The "Godfather" Of Pizza Becomes GOP Flavor Of The Moment.

From AA+ Bonds over at Balloon Juice, while pondering the general inadequacy of both Gene Lyons and Salon.com's new "direction":

This seems suspiciously like a post that is designed to divide Democrats as thoroughly as the two articles mentioned, with much the same result: depressed turnout in November 2012.

Might I suggest ignoring this slapfight and concentrating on how Rick Perry may yet kill us all

I mean, I’m sure Karl Rove is loving this but maybe he’s not the best person to seek to please right now.

Say, I thought the up-and-coming GOP flavor of the moment was pizza delivery guy Herman Cain, he of the "9-9-9 plan" and the world's worst 9/11 tribute. After all, not only did he beat out Gov. Goodhair and the other sideshow freaks in the Florida straw poll, but he's trailing the president 34% to Obama's 39% in the Rasmussen 2012 matchups.*

Personally speaking, I doubt Cain's burst of wind will carry him to Super Tuesday and beyond. I expect him to flame out at some point and fade away so the establishment types can muscle their preferred nominee (my bet's still on Romney) into place.

Meanwhile, Gov. Goodhair isn't looking too hot these days, and Michelle Bachmann is....is....*shrugs and walks away*

I feel like ending that with a slow golf clap and a patronizing "Good for you," topped with a faked semi-pleasant smile.



*Article saved as a PDF file in anticipation of Rassmussen Reports' pay wall. Let me know when to host it and I'll download it somewhere.
"Just because I criticize the president doesn’t make me a racist."

Of course it doesn't. You merely assume blacks automatically see you as a "racist" for not agreeing with the president's policies. Because you assume everyone must be on-board with the president to be seen as "not racist." Because somehow supporting the president is a matter of "racial loyalty."

You know what that makes you? That makes you one assumptive motherfucker.

Racism is a charge which is a conversation ender. It stops discourse and should, because of this, be used sparingly and only in the most obvious and egregious cases.

However, racialized speech, which is speech that is often dehumanizing, condescending, and aggressive- passively so quite often, must be examined in terms of who is saying it, and what is being said.

I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's back this bitch up to the beginning.

Professor Melissa Harris-Perry penned an article asking a good question about whether Obama's flagging approval numbers were related to the number of well-meaning white liberals who were disillusioned about Obama not being the Magic Negro™ they all voted for. Bill Maher bemoaned how he ended up with a standard run-of-the-mill white guy pol in blackface instead of the "genuine" black guy he was looking for, and Michael Moore wondered on The View when Obama was gonna start showing off his "gangster" side, apparently standard issue equipment for all blacks.

For well-meaning white liberals who fancied themselves as being enlightened individuals who not only understood "race," but also considered themselves above "race" and viewed black individuals and causes with an open mind, Prof. Harris-Perry's article stung hit a vein. All of the hard work they did and black folks still see them in the same way they see those godawful Teabaggers? Essentially, "Us? Racist? No way, you're just over-reacting/being overly sensitive/crazy/whiny."

Sometimes, I'm not even sure if it is racism that's involved. That's the whole problem with parsing the motives of most folks when it comes to blacks and many other races - the well of social and political discourse was poisoned by racial discrimination from this nation's beginnings. Reconstruction offered on of the rare, genuine moments to detoxify the well, but the expediency of keeping some aggrieved groups of people satisfied and on their side short-circuited that opportunity and since then, the poison's continued to flow unabated.

The poison was once overt and "out there." You could see the symptoms as plain as day. Over time, it evolved into something so vague, so transparent, that it's become something akin to AIDS -- it may look like it's all good on the outside, but there's a war going on inside. That means I, as a person of color, have to wonder if there's a racial subtext behind the way many white liberals are behaving about Obama, because so many people who may disdain the president based on some ill-conceived stereotypes, but they're not gonna tell you outright and be embarrassed in public -- instead, they'll smile and say it was nothing.

I can recognize the racially charged Teabagger bullshit. The overt displays of disrespect for the president (remember "YOU LIE!"?), overt name calling ("Socialist Kenyan"), outright refusal to accept him as the president of these United States and equal refusal by conservative Congressmen to work with him for the good of the nation. Everything short of calling him a "Nigger," since that finally wake the nation up to how Obama's been treated and effectively put whoever or whatever group that said it out of polite media circles for good. I can see that.

This rather insidious, low-level, passive-aggressive racism that seems so dismissive, condescending and blithe...it's hard to see it at first glance. It's the sort of unthinking, unconscious racism that one makes a quick quip about, with absolutely no introspection as to whether that should have been said at all. It's pretending you know more about the mistreatment of a group than the actual members of the mistreated group, while expecting the member you're talking to to nod in both agreement and deference. It's all voiced in a way that causes a black liberal to question whether their white counterparts are more than what they seem to be.

For instance, instead of seeing Obama as a president who could change the way this country is run, he was seen as a Magic Negro™ type capable of fixing America's woes in just a few months. Others saw him as a living trump card against people calling them "racists." Yep, somehow supporting President Obama inoculates you from accusations of racism. Over time, President Obama proved he wasn't the Magic Negro™ many white liberals were looking for. Dissatisfaction with President Obama's policies grew, rightfully so in some cases, and wrongfully in others. At any rate, the long knives started coming out -- his own supporters started calling him weak, indecisive, effeminate, cowardly, a failure, a punk, etc,. Many people out there want to primary him against a Magic Female™ (usually Hillary Clinton), since the Magic Negro™ obviously didn't work out for them. Notice the constant comparisons between Obama and Bill Clinton, the "first black president."

They wondered aloud if President Obama was too much of his mother's son instead of the fiery black guy they thought they got. That explains Bill Maher's disappointment about the supposed "bait and switch." A lot of people don't see him as being "black," because a black president would have done this or wouldn't have stood for that or enacted this or that. The president is his own man, and I doubt he identifies with race as some would want him to. He identifies with the American people, as a whole.

Nevermind the stereotypical desires by liberals for Obama to show his "black side" or get down and gangster with it. They almost peed their pants when Obama went all Willie Dynamite and put the Congressional Black Caucus on notice. And perhaps that's why the CBC is in such a shitfit over being "called out" when no one else was. Something that whites love to see but won't admit they love seeing by far and large is black people chastising each other in public. In a way, it validates all of the faults and stereotypes many whites see in blacks, plus it's the closest thing they'll get to blacks admitting they've got their own problems. For a group of people constantly being accused of being "racist," it's a refreshing change of pace and a brief respite from feeling like the world's biggest punching bag.

It's no wonder the piece didn't go down well with a lot of liberal whites. Joan Walsh's reaction was that of condescending disappointment in "her friend Melissa" for daring to suggest that she and her fellow contemporaries were in any way "racist." David Sirota dove in to put her in her place, metaphorically speaking, on Twitter. John Aravosis stood behind Joan Walsh, stepped up to the plate and delivered a vicious line drive:

Are you disappointed with Obama simply because you’re a white racist and he’s black? Unlikely. Because if we were all white racists, we wouldn’t have supported Barack Obama in the first place. And we did. Far more than we probably should have.

Damn. I guess this is what Angry Black Lady meant:

At this point, I much prefer the comment section of Fox Nation to the comment section of Salon.com or Firedoglake. At least when you walk into the lion’s den at Fox Nation, you kow what to expect — unabashed, KKK-style racism. But on the left? As a black person, you never know how you’re going to be received.

Maybe on Monday you’re their best friend and they invite you to a panel on their podcast or radio show. But then on Tuesday when you speak out about something that they don’t want to hear, they try to silence you. They demand proof and data. They discount your experiences. They call you divisive. They turn your life experiences into a joke. They play the victim. They start naming black people who agree with them (because Negros are a hive-mind, you see). They tell you about that one time they wrote an article about how racism really sucks and that proves incontrovertibly that they aren’t racist. They play dumb and act like they don’t know the difference between being A Racist, and Saying Racist Shit. They tout their liberal bona fides, thus ending all discussion. White liberals cannot be racist. It’s in the Bible. LOOK IT UP.

Hell, maybe white liberals do know more about racism than the black folks who suffer under it. After all, they helped invent it, didn’t they? Maybe we hapless Negros should just shut up and let the white people talk. Maybe they will tell us what’s best for us. Because apparently a renowned professor who studies and teaches race, gender and politics simply does not understand racism in the way that a white douchebag on AM radio does.

