Third Party & Independents Archives

The M Word

It seems a recent event in Illinois has caused a racial stir and has the Obama campaign asking for one of his delegates to step down. Has a new banned word entered our vocabulary? And further, is the understanding and inclusive Obama doing the right thing by asking this delegate to give up her position?

First, let’s detail the story before we analyze the repercussions.

Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski, a trustee for the village of Carpentersville, is very protective of her village. She recently failed in her attempt to have a member of the Board of Trustees removed after it came to light that that trustee, Paul Humpfer, was convicted of domestic battery. She cares about her community. She cares about the trees in her community. She is very protective of the village.

This past week, she noticed her neighbor’s kids, the children of single African-American mothers who live next to her, playing in the tree in their yard. It was a small magnolia tree and she was concerned about the boy’s safety and the small tree was being damaged. She came out and expressed her concern, after which the father of one of the boys told her it was none of her business. That is when she responded

The tree is not there for them to be climbing in there like monkeys.

The mother of one boy called the police. She was ticketed for disorderly conduct and fined $75.

Cmdr. Michael Kilbourne said the ticket was issued because the ordinance bans conduct that disturbs or alarms people, and one of the boys told police he was scared by her comment.

Shortly after the incident became public, the Obama campaign asked for her to resign her position as delegate, which she agreed to do, initially.

However, today, after some support from the mayor of her town, she has decided to remain as delegate, though she has stated she will not seek another term as village trustee. The Obama campaign has since stated that she could remain as delegate, days after the incident and initial demand for her removal.

Now, there are a lot of questions raised by this incident.

First, is it really now a crime to call a black person a monkey? Have we perhaps become a little thin skinned in our attempts to fight racism that we are now ready to go so far as to make some speech illegal? It is clear, IMO, that there was NO intention of a racial slur in any regards, that the animosity between the two neighbors has caused tensions between the two to bubble and the mother who called the police was playing a card that she should not have played. And the police, again IMO, caused more harm by feeding into the children’s uncomfortable feelings. Had they, and the parents for that matter, behaved in a more ‘tolerant and understanding’ manner, perhaps their children would not now believe that anyone using that word is automatically a racist and further propagate those feelings onto the next generation. Instead, the family, assisted by the police in this manner, successfully used race as a weapon against a woman who has dedicated herself to the betterment of her community, perhaps in too busybody of a way, but with nothing but good intentions. As town president Bill Sarto, who had been the other member of the board to try and force Paul Humpfer out of his position, stated and I agree with:

Frankly, I don’t see a law that was broken here,” Sarto said. “I think this entire thing has been blown out of proportion. She’s a good neighbor. She went over to caution the children to be careful not to fall out of a tree. She has never indicated to me any prejudice whatsoever. We have a trustee who has been convicted on four counts of domestic battery and refuses to resign from the board. He beat his wife with a baseball bat. This seems far less egregious to me.

He also said that the Obama campaign was wrong to ask for her to step down. Which brings us to the second, and perhaps more interesting on a national political level, point of why did the Obama campaign initially ask for her to resign and only relent when it was clear that public opinion was not on their side? Is this the type of leadership that Obama is speaking about when he talks about racial tolerance? Of understanding? The campaign could have taken a day or two to find out all of the details before asking for her to resign, that would have been the prudent reaction to take. Instead, they acted initially on the side of those claiming racial victimization and against an ardent supporter. Frankly, I question why Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski would still agree to be a delegate for someone who treated her that way. But, I question a lot of things, so that becomes second nature I suppose.

It’s clear that Sarto is right, this is ridiculous on both its face and at the deeper level once examined. She should have no trouble, IMO, defending herself against the charge which she has stated she will do. But I think that this adds to other events that Sen Obama has been involved in that causes many of us who are not members of the Cult of Obama to question the type of leadership that he will provide, not what type of leadership he tells us he wants to provide. It will be this kind of information, absent other examples of individual leadership, that will shape the second half of this campaign if he does win the nomination.

References:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/wire/chi-ap-il-obamadelegateresi,0,3669387.story
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/885822,delegate040908.article
http://www.wbbm780.com/Monkey-Comment:-Obama-Delegate-Says-She-s-Not-Quit/1972587

Posted by Rhinehold at April 9, 2008 8:38 PM
Comments
Comment #250163

And the libertarian ideal is: ………….. ?

