Charles Blow, "50 Years Later": Compare with Kathleen Parker's "Obama’s Race Remarks Exacerbate Tensions"

My goodness gracious, it's time for yet another JG Caesarea Challenge Round!

Read Charles Blow's latest New York Times op-ed entitled "50 Years Later" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/opinion/blow-50-years-later.html?_r=0). As we near the 50th anniversary of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s March on Washington, marked by Dr. King's world-shaking "I have a dream" speech, Mr. Blow would have us know:

"I’m absolutely convinced that enormous steps have been made in race relations. That’s not debatable. Most laws that explicitly codified discrimination have been stricken from the books. Overt, articulated racial animus has become more socially unacceptable. And diversity has become a cause to be championed in many quarters, even if efforts to achieve it have taken some hits of late.

But my worry is that we have hit a ceiling of sorts. As we get closer to a society where explicit bias is virtually eradicated, we no longer have the stomach to deal with the more sinister issues of implicit biases and of structural and systematic racial inequality.

I worry that centuries of majority privilege and minority disenfranchisement are being overlooked in puddle-deep discussions about race and inequality, personal responsibility and societal inhibitors."

Okay, what's missing from this opinion piece?

First, there's not even a single mention of the fact that America today has a second-term African American president. Insignificant? I don't think so. This is huge.

But there's more . . .

Just over a month ago, in a New York Times op-ed entitled "The Whole System Failed" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/opinion/the-whole-system-failed.html?_r=0), Mr. Blow wrote concerning the George Zimmerman acquittal:

"This case is not about an extraordinary death of an extraordinary person. Unfortunately, in America, people are lost to gun violence every day. Many of them look like Martin and have parents who presumably grieve for them. This case is about extraordinary inequality in the presumption of innocence and the application of justice: why was Martin deemed suspicious and why was his killer allowed to go home?"

Well, in the US there is a presumption of innocence, and "beyond reasonable doubt" remains the standard of evidence required for a criminal conviction. Zimmerman claimed that he was pinned on his back. His nose was broken, and the back of his head was lacerated. Was he acting out of fear, or, was he capable of the "intention" needed for conviction? Was there reasonable doubt?

Again, there is racism in America, and perhaps Zimmerman should never have stopped Martin, but did an "imperfect" American jury system reach the wrong verdict, or did the prosecution fail to meet its immensely difficult burden of proof? Did the prosecution "overreach" when deciding which charges to bring against Zimmerman?

Now have a look at Kathleen Parker's Washington Post opinion piece of today's date entitled "Obama’s race remarks exacerbate tensions" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kathleen-parker-obamas-race-remarks-exacerbate-tensions/2013/08/23/7491bb2e-0c1f-11e3-9941-6711ed662e71_story.html?hpid=z2). Ms. Parker writes:

"If I had a son, he would look like Christopher Lane, the 22-year-old Australian baseball player shot dead while jogging in Oklahoma.

If I had a father, he’d look like Delbert Belton, the 88-year-old World War II veteran beaten to death in Spokane, Wash.

. . . .

These are all true statements if we identify ourselves and each other only by the color of our skin, which increasingly seems to be the case. Even our president has done so.

Barack Obama helped lead the way when he identified himself with the parents of Trayvon Martin, shot by George Zimmerman in the neighborhood-watch catastrophe with which all are familiar. Stepping out from his usual duties of drawing meaningless red lines in the Syrian sand, the president splashed red paint across the American landscape:

'If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.'

In so saying, he essentially gave permission for all to identify themselves by race with the victim or the accused. How sad, as we approach the 50th anniversary of the march Martin Luther King Jr. led on Washington, that even the president resorts to judging not by the content of one’s character but by the color of his skin — the antithesis of the great dream King articulated."

Query: Where is there any reference to the deaths of Lane and Belton in Mr. Blow's op-ed? Answer: There is none.

"Puddle-deep discussions about race and inequality"? Mr. Blow's op-ed regrettably is little more than this.

Bill Keller, "Profiling Obama": Obama's "Daunting Agenda"?

Yes, the United States is in trouble.

As reported by TPM (http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/poll-race-relations-suffer-in-wake-of-zimmerman):

"The acquittal of George Zimmerman still fresh in the public's memory, a poll released Wednesday found that America's views of race relations have taken a step back in the wake of the polarizing verdict.