But hey, what do I know. I just used the term “white liberal” — repeatedly — without specifying precisely which white liberals I’m talking about, so I guess that makes me the real racist.

Of course Prof. Harris-Perry fired back, but she was sick and tired of having to defend just about every little thing she said on this and other issues. And I agree -- it's exhausting when you have to refine and break down what you've said further and further for the "benefit" of the affronted and disbelieving, and black commentators are always being told to further explain themselves as to why they say this or that. As I said, it's exhausting.

At least John Cole got it:

As a general rule when a black person or persons tell me something is racist or bordering on racist, particularly people I respect like ABL and TNC, I don’t argue. If I disagreed with them initially or just didn’t notice the racist aspect of something, what I try to do is just be quiet for a minute. Then I try to figure out what it is that made me not recognize something as racist. I’d say a lot of it has to do with the fact that I am a middle-aged white guy from a state with a small minority population, and I just don’t have the same experiences...

And I’m done talking about this crap. I’m seriously sick and tired of some of you who every time ABL posts something, you go ballistic and start calling her a race-baiter. It’s absurd, and ABL isn’t the one who looks stupid. Sure, she is over-the-top and in-your-face, and she’ll admit to it, but maybe you should just take a moment, shut the fuck up and be quiet, and think about why she is interpreting things through a different lens than you are. Or, if issues of race are so unsettling to you, you just scroll past her posts and continue to convince yourself we live in a post-racial America, and you won’t have to trouble your pretty little head with the kind of ugly crap that good people like ABL, TNC, and your President and his wife and beautiful daughters go through every day. It’ll be easier that way. You can tell yourself “I’m not racist, so therefore it doesn’t exist.” It will keep you from grappling with things. It will keep you from saying “Wow. You know, I never knew that something I used to say or do could be perceived as racist.” You’ll not have to deal with the fact that good people can still say stupid ugly things, even when they don’t mean to. You’ll never have to think about the fact that maybe you’ve been doing something or saying something hurtful or ugly without even meaning to, because your intentions are as pure as the Virgin Mary. You can just keep on rolling on, and mutter to yourself about all those hyper-sensitive black people.

He's on to something. Every time the black community attempts to verbalize their experiences and air grievances, they're told they're just "whining." Or being "hyper-sensitive." Or "ungrateful." What some of these folks want is for blacks to finally shut the fuck up about themselves and their troubles, so whites will no longer have to feel uncomfortable about interacting with blacks or feel guilty about NOT interacting with blacks, and so they won't have to hear or see stories of how their parents, grandparents and great-great grandparents treated blacks, or have to deal with the whole "sins of the father" issue. And yes, these are white liberals thinking these things, but they'll never let on to it, even outside of polite company.

This isn't a post designed to beat white liberals or people who don't support or like President Obama like rented mules and re-captured slaves. It's both an observation of how this unconscious racism resides deep in many people and how it takes little to bring it out in a variety of ways.

I couldn't care less what people thought of this piece. Like Prof. Harris-Perry, I'm tired of having to defend what I write to people who will never be satisfied with the answers I give.

"Angry Black Lady Chronicles" has an entire series of posts dealing with the fallout from Prof. Harris-Perry's pieces.

Adventures In Bad Policy: Mexican-Free Edition.


Anyone remember Alabama's House Bill 56? It's the infamous state-enacted immigration law written to target "illegal immigration," only to open the doors to the specter of increased ethnic profiling of the state's Latino population. Arizona's SB 1070 has nothing on what the folks on Goat Hill cooked up:

The Alabama state legislature passed a controversial new immigration bill on June 9 that requires public schools to check students’ immigration status, criminalizes giving an undocumented immigrant a ride, requires employers to use E-Verify to check potential employees’ status, and instructs police to check the immigration status of anyone they stop if they suspect the person of being an undocumented immigrant.

The law is alarmingly tough, eclipsing Arizona's SB 1070 by several measures—including, among other punishments, incarceration and fines for anyone who knowingly employs, harbors, or transports illegal immigrants. Giving an undocumented immigrant a ride to work, offering them shelter, offering them sacrament: All of these acts are, with just the slightest interpretation, criminalized in the bill.

A federal judge is set to rule on the validity of the law today, as the order set down to block Alabama's enforcement of the law expires tomorrow.

As it stands, the law's had a pretty big economic impact on the farming industry in Alabama and other states that enacted similar laws. Latino workers, illegal or not, have pulled up stakes and left for elsewhere, leaving farmers in a jam when it comes to finding cheap labor. Apparently, the natives aren't up to 12 to 14 hours of back-breaking sunup-to-sundown labor for $7.50/hr, at least not without adding an extra $10/hr to that figure. Even the convicts and probationers aren't up to the job.

EDIT: Judge allows key parts of immigration law to stand:

A federal judge refused Wednesday to block key parts of Alabama's new law targeting illegal immigrants, including its requirements to check the immigration status of juvenile students in public schools and for police to verify the status of those they suspect of being in the county illegally.

U.S. District Judge Sharon Blackburn blocked some other parts of the law, which both supporters and critics say is the nation's toughest clampdown on illegal immigration by a state.

Blackburn wrote in her ruling that federal law doesn't prohibit the law's provisions on students or suspects pulled over by police. She didn't say when those and other parts of the law could take effect, but her previous order blocking enforcement expires on Thursday.
- It's good to see the "Occupying Wall Street" movement going on strong, even though I have the distinct feeling it will peter out at some point and die with a whimper. I hope it spreads to other cities -- people need to let it be known they won't tolerate being drained and discarded for financial and political gain.

Not everyone's supportive of "Occupying Wall Street." This fucking guy or gal thinks they're all "a bunch of spoiled brats":

This bunch ought to get down on their knees in thanks that America's capitalist Founding Fathers saw fit to protect the privileges of the dumb and obnoxious along with everyone else.

They should also salute the NYPD and all its officers for paying diligent attention to ensuring that peace and harmony reign in their daze of rage. But no.

Blindly directed pseudo-patriotism and an equally blind subservience to authority, no matter how brusque that authority can be. No name on the op-ed piece, but the tone of it suggests someone who likes their brew in bags, if you get my drift.

- I guess all of the "SUPPORT ARE TROOPS" rhetoric goes out the window when it comes to GLBT servicemen. It really showed how classless the Tea Swillers can be. And the President wasn't about to stand for any of it.

Some people are wondering why Obama can't be that impassioned when it comes to standing up for the black community. And others are wondering if Obama would tell any other group to essentially "stop bitching and sack up" like he told the CBC.

- For those who think the anonymity of the Internet is ironclad, read this. Saying the ongoing drug wars in Mexico are "out of control" would be the understatement to end all understatements.

- The Department of Homeland Security is scheduled to move its headquarters into the western campus of St. Elizabeth's Hospital. There's a metaphor in there, somewhere, I know it.

- The way things are going, most sex offender listings won't be worth much. Not when 16-year-olds and guys like these are being thrown on the list. Once you're on that list, it's pretty much "Game Over" as far as your career and livelihood is concerned.

Stay safe out there. It's not just the meat and pork that's killing folks -- it's the gatdamned fruit, too.

DDSS Hosts A Bake Sale.

Before we move on, notice the difference between the story as reported directly by the AFP and as reported by Breitbart.

First up is the AFP piece via Google News:

A California students' group plans to go ahead Tuesday with a bake sale where Asian- and African-Americans will be charged less than whites, despite triggering a racism row, they say.

Women will also pay less at the "Increase Diversity Bake Sale," organized by student Republicans at the University of California's elite Berkeley campus to protest planned changes in student admission policy.

"The pricing structure of the baked goods is meant to be satirical, while urging students to think more critically about the implications of this policy," said organizers on the Facebook page announcing the sale.

The page lists the price of baked goods at the sale according to race: "White, caucasian, $2; Asian/Asian American, $1.50; Latino/Hispanic, $1; Black/African American, $0.75; Native American, $0.25.

"$0.25 OFF FOR ALL WOMEN!" it adds.

And next up is the Breitbart piece:

A California students' group has sparked a racism and sexism row over plans for a bake sale in which people are charged according to their ethnic background and gender.
Campus Republicans at the University of California, Berkeley say critics have overreacted to their event planned for this week, which they insist is a protest over affirmative action.

