote. Affirmative action is necessary because “we are not yet a color blind society” – thusly benefits must be distributed on the basis of one’s race – because as Mr. Lewis (not yet color blind himself) states – “we have had an affirmative action policy that benefited white men primarily”.

          • HonestDebate1

            I agree and he almost sounds as if he thinks revenge should be a factor. Still, I do respect him and cannot fault him for living in the past given his struggle.

            The very last thing folks around here want is to give up seeing everything through the lens of race. All one has to do to be color blind is be color blind. It’s really that simple.

      • jefe68

        Well said sir.

    • jefe68

      Wow, you really are a bottom feeder.

    • 1Brett1

      “Today disciplined efforts to excel are frowned upon in the black community. Today instead of being forced to sit in the back of the bus, affirmative action puts them in the front of the line. Is trading one discrimination for another an improvement for society? Today the prey has become the predator.”

      Such utter nonsense with no substantiation of your claims. I suppose this is what you mean when you say racism still exists today.

      The sentiment here is that problems exist in the African-American community, and even in how they fit into the larger community, because society treats them too well or they are given too much without hard work…such crap.

      Oh, and I know why you said, “…Southern Baptist preachers [on this forum] are the scourge of the earth.” You posted a video of a Black Southern Baptist preacher a few weeks ago. Your video showed the preacher lambasting his congregation (mostly black) for having opinions that Trayvon Martin was a victim of a violent crime committed by Geroge Zimmerman. That preacher is James David Manning. He is highly controversial, and in my view kind of vile. Anyway, as far as I know, my condemnation of Paster Manning (and your use of his video) is the only criticism of “Southern Baptist preachers” on this forum. This is how you roll, though, That one criticism of him (and you for using him to further your narrative/opinion about the Zimmerman case) becomes, “today, and especially on this blog, Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth.” This is how you wish to distort what you think is an opposing narrative. Again, such nonsense and a cheap, dimestore way of making a point.

      Black men fail today because they don’t get married and don’t stay married to the same woman for life? They don’t study hard enough in college? They aren’t disciplined enough? Any lack of self-discipline a man has may contribute to his lack of success, sure, but that is not unique to black men. Whether a man marries or not, and whether or not he stays married to the same woman all of his life doesn’t necessarily contribute to his failure in and of itself. It may be more of a symptom than a cause, and may not be a factor/indicator of success/failure at all, and the divorce rate is not something unique to black men. Again, you are putting forth nonsensical arguments about what is a problem in the African-American community.

      • jefe68

        Well said. This guy is clearly making comments that are very racially charged and negative towards African Americans, particularly males.
        Yet he claims he’s not a bigot. The problem here is it’s not up to him to make that distinction when he posts comments, which in this case is a diatribe, that are using language coded and otherwise that are clearly aimed at getting people like you and me to respond.

        Next he’s going to say it’s not about him. Or were sick. Or some other absurd meme he’s found of using all of which end up sounding like some kind of hellish refrain in an awful Country and Western tune.

        • HonestDebate1

          Please refute anything I wrote, it’s not about me.

          • jefe68

            Your not worth it.

          • HonestDebate1

            Thank you.

          • 1Brett1

            You’re beef witted.

          • 1Brett1

            (“beef witted” is a derogatory term)

      • HonestDebate1

        What a bizarre reply. You just make up stuff. You don’t have a monopoly on trashing Southern Baptist preachers around here. And why are you lying about Manning? He’s not a Southern Baptist, it’s just part of your schtick. If you can dispute anything I wrote then do so but your entire comment is about me, it’s not about me.

        • 1Brett1

          In what way specifically was my reply “bizarre”? Also, who on this forum has said all Black Southern Baptist preachers are “the scourge of the earth”? When did they say it? Can you provide a commentator, quote, date, etc.?

          Blah, blah, blah…I have explained what “Black Southern Baptist” means before to you (it is a different faction than its white counterpart). It is also a completely different organization than Northern Baptists (aside from their being a different organization altogether, they are ALL white). Manning is not white (so, he’s not a [white] Southern Baptist). He’s not affiliated with the Northern Baptist Church (they are all white and a completely different entity altogether than Southern Baptists). Therefore, He’s a Black Southern Baptist.

          I also think it reveals your dishonesty to say, “And why are you lying about Manning? He’s not a Southern Baptist…” You and I have already had that conversation. I don’t care if you don’t agree with me, but you are wrong. And your refusal to accept correct information exemplifies your bigotry. While Manning might have a congregation in the New York, he is part of a tradition of Black Southern Baptists. By the way, I have a Black Southern Baptist Church right across the street from my house, and they have a “sister church” in Delaware. Does that suddenly make them Northern Baptists? No, it doesn’t. Of course none of this stops you from wanting to argue from an ignorant and bigoted point of view, but we all know that is nothing new coming from you.

          • HonestDebate1

            Manning is not Baptist (Southern or Northern) at all dork. I’m not giving you names and links to comments, I never said any one used the words “scourge of the earth”. And while you do fit the profile you were not even the first person I had in mind. I’m not going there, think what you want. My comment was substantive and requires a little thought. It requires you confront your bigotries. It requires honest debate. You are not capable, stew in your delusions. I don’t care.

          • 1Brett1

            Aww, you’re not going to give me names and links, what a stand-up guy!

            You are absolutely wrong about Manning. His church is founded…well, I’ll let you read about it:

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlah_Worldwide_Church

            Yes, Manning is a Baptist.

            No names of commentaters, links to comments, etc., about forum participants calling Black Southern Baptist preachers the “scourge of the earth” (your words, punk, not mine)? I thought you couldn’t provide any evidence of you attack on forum commentators.

          • HonestDebate1

            Let me get tis straight, you want me to give you quotes of people saying something I never said they said. That makes sense. Cut to the cause do you think Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth?

            Yes, I’ve already read about the church which was founded in Harlem as a Baptist church. I see no indication it was ever the Southern Baptist segment, it wasn’t in the name and it wasn’t in any description I have found. But you were talking about Manning not the building. The first thing Manning did when he took over is change the name so Baptist was not in it then he changed the denomination from Baptist to Independent. That is a rejection of Baptist. Why are you playing dumb? Why are you so invested in trashing Southern Baptist? MLK Jr. would take offense,

          • 1Brett1

            Nope, not “trashing” Southern Baptists. I like Black Southern Baptist Churches, I’d just as soon spit on [white] Southern Baptist Churches, however…but no, you are wrong all way around. Manning did not “reject” Baptist, he changed the name to promote broader ministries beyond what Baptists do. HIs church sponsors outreach, ministries, etc., that go beyond what the Black Southern Baptist Church promotes. He wanted independence from scrutiny of the institution. He’s still a Baptist in his beliefs, and the church is based on the Baptist religion, but whatever, punk. You are just a gnat.

            Let me repeat: his church was not Northern Baptist (they are all white). His church was not Southern Baptist (they are all white). That leaves Black Southern Baptist. Get it?

            If I am talking about the man and not the church, according to you, but according to you, I am trashing all Southern Baptists, your grabbing at straws gets a little confusing. But you contradict yourself constantly anyway, so I’m not surprised.

          • Ray in VT

            So you are saying that you did not say that “Today, and especially on this blog, Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth.”? If your contention is that “on this blog” (which this site is not), “Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth”, then is it not legitimate for Brett to ask you to provide examples of that if you want to defend your point?

          • HonestDebate1

            I am saying I did not accuse anyone of writing those words on this blog. I didn’t put the comment in quotes. I didn’t mention names. It’s clearly my opinion but no one is emerging to defend Southern Baptist. I have never seen a single kind word from you about any religion, just derision. That doesn’t mean you don’t sing the praises of Southern Baptist preachers, maybe I missed it. And don’t worry I am also not going to dig through your comments and post any of your numerous insults to the South, Baptist, preachers or religion in general.

