Just when you think Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio can’t say anything even more demeaning, he up and proves he is still a mf’n idiot…
The clips oozing out of Fox News this week have been more foul than usual. The stench of white entitlement is almost more than I can stand.
If you want to be hateful and xenophobic, the best person to bring on for that could be Joe Arpaio, King of Arizona. Here, Arpaio helpfully claims that his tent prisons for Mexican immigrants are way better than the tents holding the Central American children at the border.
Not only that, but he’s here to inform all quaking Fox News viewers that these kids are just drug mules anyway. At least, the ones who aren’t a public health threat.
What really has Arpaio steamed, though, is that he’s still under investigation for how he treats his prisoners. At one point, he told Cavuto his tents “are like Hilton hotels compared to where they’ve got [refugee children] now.”(Crooks & Liars)
You know, I never thought I’d ever say this but if someone ever – God forbid – shot ole’ Sheriff Joe, my first thoughts wouldn’t be along the lines of ‘what happened?’ but rather ‘does the shooter need more bullets?’
There’s a very interesting, well-written – and very darkly toned, rhetorically speaking – article by Ta-Nahesi Coates over at The Atlantic on making the case for reparations for African-Americans as a result of the centuries of maltreatment they’ve received at the hands of America et.al (maltreatment that would, in my honest opinion, constitute nothing short of crimes agst. humanity anywhere else in the world); for what its’ worth, its’ high time that this country started paying that infernal bill….the sooner the better, I say.
H/T to Crooks & Liars
To borrow a quote from comedian Ron White: Mr. Hannity (and I use that term very loosely), how the hell do you sleep at night, you fucking prick?
Is there really any justification for plotting and laying in wait to murder a couple of lawbreaking teenagers? Yes, they shouldn’t have broken into Byron Smith’s home, but when accumulated possessions end up meaning more than a human being, something is seriously wrong. The killing of Haile Kifer and Nick Brady was not accidental. (Byron) Smith set up a scene to make people think he wasn’t home, and then waited…(Media Matters via. Crooks & Liars)
Note the bolded italics above…in essence, what Byron Smith did was premeditated, capital murder. Continuing:
On April 29, Minnesota resident Byron Smith was convicted on two counts each of premeditated first-degree murder and second-degree murder in the shooting deaths of Haile Kifer, 18, and Nick Brady, 17. Brady and Kifer were killed on Thanksgiving Day 2012 after breaking into Smith’s home.
While homeowners have broad latitude in defending their residences from intruders, a jury believed that Smith went too far. Prosecutors compared Smith’s actions on Thanksgiving Day to the setting up of a deer stand. After spotting a neighbor he believed had previously burglarized his house, Smith moved his car to make his home seem unoccupied and then waited in his basement “with a book, energy bars, a bottle of water and two guns.”
Smith also set up an audio recording which captured what transpired. After breaking a window, Brady came down the basement stairs and was shot two times. Smith was then heard saying, “You’re dead,” before firing a third shot into his face. He then put Brady’s body on a tarp and moved him to another room. Moments later, Smith wounded and then killed Kifer execution-style with a shot under her chin.(Media Matters via. Crooks & Liars)
Now its’ one thing to defend your home from unlawful entry; most every state has such laws and had this been one of those situations, we wouldn’t be here discussing it. On the other hand, last time I remember, in most states lying-in-wait for someone and then killing them is a whole other nasty ball of wax…and Sean Hannity has the stones to defend him?
To paraphrase Joseph Welch’s immortal words…
Have you no sense of decency anymore, Mr. Hannity? At long last, sir, have you no sense of decency?
You know, it smarts whenever I come across an article over at the conservative website American Thinker and come to realize that they’re right on something….in this case, they may actually be right.
A little background: in August 1982, a man named Anthony Porter was arrested for the murders of Jerry Hillard & Marilyn Green; Porter was later convicted and sentenced to death for those murders. In 1998, a state judge granted him a mental capacity hearing on the grounds that he was not mentally competent to be executed; now, it was during this hearing that a Northwestern journalism professor, David Protess, along with a group of Northwestern journalism students and private investigator Paul Ciolino, announced that they had uncovered evidence not only contradicting Porter’s guilt but also pointing to another individual, Alstory Simon, who later confessed (under duress, if reports are to be believed) to the murders and who now currently is serving a 37yr. sentence for those murders.