The group's Facebook page lists the price of baked goods at the sale according to race: $2 for whites, $1.50 for Asians, $1 for Hispanics, $0.75 for blacks and $0.25 for Native Americans.

"$0.25 FOR ALL WOMEN!" it added.

Notice anything missing? Here's a big hint:

"The pricing structure of the baked goods is meant to be satirical, while urging students to think more critically about the implications of this policy," said organizers on the Facebook page announcing the sale.

Sins of omission can skew a piece into any direction you wish, however subtle it may be.

I thought about holding my own bake sale, in support of the DDSS Blog, of course, with some of the proceeds going towards making sure kids in Alabama have enough toilet papers and pencils to last them throughout the semester. I wasn't sure how to go about it, but here are a couple of ideas I had in mind:


  • Hold the bake sale, but instead of the stratified price structure, all pastries will cost $5 a piece. I'll hold the bake sale in D.C. and Wall Street, allowing well-heeled politicians, investment bankers, stock brokers and military contractors to purchase my goods. Hell, I might even get a contract to supply pastries to some government organization for twice the money per.


  • Hold the bake sale, but modify the price structure. Whites will be charged $3 per pastry, but the pastries themselves will be 100% whole grain, made from natural cane sugar and cruelty-free eggs. Each patron will receive a complementary cup of coffee, brewed from South American coffee beans fermented in the asshole of a 49-year-old "greenster" who lives in a tree, yet has an extension cord strung up for his iPod and iPad.

    Blacks will still be charged $0.75 for their pastries, but the pastries will be discount-bin grade snacks and stale leftovers from Panera Bread. Cheap freeze-dried coffee is an extra for $1.05. When black patrons exit the premises with their goods, they'll be stopped by law enforcement and accused of shoplifting the goods. And since no receipts will be given, there will be little they can do to prove their innocence.

    The Latino experience will be similar to the black experience, except they will be charged $1.25 and instead of law enforcement, ICE and DHS will be waiting for them. The Middle Eastern experience will be similar to the white experience, except DHS will be waiting for them, presumably to take them to "Guantanamo Bay," which for this purpose will be an ordinary room that's been darkened, with two guards posted behind the door.

    This exercise will proceed to ignore Asians, since it's assumed they'll opt for the white experience, anyways.

Chances are this bake sale won't be that much of a success, so I may have to see if I can't be "bailed out" like the big banks have. It's worth a shot.

The Northern Beltline, Urban Sprawl And You.

If you ever looked at a road map of the Birmingham metro area, you'll notice instead of having a full loop like all other respectable cities, Birmingham has a V-shaped bypass serving the southern "Over The Mountain" portions of the city and outlying areas. This is Interstate 459, built in 1984 to spare east- and west-bound travelers from 1-65 the indignity of traveling through Birmingham, and more importantly, the much-maligned I-65/I-20/I-59 interchange known as "Malfunction Junction." It's one of the few roadways in the U.S. where you end up traveling on the wrong side of the road on purpose. And it eats trucks, tankers specifically.

After I-459 was built, bupkis. The fine minds at ALDOT thought about finishing up the loop, and promptly fell asleep for the next 20 years or so. This is what ALDOT does. They think up half-baked and half-assed solutions, and then they sleep on them for about 20 to 30 years. Eventually, they'll wake up and get around to building the damn thing, which usually takes anywhere from a speedy 4 to 5 years or perhaps another 10 to 15. Either way, you get a highway that's at least 5 to 10 years behind the curve, a question that should have been answered 5 to 10 years ago. It took them about 30 years to realize Huntsville needed an interstate highway and that Decatur wasn't gonna break past 65,000 in population anytime soon.

Needless to say, I-459's been a boon to the once-rural but now thoroughly suburban areas of southeast Jefferson County and northwest Shelby County, and not so much for the areas around Bessemer and McCalla. The main issue is how I-459, like most urban and suburban loops, enabled urban sprawl along and beyond its boundaries.

Now let's look at northern and northwestern Jefferson County. It's still largely rural as all get out, thanks to the vast majority of suburban development happening towards the southeast. When it comes to trendy suburbia, west Jefferson County gets no love. Well, ALDOT's woken up from yet another long nap to kick-start construction of the Northern Beltline.

Courtesy of the Southern Environmental Law Center

And here it is, the Northern Beltline, a.k.a I-422. Approximately 52 miles and $4.7 billion dollars of blacktop boondoggle. That comes out to approximately $90 million per mile. At this point, you'd think the road was gonna be paved with solid gold. Also note the hilariously wide arc of the overall route, staying well outside of Birmingham city limits for the most part, passing through a collection of stereotypical small towns and parcels of land owned by USS Real Estate, Jim Walter Resources and several other local interests. Little wonder about the price tag.

The roadway technically begins where I-459 ends, trudging its way through miles of backwoods Alabama landscape and underfed small towns, eventually connecting with I-22 at Graysville, a sleepy small town that, once upon a time, had exactly one traffic light. After passing through Mayberry, the Northern Beltline suddenly grows another branch, headed southwest towards Graysville's larger speed trap cousin, Adamsville. From there, the Beltline continues a northern arc across I-65, Pinson, Centerpoint and a number of other small cities until it finally ends....not at I-459 in Roebuck. Nope, instead it terminates somewhere near the otherwise insignificant city of Argo, about 10 miles away from I-459. And there's some talk about the Beltline extending further into St. Clair County so it meets with I-20. No wonder people are scared it's gonna grow into an "out-of-control" spiral.

The only benefit to the Beltline is the ability to direct truck traffic around the city and away from the aforementioned Malfunction Junction. And it remains seen if law enforcement and ALDOT will have the attention span and the testicular fortitude to enforce a ban on through traffic for trucks.

So, will building start at I-459? Nope. It's gonna start somewhere around here (skip to 5:55). In the middle of nowhere. There's an analogy somewhere, I just can't put my finger on it.

The Northern Beltline has the distinct displeasure of stomping through several fragile ecosystems made more so by years of industrial pollution. Black Warrior Riverkeeper and the Southern Environmental Law Center are not pleased about the Beltline coming to fruition. As much noise is made over environmental affairs in the state, moneyed interests and big industry usually wins out.

The city of Birmingham as it appears today. Never mind the Corridor X bit -- that's already over and done with.

My biggest concern is sprawl. Living outside of Atlanta's I-285 perimeter's given me a front-row seat to how suburban sprawl plays out when left unchecked. Left to their own devices, property developers will build communities and shopping centers with absolutely no regard to traffic flow and commute times -- that's not their problem. Given that and Atlanta's "fuck a grid, mufucka" road layout (a Southern tradition), and you're left with one of the most excruciating commuting experiences this side of L.A. At least Atlanta has MARTA rail -- it helps a little.

It's a big reason why U.S. 280 remains a jawdropping clusterfuck of stop-and-go retail and residential traffic. It's why, in a few years' time, Shelby County commuters will clammor for the widening of Grant's Mill Road, a roadway that happens to cross over Lake Purdy, a large water reservoir for the city of Birmingham. If the Northern Beltline is built, property developers will go nuts. And when that happens...

Before plunging face-first into a decades-long project answering a question that should had been answered back in 1980, let's first try to learn the lessons of Atlanta's I-285, if only to avoid GDOT's screwups and crib their better ideas...nah. Chances are we'll multiply their screwups by a factor of 5 and pocket the kickbacks and graft that come from it.
Courtesy of The Guardian
If 2,000 Tea Party activists descended on Wall Street, you would probably have an equal number of reporters there covering them. Yet 2,000 people did occupy Wall Street last Saturday. They weren't carrying the banner of the Tea Party, the Gadsden flag with its coiled snake and the threat "Don't Tread on Me". Yet their message was clear: "We are the 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%." They were there, mostly young, protesting the virtually unregulated speculation of Wall Street that caused the global financial meltdown.

Good point. For a group of mostly elderly, mostly white Americans with a distinct dislike of anything "liberal" or "Kenyan," they do know how to grab the mainstream media by the balls and lead them around like Katt Williams leading Terry Crews around with a pair of pliers on "Friday After Next".

But when it comes to a young and diverse group of Americans fed up with what they see as the hijacking (yet again) of America's wealth and well-being by extraordinarily wealthy and well-connected individuals and groups, the mainstream media didn't take much notice. Most Americans were blissfully unaware of what was going down. At least until the arrests and abuses started happening. "If it bleeds, it leads," indeed.