According to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, a slight majority of 52 percent of Americans said race relations in the country are either 'very good' or 'fairly good,' a huge dip from the stretch between 2009 and 2011. In NBC/WSJ polls conducted during that period, more than 70 percent described race relations in such positive terms."

Remarkably, the Zimmerman trial provoked racial antagonism, notwithstanding the fact that the prosecution was unable to present any evidence whatsoever of racist tendencies on the part of George Zimmerman. But then the fires of racism were stoked by Obama's misguided interference with the case, when he declared that "Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago."

Obama, who had a privileged upbringing in Hawaii, could have been Martin? Was Obama ever known for violence, even when provoked, or problems at his top private school in Honolulu? Was Obama suspended three times from high school, or was jewelry, allegedly given to him by an unnamed friend, ever found in his backpack (see: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html)? Sorry, but there can be no comparing Obama's childhood with that of Martin.

Of course, there is always a need to address and confront racism, but the Zimmerman trial was neither the time nor place. This was a time for healing and for bringing the temperature down below the boiling point. Obama bungled the matter.

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Profiling Obama" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/29/opinion/keller-profiling-obama.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0), Bill Keller refers us to Obama's responses to the Zimmerman trial and claims that the president is the object of "racial profiling" by those hoping that he will be more proactive regarding matters of race and also those fearful of his involvement. Keller writes:

"People may no longer give Obama suspicious glares in department stores or clutch their purses when he enters an elevator, but they have typecast him according to their own fears and expectations of a black man in the White House. They are still profiling Barack Obama."

Keller goes on to say that Obama will continue to tread carefully regarding matters of race, because he has an "agenda" to pursue:

"My guess is that the president will navigate those straits as he always has when race looms, carefully and without fanfare. If he is true to form, he will quietly pass over [New York police commissioner Ray] Kelly, because it’s now clear the appointment would become a major distraction from his agenda, because racial profiling is a lifelong personal sore spot for Obama, and because he has other, less polarizing options.

. . . .

And that’s O.K. President Obama has an economy to heal, a foreign policy to run, a daunting agenda blockaded by an intransigent opposition."

An "agenda"? A "daunting agenda"? And just what might that agenda be?

An economy to heal? Where is the new game plan?

The president's signature legislation? Earlier this month, Obama postponed implementation of the Affordable Care Act's demand that large employers provide their employees with health insurance or pay a tax. Sorry, Bill, but this had nothing to do with "intransigent" Republicans. Rather, it had everything to do with recognition by the administration that Obamacare is indeed a train wreck that could jeopardize the chances of Democrats in the 2014 congressional elections.

Foreign policy? Excuse me, but just what might that foreign policy be? Is it to be found in the declaration of Samantha Power, America's new UN ambassador(http://www.newrepublic.com/article/srebenica-liberalism-balkan-united%20nations#):

"A country has to look back before it can move forward. Instituting a doctrine of the mea culpa would enhance our credibility by showing that American decision-makers do not endorse the sins of their predecessors."

Yes, let's continue with the apology tour, before taking the lead on pressing issues around the globe.

An agenda? If you ask me, Barack Obama's true "agenda" is Barack Obama, which will find increasing expression on the links, which are neither black nor white, but green.

The Washington Post, "Obama on Trayvon Martin: The First Black President Speaks Out First As a Black American": Rubbish!

Read the lead online Washington Post article entitled "Obama on Trayvon Martin: The first black president speaks out first as a black American" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-on-trayvon-martin-the-first-black-president-speaks-out-first-as-a-black-american/2013/07/20/41f7045c-f154-11e2-bed3-b9b6fe264871_story.html?hpid=z1) by David Maraniss. It's rare that a news article succeeds in turning my stomach. In this instance, Maraniss succeeds in doing just that.

The article begins:

"Trayvon Martin, the president said, could have been him 35 years ago. That would have been Barack Obama at age 17, then known as Barry and living in Honolulu. He had a bushy Afro. Hoodies were not in style then, or often needed in balmy Hawaii. His customary hangout outfit was flip-flops, called 'slippers' on the island, shell bracelet, OP shorts and a tee.

Imagine if Barry Obama had been shot and killed, unarmed, during a confrontation with a self-deputized neighborhood watch enforcer, perhaps in some exclusive development on the far side of Diamond Head after leaving home to get shave ice. The news reports would have painted a complicated picture of the young victim, a variation on how Martin was portrayed decades later in Florida:

Lives with his grandparents; father not around, mother somewhere overseas. Pretty good student, sometimes distracted. Likes to play pickup hoops and smoke pot. Hangs out with buddies who call themselves the Choom Gang. Depending on who is providing the physical description, he could seem unprepossessing or intimidating, easygoing or brooding. And black."

