Stand [Some Other Person's] Ground

Another victory for post-racial America.

I just read an unnerving story coming out of Porterdale, a small town in rural Georgia. Jean-Joseph Kalonji and his wife Angelica (61 and 57 years old, respectively) were visiting their newly purchased home , which sat vacant for several months prior. But unfortunately for the couple, their new neighbors didn’t exactly offer them the friendliest of welcomes. Thinking the couple was trying to burglarize the place, neighbors Robert Canoles and his son Brandon approached the couple armed with semi-automatic rifles.  The Canoles snuck up on the Kalonjis and forced them to stand with their hands against the wall, despite being told they were the rightful owners of the property. From there, Canoles called the local police who, upon arrival, arrested the Kalonjis and actually commended Canoles for the apprehension. Seriously. I’m not making this stuff up.

After all the dust settled, the couple was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing and the Canoles were themselves charged with aggravated assault, false imprisonment, and trespassing. In a bizarre turn of events, the people once thanked for their “service” were arrested for the same action.

**I’m digressing here: In my opening line, I poked fun at the notion of a post-racial America. Truth is, I don’t know if this story was racially-motivated or not. And I certainly don’t want to needlessly race chase. But considering where this all took place, the interracial makeup of the Kalonjis, and state of race relations in this country, one would be hard-pressed not to suspect race may have influenced Robert Canoles, his son, and the police. Would Canoles pull this stunt on a white couple? Would the police have been as quick to arrest the Kalonjis without hearing their story or doing any background checking had they both been white? I can’t answer with any degree of certainty. But I’d be willing to bet on this more than I’d be willing to bet on the Mega Millions. When Canoles said in his statement that folks in this town “protect our own”, by his own account he was saying the Kalonjis were not rightful members of the Porterdale community. A few guesses as to why that is. *** END OF DIGRESSION

Back to the main point of this post: what I found interesting and noteworthy about this whole affair was the defense Canoles mounted to justify his actions. In an almost Tea Party-esque fashion, Canoles pulled, of all things, the Constitutional card to explain away his actions stating “I don’t know what they can charge me with. This is my Second Amendment right…”. In a shameful display this clown had the audacity to invoke his right to bear arms as a defense for using automatic weapons to threaten innocent people. The Constitution is not, nor has it ever been, an instrument of vigilantism.

Now, I realize it’s socially irresponsible and intellectually lazy to paint all gun owners and enthusiasts with the same brush or to indict them all based on one idiot’s actions. And I won’t. But I will say it’s time for lobbyists like the NRA and gun supporters in general to be a lot more visible during the ongoing debate over control, access, and usage of guns. Unfortunately, the only time you’ll ever hear from these folks in that context is when they’re defending their rights to own the weapons or when they put their political weight behind legislation that allows people with guns to shoot first and ask questions later. But at no point in the discussion will you hear them as passionate about teaching responsibility and accountability. Outside of personal ignorance of the law, there is no reason why a loon like Robert Canoles should ever thoughtlessly conflate the right to bear arms and the right to take the law in your own hand. Gun owners should be as much about education as they are about advocacy.

Am I blaming the NRA for this? Of course not. But I am stating that, considering the length of their reach and influence, a better attempt to educate gun owners is needed. We know politicians don’t have the testicular fortitude to address this, and liberals can’t because it will get casually dismissed as some kind of bleeding heart campaign. The NRA, more than any other group in the country, has the ability to speak and have people hear them. With a large platform comes even larger responsibility. None of this will stop people like Canoles from breeding, much less getting their hands on guns, but at least being more proactively involved is a step in the right direction.

I’m in the market myself to buy a house. But based on these kind of stories, If I ever decide to buy, I can only hope my future neighbors will bring muffins as a housewarming gift and not .45 caliber bullets.

- ACL

Cookie-Gate

Ah, yes. It’s election time once again. You can tell by some of the stories making the news. If it’s not Obama sampling an exotic dog-based cuisine as a child, it’s this bulls***:

Mitt Romney, even at 65, is known for his handsome face and slim waistline — qualities he likely has not maintained by gobbling desserts. But his refusal to eat cookies made by a beloved Pittsburgh bakery is drawing not admiration but ire from locals and Democrats.

