Patterico's Pontifications

2/26/2008

Democrat Debate: Open Thread

Filed under: 2008 Election — Patterico @ 6:18 pm



I’m seeing some real fighting and fireworks on health care. This is looking like it might actually be interesting.

UPDATE: What a great question from Russert: if Iraq goes to hell after we withdraw, do we have the right to go back in? Hillary isn’t answering.

Obama didn’t really answer. He did say he could go in if al Qaeda had a base — but what if it went to hell, but there was no evidence that al Qaeda had a base?

UPDATE x2: They’re throwing Hillary’s attacks on Obama in her face; she’s going to have to defend them. Good. I think Russert and Williams are doing a pretty good job asking tough questions.

UPDATE x3: Russert started to ask Obama about keeping his word. I thought he was going to ask Obama why he told him, Tim Russert, that he wasn’t going to run for President in 2008. But he asked another very good question: why won’t Obama commit to taking public financing. Obama’s dancing on that one — gee, I’m not the nominee yet. Even though he has already used the phrase “when I am President” in this debate. Russert: “so you may break your word.” Obama won’t commit.

Now Russert is asking Hillary about releasing tax returns, especially with Bill’s dealings overseas. She says she will do it when she is the nominee. Dream on.

UPDATE x4: Obama unequivocally denounces Farrahkan’s anti-Semitic remarks. Refreshing. But now Russert is asking him about his pastor. Tough question. He avoids the business about his pastor but says that the safety of Israel is “sacrosanct.”

UPDATE x5: Obama’s answer to the question about his liberal voting record is masterful. This guy is really clever and a good speaker.

We’re gonna lose, folks.

59 Responses to “Democrat Debate: Open Thread”

  1. We didn’t all see Saturday Night Live, Hillary. I don’t know what the pillow comment refers to, and like every joke you ever make, it fell flat.

    Patterico (4bda0b)

  2. I bet we could give her some great one-liners …

    Hopeyness and changeyness do not a President make.

    How is Minister Farrakhan these days?

    JD (851cdc)

  3. I liked the whopper about how he was in a high stakes Senate campaign against Alan Keyes at the time, and did not yet have the chance to vote against the war.

    JD (851cdc)

  4. I can’t take another Dem debate–couple of socialist windbags. If there’s anything good I’ll see the youtube of it.

    Patricia (f56a97)

  5. If AQ had a “base” ? How about pressing the empty sparkly shiny suit for a definition of what a base would constitute in his world. I would suspect that our men and women in uniform would suggest that Iraq was already a base of operations for them, prior to their arrival.

    Obama will someday have to answer the tough questions. At least they came close to actually asking him questions with baby teeth in them tonight. Not nearly the great oratator (h/t focus group) when his is not blathering on without ever actually saying anything.

    JD (851cdc)

  6. WHATS THE USE THEY WIL MAKE ALL SORTS OF PROMISES AND BREAK EM ALL

    krazy kagu (1ced21)

  7. I’ve been impressed with Obama’s depth and intelligence since I first started reading his work. No, he’s no lightweight.

    Psyberian (d18acc)

  8. We’re gonna lose, folks …

    … then it will be an interesting 4 years and (I think) will end up like the Carter presidency. Sadly, if it’s anything like the Carter years, the people who will suffer the most in an Obama presidency are the ones who are most likely to vote for him.

    DRJ (d8934e)

  9. Seems Barry Obama doesn’t do too well in debates. Frank Luntz’s group tonight said that only about four or five were for Hillary when they came in but thought she did best in the debates and had swayed them to her side. It seems the golden one doesn’t do as well when he doesn’t have a prepared speech and a teleprompter (which he uses at all speeches, not that the fawning media would ever report that).

    What is going to be interesting is what snakes crawl out from the Tony Rezko rock when he goes to trial. Wonder if he will take the fall for Barry like Susan McDougal did for the Bubba. At least the Times of London has the cajones to report on that.

    retire05 (1c585e)

  10. Barack did not react as well when the fans weren’t fainting, and cheering every time he blinked. He looked a bit off his game tonight.