Posted by: KansasDem at April 9, 2008 9:02 PM
Comment #250166

It is this type of “he said/she said” fueds that rarely get resolved to everyone’s satisfaction.
I agree that on face value, there was nothing said or done that was inappropriate, but will no doubt be nearly impossible to prove. The children will certainly side with the moms and that throws the count to multiple against one.
I’d be willing to consider there was more than what was reported to influence Obama’s camp to ask for her resignation, and good for her to stand her ground. Innocent until proven guilty !!

Posted by: janedoe at April 9, 2008 9:11 PM
Comment #250167

Hey KD, it’s good to see you !!! Hope you’re around for a while…always enjoy your comments.

Posted by: janedoe at April 9, 2008 9:12 PM
Comment #250177

Rhinehold,

“The tree is not there for them to be climbing in there like monkeys.”

“First, is it really now a crime to call a black person a monkey?”

Other than one is a question, can somebody please tell me the difference between these two statments?

She, according to your quote, didn’t call them monkeys.
I am pretty sure that, I, like many children, was accused of acting “like” a monkey when I was a child.

Posted by: Rocky at April 9, 2008 10:19 PM
Comment #250178

True, she didn’t call them monkeys, but that was what she was changed with. Actually, she was charged that her using the word monkeys caused harm to another.

But yes, it is clear, as I pointed out, that she did nothing wrong that I can see in this case. Other than being a bit of a busybody and calling upon a phrase that many of us have had our parents say to us while climbing in a tree at one point or another.

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 9, 2008 10:23 PM
Comment #250179

I was told and I have said … ‘Stop acting like monkeys.’
Don’t MOST parents say that to their kids?
Maybe it would have been okay if she had said sloths.

Posted by: Dawn at April 9, 2008 10:35 PM
Comment #250180

Rhinehold,

‘Actually, she was charged that her using the word monkeys caused harm to another.’

Think that charge will hold?
If they were climbing a tree like monkeys, how does it harm them to say it?

Posted by: Dawn at April 9, 2008 10:38 PM
Comment #250181

Rhinehold,

The ordinance seem so vague as to be unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of the First Amendment.

Are we so sensitive that we need the word monkey defined as hate speech?
And if it was, wouldn’t the fine be greater than $75?

Frankly, it makes me wonder what our simian friends would think about that.

Posted by: Rocky at April 9, 2008 10:45 PM
Comment #250182

Interesting, I usually like science fiction, but your facts suck!

Since I live in Carpentersville and have seen this person and the mayor by their inaction supported illegal aliens (not just Hispanics) when Paul Humpfer and Judy Sigwalt proposed an ordinance like those that are popping up all over the country, trying to prevent illegal’s from renting in our village, where people are getting tired of 20 million people that don’t belong here.

The Mayor, Bill Sarto, had written a letter to the editor in 2000 about the overwhelming illegal problem, now he doesn’t want any part of it. At last Tuesdays Village Meeting he got in to a shouting match with the Trustee’s, abusing one by shouting “well, your a school teacher!” I don’t even pretend to know what he meant by that.

Even a local business man tried to have others elected last year and spent in the area of 30k to bump Paul and Judy from the board. Why, because most of his company is Hispanic.

Your totally wrong when you say that she cares for her village, you have not got all the facts. She threw her son out of the house because of his drug use. Is that a loving person, is that tough love?

Posted by: Dennis Carr at April 9, 2008 11:04 PM
Comment #250191
Is that a loving person, is that tough love?

Yes.

As for the rest of your rant, nothing I wrote is unfactual or opposes anything you said… No where did I say I supported either of their politics, nor did I say I didn’t. In fact, I didn’t comment on that at all.

Of course she cares for her village. That doesn’t mean she is right in ‘all things’, perhaps that is a lesson that could be learned by some…

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 9, 2008 11:59 PM
Comment #250194

I have called my own kids monkeys when they climbed my trees.

Obama had no business stepping in this local matter for ANY reason. It is not a Federal case. The fact that he feel compelled to harass local people in a neighborhood tree climbing incident shows the extent of intrusive big government we can expect from the new liberal administration.