            It is my opinion that you think Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the Earth but at least you don’t make stuff up and call anyone, anywhere a Southern Baptist just because of a little fire and brimstone talk despite their rejection of the Baptist sect. So feel free to correct me if you hold Southern Baptist preachers in high regard. Or if you are just neutral on the matter. Maybe you don’t assume all Southern Baptist preachers are just like Westboro,

          • 1Brett1

            You are such a punk. You are weaseling out of your statement about people on this forum expressing the opinion that Black Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth. THEN, you say “no one is emerging to defend Southern Baptist[s]” as it that is the same thing. What a bunch of crap.

            For one thing, people not defending Southern Baptists is not even close to the same thing as thinking they are the scourge of the earth. Second, There is a huge difference between Black Southern Baptists and [white]Southern Baptists. Third, I said that I like Black Southern Baptists but not [white’ Southern Baptists. Fourth, Pastor Manning is a vile man who uses his pulpit to say outrageous things.

            You just happened to like one of his diatribes (“sermons”). I condemn him, not all Black Southern Baptists or all Black Southern Baptist preachers.

            Also, again, no, Manning doesn’t “reject the Baptist sect.” That is a complete distortion. He IS a Baptist but broadened the function of his church’s outreach and ministries. You just don’t get that.

          • HonestDebate1

            I love it when you get so angry you start calling me a punk. It clouds your thinking (if you can call it that) and you start making stuff up like I think one thing is the same as another and can’t see I am merely buttressing my point. BTW, do you think Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth? All you have to do is say no to put me in my place. You can even lie.

            There you go teeing it up again. Will you ever learn or are you just shameless? You wrote: “You are weaseling out of your statement about people on this forum expressing the opinion that Black Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth.”

            Where did I accuse anyone of expressing that opinion. It’s my opinion that is the mindset around here.

            But that’s not the biggest bigotry you revealed. Nor is it the biggest contradiction. You wrote: “Third, I said that I like Black Southern Baptists but not [white’ Southern Baptists. Fourth, Pastor Manning is a vile man who uses his pulpit to say outrageous things.”

            First, i didn’t see that if you wrote it, maybe you did. And you swear he’s a black Southern Baptist preacher. Do you like him because he’s a vile man. Numbers 3 and 4 are in direct conflict.

            But still, that’s not the word thing your anger clouded self implied. You are now judging churches by the color of their skin, that’s sick.

          • 1Brett1

            Manning: don’t like him.

            Black Southern Baptists I know: I like most of them.

            Black Southern Baptist Churches: they have a lot of great functions that involve really good food, great music, and a lot of community activities for their members; I like that.

            [White] Southern Baptist Churches: I don’t like them or their congregation members, generally. They are judgmental, unfriendly, narrow minded, their music is bland; their food at their functions is bland; most of their preachers are sleazy, hypocritical and stupid.

            No, there is no contradiction there. And, no, I am not angry. I am sitting here feeling pretty good; I just finished lunch an am waiting for the next student. You are wrong on all accounts.

          • HonestDebate1

            So it all comes down to the color of skin. That’s sick Mr. angry man.

          • Ray in VT

            Well if no one has specifically said “scourge of the Earth”, then perhaps you would like to provide other examples of people demonizing or demeaning some or all Southern Baptist leaders/preachers.

            I have said plenty, I think, positive about religion and spirituality, although I have little good to say for religious fundamentalism, the promotion of belief that directly contradicts observable fact or science, or the bigotry, hatred and/or intolerance that gets pushed in the any of any faith. Perhaps you consider contesting the position that god sends earthquakes or hurricanes as punishment for abortion or homosexuality, but I do not.

            I have not seen the particular need to take a position on particular Southern Baptist preachers, except, perhaps, for the one in North Carolina who suggested rounding up all of the gays and lesbians. There are some who I think have done some very good things, while others have done things which I definitely do not agree with.

            Feel free to “dig through” my comments. That is what the history is there for if one so chooses.

          • HonestDebate1

            Do you consider Southern Baptists to be fundamentalist? Most do.

          • Ray in VT

            If they consider the Bible to be the true, literal and unerring word of God, then yes.

          • HonestDebate1

            That’s what Southern Baptist believe. So you have “little good to say about them” and I suggested. You say they push hatred and/or intolerance. But you don’t think they are the scourge of the earth. Fine, maybe I chose the wrong words but the sentiment holds true.

          • Ray in VT

            Yup, I have little that is good to say about the theology and views that they push when it comes to the role of women and their views on gays and lesbians. However, I do not think that they are “the scourge of the Earth”, and I do not think that your view of my sentiment holds true, but if you have decided that I believe something that I don’t, I’m sure that I will not be able to change your mind, considering your resistance to facts that contradict your beliefs. It’s not as though I consider them to be a racist organization (at least anymore) as you have stated regarding the NAACP, and I don’t consider them to be the enemies of America, as you have said regarding our current President. Their theology is their own business, and whereas I have little positive to say regarding aspects of their theology, I consider them to be far above Westboro or Christian Identity.

          • HonestDebate1

            I used your words Ray, not mine. I acknowledged “Scourge of the earth” was overkill. They are just unscientific, hateful, bigoted (regarding women and gays), intolerant and you have little good to say about them. Fine. Just because I have never ever seen you say anything good about Southern Baptist doesn’t mean much… I suppose.

          • Ray in VT

            There’s plenty of people whom I have criticized on particular issues but who likely have many decent qualities. I guess that I just think that if people are opposed to established science, believe that women ought to stay subservient to men and that gays and lesbians are sinful and somehow defective, then one should criticize those positions if one does not believe that those positions are correct. They’re not my favorite group (as a generalized whole), but there’s far worse in America or the world.

          • Ray in VT

            Also, I did not say that I have “little good to say about them” as you say that I said. I said that ” I have little good to say for religious fundamentalism, the promotion
            of belief that directly contradicts observable fact or science, or the
            bigotry, hatred and/or intolerance that gets pushed in the any of any
            faith”. If you are going to slap some quotes around something, then you might want to make sure that it is a an actual quote.

          • jefe68

            You see, Twain was right.

          • jefe68

            “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”

            Mark Twain

          • HonestDebate1

            Sorry, i need more than your opinion to refute Manning’s rejection of Baptist and conclude he is one because you say so. All I know is what the evidence supports, think what you want.

          • 1Brett1

            You’ve provided nothing to suggest “Manning rejected the Baptist faith.” Calling his church a name that doesn’t include the word “Baptist” in it is NOT evidence to support your CLAIM that he REJECTED the Baptist denomination…Also, what you “need” goes far beyond what anybody aside from a professional can do for you here.

        • 1Brett1

          Wow, you changed your comment after I replied…and you said a couple of weeks ago that you never do that. Further evidence of your dishonesty.

          It’s interesting that you say you won’t engage with me because of my opinions of you, yet you prattle on and on…It is also interesting that when I ask you directly about why you think racism still exists, you NEVER reply. Yet you spend a lot of time replying when I press you with a lot of razzmatazz dancing around, etc. You are such a coward, and you are anything but an honest debater.

          Another new pat reply of yours is when you don’t reply to something you say you are “not taking the bait.” COP-OUT!!!

          As far as telling me what I think about racism, I’ve never really expressed what I think about all that is involved with how racism manifests itself in modern society…you make up stuff, accuse me of stuff, then say I am doing those things to you.

          • HonestDebate1

            I noted the edit as I said I always do if I change something. I never said I never edit comments. Liar. I’m not getting in a pissing match. You are not worth it.

          • 1Brett1

            I didn’t say you said you never edit comments. Liar! You keep replying but say you are not going to…are you that weak willed?

          • HonestDebate1

            One minute:
            “Wow, you changed your comment after I replied… and you said a couple of weeks ago that you never do that.”

            The next:
            “I didn’t say you said you never edit comments.”

            And I didn’t say I would not reply. If you are going to tee it up for me like that I will. But I’m not going to engage you seriously on the issues because that takes two and you are not capable. And making a fool of you is so easy it’s not really that fun, you do all the work of me.