    JD (851cdc)

  11. Right DRJ, four more years of putting the screws to the middle class. That’s just what we need.

    Psyberian (d18acc)

  12. Psyberian, maybe you would like to give us a litany of Obama’s remarkable acheivements in the U.S. Senate? And no, passing a bill to name a stamp after Rosa Parks is not a great acheivement.

    retire05 (1c585e)

  13. retire05, hell, I can’t think of anything Bush has accomplished in eight years as president! Give Obama some power and he’ll show you what he can do.

    Psyberian (d18acc)

  14. retire05, hell, I can’t think of anything Bush has accomplished in eight years as president!

    Your lack of learning does not constitute an answer to the question posed to you.

    Give Obama some power and he’ll show you what he can do.

    Why does that frighten me so? Plus, according to all of your identity politics, when given power, men just subjugate women.

    JD (851cdc)

  15. Psyberian, nice try; but no cigar. Bush is not running and Obama is. And if you are going to sing his praises you better know the words.
    Give Obama the power? You are backing someone whose greatest acheivement is being president of the Harvard Law Review (Hillary was president of the Yale Law Review), managed to get two radical 60’s terrorists to back his first run for the Illinois senate, has strong ties to a guy now going to trial that has stong connections with the Elf scandal, and has had no remarkable acheivements in his short time in the U.S. senate? Fine. As W.C. Fields said “there is a sucker born every minute.”

    retire05 (1c585e)

  16. Actually neither of them can accomplish anything that congress doesn’t approve of!

    And the only thing that all three front runners will ever change is their pants!

    TC (1cf350)

  17. Listening to the Democrat debate, about the same as listening to Yoko Ono.

    Gerald A (0cf74e)

  18. Patterico, regarding your “we’re gonna lose” comment – with friends like Psyberian, there is more than a little silver lining in the clouds in my opinion. More than a little.

    SPQR (f33853)

  19. I hate to report this, but a new poll out shows McCain defeating both CLinton and Obama.

    aphrael (a94110)

  20. aphrael – That poll makes me weep tears of joy, and sadness.

    JD (851cdc)

  21. I hate to report this…
    Comment by aphrael — 2/26/2008 @ 8:52 pm

    Hi aphrael, then don’t report it. Find me a poll that shows all of them losing and report that… please.

    Nader ’08 — “Because it’s finally his turn”

    😉

    Stashiu3 (c8e98a)

  22. Nader might work, Stashiu. I was thinking along the lines of the LaRouchies, but Nader will do.

    JD (851cdc)

  23. 19 — araphael: that is actually quite a poll. 1250 respondents over a four day period from Th-Sun.

    I think it should worry Dems some given the nature of the two contests to date — the Dems with all the excitement, energy, and Obama’s generally positive press coverage. The 79 year old Reg. Dem. who said he will be supporting McCain is exactly the kind of voter that the Dems cannot lose. If McCain cuts into the AARP vote for the Dems, those are going to be tough to make up.

    Also, the anti-McCain story in the NYT came out on the first day of that poll.

    WLS (68fd1f)

  24. We’re gonna lose, folks.

    I am not that convinced. I think you have a number of elements coming into play that are not that easy to get voters to talk about.
    First, the fact that he is black is going to hurt him with those who are biased, particularly on the Dem side and in the south specifically.
    Second, McCain has a very real connection with senior citizens. This could potentially be offset by the youth vote but it is historically unreliable where the senior vote is reliably strong.
    Third, he may draw a fair share of voters with who have Hispanic heritage. Bush drew 40% in 04 and with the defeat of the immigration bill last year it appeared the Hispanic support could possibly bottom out. McCain is not identified with the Lou Dobbs type fearmongering that occurred.

    voiceofreason2 (fda8fa)

  25. Nader might work, Stashiu. I was thinking along the lines of the LaRouchies, but Nader will do.

    JD,

    I would say this… at least Nader’s party has someone who represents what they stand for.
    😉

    Stashiu3 (c8e98a)

  26. Stash – The Dems could have that in Barry O. When in doubt go Left, hard left. Barry could be a good NASCAR driver, he has all the necessary instincts.

    Why do you assert that people are more biased against others in the South, VOR?

    Securing the borders is fearmongering? That is like the Dems calling the truth a smear.

    JD (851cdc)

  27. JD,

    I live in the south and see it every single day. In context of my analysis the thumping he gave Hillary in the south won’t be repeated in the general.

    As for fearmongering, getting nutjobs who claim to have seen the Chinese army conducting maneuvers over the border and tying it in with unrealistic calls to “deport them all – 12 million of them”… yes I call that fearmongering.