At least this was all over the social media outlets from the get-go. Just take a look at the #occupywallstreet Twitter feed. People keep saying this event, which started on the 17th this month (and there's no telling how long it will last), has the potential of becoming America's very own "Arab Spring."

And to that end, the police have been very eager to move off and arrest protesters, despite little to no threats of violence on their end.

Just to be clear, it was the police who turned violent. Protesters were dancing, singing, chanting. No reports of violence from any source that I have. I know many of those people. I would be there if I were still living in NYC. I watched quite a bit of the live feed (up until the police confiscated the video and computer equipment, arrested the media team). I saw nothing even approaching violence from the protesters...

Think about damn-near every G-8, G-11 and G-20 summit held, where protesters were pushed off, beaten down and locked up on orders from the higher-ups. Nothing different here. It's all designed to make people so afraid of the idea of protesting that they'd be loath to do it, plus it inoculates a "healthy" amount of fear-dressed-up-as-"respect" for the LEOs. Some of them relish the opportunity to swing the baton every once in a while.

There's a live feed of the protests, provided by AnonOps. Take a look.

Morgan Freeman Speaks Truth To Power.



Here's a last-minute find of Morgan Freeman on Piers Morgan Tonight. Hat tip to TREGP, although the poor bastard was trying to say something entirely different when he posted the video. Hmm...does he even deserve the hat tip? *cue Philosoraptor*
Courtesy Beverly Taylor @ The Birmingham News

Welcome to the city of Lipscomb, Alabama, population 2,458. Located next door to the slightly larger city of Brighton (3,640) and the lively metropolis of Bessemer (28,657), it's a city that's seen better days. And in order to cover a $250,000 deficit in its operating budget through the end of the calender year, the city decided to host a hot dog fundraiser for $2/dog. When you're reduced to selling hot dogs to cover your city's expenses, perhaps it's time to consider closing up shop.


Courtesy Mark Almond @ AL.com

The above is a portion of Cane Creek Road in Warrior, Alabama. Surrounded by barricades is a sinkhole that hasn't been fixed in about a year. Those barricades have seen better days. So has the road. Jefferson County is still dealing with the fallout of its $3.9 billion sewer debt and its current inability to fund much of anything. Jeffco says this and similar county roads that fall with a city's boundaries are the city's problem. The cities, on the other hand, disagree.

The one thing both stories have in common is the inability to fund well-needed projects and take care of basic civic expenses as an independent city, which there are plenty of in the metropolitan area, and the general unwillingness for these cities to come together as a consolidated city-county metropolitan area.

The benefits of consolidation are numerous:
  • Cities can unify basic utilities and other services that would otherwise be duplicated between cities, potentially saving taxpayers money.
  • Cities under consolidation will have a broader tax base for funding important infrastructure repairs and improvements.
  • The entire county can move forward with economic development as a unified team, as all cities can now reap the rewards of new businesses, attractions and services that make the metropolitan area more appealing to outsiders.
  • Suburban taxpayers will finally have to "pay their fair share" and help fund the services and obligations of the city and county they work in.

One barrier towards consolidating Birmingham and other metro-area cities with the county is the county's massive $3.9 billion dollar debt stemming from borrowed funding for the county's sewer system and the bad financial poker game that ensued shortly thereafter. Another barrier is the general reluctance of the "better run" suburban cities in the more affluent southeastern portions of Jefferson County to merge with something they've been trying to get away from for the past 40 years or so.

I won't bother mentioning Birmingham's tumultuous civil rights past. The fallout from that materialized in the form of white flight, the attendant evaporation of the taxpayer base and attempts by the suburbs to starve the city while directing the flow of money towards their pockets and theirs alone. Cities like Vestavia Hills, Mountain Brook and Hoover would rather see their taxpayer dollars benefit them and theirs alone, as opposed to benefiting the entire metropolitan region.

I envision a lot of things for a consolidated Birmingham metro government: a county-wide transit system that actually works, revitalization projects for the city and surrounding areas, a unified government ready to grab the bull by the horns instead of letting opportunity after opportunity pass by, and a living, breathing example to the rest of Alabama and the southeast that we're all not the clueless numpties everyone makes us out to be. Consolidation would be great, if only there was a spirit of cooperation, which of course isn't anywhere to be found in most cases.

While pondering upon the whole concept of consolidation I started wondering, "how in the world can you get a bunch of cities together that would prefer being their own cozy little kingdoms, to the detriment of the entire metro area?" Answer that question, and you'll have the first baby steps to fixing some of the problems that ail the city and the metro region.


The Man Takes A Good Look At Dr. Casey Wardynski.

Over the past year or so, Huntsville City Schools was busy sawing an anchor off the rickety S.S. School System. That anchor turned out to be former superintendent Dr. Ann Roy Moore, who just so happens to be on the wrong side of America's preferred color aisle, not that it seems to matter much. And the school board didn't let Moore's contract deter them from working over that anchor with a blow torch and an angle grinder -- they paid her an extra $100k to stay on as an advisor of sorts, so they wouldn't get smacked in the face with a lawyer's most favorite words: BREACH OF CONTRACT.

And after a lengthy search, the school board found a guy by the name of Dr. Casey Wardynski. At first I wasn't too interested in blogging something like this because it seemed so...small potatoes. But then I kept hearing some interesting stories about where he came from, and more importantly, what he was doing and who he brought along with him.

I still can't quite grasp why the school board and others love the guy. Maybe it was his military credentials -- after all, he is a retired Army colonel, and this city loves itself some military folk. Perhaps HCS figured they'd get a hard-nosed, no-nonsense leader who'd apply some of that military leadership magic on a school system that seems to be unable to get its collective shit together.

Wardynski's previous job was being the superintendent of Aurora Public Schools. More importantly, he's the alumnus of the Broad Foundation's Superintendents Academy, a program that, to quote Balloon Juice's E.D. Kain, "shapes new corporate reformers to go out and bring school choice and privatization to the masses." Nice, bland buzzwords. The "masses" is a nice touch, too -- gotta patronize the lesser peoples when getting your message across.

I checked up on the batting record of the "star players" that were churned out by this outfit, and it's not looking good:

  • Michelle Rhee, former chancellor of Washington D.C. schools and Broad alumnus.
  • Marla Goodloe-Johnson, former superintendent of Seattle, WA. public schools and Broad alumnus.
  • Brad Bernatek, Director of Research, Evaluation and Assessment for Seattle Public Schools and Broad alumnus.
  • Beverly Hall, former superintendent of Atlanta, GA. public schools. Although not a Broad alumnus, several members of the school board were reportedly trained by the Broad Foundation sometime in 2006.
  • Robert Bobb, current emergency financial manager of Detroit, MI and recent BFSA graduate. The Broad Foundation, along with the Kellogg Foundation, paid Bobb $145,000 a year on top of his $280,000 government salary. Fair bit of change there.
  • Kimberly Olson, former finalist for superintendent of the Dallas, TX. independent school district and Broad alumnus.
  • Arne Duncan, former superintendent of Chicago, IL. public schools, current U.S. Secretary of Education and Broad alumnus.

When you've got shit stacked this high, no amount of window opening or air freshener is gonna make the stench go away. And what of Dr. Wardynski? Well, he did leave Aurora Public Schools with a $25 million deficit.

In other words, it appears to be an outfit that trains present and future administrative staff in how to aggressively run a school system in the corporate sense, with the ultimate long-term goal of discrediting public schools as they are now in favor of charter schools largely run by corporate interests.

And now that he's settled into his new job, he's brought a few friends along:

Wardynski recruited his second-in-command, Dr. Barbara Cooper, from the school system in Aurora, Colo., just as he did with the new CFO, Frank Spinelli. Wardynski joked at last week's school board meeting that John Barry, the Aurora superintendent, is "pretty unhappy" with him.
Wardynski worked alongside both during his own nine-month stint as chief financial officer of the Aurora system.

And in Huntsville, he is paying both better than their predecessors. Cooper will make $141,600 a year as deputy superintendent - about $7,000 more than the maximum salary advertised for the job. The salary range on the posting, which ended Aug. 29, was $84,217 to $134,545.

And while the administrative staff get thousands over the maximum for their jobs, teachers, principals and faculty are being forced to abide by the absolute minimum. Keep in mind this the same school system that doubled up on bus routes and consolidated schools to save money. And also keep in mind this is in the same state where a teacher coming out of her own pockets for things like tissue and pencils is considered a perfectly normal event.

