BreakPoint Blog

Banner
Voting under Threat of a Wood Shampoo


Perhaps the dropped voter-intimidation charges -- which have been dropped post-judgment, mind you -- are an example of the much-touted "empathy" that is now supposed to pervade our administration of justice? In this case, I guess that would be empathy for baton-wielding Black Panther thugs who hassle potential voters at polling stations? And who say things like "you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker"?

But Eric Holder's InJustice Department has, as always, an impressive explanation:

The Justice Department was successful in obtaining an injunction that prohibits the defendant who brandished a weapon outside a Philadelphia polling place from doing so again. Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law. The department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote.

Ooh, what a victory. You "obtained an injunction," did you? And it prevents the main thug from menacing potential voters in the future, does it?

Um ... I think you already had that. I think it's called The Law.


Comments:

I think it's more Chicago politics in practice. The rulers might play the race card to get votors on their side...but the rulers may be of any race--which is a slight improvement over years past I think the rulers of such a system thrive on a large CONTSTANT layer of poor mostly dependent votors---which is mostly women & kids. And ACORN volunteers might enter the poor neighborhoods to roust out registered votors (or restaurants or even the dead to vote as in Lake Co. Indiana's recent massive ACORN vote fraud)...but these political machines all THRIVE on a large layer of poor. Which is mostly minority groups... There is some level of improved race relations, (as compared to my mom's time) but it comes at a price---and thus the status of WOMEN ,girls has declined...with a large, dependable, even dependent group of single family moms to mostly vote for the left. (Just translate some of the language used to describe girls, young women. If it were modified to be talking about persons of color---the JUSTICE dept. would leap into action.) Thus, it seems BAD to be racist...but okay to use women...or to encourage males & females to not commit to each other or to the next generation! I do not use this description for mere, unsubstantiated shock value, but it seems the government today offers services to girls, young women similar to that which a --- man who rents out young girls, women would offer. Have to get my son (adopted from an underage probably rented out teen) off to school.
Allen wrote: "(nor do I think you're claiming so either)" I don't think the Obama Administration is complicit. However, many individual African Americans may take this verdict-without-consequences to mean "We'll prosecute you vigorously to satisfy the public, but then let you go. (wink, nudge)" And even if that's not what the Administration intends, it could still get very interesting if that's what John Q. Panther thinks as he contemplates some rowdiness to further an agenda.
Rolley, Indeed! Lee, I'm not ready to say that's what's going on (nor do I think you're claiming so either); but I think the Administration's self-interest in this matter doesn't help anything either. Benjamin, Judgment & penalty, commensurate with the law.
Allen, How would you have had the whole thing handled?
Reminds me of the cartoon parent…. “Susie, if you hit Johnny one more time…” (Susie hits Johnny again) “Susie! I mean it! If you hit Johnny one more time…” (Hits him again) “Susie! Do you think I’m kidding? Don’t hit Johnny again, or you’re in for it!” --- “Lord, what fools these mortals be!” --- A Midsummer Nights Dream Act III, scene ii, 115
"vigorous prosecution"??!?!? I heard many other pre-election anecdotes about how African Americans assumed that an Obama victory would mean members of their race were suddenly above the law. This could get interesting.