    Remember JD, if the shoe don’t fit…

    voiceofreason2 (fda8fa)

  28. So, the Dems were willing to vote for a Dem, in a choice between 2 Dems. But it is your belief that in a traditionally Republican part of the country, should the Republicans vote for a Republican, race will play a bigger role than Barry O’s doctrinaire liberalism? So the Dems are less racist, but more sexist?

    Anecdotes are nice, but far from evidence. Have you ever lived in Boston?

    If the shoe don’t fit … then you really should avoid making blanket assertions, and smears, against large sections of the population, without anything to support it other than your anecdotes.

    JD (851cdc)

  29. I’m not going to get into an extended debate with you JD. The fact of the matter is that there are white democrats and republicans who will never vote for a black person.
    This is to Obama’s disadvantage.
    I am familiar with Boston but that is one city — the south is a bunch of states.

    Dobbs used some dubious people to make his case against the immigration bill. Rather than dealing with it as a problem to be worked it became an us against them kind of battle by some. This turned off legal Hispanics who can vote.
    You are looking for blanket assertions where there are none.

    voiceofreason2 (fda8fa)

  30. In context of my analysis the thumping he gave Hillary in the south won’t be repeated in the general.

    If the shoe don’t fit … then you really should avoid making blanket assertions, and smears, against large sections of the population, without anything to support it other than your anecdotes.

    But he has an analysis!!!

    Stashiu3 (c8e98a)

  31. So, based on your personal observations, it is alright to make a blanket assertion that whites in the South are going to be more unwilling to vote for Obama, and that is because he is black? I call BS. There are plenty of people in the South that will not vote for him, because of his positions, lack of experience, hopeyness and changiness, etc …

    I don’t know why I would think there are blanket assertions when you use phrases like “a bunch of states”.

    I would suggest that if you do not want to be called out for making a blanket assertion, maybe you should consider it a little more before making unfounded blanket solutions.

    JD (851cdc)

  32. JD, he has an analysis… debate over. The science is settled.

    Stashiu3 (c8e98a)

  33. JD,
    You are looking to be offended yet again. In your world there is no racism. Okay fine keep believing that. You call BS with no counter proof other than your assertion. That is called “an opinion”.
    Google the “Bradley Effect” and see what others say about bias in the voting booth.

    The south is composed of “a bunch of states” making it electorally more significant than Boston. Have you ever lived in the south? I’ve lived in the south about half of my life and am fairly comfortable with my personal observations about racial issues and prejudices that exist here.

    voiceofreason2 (fda8fa)

  34. VOR2,

    Will your analysis regarding racism change if Obama wins the general election?

    DRJ (d8934e)

  35. Too early to say we are going to lose. The dirt hasn’t yet come out on Obama’s ties to Auchi Mansion deal
    I think it’s hard to suppress a lot of this with all the bloggers around.

    Roberta Schwartz (fc6c1f)

  36. DRJ,

    I don’t really like to split hairs on words with you but in this case I think it is relevant. In #24 I used the word bias, not racist or racism. I said “hurt him with those who are biased, particularly on the Dem side and in the south specifically.”
    Note also that I didn’t say all, majority, or millions — just an opinion that it would have play a factor.
    The definition (and my examples) of the two are below for reference.

    To answer your question. If Obama wins the general election I may be wrong about my prediction regarding bias. The polling data will be instructive in forming a theory but not definitive in knowing what motivated a person. He could win and other factors are the reason while still seeing bias at the polls as I described — conservatives could stay at home in significant numbers, Hispanics may identify heavily with the Democrats, etc.

    bias:
    a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation

    A black voter votes for a black candidate because they feel the color makes them more qualified to understand their needs as a citizen. Where a candidate stands on the issue has less weight than their “feeling”. If I tell people my wife is the best cook in the world this is bias, mostly based on my feelings for her and not on any objective studies.

    racism:
    refers to beliefs, practices, and institutions that negatively discriminate against people based on their perceived or ascribed race.

    When my wife is told by co-workers (while at work and by people who know she is in an interracial marriage) that interracial marriages are unnatural and wrong she is experiencing racism. When the Shreveport-Bossier police forces are proven to have written a disproportionate number of traffic tickets for blacks over any other race over a 4 year period this also is racism.

