Bring me the head of George Zimmerman!

Excellent article Dr John…I would just like to add to 5 things that should have-would have for Obama…I just finished reading some GREAT INFO on HOW MUCH OF A BAD A$ T. Martin was and what has made me so BEFORE “The Night”…for the past week like for most..the only thing on TV was EVERY BLACK lawyer/expert except for a rare few..talked about he was guilty of MURDER/THE DEATH of a CHILD…through the past 16 months a only heard abouth this case in bits and pieces until it went to the jury but somewere along the way I heard that TM “THE CHILD” was really not the “POSTER CHILD” anyone would love to have…this morning I GOOGLE (what do you get when you mix AZ watermelon fruit juice with Skittles and Robitussin DM) “LEAN”
PLEASE…EVERYONE and I mean EVERYONE that wants to know why GZ said “it looks like this guy is on “DRUGS”…you will get the FULL story about T. Martin and “LEAN”…EXCELLENT READING…I’m sure that O’Mara wanted to bring it in along with the WEED…BUT…the TOP-COP’S puppet judge kept that out..REALLY ?….they want to talk about MIND-SET…Google the article and you will see were T. Martins mind was along with Rachal telling him that “You don’t want this “creepy a$ cracker” getting to your little brother”
Can someone ” STAND AND DELIVER”….you want to stop Obama/Holder fire storm…get the truth out…make the trouble makers look like A-holes…should not be hard to do !!!!!

Natalie Jackson, who works for the law firm representing Sybrina Fulton/Tracy Martin in their quest to get rich off the death of their son, said in an interview:

Natalie Jackson, co-counsel for the family of slain Florida teenager Trayvon Martin accused the nearly all white jury that acquitted George Zimmerman in the February 26, 2012 shooting death of Martin in Sanford, Florida of viewing Martin as “the black boogeyman everybody is afraid of.”

The jury was comprised of five white women and one mixed race woman believed to be black-Hispanic.

Jackson made the racially inflammatory charge in an interview with Bright House Networks’ CFNEws 13, a cable TV news channel serving central Florida, broadcast on Wednesday.

Jackson criticized juror B-37, who spoke out this week on CNN, for not identifying with Trayvon Martin as her own child. Jackson compared the juror’s lack of identifying with the 5’11” 158 pound athletic 17 year old black male to the universal sentiment for two year old Caylee Anthony, a central Florida white female found murdered in 2008 whose case similarly garnered obsessive national attention.

While Jackson said “everyone has to accept” the jury’s verdict, she accused the jury of racism and basing their decision on “emotional elements.” Jackson accused juror B-37 specifically of deciding the case on “other things besides the law” for stating her opinion of Zimmerman as a good person.

Asked what she thought changed the jury to vote not guilty after the initial vote of three for acquittal, two for manslaughter and one for second degree murder, and what was missing in the prosecution’s case, Jackson said, “I think there was not a real dialogue on race. I think that the fact that race played a part in this and how even when it came down to the defense putting on a witness who talked about crime at her house, being burglarized in 2011 (note: by two black males while the white woman resident hid in the house with her young child), and that was associated with Trayvon, a person George Zimmerman didn’t even know, that you know to me that, that brought it in. You have a picture of Trayvon shirtless that was shown to the jury–an upshot of a 17 year old body shirtless. You have silhouettes of a hoodie person and silhouettes of George Zimmerman. And that silhouette looked hulking over George Zimmerman. And it was, it was the black boogeyman that everybody’s afraid of.”

Jackson was asked about her expressed confidence before the trial that an all-white jury would convict Zimmerman and what she thinks about that now.

“I’ve always thought it was, I’ve always thought that (the racial make-up of the jury would matter.) The reason I wanted a white jury was because I wanted to see how far we’ve come in America. If people would base their evidence on the information that was presented in trial and base it on the common sense of this case, because I thought if they did that then surely George Zimmerman would be convicted.”