Methinks the fact that the school system is throwing extra money at hiring and keeping administrative staff around while at the same time turning teachers into minimum-wage slaves pisses a lot of folks off. Showering upper management and executives with money while drawing blood from entry-level turnips is an epidemic that's swept the entire nation. I understand you want to attract and keep your best and brightest, just not at the expense of the folks at the ground floor. You know, the people who actually run most of this shit.

Personally speaking, the jury's still out on this guy, although I'm not liking what I'm seeing this early in the game. And now for some commentary from the peanut gallery over at AL.com:

These salaries are not excessive. Good leadership comes at a cost. If you want cheap leadership, I understand that members of the previous school administration are available.

Don't you just hate it when people attempt to justify waste and cronyism when it works in their favor?

BTW, Geek Palaver, Redeye's Front Page and Merts Center Monitor has much, much more on this and other crap involving HCS.
The whole concept of the "just-world hypothesis" is interesting. It's essentially a coping mechanism that shields people away from the feeling of overall vulnerability, in order to maintain the mystique that you're in control of your own affairs and that you and yours aren't susceptible to the slings and arrows that seem to plague others. Whether it's poverty, discrimination, sexual assault or even death, if you can believe that those are things that happen to other people for some reason that they could control, you won't feel so vulnerable.

The economy is still circling the shitter, for all intents and purposes, and with the growing number of unemployed and the domino effect unemployment has on people's finances and social lives, it's no wonder the just-world hypothesis is catching on with people who don't want to see what's happening to their fellow Americans happen to them and theirs.

That could explain the following. Or perhaps it's just a case of Michigan Republicans being assholes, again:

An undetermined number of Michigan's nearly 2 million food assistance recipients will lose the help under new eligibility requirements the state will begin using in October.

Michigan has determined food assistance eligibility based only on income for roughly a decade. A new policy will include a review of certain financial assets starting Oct 1. The requirements will affect new applicants right away and existing recipients when their cases come up for review, which typically happens once every six months.

Those with assets of more than $5,000 in bank accounts or some types of property would no longer be eligible for food assistance. Other assets that would count against the cap include vehicles with market values of more than $15,000 and second homes, depending on how much is owed on the properties.

Apparently this is Michigan governor Rick Snyder's attempt to get those freeloading Cadillac-driving welfare queens off the public assistance rolls. For those who're already living on the bleeding edge of poverty or somewhere close to it, it's not gonna affect them much. These people thrive on paid-for beaters worth $500 to $2000, dream about owning second homes and the only time they'll have more than $5k in the bank is during tax season.

But this is gonna suck for those once-well-off middle class families who fell on hard times and need a helping hand, as opposed to a boot to the face. Unless you're willing to sell off your car and other assets, and then drain away your bank account, you're out of luck as far as the Rickster is concerned. If you have $5k in the bank, then you don't need food stamps until you've run through that $5k feeding yourself and your family. Then and only then will you become worthy enough to be blessed with a helping hand from a government that would rather not lend one.

And conservatives will go along with this. Combine the just-world hypothesis with America's unique Puritanical views on poverty and sense of achievement, and you have a situation where being poor is seen as a moral defect in which the poor are perfectly capable of controlling at their leisure. In fact, poverty is sometimes seen as a leisure activity, with the poor being "lazy" and whatnot. Sometimes I get the feeling these folks actually think the poor enjoy being in poverty.

For those deep in the just-world hypothesis shit, if you can wail on those poors with austerity-minded legislation that instead transfers wealth under your dull noses and into the bank accounts and investment portfolios of your "betters" (the ones whom deserve all of your praise, with wealth equaling smarts and ambition and drive and whatnot), then you can keep on feeling somewhat impervious while satisfying the bitter asshole that lies in just about every person on Earth.

Some assets, such as primary residences and 401k accounts, would not be considered for determining food assistance eligibility.

Gee, well isn't that swell. Most people can tell you the value of their 401k accounts with only one hand, at best. If they're lucky to have a 401k. I guess the 30,000 college students who were recently kicked off the food stamp rolls wished they had 401k accounts. The ones that actually do happen to be legacy students in Ivy League institutions.

Food assistance benefits came under some scrutiny earlier this year when it was revealed a Michigan man had continued to get food aid from the state despite winning a $2 million lottery jackpot.*

There are a number of people out there who believe if the government's dumb enough to give out "freebies," they're gonna take the government for all they can. Outside the financial and military contracting sectors, this particular philosophy isn't all that it's cracked up to be. But it's like the fine folks in Texas who took away those last meals from death row inmates on account of one stubborn fella -- it's any excuse to bring the hammer down on everyone for the transgressions of a select few.

*To be perfectly honest, $2 million isn't a whole lot of money, especially if that amount happened to be pre-tax. No wonder that person stayed on food stamps.

Troy Davis Is Dead.

Picture courtesy of Associated Press
Defiant until the end, Troy Davis was executed Wednesday night for the murder of an off-duty police officer. He convinced hundreds of thousands of people around the world, but not a single court, that he was innocent.

As he lay strapped to a gurney in the death chamber, the 42-year-old told relatives of Mark MacPhail that he was not responsible for his 1989 slaying.

"I am innocent. The incident that happened that night is not my fault. I did not have a gun," he insisted.

"All I can ask ... is that you look deeper into this case so that you really can finally see the truth," he said.

Davis was declared dead at 11:08 p.m. The lethal injection began about 15 minutes earlier, after the Supreme Court rejected an 11th-hour request for a stay.

One thing you can say about the prosecutors, police officers, detectives and judges involved in this mess: they got who they wanted. Despite the hole-shot credibility of the witnesses, the lack of physical evidence and the presence of someone who was implicated time and again for the actual crime, law enforcement officials wanted Davis to pay. They made sure to bring his name up early and often, and if it took intimidating witnesses into telling the story that fit the narrative, they did it. No one within the law enforcement community who had their hands on the lever wanted to appear soft on a black man who was an alleged cop-killer, nor did they want to be proven "wrong" about advocating Davis' death. Not even with the literal outpouring of support for leniency towards Davis.

Well, Troy Davis paid with his life. Even the family of slain cop Mark MacPhail admitted it wouldn't bring them much peace or closure.

There's nothing much anyone can do except turn this tragedy into an impetus to review whether we really need the death penalty when the process allows for so many of these wrong calls. The death penalty involves fallible people rendering permanent judgments using a fallible process. Perhaps we should think twice about using such a system when so many innocent men and women get ground up in the gears.

He was convicted on the evidence. He had his appeals. He failed. He's dead. Move along, FACT

Loss of your appeals does not equal guilt. No one wants to blame a failed judicial process and biased personalities for these failures. That not only requires a bit of heavy mental lifting on our part, but it also shakes our "faith" in institutions we sometimes regard to be infallible.

The fucked up part in all of this will come at least 5 to 10 years later, perhaps more, perhaps less. Some independent entity will produce a report detailing how the state of Georgia was clearly in the wrong for executing Troy Davis. Or someone will stumble upon evidence that fingers Sylvester "Redd" Coles or another person for killing MacPhail. Either way, it'll be "too little, too late" for Troy Davis. May God rest his soul and may He forgive the rest of us for our actions.


Picture courtesy of Associated Press


NOTE: Around the same time Troy Davis was put to death, the state of Texas executed Lawrence Russell Brewer for his role in the racially motivated death of James Byrd Jr.

Byrd, 49, was chained to the back of a pickup truck and pulled whip-like to his death along a bumpy asphalt road in one of the most grisly hate crime murders in recent Texas history.

Brewer, 44, was asked if he had any final words, to which he replied: "No. I have no final statement."

His death at the state's hand wasn't any more deserving than the death of Troy Davis. In fact, I'd prefer if Brewer was made to serve out the remainder of his years under a life sentence.
There's a lot of dissatisfaction from the liberal end of the blogosphere over President Obama's performance, largely focusing on what he has yet to accomplish and why he seems so eager to stay on the good side of Wall Street and bend to every single conservative whim. I doubt any liberal or "progressive" elected the man just to see him waffle away and soft-pitch a Democrat majority in both houses, however thin and DINO-plagued it was. Then again, I didn't expect fellow Dems to pout and sit at home back in 2010 while the GOP got its second wind and its mandate to be as obstinate and asshole-ish as they could be.