    *Note: the definition in italics came from the search strings “Define racism” & “Define bias” — both results were from google

    voiceofreason2 (fda8fa)

  37. “We’re gonna lose, folks.”……gee wiz, calm down, are you the same guy who predicted hillary would be next prez? i agree obama is a very good speaker and mc cain is not but that doesnt mean obama will win. a hell of a long way to go here, jmac has a good shot at pulling this off IMO.

    james conrad (7cd809)

  38. We’re gonna lose, folks …

    Don’t be so sure about that, Patterico. There’s a decent chance that McCain could end up winning this by default. I say that because I get the firm impression that the politically hyperactive on both the Left and the Right aren’t really that geeked up about wanting to have the Presidency for the next 4 years. Considering some of the things that are happening right now that will certainly bleed into the next term (credit crunch, Iraq/Iran issues), and considering the record of Presidents who’ve been elected in years ending in an 8, I can see where they’re coming from.

    This race may come down to who wants to do all they can to tank the race.

    Brad S (f4a3ad)

  39. There is no way McCain will be able to defeat Obama.

    syn (eb1ff1)

  40. McCain is going to lose. He lost the “footsoldiers” of the GOP long ago. McNuggets doesn’t know when to quit poking at the GOP right. You think the GOP “Moderates” are going to get out and work for him? I have a sad secret for you. The GOP Moderates are all lip and no work.

    PCD (c378fd)

  41. voiceofreason2

    No matter who is the next president, the immigration problem will be solved by the high Misery Index brought about by Greenies energy restrictions and high carbon taxation.

    Without jobs, immigrants legal or otherwise won’t be coming to America.

    syn (eb1ff1)

  42. syn,
    I’m not sure about the “greenies” impact you mentioned but I definitely agree with your point about jobs.

    voiceofreason2 (10af7e)

  43. Seems all you nay-sayers who say that McCain will loose is ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
    Hillary fans hate Obama. Obama fans hate Hillary. And yeah, a lot of white Americans have come out to vote for Obama, but the elections is a long 8 months away. A lot can change in 8 months. Another attack on American soil. The stock market can turn around. As can the housing market. The housing market may be bad in parts of the nation, but in the south (Texas) it is booming. Houses in my small town usually remain on the market less than three weeks and are pulling great selling prices.

    How many people who voted for Hillary in the primaries, will refuse to vote for Obama? I live in a blue county. Most of the Dems I know say they won’t vote for Obama. A lot of them have kids in the military and Obama scares the hell out of them.

    retire05 (caee37)

  44. Sure McCain could win. Keep talking about his experience, keep playing just as nice and “reach across the isle” as Obama, keep his real base (seniors).

    There are many many Dems in the south (well and all over, let’s keep it real) who will not vote for a black man. Period. Not if he could guarantee them an even BIGGER presidential payoff than GWB gave em. Anyone who doesn’t believe that lives in a dream world. So that may help him.

    The hispanic vote may help him (get some Mariachis dood). My experience of latinos is that they tend to be pretty conservative minded. (California, Texas, and Florida have a lot of electoral votes).

    My question is: just how important are all those “true conservatives” who aren’t going to vote for him anyway coz he won’t do things THEIR way?

    Is he smarter to try to get them to vote for him by being a smarter version of Bush and SAYING he’s all for Bush’s policies? Or by doing that will he lose more potential voters who automatically suspect anything coming out of the current administration?

    EdWood (c2268a)

  45. Obama unequivocally denounces Farrahkan’s anti-Semitic remarks. Refreshing.

    Translation: I wish he hadn’t said those things but I don’t disavow him.

    A friend of mine from Chicago says that Obama never could have been elected to the Illinois State Senate from the 13th district without Farrakhan’s solid backing.

    Peter B (16e443)

  46. UPDATE x5: Obama’s answer to the question about his liberal voting record is masterful. This guy is really clever and a good speaker.

    We’re gonna lose, folks.

    Hmmm…I only listened to the debate – and this was the only one so far I’ve “attended”. I thought that both candidates were inept in every respect. I was really struck by how poorly they both performed.

