Sunday, April 15, 2012

Selective memory from the LEFT


Janet Napolitano Signed "Stand your Ground" law for Arizona in 2006.



Amid Democrat attempts to use the Trayvon Martin shooting as a means to push for the repeal of Stand Your Ground laws, it’s been interesting to note how many Democrats have a past that includes support for them.  

For example, on April 2nd, I had a post on Big Government that highlighted how former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat, used her Current TV show to lambaste Stand Your Ground laws, and to blame Republicans for the existence of such laws in the first place. However, as I showed, the dirty little secret is that Granholm signed Michigan’s Stand Your Ground bill into law in 2006.
Now it’s been discovered that an even more prominent Democrat, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, signed Arizona’s Stand Your Ground bill into law while governor of that state in 2006. And it’s important to note that Napolitano didn’t sign the bill half-halfheartedly, rather, she even countered anti-gunners’ opposition in the signing.  According to the Arizona Daily Star:

[Gubernatorial spokeswoman Jeanine L’Ecuyer] said Napolitano, a former state and federal prosecutor, concluded the measure would not cause the harm that foes contend it would. “She believes in the fundamental right of self-defense,” L’Ecuyer said. “And the law still requires the defendant to be in imminent peril of death or serious physical injury.”

The NRA heaped praise upon Napolitano for signing the bill as well. And they issued a special press release to explain that the bill Napolitano had signed was actually a combination of Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground legislation (making it especially deplorable to gun grabbers):

[The] bill has two components: One is Castle Doctrine, which presumes you are justified in the use of force if you believe you are in danger of serious bodily harm or death within your home or occupied vehicle.  The second and most significant component is the return of the burden of proof in self-defense cases to the state, so law-abiding citizens who are forced to actually use their firearms or other means of protection for self-defense will not be wrongfully imprisoned or financially devastated by costs associated with their legal defense.  They will once again be presumed innocent – consistent with the American system of justice.

The bottom line: It would behoove current Democrats to do a quick records search before continuing their denigration of Stand Your Ground laws as a solely Republican initiative. For it is pretty evident that some prominent Democrat governors are among those who’ve recognized the value of honoring Americans’ right to keep and bear arms as well.

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

AZ - Taco Bell Shooting Victim was Holding Leash, Not Weapon


Victim's sister calling for shooter's arrest

Updated: Wednesday, 04 Apr 2012, 5:12 PM MST
Published : Wednesday, 04 Apr 2012, 3:38 PM MST

LAVEEN - Police are saying more about a shooting at a Taco Bell Tuesday night in which one man died.

They're also identifying the victim as 29-year-old Daniel Adkins.

About 7:30 p.m., a 22-year-old man and his girlfriend ordered food at the Taco Bell drive-thru and were told to pull up while their order was prepared.

At the same time, Adkins stepped around a corner into the path of the vehicle and angry words were exchanged between he and the driver.

They got into an altercation and Adkins was shot once by the driver. He died at the scene.

The driver, a 22-year-old black male, called police but has not been arrested.

At first, the couple claimed that Adkins had a metal pipe that he swung at them -- but it turns out he was holding a dog leash with his yellow lab on the other end.

Family members want that driver arrested, but he's claiming self-defense.

"He needs to be behind bars. I'll never see my brother again," says sister Marina Reyes. "If he felt that my brother was threatening him, he could have easily just rolled up the window and called the cops."

A metal pipe or bat was never located. An independent witness did say Adkins swung his fists in the driver's direction.

“He swung his fist towards the driver window, and at some point the driver shot him,” says Phoenix Police Sgt. Tommy Thompson. “Just because we don’t book a person immediately does not mean we don’t charge a person at a later date.”

The dog, Lady, stayed by Adkins' side until the Humane Society came. Adkins lived with his mom and dad. He's 29, but his family says he's mentally disabled and has the mental capacity of a 12-year-old. He didn't drive, and walked wherever he went.

"This person is still on the loose and I don't agree with that. So he's saying self defense, then where's the weapon? Where's the pipe? They didn't find anything on my brother," says Reyes. "He was just too aggressive, you don't need to go that far."

The shooter's name has not been released. The investigation is still ongoing.

Commentary:

Crank up the national media, doctor the 911 tapes, use dated pictures of the victim, use arrest pictures of the perpetrator. Ask -- Where does the President weigh in on this? Al, Jesse, (insert others), book the next flight to AZ. Tee up Spike Lee to tweet perpetrator's last known address, (insert race here) New Panther Party put a bounty on the perpetrator's head, organize national protest marches, appoint a special prosecutor, involve the Federal U.S. Attorney General's office, contact the United Nations "High Commissioner for Human Rights"...

Where's the moral outrage?  Where's the national media coverage? Who weeps for THIS families son?

