"The words, spoken
about the Eric Garner travesty in New York, were righteous and powerful.
“When you look at what
they did to this guy and putting him in a chokehold like that, it’s inexcusable
— absolutely inexcusable and brutal.”
“How this cop did not
go to jail, was not held responsible, is beyond me.”
“This is ridiculous. . . .
It’s obscene. It’s grotesque.”
“Here’s a guy who was
not resisting arrest, was not being a jerk.”
“This is the New York
police completely out of control . . . [M]anslaughter absolutely should have
been considered. Why that wasn’t considered is beyond me.”
And who uttered such
phrases? The Rev. Al Sharpton? Lawyers for the Garner family?
Actually, these
sentiments were voiced Thursday by Glenn Beck, one of the fiercest
warriors of the right. ... "
^^^ FRANKLY, I FIND IT APPALLING THAT MILBANK WOULD GIVE GLENN BECK A STARRING ROLE. JOURNALISM
101 TEACHES THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE STORY GOES AS HIGH
IN A PIECE AS POSSIBLE SO IT IS READ BEFORE THE READER GETS BORED AND STOPS READING.
MILBANK WANTED TO MAKE SURE I KNEW WHAT BECK HAD TO SAY, LEAVING ME WONDERING WHAT IN THE HELL HIS MOTIVATION COULD BE FOR THAT?
BUT WAIT, IT GETS WORSE...
"Conservatives, with a
few exceptions, have responded with admirable outrage over a grand jury’s failure to indict white police officer
Daniel Pantaleo, who was caught on video killing Garner, an unarmed African
American. Pantaleo put Garner in a chokehold and ignored Garner’s cries that he
couldn’t breathe — even though the victim’s only alleged offense had been
selling untaxed cigarettes. ... "
^^^ WHAT ??? “ADMIRABLE
OUTRAGE” ??? IF I JUST LOOK AT THE PAST
SIX YEARS, CONSERVATIVES HAVE TOLD SO MANY "BIG LIES" I
CAN’T KEEP UP WITH THEM.
MILBANK REALLY NEEDED TO GIVE ME SOME EVIDENCE OF THAT ALLEGED ABILITY TO BE “ADMIRABLE." IT’S ARROGANT TO
ASSUME I WOULD JUST TAKE HIS WORD FOR
IT.
"Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly said he was
“extremely troubled” by the video and Garner “did not deserve what happened to
him.” His Fox colleague Andrew Napolitano said the "grand jury made a grievous error" because it seemed police “used grossly excessive force on a
nonviolent, non-threatening person,” while Charles Krauthammer called the decision “totally incomprehensible. ... ”
^^^ OH, I SEE ~ O’REILLY
SAID AND NAPOLITANO SAID AND KRAUTHAMMER SAID, TOO! I AM INSULTED.
"Rep. Cathy McMorris
Rodgers (Wash.), head of the House Republican Conference, called for the House
to hold hearings on the case. “We need to be taking action,” she told MSNBC’s
“Morning Joe.” House Speaker John Boehner later referred to McMorris Rodgers’s
remarks in a news conference, agreeing that “the American people deserve more
answers about what really happened here. ... ”
^^^ IT IS SHOCKING TO ME THAT MILBANK WOULD EXPECT ME TO BELIEVE A SINGLE
WORD COMING OUT OF A GOP-ER’S MOUTH WITH NO EVIDENCE TO
REMOTELY BACK UP WHAT JOHN BOEHNER’S TAG-A-LONG COLLEAGUE HAS TO SAY. I'M NOT BUYING It.
If it is possible to
say that anything good has come from such an obvious miscarriage of justice, it
is that the Garner decision has rekindled, if briefly, what Franklin Roosevelt
called the “warm courage of national unity.”
^^^ IT IS DISTURBING TO ME THAT
MILBANK WOULD PUT FORMER PRESIDENT FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT’S NAME IN THE SAME PIECE
WITH THESE PEOPLE.
AND PLEASE NOTE, HE DOES NOT EVEN GIVE HIM THE COURTESY OF
HIS TITLE. THAT'S PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT!
"The Ferguson, Mo.,
decision last month, in which a grand jury declined to charge another white
police officer who killed another unarmed black man, split the nation along
racial and political lines, but this is one of the rare moments since the 9/11
attacks that has united left and right, black and white. It surely won’t last
long. The question is whether a reluctant president will seize the moment. ..."