    J. Peden (5c9ea1)

  47. Kaus is right – forget Carter, compare a prospective Obama presidency to the administration of his good buddy Coupe D’eval in MA. A lefty cluster*$%@ if ever there was one. Patrick just needs more CASINOS to solve the problems. How progressive.

    rhodeymark (923596)

  48. Obama is smarter than Hillary, more adroit verbally, and he’s not intimidated by the idea of not walking hand-in-hand through the Dem. party with the Clintons. I’ve watched very few of the Dem. debates, but in watching a little last night I recalled his performances months ago in larger fields where separating yourself from the pack and getting in a good soundbite or two for repeated rebroadcast by the newsies was the key.

    Obama is an excellent “debater” in the sense that he enjoys both the intellectual and competitive aspect of it. He took Hillary’s measure months ago, and its clear now he has no fear of her in this setting.

    She is not good at this because she does not anticipate in her own mind how an argument will unfold and where her opponent is likely to go with a point she raises. She’s a policy nerd who doesn’t think beyond her next comment even though she sounds smart when she speaks.

    Ex — Over at the NRO Corner they have the video clip up of the little exchange involving “denouncing” v. “rejecting” the anti-semetic remarks of Farrakhan.

    This was clearly anticipated by Hillary and her camp because she set up her pitch with a little story about the NY Independence party wanting to support her, but she was put off by their anti-Isreal/anti-semitic stances. She said while she “might pay a price” (that a candidate in NY might “pay a price” for renouncing anti-semitism is quite a howler) for doing so, she “rejected” their support.

    She then chastises Obama for merely “denouncing” Farrakahn’s anti-semitism in response to a Russert question, rather that doing something stronger like “rejecting” him.

    Now, if this were a campaign speech, that’s not necessarily a bad point to make. She’s playing semantic games with words, but that’s not uncommon.

    But she wasn’t giving a campaign speech. Obama was going to be there right next to her when she makes this charge. She should have thought about his possible responses, and then decided whether this was a battle worth having. An experienced debater would next ask himself/herself this question — “In a two-way conversation, how might Obama respond to this, and what will I say then?”

    So Obama says, predictable (what’s his downside?):

    “Denounce v. reject? I don’t really see a meaningful distiction. But if it makes you feel better, I reject. I reject and denounce. Happy now?”

    She then says “Good. Excellent.”

    She looks silly, the issue she spent 2 minutes setting up evaporates in a puff of smoke, Obama gets to smirk as the audience applauds his moral courage, and Hillary can’t find a desk to hide under fast enought. She set up the Obama’s applause line by getting herself mousetrapped in an argument where he had an easy out that made her look dumb.

    WLS (68fd1f)

  49. WLS, thank you. You are dead-on regarding Obama’s adroitness and Hillary’s arrogant idiocy. Obama is truly as smooth as the water he continues to walk upon.

    Personally, I’m preparing for four years of pure Hell with a Carteresque administration that will goad an uncontrolled Dem congress into a cataclysmic aftermath. I do pray for deliverance on Election Day…

    voiceofreason2, I have enjoyed reading your comments more than you’ll know. I am truly sorry to read that about your wife. Despicable and I know painful for your entire family.

    With all due respect, I cannot resist poking you with my knitting needle over one of your points in your #37 comment. It has bothered me all day long.

    I wish you would have used ANY other city for your claim of racism in the issuance of traffic tickets than Shreveport. The reality of life in Shreveport so demoralizes the point you were trying to make. Obviously, you were suckered by today’s Shreveport Times article somewhere on the web. What a pity.

    EHeavenlyGads (eba7dd)

  50. EheavenlyGads,
    Thanks for the kind words. As for the Shreveport-Bossier reference I am referring to the one written in January 2007 found at:

    http://www.racialprofilinganalysis.neu.edu/whatsnew/

    Today’s article I think you are referring to is at http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/NEWS01/801200302/-1/TICKETS

    and is far from a scientific analysis I agree. But she alludes to an earlier report she did on 20 Jan 07 in which she reported the study done by NEU which said in part:

    “An investigation led by a local newspaper showed that in Shreveport & Bossier City black drivers are cited for traffic violations more than twice as likely as often as whites. Blacks are also disproportionately represented in the numbers of citations for lower-level violations such as window tint or loud music. These violations are used as “gateway” reasons for stopping a driver. The study focused on 228,810 traffic citations issued in both Shreveport & Bossier City from January 2003 to October 2007.”