This post is NOT meant to diminish the shooting, tragic loss of life, or prematurely judge the actions of both parties, BEFORE the evidence is collected and analyzed by law enforcement & the court system.

Rather it is meant to highlight the duplicitous nature the numerous "activists", commentators, "experts", our nation's leaders, government officials, nationally televised networks, print, and social media outlets selection of if, when, or how to cover such events.

Click HERE for Link to Original Article 

Follow this story: One Dead in Shooting Outside Taco Bell

Monday, April 9, 2012

Zimmerman family challenges Holder - Why no arrests of members of the New Black Panther Party ?


By Matthew Boyle - The Daily Caller 7:02 PM 04/09/2012 

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday, obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, a family member of George Zimmerman asked the nation’s top law enforcement officer why he has chosen to not arrest members of the New Black Panther Party for their rhetoric — some of which may fit the federal government’s definition of a hate crime — throughout the Trayvon Martin case.
The family member believes the reason Holder hasn’t made those arrests is because he, like the members of the New Black Panther Party, is black.
“I am writing you to ask you why, when the law of the land is crystal clear, is your office not arresting the New Black Panthers for hate crimes?” the family member wrote to Holder.
“The Zimmerman family is in hiding because of the threats that have been made against us, yet the DOJ has maintained an eerie silence on this matter. These threats are very public. If you haven’t been paying attention just do a Google search and you will find plenty. Since when can a group of people in the United States put a bounty on someone’s head, circulate Wanted posters publicly, and still be walking the streets?”
The New Black Panthers have issued ultimatums to the Sanford authorities, saying they want Zimmerman arrested “dead or alive.” They have placed a bounty on Zimmerman’s head, and have called for the building of an army of vigilantes to track him down and effect a citizen’s arrest.
Most recently, the New Black Panther Party has called for violence.
In a conference call recorded over the weekend, the militant group said it planned to “suit up and boot up” and prepare for the next stages of the “race war.”
So far, however, no members of the New Black Panther Party have faced legal consequences.
After citing the U.S. Department of Justice’s published definition of a “hate crime,” the Zimmerman family member wrote that there is “no other explanation” for Holder’s failure to authorize arrests of New Black Panther Party members, other than the fact that Holder himself is black.
“I would surmise that, based on your own definition of a hate crime, you have chosen not to arrest these individuals based solely on your race,” the family member wrote to Holder, insisting too that the was “NO racial component” to the “tragedy” that occurred on the late February night when Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin.
The Daily Caller has confirmed the identity of the Zimmerman family member but is withholding that person’s identity out of concern for the family’s safety.
The family member also criticized members of Congress who have forcefully criticized police for failing to arrest Georgfe Zimmerman, as well as “the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Spike Lee, [and] President Barack Obama,” adding that “many” who have commented on the case without having a complete understanding of the facts “no doubt understand the laws of our great nation.”
Noting President Obama’s White House event last week celebrating the 1960 novel “To Kill a Mockingbird,” Zimmerman’s family member drew a novel comparison to the American literary classic.
“Strangely enough this case has a lot of parallels to those of Harper Lee’s ‘To Kill a Mockingbird,’” the letter to Attorney General Holder read. “George Zimmerman has been treated much like Tom Robinson was, chastised for not being the right (or wrong) color and found guilty based on race factors.
“You have the opportunity to act as Atticus [Finch] and do the right thing. Your boss would refer to this as a ‘teachable moment.’”
DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler has not responded to The Daily Caller’s request for comment on why Holder hasn’t authorized the arrest of any New Black Panther Party members, nor has she answered whether that decision is related to Holder’s race.
Zimmerman Family Letter to Eric Holder -- Email Redacted

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/09/zimmerman-family-challenges-holder-on-new-black-panthers-says-no-arrests-based-solely-on-your-race/#ixzz1rb89N4p9

Obama administration diverts $500M to IRS to implement healthcare reform law



The Obama administration is quietly diverting roughly $500 million to the IRS to help implement the president’s healthcare law.

The money is only part of the IRS’s total implementation spending, and it is being provided outside the normal appropriations process. The tax agency is responsible for several key provisions of the new law, including the unpopular individual mandate.

Republican lawmakers have tried to cut off funding to implement the healthcare law, at least until after the Supreme Court decides whether to strike it down. That ruling is expected by June, and oral arguments last week indicated the justices might well overturn at least the individual mandate, if not the whole law.

“While President Obama and his Senate allies continue to spend more tax dollars implementing an unpopular and unworkable law that may very well be struck down as unconstitutional in a matter of months, I’ll continue to stand with the American people who want to repeal this law and replace it with something that will actually address the cost of healthcare,” said Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.), who chairs the House Appropriations subcommittee for healthcare and is in a closely contested Senate race this year.

The Obama administration has plowed ahead despite the legal and political challenges.

