Important Note:
Opinions are fun. My friends tell me I am someone with lots of opinions and that's fine since I don't get mad at others when they disagree with me. In this same spirit I am interested in hearing yours views as long as you are able to share your views without boiling over. I look forward to hearing from you. I tend to write in the form of short essays most of the time, but contributions do not need to be in this same format or size. Some of the content here will date itself pretty quickly, other content may be virtually timeless, this is for the reader to judge.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1
When will they learn to shut up!
Posted at: Dec/29/2014 : Posted by: mel
Related Category: Perspectives, Politics & Gov, Society, Watching America,
The democratic process is a wonderful conundrum. We get to on a regular basic elect new people, placing them in positions of authority and responsibility. Sometimes we elect them because we clearly understand their agenda and see that as a path forward. Sometimes we elect people because we are optimistic they will be able to accomplish great changes even when we don’t know what those changes might be. Of course, we also elect people because they represent a contrast to the ways and policies of the administration we have grown tired and frustrated with. Despite being elected for their agenda’s and opinions, it would be nice if once in a while they would know when to keep their mouths shut. Blessed with a 24 hour news cycle, competing for the attention of the masses is the order of the day. Nothing is easier to sensationalize than death. Unfortunately, when sensationalizing rather than reporting death it is far too easy to propagate opinion rather than mere facts. It was not too long ago that a single person could start publically rating about a death and the result would be lynching long before the wheels of justice would have had a chance to spin up. It would be nice to believe that as a modern society in the 21st century, we have moved past that, but recent events have placed serious doubts on that notion. Beginning with the death of Trayvon Martin in February 2012; we have had a rash of African American deaths including Michael Brown and Eric Garner that have been used by a few prognosticators for no apparent purpose except to escalate their own public persona. Al Sharpton likely tops the list for his self-serving rants. It is unfortunate that major media continues to give him air time so that he can spew his rhetoric. Leveraging his position as an ordained minister of the Pentecostal church (acquired at the age of 10) he travels all over the country seeking pulpits from which he proclaims himself the as the leader of an activist movement fighting against racial prejudice and injustice. As a self-proclaimed champion of racial injustice, the only thing missing with each of his appearances is a cape and a real solution. Jumping to conclusions without all the facts is what Al Sharpton does, and in so doing he always stirs up a lot of noise and controversy. While this behavior is the norm for some, it is especially disappointing for our elected officials. Maybe I am naively living with a misguided vision of the past. Still, I can recall Presidents being asked during briefings and press interviews about regional or local controversies. Their response was generally a well composed version of “let’s wait to see what the courts decide.” We live in a different era now where political figures at all level are quick to take side and often render premature opinions. When Trayvon Martin was killed, President Obama was quick to make comments of a personal nature about the death. The President also openly discussed experiences of racial prejudice that he had experienced openly creating the belief that this was a racial incident. Turning up the fire and steering the dialog is a great way to get the pot boiling. It took 15 months before a trial was held in which the shooter, George Zimmerman was found not guilty. Even when the U.S. Justice Department conducted its own investigation they came to the same conclusion; that Zimmerman most likely feared for his life and acted in self-defense. When Michael Brown was killed by a police officer in Ferguson Missouri things quickly erupted into a racially based riot. The store video clearly shows Michael Brown doing a strong-arm robbery of a local store. When confronted by a police officer he resisted died when the same officer felt mortally threatened. The agitators were quick to arrive and the community quickly melted into a riot destroying many of their own stores and public conveniences. When a grand jury was convened, they concluded that the police officer acted in self-defense. Some, but not all witness accounts have Michael Brown going towards the officer with his arms up. Whether true or not, he continued to threaten the officer and the policer officer fired in defense. Even here, our President was quick to make this an issue for his involvement and sent his Attorney General, Eric Holder to the scene. Clearly, sending the U.S. Attorney General implies that the local authorities are not and cannot do the right thing. Late in 2014 Eric Garner was killed in New York by city police using what appears to be an illegal choke hold. In the case of Eric Garner a clear and complete video of the encounter and ultimate death exists. Watching the video, it is clear that Mr. Garner, a father of 6 was incensed during his encounter with the police. It is also clear that Eric Garner was not armed and was not doing anything threatening or of a provocative nature to the police. In response to the video, the officer who grabbed Garner by the neck was ordered to turn in his badge and gun; another was reassigned to desk duty. The emergency medical works who responded to the scene were also been suspended without pay. Beginning with his campaign and continuing with his administration, New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio has been an outspoken critic of active policies of the New York Police Department (NYPD). He openly disputed the value of “stop-and-frisk” despite the significant reduction in violent crime during this policies implementation. Additionally, Mayor De Blasio has made repeated claims to the press that his own son Dante would be at risk of “police abuse” by virtue of the color of his skin. When public figures speak, by virtue of their positions and titles people listen. Clearly, the officers involved in the death of Eric Garner did not handle the situation correctly, but publicly blaming and chastising the entire police force is wrong. The purpose of the police department is to protect and serve their community. For the majority of the officers of the NYPD, I am sure this is what they do on a day to day basic. Nevertheless, publically chastising the entire police force from a position of authority creates the public impression that they are the enemy, rather than the protectors of the peace. On December 20thof 2014 Ismaaiyl Brinsley killed two NYPD officers for no apparent reason other than that they wore the uniform and were conveniently available. Ismaaiyl Brinsley already had a substantial criminal record and according to those nearest him, had emotional issues. Ismaaiyl had made statements on social media suggesting that he planned to kill police officers and was angered about the Eric Garner and Michael Brown cases. Fueled by public sentiment, Ismaaiyl carried out his plan before killing himself. It would be difficult to call the deaths of officer’s Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos anything except and “Assassination.” Clearly, the trigger was pulled by Ismaaiyl Brinsley and no one else, but public figures have a responsibility to quell the fires of dissent and not to throw more gasoline on them. I would be easy to say something about irresponsibility journalism, but picking and choosing the agenda of our media intense world is a slippery slope we should start down. Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a day after officers Liu and Ramos were killed said, “We’ve had four months of propaganda starting with the President that everybody should hate the police. I don’t care how you want to describe it, that’s what those protests are all about. The protests are being embraced, the protests are being encouraged, the protests, even the ones that don’t lead to violence, and a lot of them lead to violence, all lead to a conclusion: the police are bad, the police are racist. That is completely wrong. Actually, the people who do the most for the Black community in America are the police.” President Obama, his Attorney General, Mayor Bill De Blasio and others seem to have fallen in step with outspoken demagogue Al Sharpton spewing a lethal and dangerous smear campaign on police. There is no doubt that police who abuse their position should be held accountable for their actions. Repeatedly, when the justice system is allowed to take its course these transgressions and abuses are shown to be the acts of a few and not the policies of a majority. Many years ago, newly elected President Obama promised to transform America. There are many things that could have been predicted as part of that transformation. Some would have seen a reduced military, some would have seen expanded social program. There are many who would have predicted some variation on the Affordable Care Act. It is doubtful that anyone would have foreseen a war on community police initiated and fueled with rhetoric from the highest levels of government. Clearly, President Obama is seeking to create a historical legacy that no other president holds.
Comments (0) [Add Comment]