I bet it pained liberals and "progressives" to see the man they placed so many hopes and dreams upon dismiss his ordained role as a black FDR, LBJ, reverse RWR and MLK, Jr., all rolled up into one half-black "Magic Negro™" and instead play a thoroughly centralist conciliator who gave much, much more more than he got. And it has to piss people off to see the GOP playing from a position of strength while Obama and his fellow Dems choose to portray what liberal and "progressive" voters see as sheer, craven weakness.

There's a lot of focus on what Obama hasn't done or what he could have done. He chose not to go on the warpath against the Bush administration, killing the dream of having George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney on trial somewhere for several counts of reckless assholery. He chose not to dump every single Bush-era appointee he could find. He chose not to push for universal healthcare, full stop, knowing what good it did Bill Clinton over a decade ago. He chose not to unilaterally pull troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq, or embark on a grandiose FDR-type plan to revitalize the economy. Not letting the Bush tax cuts was a bad move that made Obama's brand name mud in the eyes of many liberals. Pushing Wall Street to be nice and stimulate the economy from the top-down with job openings and R&D expenditures, while letting the banks get off damn-near scot-free for running the economy into a telephone pole had to leave a bad taste in everyone's mouths. Not to mention he practically scuttled a "teachable moment" following Henry Louis Gates' unfair arrest - after recoiling from the shitfit pushed by conservatives, he backed down and invited the asshole who arrested Gates over to the White House lawn for some brewskis. And he didn't even use the "bully pulpit" the way we wanted him to.

The man's caught flack from Tavis Smiley and Dr. Cornell West for not stumping for the black community as much as they thought he should. He's catching flack from so-called "emotional progressives" and ideological pure liberals for not being liberal or "progressive" enough and allowing the "Overton window" to be dragged miles toward the right via pickup truck. Jane Hamsher and the "Firebagger" crew have written him off as defective goods and people within his party seem to be preoccupied with practicing their latest "DINO" dance moves and other acts of self-interest. Ralph Nader and Ron Paul are both joining forces to mount a primary challenge against him, something he could do without.

He's been accused of being some sort of corporate Manchurian Candidate for Wall Street, preferring to drive the conservative opposition bonkers with his mere presence, causing Democrats to vote for him a second term as an alternative to froth-mouthed reactionaries and fundamentalists. He's been considered worse than having an actual Republican in office. His "blackness" has been called into question, with people wondering if being raised by a white woman in a thoroughly unconventional environment left him "crippled" in some way.

DADT is finally over and done with, but I have a feeling people are still so pissed off at Obama for not being who they imagined him to be that this small consolation won't be nearly enough to put them at ease. The new jobs bill doesn't appear to do much of anything to help lower the nation's high unemployment rate and Obama appeared to allow himself to be pushed around by the whole debt ceiling "crisis," putting the nation's relative "financial stability" at risk.

Despite all of this, I haven't done what most liberals and "progressives" have done so far and just walked away from supporting the president, and I won't be among the various Democrats who decide to stay home or vote third-party in protest. This isn't some affirmation of slavish devotion to the president or some sort of declaration of unending loyalty, something a lot of people accuse black Democrat voters of. And it's not about how things could be "worse" without Obama in office. It's about recognizing the most pragmatic position to take when faced with a number of other unsavory choices. Scratch that -- it's about not being a fairweather friend to your own crew when things aren't going the way you want them to go or when you didn't get what you wanted.

Of course, that may sound a bit glib, as though I'm telling liberals and "progressives" to suck it up and stick by Obama, but I'm not. This is some rather complex shit I'm trying to unpack, so allow me to unpack it as neatly and cleanly as I can.

Of course I see what Obama hasn't done, but I've also seen what he's managed to accomplish despite a completely recalcitrant legislature and fairweather support from fellow allies. He's kept his head while the Tea Party eroded the sanity of the GOP and left Wall Street scared shitless. He bagged Osama Bin Laden, someone whom Bush became bored with in favor of playing in the Iraqi sandbox. He picked up the American auto industry, dusted it off and helped it gain a new lease on life. And he passed something resembling health care reform. It's not perfect, but at least it's a starting point.

I'm not about to follow some of my fellow bloggers and completely dismiss the man because I didn't get that unicorned pony and a stack of $100 bills shoved under my pillow. I'm not here to say "it's gonna get worse if there's no Obama or [add liberal leader here]." And I'm not about to shit this post up by saying I'm a "realist" or some other such self-congratulatory bullshit. I'm just saying how I feel about the president and why I'm not going to follow the current trend of taking the piss on him.

The man can't simply step over the House and Senate to enact laws he and other Americans want to see. Like it or not, he has to work within the confines of his duties as President and the checks and balances that govern the executive and legislative offices. You can't simply can't push for the man to offer unilateral top-down reform. If you want your liberal agenda to be heard and enacted, you gotta start out from the bottom, work your way up and keep working:

Go out and work for the candidates in the primaries who fit your bill. Show up at their offices and do shitty, dull work for them. Trudge through the rain canvassing on an October Saturday when you’d much rather be at home. Send them some money. If you don’t like who’s running, run yourself.

On an ending note, I bet seeing liberals and "progressives" hit this sort of "rock bottom" is giving conservatives a new sense of resolve. If this keeps up until Election Day 2012, disillusioned liberals and an unconvinced centralist swing base will give conservative voters enough clout to push any one of the 3 stooges (Perry, Bachmann, Romney) into the Oval Office. That's something I'd rather not see, if I can help it.

"They had reduced all of who I am and the history of Jamaica and culture of Jamaica to these negative connotations of weed smoking, black skin, rastas. In this instance, it was meant to be ridiculed and seen as something that was fun and acceptable. It was humiliating as though your race is somehow a costume for baffoonery, as though somehow I was invisible or less than a person. It was really tough to have to walk by that. It’s a very painful reminder of a time when we weren’t considered people. I don’t think that was anyone’s intention but it was still deeply disturbing."

The above comes from Anthony Morgan, law student at the University of Montreal, who was less than pleased with the Hautes Études Commerciales (HEC) business school's attempt to honor five-time World, and three-time Olympic gold medallist Usain Bolt.

Dressing up in blackface was, and still is seen as a way to openly mock blacks and other dark-skinned individuals for the entertainment of fellow whites. Ditto for dressing up in "yellowface" or "brownface." Basically speaking, it's just bad form to do such a thing, even if it is for a noble intention.

There may have been a few people in that picture who honestly and genuinely didn't know any better. And then there are those who knew better, but did it anyway for whatever reason.

When one of the group members noticed Morgan, he allegedly yelled: "Look guys, we’ve got a real black!" He then turned to the crowd and continued chanting: "Smoke some weed! Yeah mon! Yeah mon!"

And then you have the assholes. You'll always have those no matter where you go.

In a rare moment of clarity for the world's largest streaming video provider, YouTube's removed the video listed on the Jamaican Observer, as "a violation of YouTube's policy on depiction of harmful activities." Considering this is the same organization that turns a blind eye to internet stalking and ethnic bigotry in most cases, this is a step up for the Google-owned and operated entity.




Troy Davis Denied Clemency.

"He's guilty," Joan MacPhail-Harris, the widow of the Savannah cop who Davis was convicted of killing, told reporters Monday before the board announced its decision. "We need to go ahead and execute him."

The above speaks to the emotional pain felt by a woman who had lost the love of her life so many years ago. Others may say it speaks to the bloodlust many people get when retributive justice is involved. Either way, Troy Davis is fucked. Tomorrow, he will no longer be on this mortal coil with us and we'll all have to deal with the aftermath of justice perverted.

one less sub human on earth draining our system good ridance too this dirtbag #$%$ cop killer how about his family and other people family this guy has ruined their life we need more public death to detor this problem of crime on humanity
Just let him out,,, he wont do it again, he promisies!!!

You have to wonder if the above assholes would feel the same way if it were their loved ones being put to death by the state.

Of course not. After all, they're assholes. Assholes don't feel a thing unless it affects them and theirs.
The last time I worked for anyone "for free" was back in college, when I was fulfilling my internship requirements at the university's public relations department. Even then it wasn't necessarily "free" - in exchange for an extra helping hand and a number of professionally-made promotional pieces, I received the necessary credits needed to move on in my undergraduate career. The "Georgia Works" program resembles something of the sort, but there are a few things that made it stand out to me.