Any discussion of the George Zimmerman acquittal must necessarily begin with the acknowledgement that no evidence was ever presented that Zimmerman was a racist. There is no mention of this fact by Maraniss. And while Obama and friends have persistently attempted to introduce race into this tragedy, there is no basis for doing so. Tragedy, yes; racially motivated killing, no.

Maraniss writes, "Imagine if Barry Obama had been shot and killed, unarmed, during a confrontation with a self-deputized neighborhood watch enforcer, perhaps in some exclusive development on the far side of Diamond Head after leaving home to get shave ice." What's wrong with Maraniss's analogy involving shave ice? Maraniss does not tell us that the Skittles and Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail, which Martin purchased, combined with cough syrup containing codeine and promethazine create a recreational drug named "lean," popular in the southern United States.

Was Martin aware of "lean"? This had been proven (see: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/).

So, had Martin simply gone out to buy candy and a pop? You decide, but don't you also think that Maraniss had an obligation to inform us of the "lean" possibility?

But let's forget "lean," and instead focus on imagining "if Barry Obama had been shot and killed, unarmed, during a confrontation with a self-deputized neighborhood watch enforcer." Was Obama ever known for violence, even when provoked, or problems at his top private school in Honolulu?

Now compare Obama's privileged upbringing with that of Martin. As reported by the Miami Herald (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html):

"The Miami Gardens teen who has become a national symbol of racial injustice was suspended three times, and had a spotty school record that his family’s attorneys say is irrelevant to the facts that led up to his being gunned down on Feb. 26.

In October, a school police investigator said he saw Trayvon on the school surveillance camera in an unauthorized area 'hiding and being suspicious.' Then he said he saw Trayvon mark up a door with 'W.T.F' — an acronym for 'what the f---.' The officer said he found Trayvon the next day and went through his book bag in search of the graffiti marker.

Instead the officer reported he found women’s jewelry and a screwdriver that he described as a 'burglary tool,' according to a Miami-Dade Schools Police report obtained by The Miami Herald. Word of the incident came as the family’s lawyer acknowledged that the boy was suspended in February for getting caught with an empty bag with traces of marijuana, which he called 'irrelevant' and an attempt to demonize a victim.

Trayvon’s backpack contained 12 pieces of jewelry, in addition to a watch and a large flathead screwdriver, according to the report, which described silver wedding bands and earrings with diamonds."

Violence? Martin broke Zimmerman's nose, and Zimmerman was also bleeding from the back of his head.

Bottom line as I observed yesterday (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/07/new-york-times-editorial-president.html), Obama as a young man was always on an entirely different trajectory from that of Trayvon Martin.

Yes, there is still much racism in America, and there is a proclivity to violence. But while racism was not demonstrated by the prosecution in the trial of George Zimmerman, President Obama insisted on Friday on explaining away the violent response to the Zimmerman verdict by alluding to racism, and in so doing, he again added fuel to the fire.

This was not the occasion for Obama to go grandstanding. He could not have been Trayvon Martin.

There is always a need to address and confront racism, but this was neither the time nor place. This was a time for healing and for bringing the temperature down below the boiling point.

I repeat, timing is everything.

New York Times Editorial, "President Obama’s Anguish": Once Again, It's All About the One

You see, it's all about our Narcissist-in-Chief.

After the tragedy involving the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin, President Obama, a Constitutional lawyer, went on record as saying:

"But my main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves, and that we’re going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened."

Had I been a defense attorney for George Zimmerman, and if he had been convicted, I would have claimed that Obama's statement was the basis for a mistrial.

Yesterday, Obama doubled down on his earlier remarks:

"You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is: Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago."

Why doesn't this ring true? As a teenager, Obama attended the Punahou School, a top private school in Honolulu. From the Punahou School, he went on to Columbia University and Harvard Law School. After becoming the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review, Obama received a fellowship from the University of Chicago Law School to write "Dreams from My Father." And from there, eight years in the Illinois Senate, a "nifty" real estate deal with Tony Rezko, four years as a US Senator, and then two terms as president of the United States.

Bottom line, Obama was always on an entirely different trajectory from that of Trayvon Martin.