We have become hypertensive to race issues. Perhaps the woman protecting the trees is a bit of a busybody – perhaps not. But the mother of the children should have asked her kids to get out of the tree and apologized for them. I really do not need to have any other details. That is what a good parent and a reasonable citizen does.

Let me get this clear – because I cannot believe I understood. The woman complaining about the tree climbing got the ticket? They really have this kind of thought crime legislation?

Short of things like yelling “fire” in crowded theaters, you should be able legally to say whatever you want. The nature of free speech is that others have the right to respond or not to listen. If we make childish laws to protect sensitive people, we will all be oppressed.

As long as we are talking words, it is racist to bring up race as often as many racial/racist advocates do.

Posted by: Jack at April 10, 2008 1:32 AM
Comment #250197

Personally, I think she sounds like a bit of a busybody nutcase.

As to why she was fined, I don’t know. I don’t have the testimony of the officer. She may have gone balistic and acted out of control in the presence of the officer.

I often climbed trees and sometimes made monkey sounds and ate bananas.

I climbed a tree in my front yard one day, and the neighbors wife saw me break a branch and fall to the ground. It knocked the wind out of me, but I was otherwise unscathed.

I hid the limb in this neighbors trash with the cooperation of my same age friend that was a child in their family. I was afraid I would get in trouble from my father for breaking the limb.

The neighbor lady asked if I was alright, and both the mother and father kept my secret.

Boys climb trees and act like monkeys. Some trees will be damaged and perhaps even sacrificed in these endeavors. The lady needs to seriously get a some perspective. I wouldn’t want the nutty old biddy on on my campaign.

Where did someone suggest this was a racial slur?

Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 3:29 AM
Comment #250198

Afternote:
The Sun did say that the camplainants cited a racial slur, but the Tribune quotes the police as saying she created a disturbance and scared the children, which is what she was fined for, not racism.

Her side seems to be that it wasn’t racist. The officer made a decision to cite her. I’m sure there is more to this story than what exists in the paper. Again, I find her behavior on behalf of the tree bizarre. I seriously doubt, after scaring the cildren, that their safety was her primary concern, or even at all. The officer seems to have thought that. It was his perogative to do what was necessary to restore order. Since he couldn’t slap some sense into her, he chose to slap her with a fine to return her to reality.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 3:45 AM
Comment #250211

Maybe the response of the officer was a result of the constant interference by Sarto and Sliwinski in the operations of the Carpentersville Police department?
After reading the chain above, only Dennis Carr has the facts.
As an aside, at first Jesse Jackson jr. supported kicking Sliwinski to the curb as an Obama candidate but now he supports her staying on - does this show the power of ICIRR and CAIR and LaRaza of which Sliwinski is a very vocal supporter?

Posted by: woning kammer at April 10, 2008 10:03 AM
Comment #250213

This is all Democrat politics and it is all race politics. The “content of their character” is lost on the whole issue.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at April 10, 2008 10:29 AM
Comment #250228
First, is it really now a crime to call a black person a monkey?

In poor taste? Maybe. Illegal? No.


Have we perhaps become a little thin skinned in our attempts to fight racism that we are now ready to go so far as to make some speech illegal?

Wouldn’t doubt it for a second.


He also said that the Obama campaign was wrong to ask for her to step down. Which brings us to the second, and perhaps more interesting on a national political level, point of why did the Obama campaign initially ask for her to resign and only relent when it was clear that public opinion was not on their side? Is this the type of leadership that Obama is speaking about when he talks about racial tolerance? Of understanding?

And now the real Obama is coming through. The one that’s listened to his racist preacher for 23 years.
Ya can bet if he’d call for Linda to step down over something like this, he’ll do worse as President.


Howard Cosell lost his job for calling a Black athlete a monkey. And I doubt he meant anything by it. Specially sense he thought Black athletes are superior to White athletes.
While I never liked the guy, I don’t think he should have lost his job over something like that. And neither should Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski.

Posted by: Ron Brown at April 10, 2008 12:33 PM
Comment #250230

Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski: “The tree is not there for them to be climbing in there like monkeys.”