At a campaign event on Tuesday, Romney joked with a woman about a plate of cookies on the table where they were sitting.

“I’m not sure about these cookies,” Romney said to the woman. “Did you make those cookies? You didn’t, did you? No. No. They came from the local 7-Eleven bakery or wherever.”

In fact, the cookies came from Bethel Bakery, a popular Pittsburgh pastry shop.

“We wanted him to be welcomed with the best in the ’burgh, and he had no idea,” the bakery’s owner, John Walsh, said on local television. “This guy has no idea how beloved this institution is that provided these cookies.”

Walsh later told The Wall Street Journal that he believed Romney was only kidding, and a 7-Eleven spokeswoman said the company was not offended by the likely Republican nominee’s remark.

The incident has actually helped business, Bethel Bakery reported.

But the Democratic National Committee jumped on Romney’s comment, tweeting “Mitt Romney disses a beloved local bakery in Pittsburgh — and 7-Eleven.”

Others also have taken to Twitter, teasing Romney with the hashtag #cookiegate.

Source

Though opponents have worked assiduously to make this a reflection of Mitt’s out-of-touchness (and the case against Mitt might be strong enough), c’mon people. This is a non-story. Much like discussions about Romney’s wealth, Obama’s religion, or hundreds of other pointless things, we are concocting controversies out of the most insignificant storylines; all serving to distract us from where our attention should truly lie – on issues. Policy, more than all this other nonsense, is what matters.

Still…

…this is yet another example of why a good political strategist is needed when a person is running for an office with as much profile as the Presidency. A good strategist would’ve told Romney (not assuming they did and he just ignored them) to eat the damn cookie, smile, and give a thumbs up. Even if the cookie tasted like complete crap, the key to being a politician is to have an ability to connect with people. In the political climate, you connect by making people feel appreciated. It was for this very reason that I used to tell my ex that I liked her cooking or acted like I wasn’t offended by her unkept house. It’s the same reason why I pretend to care about what my boss and his friends did last weekend. You carry on the appearance of being interested to avoid hurting the feelings of people who may matter. In doing so, you protect your own interests. That’s the game, Mitt. You need to learn how to play it if you seriously want to win this thing.

Besides all that, what harm would it do to your campaign if you just nibbled on a damn cookie for all of three seconds? Could Obama really say “My opponent eats butter cookies. He hates America.” I guess he could, if he didn’t care about being publicly ridiculed by everybody with at least half a brain. But with this snub, Democrats have yet another opening to attack. “Mitt Romney is out of touch with small businesses, even those considered iconic in their communities.” See, Mitt? That’s how quickly it can start. And all I have is a measly blog. Give me a talk radio show or a half hour slot during primetime, and I could go to work and do some real damage.

Make no mistake: this election won’t be won or lost due to #CookieGate. Obama faced infinitely more challenging obstacles in 2008 and managed to win it all. But, come on candidates. Play your cards right, like a good politician should, and make this race about things that matter most.

- ACL

ABC = Absent of Black Couples…?

Yep. Because black people deserve the right to act like clowns in some scripted effort to find love, too:

A pair of African American men expect to file a lawsuit against ABC television and the producer of reality dating shows “The Bachelor” and “The Bachelorette” charging racial discrimination, attorneys said on Tuesday.

The class action, to be filed in federal court on Wednesday, is being brought by two residents of Nashville, Tennessee who claim the popular shows intentionally exclude people of color.

Nashville residents Nathaniel Claybrooks, an All-American football player, and Christopher Johnson, an aspiring National Football League player, will claim that in the 10 years the shows have been on the air — a combined 23 seasons — neither has ever featured a person of color in a central role, according to a statement from the attorneys.

They plan a news conference on Wednesday to discuss the legal action taken “on behalf of all persons of color who have applied for the role of the Bachelor or the Bachelorette but been denied the equal opportunity for selection on the basis of race.”