In a prior editorial entitled "Trayvon Martin’s Legacy" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/07/new-york-times-editorial-trayvon.html), The New York Times went on record as saying, "Mr. Zimmerman’s conviction might have provided an emotional catharsis." Regrettably, however, for the Times, the purpose of criminal trials is not to provide "emotional catharsis." Rather, criminal trials by jury are intended to determine guilt or innocence on the basis of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Today, in a editorial entitled "President Obama’s Anguish" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/opinion/president-obamas-anguish.html), The New York Times gushes over Obama's speech yesterday:

"President Obama did something Friday that he hardly ever does — and no other president could ever have done. He addressed the racial fault lines in the country by laying bare his personal anguish and experience in an effort to help white Americans understand why African-Americans reacted with frustration and anger to the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting of Trayvon Martin.

. . . .

He said there are 'very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store' or 'the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off.'

'That,' he said, 'includes me.'

. . . .

Mr. Obama called on the Justice Department to work with local and state law enforcement to reduce mistrust in the policing system, including ending racial profiling."

Excuse my naivete, but where was there any evidence during the trial of underlying racism on the part of George Zimmerman?

And if we're about to end racial profiling, let's also put an end to all profiling. When persons are passing through airport security, let's undertake added security checks on a purely random basis, even if this means frisking ninety-year-olds in wheelchairs. Heck, what a relief for someone like me! I'm often dishevelled and not always clean-shaven. (There's a reason why, when I do an occasional TV commercial, I'm often cast as the bad guy.) And back in the 1980s when I was at college, my handlebar mustache somehow fit the "hijacker profile," and inevitably, while waiting for a flight, my name was called over the public address system for a pat-down. "What, not again . . ." You should have seen how other passengers cast wary glances at me; however, this never led to violence.

Yes, there is still much racism in America, and there is a proclivity to violence. But while racism was not demonstrated by the prosecution in the trial of George Zimmerman, President Obama insisted on explaining away the violent response to the Zimmerman verdict by alluding to racism, and in so doing, he again added fuel to the fire.

This was not the occasion for President Obama to go grandstanding. There is always a need to address and confront racism, but this was neither the time nor place. Timing is everything.

The New York Times editorial concludes:

"It is a great thing for this country to have a president who could do what Mr. Obama did on Friday."

Rubbish.

Charles Blow, "The Whole System Failed": "Extraordinary Inequality in the Presumption of Innocence"?

Do you remember the scene in the 1997 science fiction action film "Men in Black" in which James Darrell Edwards III (Will Smith), a New York City police officer, is tested for a position in a secret agency responsible for extraterrestrial visitors on earth?

Of course, the details concerning the tragic death of Trayvon Martin are anything but amusing. However, in this short scene from "Men in Black," we learn of the potential disastrous consequences of racial profiling - in the case of MIB, intergalactic profiling - of which most of us are guilty.

Now, consider what Geraldo Rivera had to say concerning Trayvon Martin's dress on the night of the incident in a Huffington Post article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/20/geraldo-rivera-trayvon-martin-thug-wear_n_1530811.html):

"Geraldo Rivera came down on Trayvon Martin's clothing again on Friday, arguing that the teenager's 'thug wear' led George Zimmerman to suspect that he was a criminal.

Bill O'Reilly hosted Rivera to discuss new developments in the case, including the discovery of low levels of marijuana in Martin's autopsy. Rivera argued that the marijuana is 'less powerful' than the convenience store surveillance tape, which showed what Martin was wearing.

'I think what's far more significant is what Trayvon Martin looked like on that night, Bill,' he said. 'Aside from the fact that he's dressed in that thug wear — look at the size of him, he’s not a little kid.'

'If this young man was a stranger to George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin looks just like the people who had been burglarizing and victimizing that neighborhood for the last six months,' Rivera continued.

When O'Reilly said that Rivera was 'profiling' Martin, Rivera claimed that the assumption was 'based on a reasonable comparison.'

Rivera made similar comments about Martin's clothing in March, when he insisted that the slain teenager's hoodie was partially responsible for his death."

Were Zimmerman's actions indeed "based on a reasonable comparison"? Did Martin's clothing provide Zimmerman with a reasonable basis to stop Martin? Was this an instance of racial profiling? But bear in mind that Zimmerman was not charged with "racial profiling."