“…the Obama campaign asked for her to resign her position as delegate…”

Sounds to me like the Obama campaign is not ready to have a discussion of race. What does that tell you about the sincerity of Obama’s “Reverand Wright” speech?

Are we to believe his words…or his actions?

Posted by: Jim T at April 10, 2008 12:40 PM
Comment #250234

You can’t talk about Rev. Wright.

You can’t talk about race.

You can’t even mention his middle name….

Seems like the Obama campaign is framing the debate quite nicely.

Posted by: George in SC at April 10, 2008 1:22 PM
Comment #250239

Again, inspite of continued mischaracterizations, she was NOT charged for the use of the word monkey. She was charged with disorderly conduct.
She claims innocence. What a surprise!!!! She’s a politician and has turned this into a political issue. What a surprise!!!!

She’s a nutty tree hugger with a distorted view about the relative values of kids and trees. She lacks a sense of boundaries. She was told to shut the f*&^ up, in essence by a cop. If she had any common sense, she would have, and likely there would have been no citation. End of Story. Nope…

She didn’t and got cited. She continues to pursue this, further revealing her nuttiness. People with political agenda to pursue, pick up this tempest in a tea pot issue and make it something it isn’t. What a surprise!!!

Personally, I think it is folly to take up the causes of lunatics.

Posted by: googlumpugus at April 10, 2008 3:17 PM
Comment #250243

George in SC,

ummm, you can’t? I think you just did.

Posted by: googlumpugus at April 10, 2008 3:21 PM
Comment #250247

The “small magnolia tree” in Illinois was probably more like a large Mangolia bush, unsuitable for climbing anyway as it is soft wood. I am on the side of the tree.

“Monkey” is not an uncommon racial epithet in latin american culture.

There is a picture of Ms. Ramirez-Sliwinski here:
http://vil.carpentersville.il.us/trustees.htm
I will make the assumption that she is the person on the far right in the picture.

Most of Carpentersville was previously called Meadowdale, a large subdivision like Leavittown where low cost housing was built after WW2.

To some of my relations, this is where the poor folks live, and the Boy Scouts go to hand out food baskets around the holidays.

Posted by: ohrealy at April 10, 2008 3:49 PM
Comment #250248

There is another fundamental issue at play in this story. Parents are posessive and protective of their children. But, children unaccompanied by their parents in public places are, and SHOULD BE, subject to corrections by other adults in that public place when the child’s behavior is destructive to public or private property, disruptive of the peace, or in potentially injurious of either the child themself or others in the public area.

It does take a village to raise a child, and if that village turns its back on the child in public places for fear of retaliation by the child or their parents, the child’s socialization learning is impaired. And worse, if the child is ignored in public places repeatedly regardless of behavior, the chances of that child becoming an anti-social adult to include criminal behavior and disregard for other’s safety and well being, are increased.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Our courts and enforcement authorities should be sensitive to the duty of adults to supervise unaccompanied children in public places, whether that be on the sidewalk outside the child’s home, or the public park, or public restroom.

Americans used to take an interest in, and care for the children of others unaccompanied in public places. Some still do. More would be better. Much of children’s aberrant behavior is an attempt to acquire attention and recognition that they exist, and they matter. Giving them attention for inappropriate behavior, if delivered appropriately, satisfies both the child’s need and the public’s.

But, where does one go to learn how to do this without fear of being murdered by a parent of a child scolded for destroying public behavior? This is one advantage of small rural towns and villages over urban areas. But, urban areas need not be designed to make everyone anonymous. They could be designed to promote neighborhood familiarity, obligation, and responsibility.

America is in desperate need of turning to the environmental psychologists and sociologists who now have decades of excellent research completed on this very issue. It is time voters considered voting local officials, county officials, and state officials based on the candidate’s awareness of, and willingness to, incorporate the findings of these research projects.

A city in the NorthWest adopted such research many years ago and saved itself from urban blight and flight, prospered with dramatic reductions in crime, homelessness, and incidents of hostility requiring police intervention.

It does take a village to raise a civil child. America should get busy recreating its villages, even with urban environments. The investment in redesign will pay dividends for the rest of the century.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 10, 2008 3:59 PM
Comment #250251

goo said: “She lacks a sense of boundaries. She was told to shut the f*&^ up, in essence by a cop.”