Asked what that meant about America, Jackson said, “I think we’re seeing it with the demonstrations. I think we’re seeing that people are not happy with the justice system, they’re not happy with the way that young black males are thought of in this case. And that’s why it was important to have a white jury. It was important for America to see that people who said, “Surely you can’t do this!” you know, they need to see where we are. This is not a po–we’re not in a post-racial society. Race certainly plays a part in everything that we do in life. And so now, that was to me the reason I wanted the white jury. It was the tough discussion. It was either the confirmation or the disappointment. And many people got the disappointment. And now, let’s talk about it.”

While expressing support for the prosecution in the interview, Jackson went on to reiterate her criticism of the prosecution for taking race out of the case. Jackson also made more direct her accusation that the defense engaged in race-baiting.

“The one thing that I’ve said was missing and I’ve already told you that of this case was that the element of race was taken out. And the only person that presented an element of race was the defense and they presented the ‘scary boogeyman black boy’ to the jury. So I think that if there was any tactical mistake it was that mistake.”

Jackson then went on to accuse the jurors of being liars and racists, “I will submit to you all of them will say that race played no part in this case when we all know that it did.”

Jackson’s blasting of the jury as racist follows softer attacks on the jury made by two of her co-counsels in interviews with Greta Van Susteren, host of the Fox News Channel show On the Record. As an experienced trial attorney, Van Susteren was quite upset with her guests’ attacks on the jury.

When O J Simpson was found innocent of the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, I, along with millions of others, believed he was guilty. But the prosecution team of Marsha Clark/Chris Darden put on a lousy case. It also needs to be noted that there were white people on the Simpson jury, not just blacks. I don’t remember Al Sharpton, or any of the other race baiters who earn a good living off the Black Grievance Industry, complaining about that decision. I don’t remember rallies of white people demanding O.J.’s murder, claiming they were going to take the law into their own hands, seeking justice for Nicole and Ron.

You see, most people accept the ruling of a jury in our nation. But not this time. There is too much to be had by by Obama and Sharpton by promoting even more racial strife. Nothing like moving this nation backwards. But then, we do have a president that “leads” from behind.

Like the corrupt drunk sheriff in a B movie, Holder should just open up the doors and allow the mob to have their way. Then the mayor/community organizer can make another empty speech and the town folk may put down their firebrands and pitchforks. However they will still have the option of looting innocent store keepers.

@Greg:

no meaningful discussion will take place.

You’re right. The “meaningful” discussion ended with Dr. King’s death and when Jesse Jackson found out he could become a millionaire promoting racial strife.

@Greg:

The President’s comments are both meaningful and pertinent—assuming that a person isn’t too ignorant of reality, too bigoted, or too unintelligent to take that meaning in.

He needs to be giving that message to Al Sharpton who is trying to stir up racial division.

Some people are apparently so insecure about the merit of their position on the Zimmerman case that they’ve got to continue defaming the reputation of a dead kid in an effort to prop it up.

Again, another example of how Obama is a disgrace to our country. Race relations are worse than ever under Obama. This is just another example of how he continues to dichotomize the country and destroy the melting pot. Good job Mr. President! Go play another round of golf-we’re better off when you’re not around.

@Greg: That’s your biased opinion based on wishful thinking. Simply repeating things ad nauseum doesn’t make them true.

You are indoctrinated and being guided by a cult of personality, throwing out the usual cry of “bigot.” Well, it simply doesn’t work that well anymore when your president is publicly lynching someone in spite of and against the rule of constitutional law, when your president is the textbook definition of a “bigot”.

I’m sorry Obama isn’t the person you thought he is. Time to do some soul-searching rather than devolving into just another internet troll. You’re adding nothing to the discussion beyond showing us you choose to see Obama in the light that is most favorable to your identity. Your insecure in your own position, so now you just lash out and think we should suffer.

