Yesterday, the Boulder DA formally exonerated them for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey and apologized to them for the cloud of suspicion that has hung over them since her death. The DNA says it wasn't them. Fine. It's always good when a DA does the right thing.
The story made the national news last night and the mornng news shows this morning. Why is this such big news? I'm sure the Ramseys did suffer because of the investigation and the whisper campaign that followed. It is tragic that Patsy Ramsey died, still under suspicion of having murdered her daughter.
But . . .they were never charged; they were never arrested; no one was arraigned; no one was tried; no one was wrongly convicted; and no one spent a single day in jail or in prison.
Consider all of the exonerations that have occurred across the nation, many involving black men. These individuals not only suffered a wrongful conviction, they lost years of their liberty for which there is no remedy. They missed the birthdays of children and the funerals of parents. And of course, no one knows how many individuals may have died in prison--or been executed--having been convicted of crimes they did not commit.
So yeah, I do feel for the Ramseys. They lost their daughter and the murderer is still out there. But, let's not get carried away.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
One Drop
If Barack Obama wins the Presidency, he will be the 44th white President of the United States. He will also be the first black President, and that is what has been the focus. It certainly makes a more compelling story to treat him as black, and I'm personally happy that there's lots of positive press for a black man. But does it not suggest that we are still of the mind that anything other than 100% white makes one, well, not white. And for that reason, some small percentage of the white voting public will not vote for him although his mother looks pretty much like theirs. Odd irony.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Wouldn't want to be her
Can you say caught between the devel and the deep blue sea? As it stands, only a miracle will save Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. So what's the next step for her? I'm assuming that her amibition to be president won't die with her campaign.
With that in mind, if Mrs. Clinton plays the good little former candidate and forcefully campaigns for Obama, he might just win. That ain't necessarily good news for Mrs. Clinton, because barring a horrendous first term, Obama, the incumbent, will be the Democratic nominee for 2012. In other words, helping Obama win will sink her next best chance to become President; she'll have to wait until 2016 when her age will be an issue.
On the other hand, if she fails to campaign or it's clear that her heart isn't in it, the party faithful are like to blame her if Obama loses, particuarly if he loses by a close margin such that her assistance could have been a true game-changer. She can wave good-bye to her chances in 2012. She might not become a pariah, but I doubt there'll be a rush to annoint her the 2012 candidate. The Obamaites won't forget and will punish her for her lack of support.
It's a no-win situation, as I see it. To borrow from Laurel and Hardy, this is a fine mess she's gotten herself into.
With that in mind, if Mrs. Clinton plays the good little former candidate and forcefully campaigns for Obama, he might just win. That ain't necessarily good news for Mrs. Clinton, because barring a horrendous first term, Obama, the incumbent, will be the Democratic nominee for 2012. In other words, helping Obama win will sink her next best chance to become President; she'll have to wait until 2016 when her age will be an issue.
On the other hand, if she fails to campaign or it's clear that her heart isn't in it, the party faithful are like to blame her if Obama loses, particuarly if he loses by a close margin such that her assistance could have been a true game-changer. She can wave good-bye to her chances in 2012. She might not become a pariah, but I doubt there'll be a rush to annoint her the 2012 candidate. The Obamaites won't forget and will punish her for her lack of support.
It's a no-win situation, as I see it. To borrow from Laurel and Hardy, this is a fine mess she's gotten herself into.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Politically correct on age?
Remember Omarosa from The Apprentice? Remember the controversy she created over another another competitor's statement about "the pot calling the kettle black?" "It's racist!" she exclaimed
Her claim was ridiculous, and it made her look bad to press such an idiotic claim. And there were plenty willing to tell her as much. Such claims as Omarosa made often bring out those who rail against "political correctness" and accuse blacks of being hypersensitive.
I hope that those same critics will rail against John McCain in the same way. Didn't McCain just play the age card? After all, when Obama suggested that McCain had "lost his bearings" in response to McCain's statements about Hamas wanting Obama for president.
I have only one college degree and one professional degree, and I'm well into middle age, so I might be a little slow on the uptake, but exactly where is the ageism in that? I suppose you could say that the statement suggests senility, which one associates with age, but to claim ageism is a bit of a stretch.
Come on, John. Is that the best you can do? But if you want to make such spurious claims, you can start writing your concesesion speecch now. But until then, all you other folks had better watch what you say.