I thought one had a certain freedom of speech in this country. When did police acquire the power to shut people up prior to arrest and detention? Oh, yeah, when most of us agreed it was political speech that was free, all other kinds are subject to police power review and censorship, right?

There are numerous cases each year of police beating and or arresting individuals for nothing more than a curse word delivered to the police. There is a difference between individual expression of emotion or reaction which does not incite or create public unrest, and individual speech which does incite and or create civil disorder. But even civil disorder which is non-violent is tolerated by the law under some circumstances involving hundreds, but, not tolerated by the individual. Is this equal justice under the law?

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 10, 2008 4:32 PM
Comment #250256

David said:

“I thought one had a certain freedom of speech in this country. When did police acquire the power to shut people up prior to arrest and detention? Oh, yeah, when most of us agreed it was political speech that was free, all other kinds are subject to police power review and censorship, right? “

Well, considering the kids were on THEIR property and being supervised by THEIR parent, her imposition created a disturbance. Her free speech ended when she decided to invade her neighbors abode and then ignored a directive from law enforcement trying to restore ordoer.

I don’t know that she ignored a directive, and you may be correct that law enforcement overstepped it’s bounds. I seriously doubt it. It is my experience that cops hate to be called out when stupid neighbors can’t control their own behavior. The officer would have likely not ticketed her if the matter was done and over. She likely drew the ticket for being an obnoxious ass.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 4:59 PM
Comment #250257

orealy,

So, you are on the side of neigbors who feel the urgent need to protect my hedges whenever I decide to trim them??? Huh? Why do you care if I buy a magnolia and proceed to chop it down every week?

When I was a small child, my father related in our Levitt town styled cracker box, that neighborhood kids had a habit of running down small shrubs planted at the public sidewalk with their bycycles. My father planted thistle hedges we called sticker bushes. After running them down once, they stopped doing this for obvious reasons. Problem solved.

Us kids hated the shrubs. We hated having to trim them. Neigborhoods kids didn’t run or play in our yard much, because the thistles were all over. Dad got peace and quite. I still don’t like those shrubs, but I now smile when I think of dad’s ingenous solution.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 5:11 PM
Comment #250259

I know for a fact you can end up in jail for saying the wrong thing to a cop. They are trained to intimidate to gain control. They expect to cow the subject into submission and not being intimidated is an act of disobedience. The charge is disorderly conduct and the evidence presented in a court of law is refered to as “officers descretion”.

Outright lies are also used because they are not followed up by the judge questioning the officer so any testimony presented by the officer is considered to be the equivalent to words from a god. No contradiction is valid.

Of course, you could pay a lawyer a thousand dollars or so to buy an innocent verdict but the punishment is still there. A thousand dollars to a lawyer or a thousand dollars in fines and court costs to a judge.

Judges like to run their court like a business and it’s easier when you promote an environment that allows an officer to lie and charge people with a crime and not expect physical evidence to back it up.

This case may well be a sign of things to come. I expect an exponential expansion of this behavour under an Obama/Democratic government just as it had during the Clinton Administration.

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 10, 2008 5:16 PM
Comment #250274

Weary,

Saying the wrong thing to a cop has always been considered by me to simply be stupidity.

My favorite joke by comedian Ron White has the line…. the officer told me I had the right to remain silent……….but after a ten vodka tonics, I didn’t have the ability.

As to official oppression, connecting the dots from an out of control cop to Clinton or Obama or to some stupid arrogant woman behaving like an ass, is akin to connecting aliens in Roswell to running the government.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 9:57 PM
Comment #250275

By the way,

http://www.urbanext.uiuc.edu/treeselector/detail_plant.cfm?PlantID=228

Magnolias can grow quite large in Illinois. I have one in my front yard (In Texas). A girlfriends kids liked to climb it when they were small because it had limbs low to the ground, making it easy for them to climb into it.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 10:11 PM
Comment #250302
Again, inspite of continued mischaracterizations, she was NOT charged for the use of the word monkey. She was charged with disorderly conduct.