It has moved aggressively to get important policies in place. And, according to a review of budget documents and figures provided by congressional staff, the administration is also burning through implementation funding provided in the healthcare law.

The law contains dozens of targeted appropriations to implement specific provisions. It also gave the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) a $1 billion implementation fund, to use as it sees fit. Republicans have called it a “slush fund.”

HHS plans to drain the entire fund by September — before the presidential election, and more than a year before most of the healthcare law takes effect. Roughly half of that money will ultimately go to the IRS.

HHS has transferred almost $200 million to the IRS over the past two years and plans to transfer more than $300 million this year, according to figures provided by a congressional aide.

The Government Accountability Office has said the transfers are perfectly legal and consistent with how agencies have used general implementation funds in the past. The $1 billion fund was set aside for “federal” implementation activities, the GAO said, and can therefore be used by any agency — not just HHS, where the money is housed.

Still, significant transfers to the IRS and other agencies leave less money for HHS, and the department needs to draw on the $1 billion fund for some of its biggest tasks.

The healthcare law directs HHS to set up a federal insurance exchange — a new marketplace for individuals and small businesses to buy coverage — in any state that doesn’t establish its own. But it didn’t provide any money for the federal exchange, forcing HHS to cobble together funding by using some of the $1 billion fund and steering money away from other accounts.

The transfers also allow the IRS to make the healthcare law a smaller part of its public budget figures. For example, the tax agency requested $8 million next year to implement the individual mandate, and said the money would not pay for any new employees.

An IRS spokeswoman would not say how much money has been spent so far implementing the individual mandate.

Republicans charged during the legislative debate over healthcare that the IRS would be hiring hundreds of new agents to enforce the mandate and throwing people in jail because they don’t have insurance.

However, the mandate is just one part of the IRS’s responsibilities.

The healthcare law includes a slew of new taxes and fees, some of which are already in effect. The tax agency wants to hire more than 300 new employees next year to cover those tax changes, such as the new fees on drug companies and insurance policies.

The IRS will also administer the most expensive piece of the new law — subsidies to help low-income people pay for insurance, which are structured as tax credits. The agency asked Congress to fund another 537 new employees dedicated to administering the new subsidies.

The Republican-led House last year passed an amendment, 246-182, sponsored by Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) that would have prevented the IRS from hiring new personnel or initiating any other measures to mandate that people purchase health insurance. The measure, strongly opposed by the Obama administration, was subsequently dropped from a larger bill that averted a government shutdown.

See original article here:
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/220475-white-house-has-diverted-500m-to-irs-to-implement-health-law

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

ABC Unmasked: Enhanced Video Shows Zimmerman Head Gash



Yesterday, ABC has made an astounding about-face on a story related to the Trayvon Martin shooting. Less than a week after proclaiming that new video showed no signs of injury on Zimmerman the night of the shooting, ABC has now released an enhanced version of the same video. The new video clearly shows a bloody gash on the back of Zimmerman's head. Here's the lead of the story ABC published Wednesday March 28th:

A police surveillance video taken the night that Trayvon Martin was shot dead shows no blood or bruises on George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch captain who says he shot Martin after he was punched in the nose, knocked down and had his head slammed into the ground. 
[...] 
In the video an officer is seen pausing to look at the back of Zimmerman's head, but no abrasions or blood can be seen in the video and he did not check into the emergency room following the police questioning.
Obviously, the bombshell ABC is touting here is that the video appears to contradict claims that Zimmerman was injured and acted in self-defense. They present the video as evidence to the contrary. By that evening, the Daily Caller and others began to question what was visible in the video. By Friday March 30, just two days after ABC published its scoop, MSNBC ran a story contradicting ABC and showing evidence of an injury on Zimmerman's head.

Now, five days after their big scoop, ABC has posted new video under the headline "George Zimmerman: Enhanced Video Shows Injury." As you'll see, ABC makes no mention of the fact that their previous story was wrong. And thus far, ABC does not appear to have published a print version of the story. Keep in mind that the claim Zimmerman was injured was widely known before ABC posted the video. In other words, they knew what they should be looking for in the clip. And yet it seems they were unable to find it for five days, even though other media outlets pointed it out within 48 hours.

At this point, ABC needs to explain why it took them until today to correct the record. Enhancing 4-5 minutes of video is not a five day job. This is one of several missteps by major media in this case. Earlier, NBC deliberately miscut George Zimmerman's 911 call in a way that insinuated George Zimmerman was profiling Trayvon Martin because he was black.

NBC has now launched an internal investigation to find out how the botched audio wound up on "The Today Show." Notice that in both instances the initial media error works against Zimmerman. Suspicion of Zimmerman's story is certainly appropriate, but what ABC and NBC have done goes well beyond that. They have carelessly -- or deliberately -- put out false and misleading information in a way that pours fuel on the firestorm surrounding this case. That may be good for ratings. But it's unprofessional, and worse, deeply unethical.