    I live in the Bossier-Shreveport area and understand the demographic percentages as relate to black and white citizens. This report seemed to factor that into the equation.

    voiceofreason2 (590c85)

  51. EheavenlyGads,
    Minor correction to above – should have written January 2008

    voiceofreason2 (590c85)

  52. voiceofreason2, perhaps that which I respect most about your comments is your civility and the manner in which you live up to your moniker. Thank you.

    I apologize to all for the antihistamine- and passion-induced verbosity to come…

    My connection to Shreveport is not as direct as yours, voiceofreason, but likely close. My octogenarian Mother lives on Cross Lake, and I have been visiting at least once each month for several years (often in conjunction with business), not to mention the annual holiday sojourns. My brother-in-law is a Capt. with the Caddo Parish Sheriff’s Dept. and has been with them for 20+ years. I have been a close friend of Shreveport’s previous Coroner since high school debate match days. And my mother’s closest friend for some 40 years was one of the elderly women raped last year in Shreveport. So, if you wish to consider me tremendously biased and spinning what is to come for my own purposes, I would certainly understand.

    But I do understand and appreciate the point you are making, yet my opinion is this particular study is incomplete, skewed, and does not serve your well-intended point beyond its catchy and enticing headline.

    As a Shreveport or Bossier City resident, you know that Shreveport is predominantly African American, as are the drivers on its streets. If you crunch the numbers in this report, Shreveport wrote 62% of its traffic citations over the almost 5-year date range to blacks, which is fairly comparable to Shreveport’s majority of black residents. What was not mentioned is nearly half of the traffic tickets written to blacks overall were written in areas of Shreveport that are 100% black in population, and there are several. That’s not disproportionate, but simple demographics. Wholly unknown is how many of those traffic tickets were written to tourists heading to the casinos and various public events who don’t reside in Shreveport.

    I just don’t see how the actual numbers of citations (not the rhetoric) are disproportionately targeting African Americans there.

    Traffic tickets are not issued in Shreveport without cause. In fact, they are the result of probable cause. And not every person stopped for speeding, driving without tail lights, or having their speakers cranked up so loudly to be audible beyond 50 feet in Shreveport is issued a traffic citation, yet speeding, driving without tail lights, and violating the city’s noise ordinances are illegal. How in the world is an officer capable of discerning race when window film is too dark to see through?

    Also not mentioned is the staggering percentage of these traffic citations that were the vehicle for netting a short ton of drugs, drug paraphernalia, illegal weapons…and a huge percentage of folks with arrest warrants issued against them.

    I don’t see racial profiling here. I see instead a city struggling in every possible way to achieve any amount of control over its out-of-control crime rate. The traffic citations may well be described as gateway methods, but that does not make the traffic stops improper or racially motivated. It makes them effective.

    As you know, Shreveport PD and the Caddo Parish Sheriff’s Dept. are each even more predominantly African American than Shreveport’s population. Shreveport’s police chief is black. Its mayor is black. The city councilman who authored Shreveport’s approved “baggy pants ban” last Fall is black and its most outspoken supporter was a black councilwoman. The precious child pictured on the PD’s web homepage under the caption “Don’t Shoot…I Want To Grow Up!!!” is also black. In Shreveport, that young child is more likely to be killed in a drive-by shooting than to reach her 18th birthday.

    Gang-related and drug-related crimes in Shreveport are several times the national average, and the vast majority of crime overall is committed by blacks. The vast majority of crimes committed by blacks in Shreveport are upon blacks. Making crime fighting in Shreveport next to impossible, the PD has been hemorrhaging officers to other jurisdictions over the last decade, but especially in the last three years and they now have one of the lowest rates of officers per 1000 residents in the nation. They are also among the lowest paid. Since the dawn of 2008, two officers have been shot (one in the face, one in the arm) by black drug thugs while the officers were stopped at red lights — strong incentives to change professions or leave, IMHO.

    If Shreveport’s predominantly black police force is committing racial profiling by issuing valid traffic tickets to black drivers who are among the majority of Shreveport’s own population on the roads, then the majority of black residents killing, raping, robbing and generally terrorizing other black residents in Shreveport are egregiously racist, wouldn’t you agree?