Sorry, googlumpus, but you may have missed the part where the police stated that the reason she was ticketed for disorderly conduct was because the one boy told them he was scared by her comment about being a monkey. The police have not shied away or stated anything different, so I’m confused where you are getting your facts about the issue…

Think ‘Clerks II’ when Randall uses a word that he didn’t realize was a racial slur. That’s pretty much what I think happened here.

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 11, 2008 10:59 AM
Comment #250325

Sorry Rhinehold, but that is your assumption.

The charge was disorderly conduct. The statute includes phrasing such that for the charge to be in order, some disturbance must occur, such as frightening a child.

It doesn’t pass the smell test. She was likely out of control. The article does not say what generated the fear. It includes a phrase she used at least once. Unless you have access to the full police report, you are speculating.

So am I. All I’m saying is that most police do not tioket people for disorderly conduct for one utterance. If the officer did, she’d have a sound defense. It is doubtful that is what happened here. Saying that is all that happened is misleading. The article does not claim to be a full and complete affadavit.

Posted by: googlumpugus at April 11, 2008 3:34 PM
Comment #250326
Sorry Rhinehold, but that is your assumption.

Sorry, googlumpugus, but it is not.

Cmdr. Michael Kilbourne said the ticket was issued because the ordinance bans conduct that disturbs or alarms people, and one of the boys told police he was scared by her comment.
Posted by: Rhinehold at April 11, 2008 3:39 PM
Comment #250331
As to official oppression, connecting the dots from an out of control cop to Clinton or Obama… Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 09:57 PM

Do you remember the 30,000 new cops on the streets? What strings were attached to get that money? What did my county have to do to get the $125,000 grant money to pay sheriff deputys to babysit marajuana patches? How about the federal mandate instructing county governments to regulate garbage disposal? Let’s not forget the 80 or so men, women, and children who were burned to death in Waco, Texas.

And to bring the point home, the woman was fired by a Presidential campaign for this so-called disorderly conduct.

What kind of president would Obama make if he takes his lead from a mayor and changes his mind like he did in this instance?

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 11, 2008 4:13 PM
Comment #250351

As a former law enforcment officer I would never have ticketed anyone for a single utterance. Likely the woman was either;

A. angry and or irate thus disturbing the child.

B. refusing to leave when ordered to do so by the officer.

C. had escelated the situation to the point that something needed to be done to prevent further, future occurances. Thus the disturbing the peace ticket.

Or some combo. of the above. but the likelyhood of an officer ticketing someone for a simple utterance is implausable unless it incites a riot.

Posted by: napajohn at April 11, 2008 8:08 PM
Comment #250356
but the likelyhood of an officer ticketing someone for a simple utterance is implausable unless it incites a riot.

Is the law the same everywhere, napajohn? It seems that they were just following the law, I’m sure the resulting frackas from using the word in front of ready to boil African Americans wasn’t a calm situation when the police were called and arrived, however the police state quite clearly why she was given a ticket.

It’s nice that you and others want to say that it doesn’t ring true, but it’s not in dispute as to the why she was given the ticket and the police are quite clear on that… It’s not like we are trying to figure out what happened.

Posted by: Rhinehold at April 11, 2008 9:16 PM
Comment #250358

So, Rhinehold, you do have access to the arrest report? I’m impressed if you do.

I’m glad you now acknowledge that other events were likely precipitating. Thanks for seeing the light.

Thanks, napajohn, for the shot of reality.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 11, 2008 9:37 PM
Comment #250362

Rhinehold,
you misunderstand my point. I do not believe that the officers involved violated the law. Nor do I believe that the officers should not have in fact ticketed her.
What I was getting at was that the officers surely where acting on more than a simple utterance. That the media reports are incomplete and leave vital information out of the story.

Posted by: napajohn at April 11, 2008 10:00 PM
Comment #250364

weary,

I know there are Waco wackos. Somehow, I think if you hole up and shoot at ATF agents, you might presume things might go bad. But let’s blame Clinton, not Kouresh. He was completely innocent.

Federal grants always indicate deep conspiracies.

You know, like the Clean Water Act.

I sure there is a point to this somewhere, perhaps it’s under the timfoil hat.