          • 1Brett1

            You said a couple of weeks ago that if you ever do change your comment it is within the time of initially posting it and not later, especially after someone has replied to it. You are so dishonest. How can you even live with yourself? You don’t engage seriously in the issues in the first place but use issues as a way to promote your ideology.

          • HonestDebate1

            No I said if I change something without noting the edit it is within a couple of minutes. This time I noted the edit even though it was within a couple of minutes because it was a significant change.

            First you say I said I never change my comments, the next minute you say you never said that so I busted you. Now you go back and start over saying I said what I didn’t. And you call me dishonest?

            Quit teeing it up for me, it’s embarrassing.

          • 1Brett1

            First I said, “you changed your comment after I replied…and you said a couple of weeks ago that you never do that.”

            You translated that into, “first you say I said I never change my comments.”

            In all fairness, you never said you wouldn’t reply unintelligently, and you certainly have replied unintelligently over and over.

            If you are going to change your comment AFTER someone replies, that makes you even more dishonest than you already are.

          • HonestDebate1

            Alrighty then.

  • RobertLongView

    Thank you Hon. Rep Lewis. You have lived life well.

    Sad to see how Falwell’s Moral Majority and our modern Jim Demint South have stolen the moral high ground legacy for the Republican party. As Rev. Barber, North Carolina NAACP, is fond to say. Wake Up America!

    Again, thank you. You have done a great thing.

  • HonestDebate1

    One only has to look at the replies to my comment below to see why an honest discussion on race is not possible. But we are seeing it the media as well with the murder of Chris Lane. We now learn it was indeed racially motivated. The murderer’s social media is chock full of hate, racism and misogyny. As Rush pointed out, the rodeo clown got more press. What a sad day for blacks.

    • 1Brett1

      I’ve seen reports about the shooting on all of the major news outlets. They aren’t reporting stuff that has yet to be proven or revealed as fact like Fox, does that make their reporting invalid?

      • HonestDebate1

        I haven’t seen the Fox reporting. But yes, in general the press is feckless and corrupt.

        • 1Brett1

          Fox’s reporting is similar to the other right-wing nutjob news outlets/blogs, etc., in their reporting of this shooting: a lot of speculation presented as facts that “mainstream media refuse to report.” THe way right-wing media have latched onto this story and have tried very hard to gin it up is, well, race baiting.

          Also, your reply agreed with something I didn’t say, but you are aware of your dimestore tactics.

  • HonestDebate1

    “Warfare is eminent,” the website declares, “and in order for Black people to survive the 21st century, we are going to have to kill a lot of whites – more than our Christian hearts can possibly count.”

    This guy works for Homeland Security procuring ammunition, Terrific.

    http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2013/08/21/dhs-employee-promotes-race-war-in-spare-time-advocates-mass-murder-of-whites/#.UhUrdElWfjY.twitter

    • 1Brett1

      His contract with DHS should be terminated, then, if this is true. What exactly is your point to posting this?

      I thought neocons claimed the Southern Poverty Law Center are just a bunch of propagandists who make up stuff? Are you going to believe this because it fits your views about blacks being racist or because you think the SPLC is a valid watchdog of racism/bigotry? If you believe this to be true, then are you saying the SPLC is a legitimate organization looking to out bigotry and monitor people who have the potential to cause problems in society?

      • HonestDebate1

        I’ve never commented on the SPLC, ever. Please don’t tell me what I think. Why do you keep making stuff up? Do you dispute the story?

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/22/ayo-kimathi_n_3794900.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

        • 1Brett1

          Nope, not disputing the story just haven’t had time to look at several sources and see what it is all about. I think the SPLC is an important watchdog group; I have no reason to doubt the story just question your motives. Actually, I don’t question your motives; you haven’t built a case for your “blacks committing violence against whites is an epidemic” in the form of a diatribe narrative for a couple of weeks, so you were overdue to beat your drum again.

          I didn’t say you commented on the SPLC, I said neocons tend to demonize the organization. Are finally admitting that you are a neocon?

          • HonestDebate1

            You said “claimed”. You did not say “neocons tend to demonize” but you now are writing you did. Who claimed it? Where’s your proof? Or is your above comment and change of wording backtracking? Please stop teeing it up like this, you really are looking silly.

          • 1Brett1

            You said what you said then weaseled out of it, now you are trying to find hair-splitting ways to deflect from your lack of support of your statement about forum commentators expressing that Black Southern Baptist preachers are the scourge of the earth. It is that simple.

          • HonestDebate1

            Alrighty then, it’s all there for anyone to see.

          • jefe68

            It’s great that he sets aside this special time to humiliate himself in public.

  • HonestDebate1

    They are calling the murder of David Santucci a robbery but nothing was taken, not his phone, his car keys or his wallet, nothing. The shot was fired from a distance not up close as would be typical of a robbery. The murderers had numerous photos of Trayvon Martin on his Facebook page. We already have numerous accounts of revenge beatings by blacks on whites for Trayvon. I suppose we’ll find out soon enough if this was a revenge murder. It sure seems so.

    • hennorama

      Debates Not, He – what you are putting forth is the speculation of a family member of the man who was killed.

      According to various reports from local media, AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT, the police indicated this was a robbery gone wrong.

      Here’s just one of the reports:

      “Police say Mario Patterson, Dondre Johnson and Jerrica Norflett admitted to the crime. Thirteen minutes after the shooting police arrested the trio at Foote Homes public housing just over a mile away from the scene of the crime. Investigators say Norfleet was driving the Gray Pontiac Grand Am, and Patterson and Johnson got out of the car and tried to rob Santucci.”

      Speculation is not evidence, sir. Please provide your evidence supporting your claim that “The shot was fired from a distance not up close as would be typical of a robbery.”

      Keep in mind that shell casings can be ejected quite a distance from a firearm, and that there were various people at the scene giving aid to the victim who could easily have inadvertently moved the shell casing. In addition, the fact that nothing may have been taken from the victim does not mean that the offenders were not trying to rob the victim. It may simply be evidence of panic on their part.

      See:
      http://www.wmctv.com/story/23130210/family-friends-grieve-loss-of-murdered-nurse

      You might want to check out the info you get from TheDimness.com before posting.

      Allow me to renew my question:

      Why is the indefensible homicide of David Santucci even relevant to this discussion?

      • HonestDebate1

        if you can’t see the relevance to how Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy is being trampled and belittled then don’t reply to a comment you don’t think is relevant with a comment that is irrelevant. It’s simple. Click the little button and I’ll go away.

        The police said the shell casing was 10 feet away. Eyewitnesses said the shooter drove past, stopped, got out of the car, killed then got back into the car and fled. That’s not a robbery. We’ll see as facts emerge but they probably won’t. No one cares.

        But you as usual are missing the point because you have fallen prey to manipulation. My point has always been that the press does all they can to make incidents like this into what they are not. They will not even hint at racial motivation even if they have to invent robbery motive as long as the perpetrators are black and the victim is white. Conversely, they will invent a race like “white-hispanic” and publish a picture of victim as a 12 year old to manipulate people into believing blacks are not safe on the street because of white racist.

        • hennorama

          Debates Not, He – TYFYR.

          If you can’t or won’t answer simple questions about your positions, you demonstrate their weakness. Feel free to continue your brave silence.

          This case has absolutely nothing about it that is relevant to the topic of this forum.

          ==========

          You wrote that “you [hennorama] have fallen prey to manipulation.” Apparently you believe that only you and your sources have an omniscient “forrest [sic] thing” viewpoint, and only you and your sources can see the “big picture.”

          Yeah, right. Can you say “echo chamber” and “confirmation bias?”

          In addition, you claim “the press does all they can to make incidents like this into what they are not. They will not even hint at racial motivation even if they have to invent robbery motive [sic] as long as the perpetrators are black and the victim is white.”