The lawsuit will be filed against ABC television, Warner Horizon television, Next Entertainment, NZK Productions and Michael Fleiss, the executive producer of the “Bachelor” and “Bachelorette” franchises.

ABC could not immediately be reached for comment.

Read the rest of the article here.

Fine. I guess I’ll concede to the notion that the ethnic makeup of shows like the Bachelor and the Bachelorette are in direct conflict with the diverse nature of America’s dating practices. But I’ve watched this show before (Lord knows why), and it really is quite atrocious. So not seeing black folks being represented on this nonsensical programming is a check in the social progress column as far as I’m concerned. All that notwithstanding, I guess this bears asking: don’t people of color have enough legitimate concerns to worry about? When did not being picked to be on some silly, fake, and socially inept reality show become grounds for racial discrimination? Priorities, people.

Besides, if you want the opportunity to behave like a coon on a national TV, I hear auditions are taking place for the next season of Basketball Wives.

- ACL

Rosen’s War on Woman (SMH)

Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen recently triggered a right-wing media firestorm when she brought into question Ann Romney’s – Mitt Romney’s wife – ability to understand and deal with economic issues facing women because she’s “never worked a day in her life.” Romney, a mother of five, was quick to fire back by appearing on cable news to remind Rosen of the challenges associated with being a stay-at-home mom vis-a-vis a women who choose to enter the workforce. Republicans have all but eagerly attacked Rosen as Democrats have quickly distanced themselves from her.

My take on the whole thing…

First, I can’t help but wonder if I missed my calling as a strategist. I mean, even the most novice political commentator can see where Rosen shot herself in the foot. By suggesting that Mrs. Romney “never worked a day in her life”, Rosen implicitly attacked unemployed women, diminished their role in economic affairs, and only furthered the GOP’s claims that Democrats (and Obama, by association) are waging a so-called “War on Women.” Even if that wasn’t her intention (and I don’t believe it was), that’s how it came across. In the age of the 24-hour news cycle, that’s all that matters. Honestly though, I can’t say I’m shocked by this. After all, Rosen was a Hillary surrogate during the 2008 Democratic Presidential race. We all know how that went.

Secondly…and directly to the point of Rosen and her comments, a smarter strategist would’ve said “Ann Romney doesn’t face the same problems as most American woman”, making the clear distinction between Mrs. Romney (the multi-millionaire who could have easily afforded a team of maids, nannies, and servants to be at her disposal) and the average single mother struggling to make ends meet. While it’s true that Mrs. Romney may have other motherhood issues she faces right alongside many other Americans, financial hardships ain’t it. That’s all Rosen needed to say. But in her zealous effort to discount Mrs. Romney’s ability to related to American women, Rosen’s comments – innocuous as she may have intended for them to be – have given Republicans a much needed breath of fresh air headed into November. Which is funny…because she ain’t even working on the Obama campaign.

Thirdly (and speaking of Obama) the President demonstrated a great deal of class when he stood up for Mrs. Romney and rejected Rosen’s comments. Ever since he was a candidate himself back in 2008, he has made it a point to leave family out of the political mudslinging. Even when Sarah Palin’s knocked up daughter, Todd Palin’s bizarre political affiliations or Cindy McCain’s wealth could have been fodder for Obama, he refrained from going after them. Even if/when some of his surrogates got out of control, he never did. He has once again demonstrated class in an arena mostly devoid of class. This is particularly noteworthy given the number of Republicans (or lack thereof) who have come to the defense of the First Lady as she has been mercilessly attacked by those on the right.

Finally, as I’ve stated before, I hope this election and indeed our criticism of the candidates rests on policy and NOT on superfluous stuff like their bank accounts. Yes, it can be said with some sense of certainty that wealth tends to translate into a certain disconnection to people. But Mitt is not the first wealthy person vying for public office. Nor will he be the last. Also, wealth is not the sole province of our friends on the right. I’d like to think that a person’s wealth and affluence won’t trump (or dictate) their positions, but I’m not holding my breath here.