Imagine a President who can change his mind with new facts. Imagine Bush admitting Iraq was a mistake. Imagine that.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 11, 2008 10:03 PM
Comment #250376

googlumpus, I have never seen a Magnolia “tree” in northern Illinois. They are bushes here. I have lived in FL and GA and know what a Magnolia tree looks like. For a Magnolia to grow into something large enough to be described as a small tree, would take decades here, and was most likely planted there long before this family moved there. The neighbor might have enjoyed watching it bloom for years, and felt protective, but should never have called the child a monkey, no matter the behavior. If you have a problem with a child, you always need to take it to the parents.

Posted by: ohrealy at April 12, 2008 12:30 AM
Comment #250377
a ticket was issued because one of the boys told police he was scared by her comment.
When I was a small child I was scared of the old lady when she came out of her house after me.
The police issued the $75 ticket, similar to a parking ticket,
My ol’ neighbor wasn’t issued a ticket because my parents thanked her.
the Obama campaign, says that, she would step down as a delegate
The next president of these United States says this lady should resign from her civic duty because a cop gave her a ticket.
Ramirez Sliwinski told him she has no intention of resigning as an Obama delegate.
Cha-Ching! (that’s lawyer talk)
officers did what they think was right Ramirez-Sliwinski did nothing wrong. the Obama campaign was wrong to ask her to step down
These are facts.
As to official oppression, connecting the dots from an out of control cop to Clinton or Obama… Posted by: googlumpus at April 10, 2008 09:57 PM
This is denial.
Posted by: Weary Willie at April 12, 2008 12:33 AM
Comment #250392

goo, I have seen stories break both ways, police abusing those in their way, and citizens abusing police for doing their job to inquire, investigate, and preserve the peace. I personally like nearly all police, and when I encounter them, I feel a certain citizen duty to cooperate with them in their job as fully as I can. Police saved my physical integrity if not my life when I was accosted by two drunks, once.

But, then, I am fortunate not to have been accosted by a cop who assumed wrongly that I was not a cooperative citizen. That happens too! In some areas, far more than in others.

I look forward to having more cops on America’s streets again. Since Bush came into office with a Republican Congress backing him, the extra Clinton police vanished and crime has grown in proportion, according to FBI stats. Cops on the streets do make a tremendous difference in curtailing certain kinds of crime.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 12, 2008 3:48 AM
Comment #250396

Those extra 30,000 cops were a temporary thing built into the Clinton plan.

The money ran out because it was a three year plan for x number of cops to x number of cities.

In other words, He bought some concessions that curcumvented the constitution.
Then the media blamed it on V.W.Busch!

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 12, 2008 4:08 AM
Comment #250397

Did ya see that? V.W.Busch! Did ya see that? V.W. is foriegn and Busch is a beer.

Prima Facia Bigotry. AArrg! Rearing it’s ugly head!

Posted by: Weary Willie at April 12, 2008 4:14 AM
Comment #250416

David,
Sure sometimes cops act badly. This is not likely one of those instances, nor is this some sort of free speech repression. It was a poor choice for Rhinehold’s argument. A cranky woman who likely overstepped good behavior bounds. I have no idea whether she is racist or not, and to make this minor player some sort of conclusive evidence about Obama’s racial positioning is absurd.

I once witnessed Houston police surround and beat and kick a person. That was back in the seventies when Houston police had a bad reputation. They handcuffed and threw a man into Buffalo Bayou, drowning him. That led to a cleanup of the department. I think most cops are professional and do a great service for their community.

Willie, while government does bad things at times, I’m afraid you go way too far into a rather off-the-wall paranoid rant. There’s enough to worry about in the world without creating X-file league conspiracies.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 12, 2008 1:15 PM
Comment #250417

WW said: “The money ran out because it was a three year plan for x number of cops to x number of cities.”

The money ran out because Bush was elected and a Republican Senate to boot. Democrats fully supported the COPS program.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 12, 2008 1:19 PM
Comment #250418

Ohreally,

I have no idea. My link was from the University of Illinois extension. I’m no expert. They say they can grow there. I’ve been to Chicago several times and have a good friend that lives there. I’ve never paid attention to Magnolias there.

Posted by: googlumpus at April 12, 2008 1:22 PM
Comment #250431

WW said: “The money ran out because it was a three year plan for x number of cops to x number of cities.”

The money ran out because Bush was elected and a Republican Senate to boot. Democrats fully supported the COPS program.