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "The Whole System Failed" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/opinion/the-whole-system-failed.html?_r=0), Charles Blow writes:

"This case is not about an extraordinary death of an extraordinary person. Unfortunately, in America, people are lost to gun violence every day. Many of them look like Martin and have parents who presumably grieve for them. This case is about extraordinary inequality in the presumption of innocence and the application of justice: why was Martin deemed suspicious and why was his killer allowed to go home?

. . . .

The idea of universal suspicion without individual evidence is what Americans find abhorrent and what black men in America must constantly fight. It is pervasive in policing policies — like stop-and-frisk, and in this case neighborhood watch — regardless of the collateral damage done to the majority of innocents. It’s like burning down a house to rid it of mice.

As a parent, particularly a parent of black teenage boys, I am left with the question, 'Now, what do I tell my boys?'"

Do racism and racial profiling exist in America? Absolutely, and regrettably I don't have answers for Blow's sons. Martin's death was an unspeakable tragedy. On the other hand, was the jury's decision incorrect? As stated by CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/13/justice/zimmerman-trial):

"The jury had three choices: to find Zimmerman guilty of second-degree murder; to find him guilty of a lesser charge of manslaughter; or to find him not guilty.

For second-degree murder, the jurors would have had to believe that Martin's unlawful killing was "done from ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent" and would be 'of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.'

To convict Zimmerman of manslaughter, the jurors would have had to believe he 'intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.'"

Remember that in the US there is a presumption of innocence, and that "beyond reasonable doubt" is the standard of evidence required for a criminal conviction. Zimmerman claims that he was pinned on his back. His nose was broken, and the back of his head was lacerated. Was he acting out of fear, or, was he capable of the "intention" needed for conviction? Was there reasonable doubt?

Again, there is racism in America, and perhaps Zimmerman should never have stopped Martin, but did an "imperfect" American jury system reach the wrong verdict, or did the prosecution fail to meet its immensely difficult burden of proof? Did the prosecution "overreach" when deciding which charges to bring against Zimmerman?

The agony of Martin's family is very real - I cannot begin to fathom the pain of losing a child.

But for Charles Blow to "trash" the American jury system for reaching this verdict? This system makes mistakes - I thought O.J. Simpson's 1995 acquittal was wrong - but where do you find a better system in an imperfect world? You don't.

New York Times Editorial, "Trayvon Martin’s Legacy": "Zimmerman’s Conviction Might Have Provided an Emotional Catharsis"

In an editorial entitled "Trayvon Martin’s Legacy" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/15/opinion/trayvon-martins-legacy.html), The New York Times goes on record as saying:

"It may not be possible to consider the case of George Zimmerman, who was acquitted Saturday of all charges in the killing of Trayvon Martin, as anything but a sad commentary on the state of race relations and the battle over gun rights in America today.

Certainly it is about race — ask any black man, up to and including President Obama, and he will tell you at least a few stories that sound eerily like what happened that rainy winter night in Sanford, Fla.

While Mr. Zimmerman’s conviction might have provided an emotional catharsis, we would still be a country plagued by racism, which persists in ever more insidious forms despite the Supreme Court’s sanguine assessment that 'things have changed dramatically,' as it said in last month’s ruling striking down the heart of the Voting Rights Act."

An "emotional catharsis"? Excuse me, but the purpose of criminal trials is not to provide "emotional catharsis." Rather, criminal trials in the US are intended to determine whether the prosecution bore the burden of proving a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

I have not closely followed the George Zimmerman case and have not read the trial transcripts. Trayvon Martin's death was an avoidable tragedy, and the horror of losing a child would drive me insane. But not having read the trial transcripts, I am hardly in a position to argue with the jury verdict, which was strictly intended to address the question of reasonable doubt as regards the charges pressed by the prosecution against Zimmerman.

I would only mention that there was another recent murder of a black child, which is not receiving the attention provided to the Zimmerman case. As reported by Ben Shapiro of Breitbart (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/14/17-year-old-Darryl-Green):

"On Thursday, July 11, police discovered the rotting body of 17-year-old Darryl Green, a black child from the Englewood neighborhood of Chicago. Green’s body was found behind a boarded-up house in the 6500-block of South Damen, face down on basement stairs. The body was so badly decomposed that originally, local news reports suggested that he had died of blunt force trauma. On Friday, an autopsy showed he had been shot to death. Relatives reported that Green had refused to join a gang at school."

Green's murder does not also deserve the outrage of the media? Why are there no demonstrations over Green's death?

Go figure.