All told, Rosen had a point to be made. But her time as a consultant clearly didn’t prep her for this one. So, as a public service announcement for Ms. Rosen, I’d like to offer the following advice:

Find a corner. Sit down. Be quiet. And leave the politics up to the smart people.

- ACL

Zimmerman’s Cause

So, I was watching the Daily Buzz yesterday morning (as a quick side note: Bri, you’ve GOTTA try out for this show. You’d be perfect for it), and was completely floored to find out that George Zimmerman – the now infamous shooter in the ongoing Trayvon Martin case – created a website to tell his side of the story and to solicit monetary donations. Then, the news was confirmed:

George Zimmerman’s attorney, Hal Uhrig, confirmed to Fox News that the website, therealgeorgezimmerman.com, was in fact produced by the real George Zimmerman, who otherwise has gone into hiding as a special prosecutor determines whether he should face charges in the death of Trayvon Martin.

The website was no longer available Monday night, possibly because of increased traffic after news of existence spread. But earlier, it featured a first person plea for help.

“On Sunday February 26th, I was involved in a life altering event which led me to become the subject of intense media coverage,” the site reads. “As a result of the incident and subsequent media coverage, I have been forced to leave my home, my school, my employer, my family and ultimately, my entire life. This website’s sole purpose is to ensure my supporters they are receiving my full attention without any intermediaries.

Zimmerman then warns that others have tried to set up campaigns to collect donations for his cause, but he “cannot attest to the validity of these other websites.”

For his site, he said he created a PayPal account, “as I would like to provide an avenue to thank my supporters personally and ensure that any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment. … I reassure you, every donation is appreciated.”

Got it.

So, after visiting Mr. Zimmerman’s website, a few thoughts came to mind:

(1) What kind of grade school HTML mess is this? Look, I’m no techie. I certainly won’t be the next Mark Zuckerberg. So far be it for me to begrudge the web hustle. But if you’re going to use a website to solicit funds for the tough legal battle that is sure to come, wouldn’t you think to have a better looking joint? I’ve seen bloggers solicit funds on their sites with the common sense to at least use a pre-designed template from the hosting site of their choice. Even if I supported Zimmerman (which, for the record, I don’t), my inclination to donate would be severely comprised if it was through this website. In addition to cash donations, somebody please buy this fool “Web Design for Dummies.”

(2) Zimmerman’s lawyer did good by stepping away from the case. Any lawyer without the basic ability to keep his client’s mouth shut doesn’t deserve to practice law, much less be the lead attorney in a high-profile case like this. While Zimmerman hasn’t made any public appearances yet, it appears that he’s at least spoken to Sean Hannity. If Zimmerman doesn’t want to derail his defense and tear asunder any opportunities of an acquittal, he’ll keep his mouth shut until the trial. Well, if there ever is one. But I digress.

(3) Not that we’ll ever find out – maybe we will – but I wonder who will donate to Zimmerman’s cause. I have my suspicions, though. But it probably won’t stop at the NRA. People with an ax to grind against the President and who are trying to make this political will probably line up as donors as well. Just as you have loons lurking around in the anti-Zimmerman camp, you most assuredly will have them on the pro-Zimmerman side.

(4) Finally, it’s odd (but certainly not surprising) that Zimmerman didn’t offer a shred of sympathy for the family of Trayvon Martin. His website is solely meant to propagate the “whoa is me” sentiment, using self-victimization as a method to generate donations. Not of word of sympathy for the family who has a murdered son on their hands. I suppose he can’t say much, in that offering an apology or an expression of sympathy could be considered an admission of guilt. But I saw a CNN interview with Trayvon’s father (I’m sorry. I can’t find a clip of it), where he offered his prayers to the Zimmerman family for what they may be going through. It is possible to offer your sympathies without admitting guilt. Unfortunately not a lot of people understand that (including a certain person I used to date. Wait. Did I say that?).

Anyway, what do you think? Have you checked out Zimmerman’s site? Do you plan on donating to his cause?

Holla at me?

- ACL