The program "works" like this: if you're a currently unemployed individual drawing benefits from the state, you have to undergo "workforce training." To fulfill this requirement, you spend up to eight weeks with a willing employer participating in the program. You get to "show your stuff" to what could be your future bosses and fulfill the "workforce training" bit. The employer gets eight weeks of "free labor" from the state, with no obligation to hire anyone from the program. If they do, they save time and money on training. The "intern" still draws unemployment benefits and receives a $240 stipend for transportation, child care, etc,. It's unclear whether that's $240/week or just $240 for the entire period, period.

The reason it stood out to me was because it smacked of "free labor," in the sense that participating employers enjoy what is essentially "free labor" - they don't have to pay these people because the state is taking care of that for them. No benefits, either, unless you consider Medicaid/Medicare one. And when the period is over, the employer has the luxury of dismissing their "intern" for a fresh face and another eight weeks of "free labor." Granted the "intern" can only work under 24 hours per week, but if there was a way to increase the number of required hours per week, you can bet your bottom dollar they would be increased.

"Georgia Works" seems like a win-win situation, except:

  • Job seekers are tied down with a single potential employer for up to eight weeks, when they could be spending their time applying for multiple employers for an increased chance of landing a job.
  • Job seekers are still "working" for peanuts -- those unemployment checks are not as glamorous as the hardened Teabagger conservative makes them out to be. Compared to a genuine job with a paycheck and benefits, they're still barely getting by.
  • Single-parents are once again burdened the most by the program -- it's the hassle of locating and securing daycare arrangements for their kids that makes this program a bitter pill to swallow, and a $240 stipend doesn't go that far when it comes to child care.

Mike Konczal over at "new deal 2.0" did a bit of digging and found out that nearly 70% of the program's 30,000+ participants between 2003 and 2010 were women, and that a surprisingly high number of them only had high school diplomas. Only 16.4 percent were permanently hired by the company they trained under during or at the end of the training period. According to Dr. Eileen Appelbaum of the Center for Economic Policy and Research, two-fifths of the participants who found employment within the program were doing clerical work, with others working in general service industry occupations - hotel maids, fast food workers, drivers, janitors, etc,.

Apparently, the program is such a success that President Obama and others want to promote the program on a national scale. For the administration, it's all about doing something to alleviate the nation's current unemployment crisis. For conservatives, it fits into the narrative that if people want aid and assistance, they'll have to put in some sweat equity for it. For the unemployed, some may welcome it and others may find it detrimental to their job seeking...

I wouldn't want to work my hardest to impress the hell out of someone for eight weeks and a chump-change stipend, only for that someone to say "thanks but no thanks." And I wouldn't want those eight weeks to bog me down when I could up my chances of employment tremendously by applying to and getting interviewed by multiple companies in that same time span. There is a sort of certainty to the "Georgia Works" program, while at the same time there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding it. And on a national scale, it can be abused maliciously by corporations - instead of employing candidates through normal channels, close those off and funnel everyone through the "Nation Works" program. It's like having your very own "try before you buy" temporary staffing agency. Not a good look for anyone involved.
This comes courtesy of Balloon Juice's "Too Many Jimpersons," in response to the whining from the "emoprogs" for a primary challenge of President Obama:

Dude, if you don’t like something Obama has done—or hasn’t done—then by all means call him on it. He said as much way back while he was still running. Nudge him further the way you’d like him to go.

But for fuck’s sake, do it in a way that helps rather than hinders. Don’t start screaming about primary challenges because he hasn’t done everything you wanted. Don’t go all over Fox and screech that he’s a sellout and as bad as Bush was.

Those were a few handy “don’t”s. Here are some “do”s:

Go out and work for the candidates in the primaries who fit your bill. Show up at their offices and do shitty, dull work for them. Trudge through the rain canvassing on an October Saturday when you’d much rather be at home. Send them some money. If you don’t like who’s running, run yourself.

Those are helpful tips. But before you do all that that I suggested, here’s another “don’t”:

Don’t work for some Democrat you love above all else if it means you’re likely to badly weaken the Democrat in office who votes as you’d like 9 times out of 10, or even only 7 or 8, or even only 6 or, yes, even only 5 out of 10, if—and here’s the thing—the 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9 out of 10er is the best you can get. Examples: O.K., we all know Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson are irritating assholes. But before you go out and work your ass off for Louisiana or Nebraska’s version of Dennis Kucinich, bear in mind that Landreiu and Nelson are the best we can hope for in those states. Yeah, I’d love it if Louisiana sent somebody who speaks and votes like Al Franken to the Senate. But that isn’t going to happen. The choice isn’t Mary landreiu or Al Franken; it’s Mary Landreiu or some dickwad who votes like David Vitter. There are reasons Minnesota sends people like Franken to Washington and Louisiana doesn’t. Those reasons are called “voters”.

I live in Virginia. In 2006 and in 2008, I worked for Jim Webb and Mark Warner when they ran. If Virginia were a place where somebody like Franken or Sanders or Sherrod Brown could win statewide, I’d happily have worked for them. But it isn’t, and no amount of wishing by me will make it so. So I worked for the best I could reasonably hope for. And much to my delight, I got two Democratic senators in the last two elections we had here. They aren’t as liberal as I am; they aren’t as liberal as I would like them to be. But none of that matters. I live in Virginia in the early 21st Century, not some fantasy world where everybody thinks the way I do.

Now as for Obama, well, you know what? I would like it if he were more like Al Franken or Sherrod Brown. I’d love that. But right now, it’s hard to get somebody like that into the presidency. It isn’t going to happen right now, however much you might want it to. So, yes, maybe Obama does what I’d like 8 or 9 times out of 10. Guess what? I lived through 8 years of George Bush, who did what I would have liked 0 times out of 10. And Rick Perry and Romney would also do what I’d like them to 0 times out of 10.

0. 8. 10. Those are the numbers to keep in mind next year, 0, 8 and 10. There are, to be sure, fantasy candidates who would give me what I want 10 times out of 10. (Nader sure as hell isn’t, however many people wrongly think of him as some kind of liberal crusader; he’s only an egoist who wants to throw fits and show everybody how wrong they were. If he got in, he might well appoint somebody like Palin just to stick a thumb in our eyes. I don’t trust him or anybody who works with him.)

Anyway, 0, 8 and 10. Keep those in mind. Maybe President Franken would give you what you want 10 times out of 10. But that means nothing. He’ll never be president, not in this country, not as it is. This is a country that chose George Bush 7 years ago, knowing fully what it was getting. So 10 is an important number because it’s what you—we—won’t be getting. That leaves 8 and 0. What we have to choose from is getting our way 8 times out of 10 or no times out of 10. Maybe you don’t like that. Tough shit. That’s what you have, and whether you’re happy with it has nothing to do with the world as it is.

Do you want to get your way 0 times out of 10 as long as you can happily, smugly tell us all about how pure you are and how devoted to The Cause—whatever it may be—you are? Are you willing to live with that? Or would you rather have somebody who does what you like 8 times out of 10? That isn’t as good as 10 out of 10, I know that. But what if these are your only choices? Then what? Are you going to work to get Rick Perry voted in so you can feel like you’re one of the few who are really, truly committed to doing what’s right, even though you might have to take a few lumps for it? (Keep in mind that you are unlikely to get any lumps; it’ll be some other poor losers, but, hey, eggs and omelettes and all that, right?) Or will you take the 8 out of 10 and be willing to be let down once in a while for the sake of all of us? Because these are your choices. These two. Forget about 10. Forget about President Franken. Forget about President Sanders. Forget about President Kucinich, and for the love of God, forget about President Nader. Can you do that? I hope so, since you’ll never get them. Understand that: You will never get them. It won’t happen. You get to choose between President Obama andGovernor Perry, or between President Obama and Governor Romney. That’s it. That’s all.

And if you work for Nader or some other asshole in the primary, all you will do is weaken President Obama and make the likelihood of President Perry or Romney that much greater. That’s what primary challenges to sitting presidents do. It happened in 1992. It happened in 1980. It happened in 1968 (Humphrey was running more or less for Johnson’s third term). It happened as far back as 1912. Each time—each time—the challenging party got the advantage and each time it won. That’s what happens when you run a serious primary against a sitting president: you help elect somebody from the other party. We can’t afford that.