Her claim was ridiculous, and it made her look bad to press such an idiotic claim. And there were plenty willing to tell her as much. Such claims as Omarosa made often bring out those who rail against "political correctness" and accuse blacks of being hypersensitive.
I hope that those same critics will rail against John McCain in the same way. Didn't McCain just play the age card? After all, when Obama suggested that McCain had "lost his bearings" in response to McCain's statements about Hamas wanting Obama for president.
I have only one college degree and one professional degree, and I'm well into middle age, so I might be a little slow on the uptake, but exactly where is the ageism in that? I suppose you could say that the statement suggests senility, which one associates with age, but to claim ageism is a bit of a stretch.
Come on, John. Is that the best you can do? But if you want to make such spurious claims, you can start writing your concesesion speecch now. But until then, all you other folks had better watch what you say.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Hillary Clinton, President of Hard-working whites only?
Hillary Clinton keeps making the pitch that Barack Obama can't draw the vote of working-class whites like she can, and that's what makes her the stronger candidate against McCain. Excuse me? Did I miss something?
The Democratic candidate will need the support of working class whites, but that's not all. Lest Mrs Clinton forget, the candidate will need the vote of African-Americans of all income and educational levels. That candidate will also need the votes of young voters, including first-time voters. In other words, the candidate will need broad support, which is fitting since that person will have a darn good shot at becoming the President of theUnited States. The same United States that, as cliche-ish as it sounds, is a great melting pot.
When I survey the results from the past few months, it is Obama that has generated excitement among a broad spectrum of voters.
The Democratic candidate will need the support of working class whites, but that's not all. Lest Mrs Clinton forget, the candidate will need the vote of African-Americans of all income and educational levels. That candidate will also need the votes of young voters, including first-time voters. In other words, the candidate will need broad support, which is fitting since that person will have a darn good shot at becoming the President of theUnited States. The same United States that, as cliche-ish as it sounds, is a great melting pot.
When I survey the results from the past few months, it is Obama that has generated excitement among a broad spectrum of voters.
To the extent that Hillary believes she can somehow pull out the nomination by focusing on one demographic, she'd better remember that she risks alienating the others. I don't expect this to become relevant because I don't expect Hillary to be the nominee. But if she does, she had better not assume that she can pander to one group and write the others off or take them for granted.
We have spent the last 8 years with a President who thinks that only certain groups matter. He is our President in name only, but theirs in reality.
Hillary's latest tact is one likely borne of desperation, but don't make the mistake of failing to appeal to all of us. That's what she should have been doing from the outset, and then maybe she would not have found herself in such a precarious position.
Monday, May 5, 2008
In Memory of Mildred Loving
By all accounts Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving were madly in love. They had grown up near each other and fallen in love at an early age. First comes love, then comes marriage, so the saying goes, and that's what followed for them. Nothing particularly unusual about that--just an old-fashioned love story. Except that their union was illegal.
Until 1967, the Commonwealth of Virginia had the audacity to criminalize interracial marriages. The so-called Racial Integrity Act made it a felony for blacks and whites to marry, as Mildred and Richard discovered. Mildred, black, and Richard, white, had married in Washington D.C., but returned to Virginia, and the Commonwealth just wasn't going to have any of that race mixing. Police officers invaded the Lovings' home in the dead of night and upon finding them in bed, arrested and convicted them. They were sentenced to 1 year in prison, suspended, if they would leave the Commonwealth. The U. S. Supreme Court overturned their convictions, finding the statute unconstitutional.
The Virginia miscegenation statute had been on the books since 1924. The trial judge that convicted the Lovings stated,
"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
The Commonwealth of Virginia argued before the Supreme Court that the original intent of the framers of the 14th amendment was that its provisions did not apply to interracial marriage. Original intent. The Commonwealth also relied on another familiar argument: states' rights, i.e. marriage is a matter to be determined within the realm of a state's police power.
If there is ever a time one doubts the importance of the Supreme Court, it is cases like Loving that should remind that person of the important role the Court plays in checking the power of the State. How different this country would have been had Virginia and the other Southern states had their way.
Mildred and Richard didn't set out to make history or even to make new law. They just wanted to be married and to live in the community in which they had grown up. That's not much to ask.Mildred died several days ago. Richard has been dead since 1975, killed in a car accident caused by a drunk driver.