          If you are referring to press coverage of the indefensible homicide of David Santucci, the press did NOT “have to invent robbery motive [sic]” in any way. The simply reported that “Mario Patterson, 23, and Dondre Johnson, 19, were both charged with first degree murder in the perpetration of robbery. Jerrica Norfleet, 23, was charged with accessory after the fact first degree murder.”

          Are the police and the prosecutor “invent[ing a] robbery motive, too, sir?

          See:
          http://www.wmctv.com/story/23108035/suspects-involved-in-deadly-shooting-are-in-custody

          ===========

          Let’s look at what are reported to be facts in the indefensible homicide of David Santucci:

          According to you, “Eyewitnesses said the shooter drove past, stopped, got out of the car, killed then got back into the car and fled. That’s not a robbery.”

          First, you left out that witnesses reported that the vehicle stopped, then backed up. Even your frequent source TheDimness.com included that in its article.

          Please allow another simple possible explanation – the alleged offenders drove past the victim, one of them said “Let’s rob this guy,” they stopped, backed up, one of them got out, tried to rob the victim, and things went terribly wrong. The alleged shooter panicked, failed to take any valuables, jumped back into the car, and the alleged offenders fled. Same reported facts, different scenario.

          This is a possible explanation of the same reported facts, is it not, sir?

          According to you, “The shot was fired from a distance not up close as would be typical of a robbery.” You provided no direct evidence to support your claim, such as a lack of powder burns on the victim’s clothing, etc. You then wrote, presumably as evidence of your claim, “The police said the shell casing was 10 feet away.”

          Again, please allow another simple possible explanation. First of all, where the shell casing was found is not direct evidence of the distance between the firearm and the victim. In addition, as previously stated, shell casings can be ejected quite a distance from a firearm, and there were various people at the scene giving aid to the victim, and they could easily have inadvertently moved the shell casing.

          Again, same reported fact, different scenario.

          This is a possible explanation of the same reported fact, is it not, sir?

          All you are doing is putting forth speculation from the victim’s relative, and lending credence to this speculation. This is despite the fact that both the police and the prosecutor have indicated they believe this was a failed robbery that went horribly wrong, as indicated by the charges thus far.

          • HonestDebate1

            You are entitled to speculate all you want.

            Where are you getting the word of the prosecutor from? I can’t find any reference at all. The dimness link does not work, is that it? Have you seen a police report? Is it actually classified as a robbery or did an “investigator” (whatever that means) just speculate? Does it have anything to do with politics of tourism near Beale street and the effort of the press to downplay cold-blooded murder as the relative suggested? He said nothing about Trayvon as far as i know.

            Again what is your source? There are very few reports on this and I think I’ve read them all. I’ve looked for a police report. I even watched all 3 videos in the link you provided but there is nothing about a prosecutor and no police officer quoted. The first video even begins by saying Santucci was robbed, he was not.

            And yes, IMHO this has everything to do with the topic at hand. you and Brett just went back and forth a few times about me, what does that had to do with Mr. Lewis?

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – TYFYR.

            Two points, then answers to your questions:

            By now I expected that you would understand that my use of “TheDImness.com” is in reference to one of your frequent sources, founded by G. Beck. I’ve used the term several times in the past.

            The suspects were all arraigned; two were charged with First Degree Murder in Perpetration of Robbery, and the third was charged with Accessory after the fact First Degree Murder. Prosecutors must agree to the charges prior to arraignment. This is pretty basic.

            Answers to your questions, in order:

            1. The prosecutor question was disposed of above, as was “TheDimness.com.”.

            2. No, I have not seen the police report, but the report number is #1308007134ME, per the Memphis PD’s Facebook site. The fee for a copy is $15.00.

            3. Again, two of the suspects have been arraigned under the charge “ First Degree Murder in Perpetration of Robbery,” again per the MPD’s Facebook site and other sources.

            4. I have no idea if the police would fabricate a charge, and whether a prosecutor would agree to a fabricated charge “hav[ing] anything to do with politics of tourism near Beale street and the effort of the press to downplay cold-blooded murder,” as you claim. As to “the relative” having “said nothing about Trayvon as far as [you] know” – I refer you again to the site I call “TheDimness.com.” Here’s a quote from an article on the referenced site:

            “Miguel [the victim's brother-in-law] told TheBlaze that he tracked the alleged shooter, Patterson through his Facebook account — an account now deleted. He said the page had numerous photos of Trayvon Martin, and he wondered if it’s possible the shooting was a revenge killing for the Zimmerman verdict.”

            See (again):
            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/22/another-senseless-murder-youre-not-hearing-about-and-some-in-the-family-wonder-if-it-could-be-a-trayvon-martin-revenge-murder/

            5. Sources, in addition to the above, all of which have been cited previously:

            http://www.wmctv.com/story/23130210/family-friends-grieve-loss-of-murdered-nurse
            http://www.wmctv.com/story/23108035/suspects-involved-in-deadly-shooting-are-in-custody
            https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.506524082761289.1073741827.123202141093487&type=1

            6. If you wish to mischaracterize a discussion of the use of the word “racist” as being “about” you, that is your prerogative. I never said this discussion had anything to do with Rep. John Lewis, but certainly both the word “racist,” and its use, are germane to the topic.

            TYAFYR.

          • hennorama

            [Posted deleted by the writer, due to repetition. Please blame DISQUS, and of course, Canada.]

          • hennorama

            [EDIT: post deleted by the author due to repetition. Apologies for the echo. Blame DISQUS, and of course, Canada.]

      • 1Brett1

        “Why is the indefensible homicide of David Santucci even relevant to this discussion?”

        Exactly, he’s just an opportunist ideologue/racist under the thin guise of some samaritan news reporter.

        • hennorama

          1Brett1 – TYFYR.

          While I generally agree with the tenor of your comments, and generally disagree with Gregg’s comments, I can’t in any way condone the use of the word “racist,” as no one but Gregg knows what is in his heart. In addition, one can think and believe anything they wish. One’s actions can confirm one’s beliefs, as they speak much louder than words. Without evidence of action, an observer has no confirmation, and is left only with suspicion.

          Certainly, as I wrote previously, such suspicion is not unreasonable:

          “Debates Not, He – let’s just say that if all of your comments that begin with “Blacks are …” were read by an NYPD officer, that officer might apply the “reasonable suspicion” standard, and “stop, question, frisk” you about racism.”

          TY again for your response.

          • HonestDebate1

            You actually make a good point and that is the reason I tolerate the hateful accusations of racism. I am comfortable with my actions. I am comfortable with my place in my community and my community is comfortable with me. I am comfortable with my black friends’ and black business associates’ views of me as a person through my actions. I don’t need to prove anything on a stupid blog so it doesn’t bother me.

          • hennorama

            1 Hot Dense Beat – TYFYR, and for your kind words.

            As I wrote nearly 11 months ago,

            “My view of everyone in here is that we all deserve the benefit of the doubt, the words typed here should be taken with a grain of salt, and those making comments are of fine upstanding character, truly bear no malice toward anyone, and deserve respect.

            “One important thing to remember is the nature of forums such as this, with the relative anonymity of posters and the non-simultaneous nature of the discourse, tend greatly toward hyperbole and bluster.

            “I daresay that many of the comments would never be made in an in-person discussion. Certainly they would be toned down, for simple politeness and respect.”

            Of course, this was in one of my periodic quixotic threads that attempt to promote agreement.

            See:
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2012/09/21/week-in-the-news-214#comment-660061562

            Now Gregg, all you need to do is to recognize that ALL of my points are good points, and you’ll be just fine.

            Thanks again for your response, and your kind words.

          • HonestDebate1

            I still think you are very disingenuous and somewhat nasty. I question your ability to interpret the facts but I don’t question your intelligence or ability to gather them. That is marginally better than my opinion of brett who i think is nasty as hell, and not very intelligent at all. So it’s nothing to write home about but you’re welcome.