    Yes, black drivers do receive the majority of traffic citations written in Shreveport. But that is neither disproportionate, nor due to racial profiling or racism (which Shreveport’s present outstanding black leadership has devoted their lifetimes to fighting). It is merely a heartbreaking reality capable of being spun in a myriad of directions.

    I apologize, Patterico, et al, for eating up so much off-topic space, but I thank you and voiceofreason2 for allowing me to do so…especially if I am perceived as wrong.

    EHeavenlyGads (eba7dd)

  53. I’d support hillary. Love her smile and her confidence. She always has a positive attitude and that is what makes her outstanding. Everytime I signed in the site ***Mixedfriends.com*** and some men were talking about her and said she is attractive.

    Daisy (ec24f7)

  54. This is McCain’s election to lose. Obama’s repeated stupid comments on issues of national security give Johnny War Hero a chance that any of us here could grab with both hands and ride all the way to the White House, but since we’re talking about politicians he’ll probably mess it up.

    Obama’s response that “al Qaeda wasn’t in Iraq before the invasion” is the kind of quote that any of us here could win an election on. al Qaeda is in Iraq today. We’re fighting them there. Whether they were there five years ago or not is irrelevant to the issues facing us today. Obama is not qualified to be president of this country if he really thinks that his response to McCain is a refutation or even a valid attempt at refutation.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  55. Obama has peaked. It’s all downhill from here.

    By the way, has anyone REALLY looked at how that California judge unsealed those custody records to knock Obama’s opponent (Jack Ryan, Jeri’s ex) out of the 2004 Senate race?

    When it was just an Illinois mattter people said “Well, that’s Chicago politics”, but now I’d really like to know how a judge can open sealed records that were sealed to protect a child, just because one of the folks is in an election race and the local newspaper wants a peek.

    Separately, perhaps, the Illinois Governor looks like he’s going to jail in the near future.

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

  56. EHG – Bravo.
    chaos – Well said.

    JD (a71458)

  57. EheavenlyGads,

    Thanks for taking the time to put your thoughts into a well written explanation.

    While you make a compelling case for some possible explanations I think you missed a couple of facts regarding it.
    (1) Bossier City is 71% white — it would be very difficult to apply the logic that you make for Shreveport based on an almost even split between the white and black population.
    (2)”A recent Times study of traffic tickets issued to drivers in Shreveport and Bossier City over the last 4½ years found that blacks were cited more than twice as often as whites even though they made up a minority of licensed drivers in both cities.”
    “In Shreveport, licensed white drivers outnumber black licensed drivers by about 25 percent; in Bossier City, they outnumber black licensed drivers by 75 percent, according to Louisiana Office of Motor Vehicles statistics.”
    “Black drivers in Shreveport were cited about 2.1 times more often or 119 percent more frequently than white drivers and about 2.25 times more often or 125 percent more frequently in Bossier City”

    That works out to 123,000+ white drivers and 74,000+ black drivers according to the article.

    In raw numbers there were approximately 152,000 tickets issued to blacks and 76,000 to whites over a 4.5 year period.

    Something is not right with those numbers. There may be multiple explanations but I still contend that there is bias or racism involved in the disparity.

    voiceofreason2 (b7ee40)

  58. Here’s a summary paragraph from a Bossier City newspaper article that discusses some concerns about the validity of the Louisiana study:

    “[Bossier City Police Chief Mike] Halphen said that he also had concerns about the study’s parameters. He noted that Bossier City’s driving population simply isn’t limited to the number of drivers depicted in the study. Halphen said that while Bossier City’s population is approximately 60,000, with the addition of casino visitors, shopping visitors, folks traveling to and from work, etc., that population can swell on any given day to upwards of 100,000 people – thousands of them counting for additional vehicle drivers. Additionally, Halphen said the study did not account for Barkdale drivers – and that a significant number of the Barksdale drivers and visitors would be driving on out-of-state licenses. Nor, said Halphen, did the study account for folks driving without a license.”

    DRJ (d8934e)

  59. DRJ,
    As I said there are probably multiple reasons. Halpen has his view as does Chief Whitehorn. They are the police chiefs and I don’t expect the police departments to admit there is a problem unless forced to.
    But if you want to contend there is no bias or racism involved at all, we each have the right to our opinion.

    Not sure if you noticed but I did answer your question from yesterday in comment #36

    voiceofreason2 (b7ee40)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0886 secs.