Until 1967, the Commonwealth of Virginia had the audacity to criminalize interracial marriages. The so-called Racial Integrity Act made it a felony for blacks and whites to marry, as Mildred and Richard discovered. Mildred, black, and Richard, white, had married in Washington D.C., but returned to Virginia, and the Commonwealth just wasn't going to have any of that race mixing. Police officers invaded the Lovings' home in the dead of night and upon finding them in bed, arrested and convicted them. They were sentenced to 1 year in prison, suspended, if they would leave the Commonwealth. The U. S. Supreme Court overturned their convictions, finding the statute unconstitutional.
The Virginia miscegenation statute had been on the books since 1924. The trial judge that convicted the Lovings stated,
"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
The Commonwealth of Virginia argued before the Supreme Court that the original intent of the framers of the 14th amendment was that its provisions did not apply to interracial marriage. Original intent. The Commonwealth also relied on another familiar argument: states' rights, i.e. marriage is a matter to be determined within the realm of a state's police power.
If there is ever a time one doubts the importance of the Supreme Court, it is cases like Loving that should remind that person of the important role the Court plays in checking the power of the State. How different this country would have been had Virginia and the other Southern states had their way.
Mildred and Richard didn't set out to make history or even to make new law. They just wanted to be married and to live in the community in which they had grown up. That's not much to ask.Mildred died several days ago. Richard has been dead since 1975, killed in a car accident caused by a drunk driver.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Stick to the Issues or Get Out!
Six months ago, when I looked at the candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination, I was as thrilled as preacher at a Sunday buffet. Obama. Clinton. Edwards. Sure there were differences, but all three were strong candidates, and shoo-ins to win the presidency. I could no more imagine not voting in November than I could imagine taking a weekend trip to Pluto. Now look at the mess we Democrats are in.
So, I'm starting my own campaign. Stick to the Issues or Get Out! My campaign is not aimed at any particular candidate. Rather, it is my way of saying that personal attacks and strategies designed to focus on irrelevancies will guarantee only one thing: that a candidate who becomes the Democratic nominee this way won't get my vote. I'll be busy come election day.
Issues that I want to hear about:
1) The economy and what the plan is for giving the poor a hand-up and revitalizing the middle class.
2) Education. What's the plan for addressing our unacceptable high school drop-out rate. What ideas does the candidate have to make higher education more affordable.
3) Iraq. What's the plan for the future there? A precipitous withdrawal would likely be disasterous, but it makes little sense to continue to throw billions of dollars at a warthat should have never been started.
4) Health care. I'd like someone to really push a reasonable plan that immediately provides preventative health care to everyone. I'd like to hear some innovative thinking about how to address the larger issue of providing diagnostic and treatment to everyone if not free, at an affordable rate.
5) Taxes. Our system is horribly out of whack. Why should some lower middle class, single mother pay more taxes than a multinational corporation?
That's just my short list. I know that from time-to-time the candidates do talk on these issues, but I'm sick of hearing about Rev. Wright. I'm sick of hearing about shooting in duck blinds.
If you agree with this, pass this message along to other bloggers and friends. Let's get our own campaign underway.
So, I'm starting my own campaign. Stick to the Issues or Get Out! My campaign is not aimed at any particular candidate. Rather, it is my way of saying that personal attacks and strategies designed to focus on irrelevancies will guarantee only one thing: that a candidate who becomes the Democratic nominee this way won't get my vote. I'll be busy come election day.
Issues that I want to hear about:
1) The economy and what the plan is for giving the poor a hand-up and revitalizing the middle class.
2) Education. What's the plan for addressing our unacceptable high school drop-out rate. What ideas does the candidate have to make higher education more affordable.
3) Iraq. What's the plan for the future there? A precipitous withdrawal would likely be disasterous, but it makes little sense to continue to throw billions of dollars at a warthat should have never been started.
4) Health care. I'd like someone to really push a reasonable plan that immediately provides preventative health care to everyone. I'd like to hear some innovative thinking about how to address the larger issue of providing diagnostic and treatment to everyone if not free, at an affordable rate.
5) Taxes. Our system is horribly out of whack. Why should some lower middle class, single mother pay more taxes than a multinational corporation?
That's just my short list. I know that from time-to-time the candidates do talk on these issues, but I'm sick of hearing about Rev. Wright. I'm sick of hearing about shooting in duck blinds.
If you agree with this, pass this message along to other bloggers and friends. Let's get our own campaign underway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)