Now, the name Anthony Porter should be familiar to death penalty opponents; after Porter’s death sentence was commuted by then-Gov. George Ryan (who later commuted all death sentences in the Illini State), Porter was later released from prison following Story’s confession and plea agreement on the murders in question. However – and this is where I think American Thinker gets it right – it may indeed be that it was Anthony Porter and not Alstory Simon who committed those murders…
If this is the case – and you can click the AT link to see what the current state of affairs on this sordid tale are at present – then frankly heads should roll; this is precisely the kind of malicious misappropriation of justice that screams for federal investigation. To be fair, though, for all the above, let us not forget the victims in this case – Jerry Hillard and Marilyn Green – who may never get the justice they deserve.
Somewhere the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson and other high-spending campaign donors are smiling…
The Supreme Court pressed ahead on Wednesday with the majority’s constitutional view that more money flowing into politics is a good thing — even if much of it comes from rich donors. By a five-to-four vote, the Court struck down the two-year ceilings that Congress has imposed on donations by individuals to presidential and congressional candidates, parties and some — but not all — political action groups.
The main opinion delivered by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., said confidently that corruption in politics will be kept in check by caps — left intact — on how much each single donation can be. Removing the ceilings on the total amounts that may given in each election cycle will not undermine those limits, Roberts predicted.(ScotusBlog)
This has problems written all-over-it when it comes to campaign finance laws, especially in regards to campaign limits in an election cycle; one of the very reasons for those campaign limits was to lessen the very corrupting nature of campaign spending. It’s a basic rule: he who spends the money makes the rules and this decision gives the Kochs’ of the world carte blanche to spend gazillions in campaign from top to bottom.
It could’ve been worse, though…
Although the Roberts opinion spoke only for himself and three other Justices, Justice Clarence Thomas said he agreed with the result, making a majority for eliminating the two-year ceilings. Thomas said he would have gone even further to free up even more donations in federal campaigns. He would have overruled a 1976 decision (Buckley v. Valeo) that gives contributions less constitutional protection than spending during campaigns. He added, though, that the Roberts opinion “continues to chip away” at the 1976 decision’s foundations.(ScotusBlog)
And you wonder why Supreme Court nominations are fought over as much as they are; in Thomas’s bizarro world of campaign spending, one should be able to spend as much as one desires without any appreciable limits. Think about that one the next time you step into the voting booth…
Links of interest…
—McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, 12-536
—ScotusBlog Coverage of the McCutcheon case
—New York Times: Supreme Court Strikes Down Aggregate Limits On Campaign Contributions
—Think Progress: How The Supreme Court Just Legalized Money Laundering By Rich Campaign Donors
H/T to Crooks & Liars
Reading this Atlantic article about the thirty-year struggle to free Glenn Ford from Louisiana’s death row for a murder he did not commit, I can’t help but wonder how much longer we as a society can tolerate capital punishment, which is more and more becoming an increasingly inhumane, cruel and barbaric practice which should be outlawed across America…then again, given the increasing divisions across America at present, I have to wonder if we haven’t become as inhumane, cruel and barbaric as that ultimate punishment we still use in this country.
President George W. Bush’s former chief strategist Matthew Dowd on Sunday likened Christians in Arizona who are using religion to discriminate against LGBT people to Islamic terrorists.
Last week, Arizona’s legislature passed a bill that would allow business owners to assert religious beliefs as an excuse to discriminate against gay and lesbian customers.
On Sunday, ABC’s Martha Raddatz asked Dowd to predict if Gov. Jan Brewer (R) would sign the bill into law.
“I think, in the end, Gov. Brewer is probably going to veto this because it seems like an easy veto for her to do because of everything that’s going in the business economy there,” Dowd explained.
“This is one of those problems when people use religion as a way to sort of enforce discriminatory practices,” he continued. “People used religion back in the 1860s when they defended slavery. They used religion to defend slavery.”
“We’ve used religion to go to war. People have criticized Islam because they use religion to fight people and kill people. This is the problem with that [bill].”(Crooks & Liars)
I’m of two minds here. On the one hand, it is refreshing to hear someone on the right finally speak the truth about the base of the Republican Party (and the party itself)…on the other hand, this is what you get when you pander to the lowest base elements of humanity.
And you wonder why religion, in general, gets a very bad name? This would be a good reason why.