Posted by: David R. Remer at April 12, 2008 7:03 PM
Comment #250447

A major reason why the COPS program expired is that the money for it was being misappropriated and crime experts said that it was a it wasn’t effective in reducing crime.

Look at New York City, for example. They got 442 million dollars under this program and set a target of hiring 4,800 new officers. When the money was spent, they had more than 300 FEWER officers on the force. Typical government behavior.

Posted by: Loyal Opposition at April 13, 2008 12:26 AM
Comment #250449

Do we need MORE cops? I lived in an apartment in a wealthy suburb for one year and was pulled over 4 times, one time was made to blow a 0.00. I worked in Chicago 3-4 months ago and was pulled over in a rental car for driving too close to the center line, which was bs it must have been because of the Florida plate. Long story short I was cuffed while one cop searched the car and the other berated me, they ended up after 45 minutes throwing my license on the ground and telling me that next time they wouldn’t be so nice…I did NOTHING.

Cops are glorified tax collecters, with I guess some sort of God complex. Where do you always see them? Saving us from those bastards going 65 in a 55. Yes more cops, are they in bed with the insurance companies or something?

Posted by: andy at April 13, 2008 1:26 AM
Comment #250451

This whole thread is ridiculous and is illustrative of what is generally wrong with the USA today. With all the really important issues that face us today, it should be disturbing that we actually pay heed to such nonsense and let this kind of crap distract our focus from the real issues that threaten to dismantle our society piece by piece. Other peoples of the world pay attention to this phenomenon as well as the ‘powers to be’ inside the elitist inner-circles of power here at home and use it quite nicely to their advantage. You play into their hands when you let them use you as is being shown in this thread. They love it. How does it feel to be used? You people are pathetic. Get a life and use the two peas of intelligence that you still retain to solve the real problems of the world. Things like this are demeaning and a terrific waste of time and talent and at the very least should be beneath us all.

Posted by: Glenn Sand at April 13, 2008 4:54 AM
Comment #250487

Glenn Sand

like foghorn leghorn once said “your talkin but ya aint sayin nothin”. show us the way bodhisattva.

Posted by: dbs at April 13, 2008 4:30 PM
Comment #250507

My sincerest apologies Sir Sand. Believe me when I say I was unaware your brilliant mind would be checking my mildly retarded mind’s comments. I perused (that word is for you not sure of spelling) your page and surely you are the answer my lord (sarcasm).

Anyway, sorry for my earlier post but I was really hoping that napajohn or someone else had some insight as to police policy. As Mr. Sand has pointed out I’m not the brightest bulb but it just seems that my rights were violated in some way. But I didn’t want to change the subject and if I did I really do apologize but not to “Grumpy Glenn”.

Posted by: andy at April 14, 2008 12:42 AM
Comment #250508

Btw…for all who want enlightened lives just click under Glenn Sands name for his website. Check out the Asian man and Bush’s ballon quotes. This, my friends, are life changing quotes if read with an open mind.

Posted by: andy at April 14, 2008 12:51 AM
Comment #250515

sounds to me like you had two ******* cops andy. By what I read there where no outright violations of your civil rights but throwing your license on the ground and such is childish. Some become officers because they love pushing people around. Some become officers to try and make this place better for us all. One guess as to which kind you encountered. I find the behavior reprehensible but not a civil rights violation. If I was the supervising officer over those two a reprimand would be the strongest thing I could do. You should document the encounter and send it to your local police chief, or media outlet. You want bad behavior stopped, the best way is to expose it.

Posted by: napajohn at April 14, 2008 9:45 AM
Comment #252065

napajohn, thanks. And I was somewhat short with them. The more questions they asked, which I felt became more and more none of their business, the shorter my answers became. I have ran across many great officers also which I’m sure you are one.

Posted by: andy at May 4, 2008 1:46 AM
Comment #253572

The Obama group has no problem using sexist language but rants and rages and whines regarding others.

The hypocrisy has been appalling and chilling.

As a result I now have no decent hope for this next election.

Hillary had better solutions and knowledge but whinning and the media seem to call the shots. How low have we gone?

Posted by: newman at May 24, 2008 2:26 PM
Post a comment