          • 1Brett1

            There you go again. You’ve gone out of your way to reply unnecessarily by bashing hennorama when his post was about giving people the benefit of the doubt and holding no malice toward others…but, no, you are not unnecessarily nasty…

          • jefe68

            Grandiosity refers to an unrealistic sense of superiority – a sustained view of oneself as better than others that causes the narcissist to view others with disdain or as inferior – as well as to a sense of uniqueness: the belief that few others have anything in common with oneself and that one can only be understood by a few or very special people.

          • 1Brett1

            Hennorama, with all due respect–and I do respect your views and comments (wit and humor included)–I respectfully disagree with your definition of “racist.” The word doesn’t denote only an action. It is also a term associated with a belief, a way of thinking; one can be a racist without doing racist things…In all fairness, do I know if Gregg is really, truly a racist? No, I don’t. He may just simply be baiting this forum to stir up the pot and rile people into fights and to upset liberals, as it were.

            If one can believe his comments (and he has asked me, you, and many others to take his comments at their face value and to not read any machination/manipulation into them, so I am honoring his request to believe them), he is a racist, however casual or insidious. Many of the things he says/the attitudes he expresses are racist, whether they are to be believed or not.

            I know a lot of people in the south, am from the south, and live in the south. Many white people down here (and this phenomenon is certainly not limited to the south) feel as though they are not racist because they don’t harbor overtly hateful feelings toward black people and do not themselves commit acts of racism. They still have an attitude, though, of being better people than blacks (the ones they see in public on a daily basis, etc.), of being more responsible as people than blacks, of being superior in either subtle ways or in terms of achievement/community position than blacks, and are often subtly condescending, being overly complimentary and encouraging toward blacks (often saying how much they respect blacks of renown/historic significance, etc.).

            I “strongly suspect,” if you must, that Gregg is in this category. Because they don’t have any deep malice in their heart, and their ideas of segregated communities are normal to them because that is what they are used to, and the word “racist” is something to them that is reserved for the guy with the white hood only, or the fellow who openly expresses his disdain for black people, etc.. They don’t live with diversity; they don’t see that people are different with different histories and different reasons for why they might behave differently or meet the same set of stimuli with a different response.

            Every behavior they see in black people that does not conform to the standard they grew up with in their own small communities is suspect and should have a finger pointed at it for consideration as “those black people have a bad attitude.” Maybe it is just a cultural bias?

            He could just be ignorant, having socio-political views that see the majority of black people as being more violent, lazier, and having a sense of entitlement. To me, though, that is racist.

          • hennorama

            1Brett1 – TYFYR.

            I agree that acting on one’s beliefs is not required for one to be racist.

            However, my point is that I prefer confirmation via actions, over suspicion via words. That’s why I wrote that “I can’t in any way condone the use of the word ‘racist,’ “ as I prefer the confirmation described. In other words, I truly give the benefit of the doubt.

            That you feel otherwise is of course perfectly fine. This is not unreasonable, as you provide considerable justification for your views. But you recognize the many possible doubts as well.

            I just can’t implicitly condone your view by not registering my disagreement. In this case, my silence would not be golden, as you expressed your view in a direct response to me. As such, I felt compelled to register my disagreement.

            Thanks again for your thoughtful response, and your kind words.

          • 1Brett1

            That’s cool; I respect that. You and I can have differences in some of the subtle parts of our views but still see the so-called big picture in similar terms, and that is gratifying. Even if we didn’t see the “big picture” in similar terms, I would still value your presence on this forum.

            I will say that I don’t use the term “racist” lightly, and I don’t use it regarding Gregg in any “hateful” or vindictive reaction. I use it because that is what I sense from him. I read his comments on race for a couple of years before using the word.

            I don’t hate Gregg, but I will say that I haven’t respected him for a long time now, and I feel he purposely riles people to infuriate them; he also often goes out of his way to bash liberals and invite the worst kind of discourse. I don’t respect that and find it a very negative thing. It is often impossible to have an interaction that can be anything but negative without being being run roughshod over. I don’t think much of that.

          • hennorama

            1Brett1 – TY again for your response and your kind words. Backatcha.

            I understand your frustration, and have shared it. As you may know, I “unilaterally imposed [a] temporary cessation of hostilities” in regard to this particular poster, and held that stance for two months, despite said poster making direct comments to me an average of once per day over that period.

            I understand your use of the term “racist” completely, but simply prefer to give everyone, regardless of their words, the benefit of the doubt in the absence of any confirming action on their part. I realize this requires enormous grains of salt at times, (see below), and many deep breaths before responding.

            Perhaps my habit of composing my posts externally, then transferring them into this forum, helps me gain some perspective and distance. I also suspect that my habit of thanking people for their response helps to take the edge off for both parties involved.

            You may find these useful:

            http://www.foodiemoment.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/20100816-005-Bas-holds-a-couple-of-the-large-salt-crystals-also-available-from-our-local-salt-company.jpg

    • 1Brett1

      The trio who murdered him (allegedly) were arrested 13 minutes after the killing. That is quite a bit faster than the amount of time it took Zimmerman to be arrested for Martin’s murder, wouldn’t you say? You are like the old woman who sits around the house all day in a tattered house dress, eating candy and looking for articles on blacks killing whites. When are you going to post a story about a black man raping a white woman? How about a gang of black youths robbing a 7-11? Isn’t it about time for your Soaps to come on?

      • HonestDebate1

        Zimmerman was in custody immediately and there was insufficient evidence to arrest him. The race baiters howled and made it happen. I don’t look for squat, I just use news outlets that report the news.

        • hennorama

          Debates Not, He – An event from 10 days ago is “news” in your world? Why did you bring it up relevant to this topic?

          • HonestDebate1

            “Why do you did you bring it up relevant to this topic?”

            Recast and try again, I still probably won’t answer.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – TYFYR.
            If you can’t or won’t answer simple questions about your positions, you demonstrate their weakness. Feel free to continue your brave silence.

          • HonestDebate1

            Now that’s rich. I go places my conservative friends won’t even go. I’ve been called even name in the book for speaking honestly and boldly. I judge my effectiveness by the dislikes not the likes. You seem to think I’m required to answer your questions but I am not. Don’t confuse silence with disinterest in answering your silly questions.

            But if the question is relevance I have already addressed that.

          • jefe68

            Grandiosity refers to an unrealistic sense of superiority – a sustained view of oneself as better than others that causes the narcissist to view others with disdain or as inferior – as well as to a sense of uniqueness: the belief that few others have anything in common with oneself and that one can only be understood by a few or very special people.

            That sums you up more or less.

          • HonestDebate1

            One should note the edits but thank you for changing it to something coherent but it’s still not very clear. I suppose you did it that way to make it seem like you didn’t change anything. So, even though you don’t deserve it I will recast your awkward wording to what you seem to be implying and answer.

            Question: Why did you bring it up and what is the relevance to this topic?

            Because the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme. What we have is not what Mr. Lewis fought for. What we have is spitting on the grave of MLK jr. You don’t have to agree but can make the case that it is very relevant to the topic.

            And please either quit throwing stones or quit speaking german about schoolmarms and Howard Kurtz or talking alliterative nonsense or replying without complaint about Coltrane. At the very least you should practice what you preach. But we already knew you win the prize for being disingenuous.

        • 1Brett1

          Such dishonesty. You are not simply reporting news; you are making your stupid point about black on white crime.

          This was a local story that happened over a week ago. You have tried to inject a meme of “hate crime against whites” into this without any official pronouncement/verdict, etc., about this story or any of your “reported stories” to prove they are hate crimes.

          You asked over and over for people to not speculate but wait for justice to be served in the ZImmerman case (translation= for Zimmerman to be not guilty), but now you are going on and on with diarrhea of the typing fingers about stories of shootings being hate crimes against whites, etc. “Yellow journalism” would be the term if you were actually a journalist, but you aren’t, just some jackass with a racist opinion.