COMMENTARY:
While the formal criminal investigation continues, here is another tangible example of the national media's selective "omission" or outright fabrication of "evidence"; then passing it along to an unsuspecting public as "fact".  While the actions, guilt  and/or innocence of both men have yet to be determined by a court of law; it would seem the media has already passed it's own judgement.

Original article found here:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/02/hd-zimmerman-head-gash-abc

Sunday, April 1, 2012

Fair Unbiased Reporting - NBC Nightly News



NBC News is said to have launched an internal investigation into why it posted an edited version of George Zimmerman's call to a 911 dispatcher made prior to a shooting incident resulting in the death of 17 year-old Trayvon Martin. The altered version made it appear as though Martin's race was an important factor that night for Zimmerman, when, in fact, he was only answering a question posed by a 911 dispatcher.

NBC told the Washington Post's Erik Wemple Saturday that it would investigate an incident in which the "Today" show used an abridged recording of George Zimmerman's 911 call before he killed Trayvon Martin. The version used by NBC emphasized race as a factor in the incident.
Big Journalism first reported on the online version of the MSNBC controversy 3 days ago and followed up with another report yesterday, March 30th on NBC's aired segment. As the Hollywood Reporter states, Fox News, led by host Sean Hannity, along with Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center, have also been challenging NBC on what appears to be an outrageous use of an editing technique to make the 911 call seem damning of Zimmerman, as well as divisive and inflammatory along racial lines.
After playing both versions, Hannity said: “They forgot the dispatcher’s question! How could NBC, in good conscience, do that?”
“This isn’t bias, this isn’t distortion, this is an all-out falsehood by NBC News,” answers Bozell, who runs a conservative watchdog group called the Media Research Center.
“When you hear him say, ‘he looks black,’ anyone watching that believes that there are racial overtones to what this man did,” Bozell says. “How could you not believe that? It goes with the narrative of the profiling. The only problem is, they edited out the dispatcher asking him, ‘what does he look like?’”
“This is NBC News, Brent, and this is what they did at a time when emotions are running very high in this country,” Hannity said during his Thursday night TV show.
“Tom Brokaw, Matt Lauer, I wonder if they’re proud tonight?” Hannity asked.
NBC News declined to comment.
As the 911 call editing controversy continues to grow, MSNBC contributor Touré was recently called out on air by CNN's Piers Morgan for his seemingly racially biased handling of the Florida story. When MSNBC branded itself as the "Leans Forward" network, few likely suspected it meant to stir up racial divide in America. Now, NBC looks to be taking a page out of MSNBC's playbook, as well.
MSNBC contributor Toure suffered an epic meltdown on CNN last night. Piers Morgan challenged Touré to come on his show to debate the Trayvon killing after their Twitter war earlier in the week. Morgan blasted Toure for his race-baiting and lecturing.
With the NAACP and MSNBC's Al Sharpton divided over the incident, Barack Obama weighing in early, only to say nothing in recent days, and now rival Cable News networks questioning MSNBC's and even NBC's judgment, it's hard to see the post-racial healing in America Barack Obama promised while running for office in 2008.

Original Hannity Episode found here:

Original article found here:

Vice President Joe Biden announced that the shooting of Trayvon Martin should spark a national debate about gun control

 

 Today on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Vice President Joe Biden announced that the shooting of Trayvon Martin should spark a national debate about gun control:



It's important that people be put in a position where their Second Amendment rights are protected, but that they also don't, as a consequence of the laws, unintendedly put themselves in harm's way … The idea that there's this overwhelming additional security in the ownership and carrying concealed and deadly weapons... I think it's the premise, not the constitutional right, but the premise that it makes people safer is one that I'm not so sure of.



The problem, of course, was not the gun laws in Florida. If Zimmerman shot in self-defense and is not prosecuted, the gun laws saved his life; if Zimmerman shot without proper provocation, he violated the relevant Florida gun laws. The law itself isn’t to blame, any more than insider trading laws are to blame when somebody violates them.



Beyond that, Biden’s bizarre notion that concealing and carrying guns doesn’t provide additional security is plainly nonsensical. Misuse of guns is always an issue – but as a general rule, of course carrying a gun makes you more safe than not carrying one. John Lott has pointed out clearly in More Guns, Less Crime:  “Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.” This is called common sense, and the data backs it up.



But that’s been the two-barreled liberal agenda throughout this debate: first, raise the specter of race; second, crack down on guns. The left isn’t all that interested in what happens with George Zimmerman – if they cared, they’d stop tainting the jury pool – but they are interested in making political hay out of the killing. And Joe Biden is just following in his boss’ footsteps

Original article found here:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/01/Biden-Gun-Control-Trayvon