No one is insecure about a position of Zimmerman as innocent and non-racist: it’s fact. You are lying to yourself and others because you simply can’t face the truth that things haven’t supported your hopes. Your support for GZ as racist slayer and Martin as innocent kid is a narrative fed to you by the media and president. You’re merely a junk-yard dog protecting someone else’s trash. Cowboy up, use your brain, and stop trying bark at those you don’t agree with. Your deductions aren’t your own — just propaganda fed to you. Not intelligent. Not worthy of real conversation. This is the true pestilence that is gripping the nation: ignorant fears translated into hostile actions by the sycophantic mob.

Stop toeing the line provided by corrupt bureaucrats and start thinking for yourself.

@Nathan Blue, #15:

The interesting thing about the far right is that they’ve become so thoroughly indoctrinated that they believe anyone who disagrees with their world view surely must themselves be a victim of indoctrination. This sort of thinking is a manifestation of a doctrinal defense mechanism that’s part of the right wing propaganda package, included to create precisely that effect. In the propaganda package, it takes the form of a frequently repeated suggestion that you can’t trust any information sources other than those which constantly hammer home the approved messages—many of which appear inconsistent or patently false to anyone thinking outside of the increasingly insular right wing box.

Even observing and understanding this, it still astonishes me that two facts can be placed side-by-side in such a way that a contradiction becomes totally obvious, yet it will apparently remain invisible to those sufficiently indoctrinated. I’ve sometimes wondered if those who are strongly conservative might not be psychologically predisposed not to question, and to defend any paradigm that’s already been taken in. There does seem to be a correlation between religious fundamentalism and conservatism, for example. In both, there’s a strong tendency to avoid questioning transmitted, underlying principles, and to perceive thinking that lies outside the belief system as a serious threat.

Hey, I just thought all of that up myself.

@Greg: You’re putting the face you’d like to fight on anyone who is unlucky enough to suffer your political point of view . . . and disagree. Far right? Who is “far right?” Oh, those you’ve identified in your narrow crusade . . . and you post on a non-liberal blog, reinforcing the very views you find so vile?

But to easily address your babble: you’ve become what you hate. All that you spout is exactly what you think you are combating. You are the bigot, the religious zealot, the hate-mongering nut.

As I said, time to do a little soul-searching instead of blathering on. You have a fabricated archetype that you draw posters here into, valiantly doing battle with a phantom that resides in your own mind.

There does seem to be a correlation between religious fundamentalism and conservatism, for example. In both, there’s a strong tendency to avoid questioning transmitted, underlying principles, and to perceive thinking that lies outside the belief system as a serious threat.

Ah. Need I point out the blatant prejudice and evil of the statement above? Stop being part of the problem and start being part of the solution. Find a real battle to fight instead of hanging onto a broken identity by pestering the “far-right” targets you’ve been indoctrinated into harassing.

It’s not blatant prejudice. It’s a fairly straightforward observation. There is a correlation between religious fundamentalism and right-leaning conservatism. One that is openly politically exploited.

@Greg:

I’ve sometimes wondered if those who are strongly conservative might not be psychologically predisposed not to question, and to defend any paradigm that’s already been taken in.

Human nature has not changed in thousands of years. Much of what humanity has learned in that period has been through a painful process of trial and error. In the ordering of human societies, empirical knowledge consistently trumps utopian blueprints drawn up from scratch because there is no way to calculate or design a better human. It is the Left that consistently does not question its basic assumptions, that ignores data in the name of ideology. Every Marxist/socialist society has produced economic stagnation and tyranny.

Leftists looked at the Soviet Union or Cuba or Red China, and either said that there was never any problem there and everything was beautiful, or they were forced to acknowledge (eventually ) that the dictatorship of the proletariat kept turning in a big pile of sh**, but they explained that this was because the paradigm wasn’t applied properly — the next iteration of the design would get it right. Now they say the revolutions were merely unlucky, hijacked in mid utopian trajectory by opportunistic sociopaths who wandered onto the scene. They fail to have the insight that such people will always be with us, and that perhaps a system that ignores human nature will always be hijacked in this manner and is dangerous and undesirable for that reason alone. I would assert that the hijacking of our own government by Leftist grifters over the last few decades is the latest data point in this set. Don’t worry, they just want what’s best for us, and their massive and unprecedented social engineering initiatives were designed by top men. Top. Men.