          • HonestDebate1

            That’s funny!

        • hennorama

          Debates Not, He – let me see if I understand you correctly.

          In the Trayvon Martin killing, you believed initial police remarks and actions that “there was insufficient evidence to arrest [Zimmerman],” and imply that the speculation of the victim’s relatives should have been dismissed.

          Now, as to the killing of David Santucci, you are calling into question the fact that “They [the police and the prosecutor] are calling the murder of David Santucci a robbery,” and you feel that “It sure seems” that “this was a revenge murder,” giving credence to the speculation of the victim’s relative.

          Can you explain your inconsistency, sir?

          • HonestDebate1

            I replied but the moderator needs to approve. That means tomorrow. I was able to view the comment so I copied it but I have no idea what to change to make more palatable. I will attempt to repost up top but no guarantees.

          • HonestDebate1

            The Moderator got me, I have no idea why.

            Sorry, I tried 3 times so tomorrow the reply will be all over the place. I’m not going to rewrite it but the short answer is I have not seen evidence the police classified it as a failed robbery and just the press saying so without attribution is insufficient given their agenda. I cannot find a police report. I am not aware the relative said it had anything to do with Trayvon.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – TYFYR.

            Are you being willfully blind or simply ignorant? This is from an earlier reply to you:

            “Mario Patterson, 23, and Dondre Johnson, 19, were both charged with first degree murder in the perpetration of robbery. Jerrica Norfleet, 23, was charged with accessory after the fact first degree murder.”

            See:

            http://www.wmctv.com/story/23108035/suspects-involved-in-deadly-shooting-are-in-custody

            If you “have not seen evidence the police classified it as a failed robbery and [believe that] just the press saying so without attribution is insufficient given their agenda,” perhaps you will instead believe THE MEMPHIS POLICE DEPT.:

            “Mario Patterson, 23, and Dondre Johnson, 19, were both charged with First Degree Murder in Perpetration of Robbery.

            “Jerrica Norfleet, 23, was charged with Accessory after the fact First Degree Murder.”

            See:

            https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.506524082761289.1073741827.123202141093487&type=1

            Isn’t it interesting that those two quotes are EXACTLY THE SAME, except for capitalization and spacing. Does the Memphis Police Dept. also have an “agenda,” sir?

            As stated previously, you might want to check out the info you get from TheDimness.com before posting. They conveniently omitted the fact that two of the suspects had been charged with “First Degree Murder in Perpetration of Robbery.”

            No doubt you’ve already seen this source:

            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/22/another-senseless-murder-youre-not-hearing-about-and-some-in-the-family-wonder-if-it-could-be-a-trayvon-martin-revenge-murder/

            Notice how the article only says “Police have arrested three people and charged them with first degree murder,” conveniently omitting the full charges (“…in Perpetration of Robbery.”) The article then goes on in the very next sentence to indicate its intent, without once delineating the complete facts of the charges:

            “But some in the victim’s family can’t understand why the shooting is being called a failed robbery when they say the evidence suggests something possibly more sinister: a hate crime.”

            A bit deceptive at best, wouldn’t you agree?

            One can understand your ignorance of the charges if you read only this source. Perhaps you should do as you say, not as you do, sir, and “verify before posting.”

            You also wrote that “I am not aware the relative said it had anything to do with Trayvon.” I find this hard to believe, as you clearly regularly read the site I call “TheDimness.com,” which is referenced above. The same article linked to above says the following:

            “Miguel [the victim's brother-in-law] told TheBlaze that he tracked the alleged shooter, Patterson through his Facebook account — an account now deleted. He said the page had numerous photos of Trayvon Martin, and he wondered if it’s possible the shooting was a revenge killing for the Zimmerman verdict.”

            You referenced Facebook as well when you wrote “The murderers had numerous photos of Trayvon Martin on his Facebook page.”

            Perhaps you had another source. As is typical, you did not cite one.

          • 1Brett1

            What is also interesting (according to The Blaze) is that only a family member has said it was possibly a hate crime/revenge killing for Martin’s shooting. It is also interesting that the same family member is also the only person who says he saw the FB account that had the so-called photos of Martin/racist stuff on it…I am more inclined to believe the Memphis Police Department’s charges as to any indication of motive more so than I am an article in The Blaze citing a relative of the victim as having knowledge of any possible motive.

            It is also difficult for me to believe that a person who admits to regularly reading a certain news outlet (if one can call it that) and who initiated the “reporting” of this very crime on this forum, stating the very same speculations that the news outlet stated (and who has presented such speculative information as facts without citation), now says he is not aware of any police reporting (sounding as though he has tried in vain to seek out such information that is easily accessible), and who also says he is not aware of any family member connecting the crime to any FB page/Trayvon Martin revenge killing, yet it is this very relative only who has made the claims…honest debate indeed.

          • hennorama

            1Brett1 – TYFYR.

            I give the benefit of the doubt to the brother-in-law, and would not find it surprising if various social media accounts belonging to the suspects were deleted. Certainly one would be well-advised to delete such accounts if they contained even a hint of incriminating or prejudicial postings, and one would expect that a suspect might direct someone to do this one their behalf, for example.

            It’s also not surprising that a) no source was cited in the initial post, and b) someone other than the initial poster was able to uncover additional important info that rebuts said post’s speculative remarks.

            However, speculation is neither evidence nor fact.

            That the website under discussion would post the brother-in-law’s speculation is not a surprise, nor is it surprising that they omitted important details that do not fit their narrative, such as the complete charges of “First Degree Murder in Perpetration of Robbery.”

            Facts get in the way, dontchaknow?

            TYAFYR.

          • 1Brett1

            Yeah, I don’t fault the brother-in-law, either. I do, as you, find fault with the “news” outlet for using the relative’s comments as “information” in the case but leaving out reporting the charges brought by the Memphis Police Department. I find that suspect.

            I Googled the victim’s name (based on this forum’s poster’s initial comment) and easily found both the specific charges brought against the three perpetrators, as well as the opinions of the brother-in-law.

            Needless to say, it seems inexplicable that someone initiating a post about the crime yet claiming not to know about sources for any evidence regarding the details in the motive of that crime (both the charges and the speculative comments of a relative of the victim, not to mention presenting those same details as facts), would also not be able to find any such information after supposedly doing a thorough search online. I mean I wouldn’t deny anyone his own speculation; I do find it suspect, however, that the speculation would go directly, immediately to a hate crime when that runs counter to the charges brought by police. The only thing that could make sense of that whole speculation about motive, as well as a denial of being able to access basic information easily found doing a quick online search, would be if the person had a desire to perpetuate a narrative that violence by blacks against whites due to racism against whites is prevalent to the point of being an epidemic in our society.

            The poster has posted countless comments in the past month or two about black on white crime, black on white violence, black on white racism, etc., and how that is at epidemic levels, so it makes sense that this forum’s commentator’s motives for even posting the comment to begin with are to further his narrative.

          • hennorama

            1Brett1 – you left out an important possibility. One’s use of search engines, and the history of what results one selects, leads the search engine’s algorithms to customize the search results, and can in effect “bury” atypical results further down the list.

            This can lead to confirmation bias. If one keeps clicking on the same sites in the search results, one gets “fed” more or the same in the future.

            Motivation may or may not be at play in such a scenario.

          • 1Brett1

            That’s certainly a possibility. If one gets his news from the same sources day after day, it is likely his searches would conform to taking him to his usual haunts, as it were.

            However, if one has stated that he has made a thorough search and could not find anything of what you mentioned, he either didn’t really search beyond what initially came up (which isn’t really much of a search but a pretense of a search), or he found what you said and chose to ignore it based on it not fitting his narrative, or chose to ignore it based on some other reason. Or, he didn’t really search at all.