^^^ OH. I SEE. THIS LUDICROUSNESS IS ALL LEADING UP TO ~ “THE QUESTION IS WHETHER A RELUCTANT PRESIDENT WILL SEIZE
THE MOMENT.” AND WHAT? CURE AMERICA OF RACISM?
"The early signs
indicate more of the same reticence. Though President Obama has spoken twice
about the Garner case since the decision, White House press secretary Josh
Earnest on Thursday, asked about a “broader national effort” by the president,
suggested people wait to see what Obama’s new task force on policing comes up
with — in 90 days. ... "
^^^ CLEARLY MILBANK DOES
NOT FOLLOW POTUS OR HE WOULD KNOW: ONE, POTUS HAS A MEASURED
WORK STYLE THAT HAS BEEN CONSISTENT SINCE DAY ONE AND HE WILL NOT ALTER IT FOR
ANYONE (NOT COUNTING NATIONAL SECURITY, OF COURSE) AND; TWO, HE IS PRESIDENT OF ALL OF THE
PEOPLE AND ALL HE DOES ON BEHALF OF OUR COUNTRY IS TO BENEFIT ALL OF THOSE
PEOPLE, COLOR ASIDE.
"But Obama doesn’t have
90 days. If he waits, he will violate Rahm Emanuel’s famous rule, expressed
after Obama won the presidency in 2008: “You never want a serious crisis to go
to waste,” because it is “an opportunity to do things that you think you could
not do before.” The Birmingham church bombing in 1963 helped to pass the Civil
Rights Act of 1964. The Garner case should produce more than mumbles about a
task force and some modest funds for police training and body cameras — items
Obama proposed after the Ferguson grand jury decision. ... "
^^^ REALLY? WHO SAYS PRESIDENT
OBAMA DOESN’T HAVE 90 DAYS? WHO SAYS THE PRESIDENT SUBSCRIBES TO EMANUAL’S
WORK STYLE? WHO SAYS THE PRESIDENT’S RESPONSE TO THIS CRISIS HAS BEEN “MUMBLES”?
A COLUMNIST WHO LEADS WITH GLENN BECK??? NOT CREDIBLE.
"There are any number
of bigger things Obama could do, including alternatives to grand juries. This
year, Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker — no liberal — signed first-in-the-nation legislation requiring an outside investigation
whenever anybody dies in police custody and a public report if charges are not
filed. The president could use his pulpit to push for similar laws in the other
states. He could at least demand a national count of police killings, which,
scandalously, we still don’t have. Or he could take a broader approach to
racial matters and revive a rewrite of elements of the Voting Rights Act struck
down by the Supreme Court; there is already bipartisan support for such action. ... "
^^^ POTUS
DELEGATES AND HE TYPICALLY DELEGATES ALONG HISTORICAL LINES OF JOB DESCRIPTIONS, SOMETHING MILBANK SEEMS TO BE IGNORANT OF. ONE, HIS ATTORNEY GENERAL IS WORKS THE LEGAL ASPECTS RELEVANT TO THE CURRENT CRISIS
AND; TWO, THE LEGISLATIVE BODY IS WORKS THE LEGISLATION RELEVANT TO THE VOTING
RIGHTS ACT. CIVICALLY ILLITERATE?
"In a sense, it matters
less what Obama does than that he does something with this moment —
particularly because the rest of his agenda, and with it much of his legacy, is
moribund on Capitol Hill. A top White House official suggested to me Thursday
that Obama may be coming around. “We agree there is a moment here to have this
conversation and make something of this,” the official told me. ... "
It would be more than
a shame for Obama to squander this moment of national unity. He may never get
another one.
^^^ ACTUALLY, WHAT WOULD BE A SHAME WOULD BE FOR A NOTED COLUMNIST TO SET UP A UNITED STATES SITTING PRESIDENT WHO
IS BEING NULLIFIED BY THE GOP TO TAKE THE FALL FOR ANY BINDING ACTIONS THAT
WILL BE IMMEDIATELY NULLIFIED BY THE NULLIFYERS, MANY OF WHOSE CHEERLEADERS SAID COLUMNIST HAS USED TO MAKE HIS CASE. SHAMEFUL.
G.
Milbank's column can be found here .
More information on Milbank can be found here .
Further reading on points made can be found below:
(*** I
couldn’t find a Politifact file on Charles
Krauthammer so you all will have to Google him!)
.jpg)
.jpg)