Functionally, Marxism/Leftism is a quasi-religion with its prophets, and a set of basic beliefs that are not to be questioned.

The belief that isolated application of pure reason can solve any problem, and that giving priority to empirical data is something low-class stupid people do, was a hallmark of the ancient Greek philosophers. What they accomplished with pure thought was brilliant, and it was not science, and it was often wrong. Marx was a philosopher in this tradition.

Mankind is not perfectible, and any political or social system must incorporate that reality or fail. That belief is what sets conservatives apart from progressives.

@Wm T Sherman: A great post. I remember the media blitz during the Bush years to show that the Reps were winning elections because of the religious right: fundamentalist Christians full of ignorance.

That wasn’t the case, but the myth planted itself within many and still lives on today, as shown posts 17 and 21. There was no self-analysis into the nature of the far left’s own ideology-as-religion.

Mankind is not perfectible, and any political or social system must incorporate that reality or fail. That belief is what sets conservatives apart from progressives.

Brilliant — this, I feel, is the crux of it, regardless of your religion or ideology.

@john: “The sky is green.”

Got it.

@Angel Artiste: Zimmerman did NOT get a fair trial — he did GET a fair and CORRECT verdict.

@John: Nutshell contents there — congrats my good man!

@Nathan Blue: Nathan — a fabulously accurate characterization of the liberal thought process — and I quote:

As I said, time to do a little soul-searching instead of blathering on. You have a fabricated archetype that you draw posters here into, valiantly doing battle with a phantom that resides in your own mind.

@Budvarakbar: Thanks. I’m sure there’s more to it, but most of these “discussions” are a simple revealing of what our ultimate concern is.

Truth is, we are being drawn into these debates about the federal gov, but away from the things that affect us the most: home life, local government, and state government.

Federal issues have become the bloodspot of this nation. We argue and spit, but we have no control whatsoever. It has to come from the groud up.

@Wm T Sherman: Very Nicely stated.

@Old Guy:

Maybe just another OFA paid troll?

Retire05 says that Trayvon texted that Fulton kicked him out. This same woman abandoned him when he was 3. He was brought up by his step-mother until the father switched to woman number three 12 years later and dumped him back on Fulton. The step-mother was the only mother he ever had and she said he didn’t use bad language when he was with her. They shoved the step-mother in the shadows; she was not even asked to testify. Secret denunciations that Holder is resorting to now in order to frame Zimmerman is a method used in totalitarian countries.
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/zimmerman-and-the-jewish-question/

@Greg: Stop it Greg . What is there to defame? Expelled from school multiple times. Found in possesion of burglary tools and stolen property. Interested IN and a willing participant in MMA stYle fights. Interested in purple lean (made from skittles, cough syrup and arizona watermelon fruit drink), with liver damage consistant with frequent use of such a drink, whose side effects include paranoia an extreme aggresiveness. Instigator of an unprovoked and violent assault .

We live in a nation where anyone can get any job and live anywhere they want to. We live in a nation with a President who is not the same old white guy whose been screwing us for decades. And yet some people would choose to believe that they are still oppressed.

Rise above. No one is persecuting or oppressing you. Get out of that mindset and make something of yourself.

I grew up in a place where being white was just cause for assault on a daily basis. I had black friends in the classroom, but at the bus stop we were enemies. They couldnt be seen associating with a nerdy, skinny, thick rimmed glasses wearing white boy. They would punch you in the back of the head in the hallway between classes for no reason. They knocked out my front teeth simply for being white in the hallway. And nothing was ever done about it. The school never pursued it or suspended anyone, and criminal charges were never filed – except the one time in middle school when a huge white guy who was 16 – too old for middle school – attacked me.