            I am inclined to believe there was a motivation to present the story as one of racially motivated violence by blacks against whites. I am considering, when I say this, his history of commenting on there being an epidemic of hate crimes against whites by blacks. The speculation that this was a hate crime, devoid of any facts found to support such speculation, especially those that would run counter to a narrative of a hate crime, seems a likely motivation to ignore/disregard information/replace it with an opinion based purely on past preconceptions.

          • HonestDebate1

            No, as you will see tomorrow when my replies appear The Blaze said they asked for clarification on the robbery charge. The Blaze story said the police said it was a failed robbery right up top, they omitted nothing and are the only source I’ve seen that asked for clarification and said they would post the results. Still I’m skeptical. I want to see the police report and hear a police spokesperson explain the charge.

            As an aside I commented on The Blaze today to criticize them for treating Obama unfairly by ragging him for getting some names mixed up. I’m all about honest debate.

            And you’re dern tootin’ the Memphis police have an agenda, are you kidding me! I don’t know if you’ve been to Beale Street in Memphins but I can assure you the last thing they need is a reputation for cold blooded murderers. Robbery is bad enough.

            I stand corrected about the relative claiming the Martin connection, apologies. We’ll find out soon enough if it’s true.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – TYFYR.

            That your (presumed) source “asked for clarification on the robbery charge” is interesting but is neither dispositive nor evidentiary.

            Your (presumed) source did indeed omit the full charges in the case, unless of course the Memphis PD is lying about the actual charges. Why do you suppose they did that?

            You wrote “The Blaze story said the police said it was a failed robbery right up top.” No, they did not write any such thing. Allow me to quote the article, again:

            “It’s a senseless murder you aren’t hearing about.

            “A young white male was walking to his car on a city street late at night on August 12 when he was confronted by a trio of black individuals. They shot him dead. Police have arrested three people and charged them with first degree murder. But some in the victim’s family can’t understand why the shooting is being called a failed robbery when they say the evidence suggests something possibly more sinister: a hate crime.”

            Please show everyone exactly where “The Blaze story said the police said it was a failed robbery right up top,” sir.

            And of course, the headline itself indicates “SOME IN THE FAMILY WONDER IF IT COULD BE A TRAYVON MARTIN REVENGE MURDER.” Kinda hard to miss THAT, wouldn’t you agree?

            Now, for the sake of argument, let’s say the Memphis PD has “an agenda” to protect the tourist industry. Please tell everyone exactly how this agenda would be served if this killing was “cold blooded” First Degree Murder, rather than First Degree Murder in Perpetration of Robbery. Either way, there’s a dead person, killed at random, or in a botched robbery, or in a racially motivated attack, or for some other unknown reason. (Assuming no prior connection between the victim and alleged offenders.)

            Do you “honestly” believe that tourists would view any one of those scenarios more favorably than any of the other scenarios? Homicide is not good for business, period.

            Was the site I refer to as “TheDimness.com” the source for your initial remarks? And why would you not cite a source in the first place?

            Inquiring minds want to know.

          • HonestDebate1

            What in the world are you talking about? You quoted the citing of the alleged robbery yourself. Did you not? Oh let me guess, they didn’t say the police said it, is that it? Did they make it up? Well, if thats the way you want to play then quote the prosecutor as saying what you claimed.

            I’m sick of your BS. Your constant deflections are ridiculous. You find some esoteric nothing, you pound it home and at the same time you refuse apply the same rules to yourself. You ask questions but don’t answer them. You accuse me of being off topic when I’m not while you fill the blog with irrelevant nonsense. It’s not your blog schoolmarm.

            This is why you are not worth my time. This is why you win the disingenuous prize. Here’s a clue, it’s not about the Blaze. It’s not about me. It’s about you tacitly telling John Lewis to go to hell with his concerns for racial equality. You are not concerned wit racial equality. It’s about blacks preying senselessly on whites at epidemic proportions. It’s about a press that has brainwashed you and your compatriots. But it’s worse than that because you are not stupid like Brett and the others. You know better. You are purposely going to the weeds to deflect from the point. You are spitting on the grave of MLK jr. I accused another commenter of being angry but he would not own up. I will. I am angry at the likes of you but you are just a microcosm of the bigger picture. It’s you and your kind who are as bad as slavery itself with regards to race relations in America. You are Jim Crow. You are the enemy of liberty. You should be ashamed. I deeply regret engaging you.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – you’ll have to forgive my astonished laughter. TY VERY MUCH for your response. You are truly hilarious.

            Pointing out the problems in your writing is Schoolmarm’s duty, is it not, sir?

            Allow me to refresh your recollection as to my mentions of the police and the prosecutor relative to the indefensible homicide of David Santucci. Please note that I never quoted the prosecutor, nor did I even once write that the prosecutor “said” anything:

            1. My first post quoted a Memphis TV station’s website:

            “According to various reports from local media, AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT, the police indicated this was a robbery gone wrong.

            “Here’s just one of the reports:

            “Police say Mario Patterson, Dondre Johnson and Jerrica Norflett admitted to the crime. Thirteen minutes after the shooting police arrested the trio at Foote Homes public housing just over a mile away from the scene of the crime. Investigators say Norfleet was driving the Gray Pontiac Grand Am, and Patterson and Johnson got out of the car and tried to rob Santucci.”

            2. Next, I quoted your original post, and inserted my interpretation of who you were referring to as “They” in your original post. You did not dispute my interpretation:

            “Now, as to the killing of David Santucci, you are calling into question the fact that “They [the police and the prosecutor] are calling the murder of David Santucci a robbery,” and you feel that “It sure seems” that “this was a revenge murder,” giving credence to the speculation of the victim’s relative.”

            3. Next, I rebutted your claim that “the press does all they can to make incidents like this into what they are not. They will not even hint at racial motivation even if they have to invent robbery motive [sic] as long as the perpetrators are black and the victim is white” by referring to a different post on the same TV’s station’s website. This post included video of the suspects being arraigned, both in court and via video link. You wrote that you had viewed this and other videos from this website:

            “If you are referring to press coverage of the indefensible homicide of David Santucci, the press did NOT “have to invent robbery motive [sic]” in any way. They simply reported that “Mario Patterson, 23, and Dondre Johnson, 19, were both charged with first degree murder in the perpetration of robbery. Jerrica Norfleet, 23, was charged with accessory after the fact first degree murder.”

            “Are the police and the prosecutor “invent[ing a] robbery motive, too, sir?”

            I closed this comment by writing:

            “All you are doing is putting forth speculation from the victim’s relative, and lending credence to this speculation. This is despite the fact that both the police and the prosecutor have indicated they believe this was a failed robbery that went horribly wrong, as indicated by the charges thus far.”

            REPEATING: “This is despite the fact that both the police and the prosecutor have indicated they believe this was a failed robbery that went horribly wrong, as indicated by the charges thus far.” This was carefully worded, to avoid any hint of quotation, as there were indeed no quotes from the prosecutor found.

            4. I then went on to quote the Memphis PD’s Facebook site, which indicated the exact same thing as the TV station’s website, quoted above:

            “Mario Patterson, 23, and Dondre Johnson, 19, were both charged with First Degree Murder in Perpetration of Robbery.

            “Jerrica Norfleet, 23, was charged with Accessory after the fact First Degree Murder.”

            =========

            One must note that the details of this case as presented by the victim’s brother-in-law are unconfirmed by official sources. As such, these reported details about “his wallet, car keys, and cell phone” and “Miguel also says the police told him that the 9mm shell casing was found 10 feet from the body — an indication to him that the shooter was not at close range as would typically happen with a robbery” and …

            Wait a second – notice anything familiar about that last phrase? Quoting your original post … oh heck let’s just put them next to each other for easy comparison, OK?:

            ARTICLE: “the shooter was not at close range as would typically happen with a robbery”
            YOU: “The shot was fired from a distance not up close as would be typical of a robbery.”

            Sequentially, these phrases read “the shooter/ The shot” and “close/close” and “as would typically/as would be typical” and “a robbery/a robbery”. I’m sure that’s merely a coincidence, right?

            Anyway, these reported details are unconfirmed and are merely speculation, hearsay, suspicion, “Miguel said” and “Miguel wonders.” (The article, which is presumably your source, says the following):

            “Miguel De Diago is one family member who doubts this killing was a failed robbery.”
            “The first and foremost question in De Diago’s mind: If this was a robbery, why did his brother-in-law still have his wallet, car keys, and cell phone? Nothing was taken from him. And witnesses confirm that.” (No witnesses were quoted or named).
            “Miguel says witnesses told police that the car drove past David, stopped and backed up.”
            “Miguel told TheBlaze that he tracked the alleged shooter, Patterson through his Facebook account — an account now deleted. He said the page had numerous photos of Trayvon Martin, and he wondered if it’s possible the shooting was a revenge killing for the Zimmerman verdict.”
            “Miguel wonders if the killing is being labeled as such [“a failed robbery”] because of the neighborhood’s proximity to Beale Street, the biggest tourist attraction in downtown Memphis.”

            ==========

            Please excuse my not commenting on the balance of your sanctimonious screed, as it is far too hilarious for me to maintain my composure for composition.

            My sole comment will be that your sanctimonious screed is further proof that you are truly an equine excrement expert.

            “Sir.”

          • HonestDebate1

            I’m not reading your irrelevant BS. Speculate all you want, it doesn’t matter. Was it a failed robbery? Who knows, who cares? Was it revenge? Who knows, who cares? Innocents are dead. We are seeing the results of the generational degradation of the family. We are finding out what happens when we make excuses for those who don’t have integrity. We are discovering the devastation of low expectations. The chickens have come home to roost. it’s sad you want to laugh about it.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – TYFYR.

            I see. Your omniscient “forrest [sic] thing worldview is challenged, so you close your eyes. To each his own.

            As to speculation about the Memphis shooting – you introduced all the speculation, sir, in your original post. That I was able to construct multiple scenarios using the same as yet unconfirmed details was a simple exercise intended to illustrate alternative possibilities. That you close your mind to these possibilities is your issue, not mine, sir.

            The one clear conclusion is that the death of David Santucci was senseless and indefensible (again, assuming no connection between the alleged offenders and the victim). The details are simply that – details.

            As to the balance of your comment – those are certainly your opinions, and you are free to both hold and express them. Whether you can demonstrate their validity is an open question, as usual.

            Finally, I was laughing at YOU and your sanctimonious, self-righteous, hilarious, holier-than-thou screed, and not anything involved in the case of the Memphis shooting, the Duncan shooting, racism, race, or anything else whatsoever.

          • jefe68

            Oh for the love of idiocy.
            Who the hell do you think you are buddy?

          • HonestDebate1

            I am someone who loves and respects my fellow man enough to be outraged.

          • hennorama

            Debates Not, He – upon reflection, I believe the appropriate Gregg Smith Response-O-Matic reply to your post, based on the use of the words ‘you,’ and ‘your’ and ‘yourself” a total of 34 – count ‘em – 34! times is:

            [It's not about me]

          • HonestDebate1

            The origin comment reappeared at the top of the page but I made the mistake of editing it to clarify who it was to and why it appeared out of context. You guessed it, back to the moderator. I have no idea why.

    • hennorama

      Debates Not, He – It doesn’t really take much imagination to come up with possible scenarios that would both indicate a robbery gone wrong, and, assuming that it turns out to be true, that “nothing was taken, not his phone, his car keys or his wallet, nothing.”

      1. Witnesses may have heard the alleged offender(s) say “Gimme your money” or similar, but something happened to prompt the shooting before the victim handed anything over.

      2. The victim may have been discovered with his wallet/phone/keys partly out of his pocket, or in his hand, and something prompted the shooting before the victim handed anything over.

      The victim, the offenders, or all of them may have been drunk, high or both. This incident occurred in the wee hours of the morning, after all. Anything could have happened in such a scenario – a wrong move, a twitch, a stumble, too slow a response, etc.

      Do you agree such scenarios are possible, and that they conform to the remarks presented in your post? If so, do you still feel that “It sure seems” that “this was a revenge murder,” and if so, why?

      Maybe you should just order a copy of the police report. You can contact the Memphis PD here:

      http://www.memphispolice.org/

      Quoting the site:

      “To Obtain a Police Report

      Auto Crash Reports
      (901) 636-3650

      Incident/Offense Reports
      (901) 636-3800

      No Online Police Reports available at this time

      Police Reports can only be obtained through Central Records

      Hours of Operation: CENTRAL RECORDS

      201 Poplar Ave.
      10th Floor
      Memphis, TN 38103

      8:00 a.m. to 3:00 pm.

      The cost for a police report is $15.00 for the initial report and all other pages of closed cases are $1.00 each.

      Photographs are $5.00 each and a photograph spread a on [sic] CD is $25.00 each.

      Crime Analysis and Communication dispatch tapes are $25.00 for each individual request.

      We accept cash, money orders, cashier checks, Visa or MasterCard for payments.

      NO PERSONAL CHECKS ACCEPTED

      We do not fax reports to customers.

      For more information call one of the phone numbers listed below

      901-636-3650

      901-636-3800”

      Good luck.

  • HonestDebate1

    89 year old WWII veteran Delbert Belton has died from injuries sustained in a brutal beating by two savages.

    http://www.kxly.com/news/spokane-news/elderly-man-dies-after-being-attacked-outside-ice-arena/-/101214/21574858/-/9flm7iz/-/index.html

  • HonestDebate1

    The trial has begun in the case of the savage animal that shot and killed a helpless baby in the face:

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/22/teen-co-defendant-questioned-in-case-fatal-shooting-baby/

  • HonestDebate1

    The problem with Obama weighing in with his race baiting on the Trayvon Martin case, that had zip to do with race, is when he is silent about other tragedies. It leaves him open to legitimate criticism for not speaking out. Why? Is it because of the color of skin? The dynamic and frequency of young black thugs preying on innocent whites is an opportunity for Obama to speak out and condemn the madness. i doubt he will.

ONPOINT
TODAY
Jul 24, 2014
Youths seen playing basketball through bars on a window at the Wisconsin Department of Corrections Ethan Allen School in Wales, Wis. (AP file)

The cold hard facts about juvenile prisons. And the case for shutting them all down. Plus: former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is with us.

Jul 24, 2014
Orchid (Galileo55/Flickr)

We’ll look at the new science of what plants feel, smell, see – and remember.

RECENT
SHOWS
Jul 23, 2014
Actor Wallace Shawn attends special screening of "Turks and Caicos" hosted by Vogue and The Cinema Society at the Crosby Street Hotel on Monday, April 7, 2014 in New York.  (AP)

From “The Princess Bride” to “My Dinner with Andre “and “A Master Builder,” actor and writer Wallace Shawn joins us.

 
Jul 23, 2014
In this Saturday, July 12, 2014, photo, migrants walk along train tracks and boxcars after getting off a train during their journey toward the US-Mexico border, in Ixtepec, southern Mexico. (AP)

Crisis at the US border. What do Latinos on this side of the border have to say? We’ll ask our special roundtable.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Hillary Clinton: ‘The [Russian] Reset Worked’
Thursday, Jul 24, 2014

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton took time out of her global book tour to talk to us about Russia, the press and the global crises shaking the administration she left two years ago.

More »
Comment
 
Where Did Nickel Creek Go?
Thursday, Jul 24, 2014

The Nickel Creek interview originally scheduled for Thursday, July 24 is rescheduled for an as-of-yet undetermined later date. We explain why.

More »
2 Comments
 
Our Week In The Web: July 11, 2014
Friday, Jul 11, 2014

As we prepare for a week of rebroadcasts, we reflect on Facebook posts, misplaced comments and the magic of @ mentions. Internet, ASSEMBLE!

More »
Comment