Me and my group of friends were accepting of anyone. It didnt matter if you were black, white, asian, male, female, fat, skinny, transsexual or what. We were a tight knit group who didn’t judge anyone for anything.

From my perspective, the world certainly was racist – but not against blacks. It was against white people.

To retire 05.

The step-mother, the woman who brought him up is Alicia Stanley. She was on Dr. Phil with Robert Zimmerman Jr. And then after many months with Cooper on CNN where she said flat out that she did not see George Zimmerman acting out of racial motives. She seems to be a straight shooter. She’s the only one who might have heard him scream growing up — he would scream for her. They shoved her aside and brought out Fulton, who had no relationship with her son except that he was a minor and had to live somewhere. The father’s new babe Brandi obviously didn’t want him.

@Greg:

Finding fault with laissez faire capitalism doesn’t automatically make a person a Marxist or socialist.

We have not had laissez faire capitalism in a hundred years. Finding fault with the already highly regulated and restricted form of market economy that we have because of hostility to its fundamental basis (distributed individual decision making and private property) is a sign of a Marxist or socialist outlook.

The fact that mankind is not perfectible does not mean that only the baser drives can be harnessed.

No, it means the fact that people act in self-interest must be acknowledged and incorporated into the system because people are not going to stop doing it. It doesn’t stop just because you declare it over. People work to rise in the Communist Party to get cars, better houses, better clothes, and access to special stores. In our highly regulated welfare state, a government bureaucrat in the Department of Fairness seeks to regulate more things in your life so as to increase their responsibilities and the size of their department. Note also the following reality – when a Communist Party official or government bureaucrat get more money, on average it means everyone else gets less. When an entrepreneur makes more money, on average it means that every one else gets more.

The best road to travel in the real world is a middle path between the extremes.

We have had that, and yet you and your ilk declare it brutal. You want socialism because you think “the right people” will be in charge. They never are.

Selfishness is not a virtue. Greed is not good.

Nobody on my side of the equation says that they are good, only that they exist and are not going anywhere. Everyone, including you, acts out of perceived self-interest. That is not the only thing that motivates people, but it is never goes away. Do recall that the “greed is good” statement was put into the mouth of a fictional arch capitalist by a raging leftist film-maker.

They’re character flaws. They’re moral defects.

And here we are — the absurd search for the perfectibility of man. There are rules and there are punishments – lots of them – for straying outside the bounds of acceptable behavior. What I call self-interest you call greed and selfishness — this is the language of leftist propaganda.

Any system that rewards them without imposing reasonable controls, constraints, and moderating mechanisms will turn into some modern version of a feudal state.

There is no such unregulated system in this country, genius. And many controls and restraints are built in to the free market itself. Sell a bad product, or charge too much, then the competition moves ahead of you. Treat your employees like crap, they go work for someone better. The first major regulation on capitalism in this country was the Sherman Antitrust Act, and it is instructive to note that (1) the purpose of this act was to preserve the functioning of a free market, not inhibit it, and (2) Monopolistic and quasi-monopolistic corporate practices are one of the preferred techniques that the current regime uses to extend its power and make money for itself and its friends.

Those who accumulate the most will become insatiable masters, while those who prefer more balanced lives will become their slaves.

You sound rather – excited. There are many ways to accumulate excess power, and to completely ignore that statism is one of the ways, is intellectually dishonest. What we have had for a hundred years is an increasingly regulated market economy that constrains the “base desires” that you have denounced – UNLESS one cultivates friends in high places in the government – and this latter tendency has exploded since 2008. It’s gone from a problem to a catastrophe. Friends of the Democratic Party can grow rich with special arrangements (General Electric, Solyndra), but their enemies are denied access and prosecuted with regulations that don’t even necessarily have a legal basis (Gibson Guitars).

There are no angels who can be put in charge to make everything fair. The Founding Fathers understood this, and the machinery of government that they constructed, the checks and balances, the representative instead of direct democracy, absolutely was intended to incorporate this reality.