Now, before anybody weeps and wails about “Don’t I have the right to vote for whomever I want? Isn’t this a democracy, don’t you believe in democracy?” let me just say: Yes, you have the right to vote for whomever you choose. Yes this is a democracy. And yes, I believe in democracy. Yes, yes and yes. Nobody is telling anybody else, “You have no right to vote for Nader,” or anything like that. What we are saying, what we are asking you people who have legitimate criticisms of Obama, is to put your own feelings and your own egos and your own need to feel holy or to feel like martyrs to the cause to the side. That’s all we’re asking. We’re asking you to take a good look at what’s going on here in this country, and to swallow your pride for a little while, and to get over the bruise Obama gave your ego when he didn’t do everything just the way you wanted him to.

We aren’t telling you; we aren’t ordering you. We aren’t shooting you or threatening you or jailing you or hosing you down with fire hoses or beating you. We are asking you. Yes, sometimes you (collectively; people like you) piss us off and we call you mean names and say intemperate things to you. But, Lord in heaven, get over it. If you can’t even take a few nasty comments without crumpling up and whining about how this is just like what Martin Luther King or somebody had to go through—and there are manic progressives who go on that way; I am not saying you are one of them—then you really aren’t the fearless liberal warriors you like to think you are.

So, again: Please do not work for or encourage primary challenges to President Obama in 2012. If you do, you greatly weaken his odds of winning next year, and if you do that, then lots of other Democrats will get highly pissed off at you, and we withhold the right to call you mean names. If we do that, then live with it. It’ll be the least you’ll have to worry about.

This could be a blog post in of itself. Powerful stuff.
Both the Democrat and Republican parties are considered by the new breed of "progressive-liberals" as "corporatist," "fascist" and "pro-war." True enough. So some of them ask, "why bother voting?"

Answer: Because voter apathy is one of the most powerful weapons in any politician's arsenal. If the other side adopts a "why bother" attitude and fail to show up at the polls, it gives them an even greater opportunity to win. And once they win, so will their policies. And once their policies are firmly in place, it's hell trying to get them undone.

Others ask "why not show you're pissed at both parties by voting a third-party candidate?"

Answer: Because every time dissatisfied liberal voters gave the bird to their liberal candidate by voting third-party, the conservatives end up winning. I don't want to bring up the "spoiler" cliche, but there's a reason why it exists.

And a lot of these "progressive-liberals" are now asking "why can't we field a primary challenge against him, so we can force him into being more liberal / put a real liberal in office / show everyone how positively pissed we are?"

Answer: Internecine fighting makes it all the more possible that come January 2013, you'll be seeing President Rick Perry being sworn in.

Troy Davis Update.

Troy Anthony Davis' legal team has finished presenting its case to the state Board of Pardons and Paroles in a last-ditch bid to win clemency.

"We believe we have established substantial doubt in this case," Stephen Marsh, one of Davis' lawyers, said after a three-hour hearing. The execution should not be allowed to go forward, he said.

The five-member board will now hear from prosecutors and surviving relatives of Savannah Police Officer Mark Allen MacPhail, who was gunned down in a Burger King parking lot in 1989. Members of MacPhail's family, including his mother, Anneliese, were seen entering the parole board offices as were former Chatham County district attorney Spencer Lawton and and his former chief assistant, David Locke.

Davis, who has always maintained his innocence, is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection Wednesday at the state prison in Jackson. Davis declined to request a special meal before the execution, prison officials say.

Davis’ case generated worldwide attention after a number of witnesses recanted or backed away from trial testimony that implicated Davis in the shooting. Some people later pointed to another man at the murder scene as the killer. But one court after another has rejected Davis' claims. His legal appeals appear to be exhausted, so the parole board could be his last chance to avoid execution.

A host of dignitaries have asked the parole board to grant Davis clemency. These include former President Jimmy Carter, former FBI Director William Sessions, former Georgia congressman Bob Barr and former Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Norman Fletcher.

Among witnesses to testify today before the parole board was Brenda Forrest, a juror who voted to sentence Davis to death at the 1991 trial. She now says she has doubt about her verdict and is asking the board to grant clemency. Two other jurors who voted to sentence Davis to death have signed affidavits asking the board to spare Davis from execution.

Since the trial, Forrest said in her affidavit, she learned information that makes her no longer believe the case against Davis was ironclad. "I feel, emphatically, that Mr. Davis cannot be executed under these circumstances," she said.

Also testifying before the board was Quiana Glover, a Savannah woman who says that she heard Sylvester "Redd" Coles, who was with Davis shortly before MacPhai was killed, say he was the actual trigger man. Coles made the statement during a party in June 2009 and he had been drinking heavily, Glover said in a sworn affidavit. Coles, the first to implicate Davis to the police, testified at trial that he left the scene before shots were fired.

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/troy-davis-legal-team-1184011.html

Troy Davis.

Courtesy of The Well Versed.

The following comes from Amnesty International's documentation on the Troy Davis case.

Kevin McQueen
Affidavit, 5 December 1996
In September and October 1989, Kevin McQueen was detained in the same jail as Troy Davis. McQueen told the police that during this time Troy Davis had confessed to shooting Officer Mark McPhail. In his 1996 affidavit, he retracted this statement, saying that he had given it because he wanted to "get even" with Davis following a confrontation he said the two of them had allegedly had.
"The truth is that Troy never confessed to me or talked to me about the shooting of the police officer. I made up the confession from information I had heard on T.V. and from other inmates about the crimes. Troy did not tell me any of this… I have now realized what I did to Troy so I have decided to tell the truth… I need to set the record straight".

Monty Holmes
Affidavit, 17 August 2001
Monty Holmes testified against Troy Davis in a preliminary pre-trial hearing, but did not testify at the trial, as he explains in an affidavit signed in August 2001:"In August of 1989, the police came to talk to me about the officer who was killed in Savannah. They wanted to know if Troy Davis was involved in the shooting and whether he had said anything to me about being involved with the shooting… By the way the police were talking, I thought I was going to be in trouble. I told them I didn’t know anything about who shot the officer, but they kept questioning me. I was real young at that time and here they were questioning me about the murder of a police officer like I was in trouble or something. I was scared… [I]t seemed like they wouldn’t stop questioning me until I told them what they wanted to hear. So I did. I signed a statement saying that Troy told me that he shot the cop."
When I had to go to court that first time, I felt like I had to say what was in that statement or I’d be in trouble, so that’s what I did. When it came to the trial though, I didn’t want to go because I knew that the truth was that Troy never told me anything about shooting [the police officer]. I heard the police were coming by to give me a subpoena for trial. I dodged the subpoena but they still left it with my mother. I still didn’t feel like I could walk in a court and say those things so I didn’t go to the trial".
Monty Holmes’ pre-trial testimony was admitted at the trial without cross-examination possible due to his absence. Article 14.3(e) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that any criminal defendant must be allowed, "in full equality", to be able "to examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him". While Monty Holmes knowingly avoided testifying at the trial, if his pre-trial testimony and his absence from the trial were influenced by coercive tactics allegedly employed by the police, the state played a role in undermining the right of Troy Davis to a fair trial.

Jeffrey Sapp
Affidavit, 9 February 2003
Jeffrey Sapp testified that Troy Davis had told him that he had shot the officer in self-defence. In his affidavit, he stated:"I remember when the officer got shot down at Burger King… The police came and talked to me and put a lot of pressure on me to say, ‘Troy said this’ or ‘Troy said that’. They wanted me to tell them that Troy confessed to me about killing that officer. The thing is, Troy never told me anything about it. I got tired of them harassing me, and they made it clear that the only way they would leave me alone is if I told them what they wanted to hear. I told them that Troy told me he did it, but it wasn’t true. Troy never said that or anything like it. When it came time for Troy’s trial, the police made it clear to me that I needed to stick to my original statement; that is, what they wanted me to say. I didn’t want to have any more problems with the cops, so I testified against Troy".


Dorothy Ferrell
Affidavit, 29 November 2000
At the trial, Dorothy Ferrell, who was staying at a hotel near the Burger King at the time of the crime, identified Troy Davis as the person who had shot Officer McPhail, emphasising "I’m real sure, that that is him and, you know, it’s not a mistaken identity".
After the guilt/innocence phase of the trial had ended, the wife of Troy Davis’ defence lawyer received a telephone call from a woman who identified herself as Dorothy Ferrell, and stated that she had lied on the witness stand. The prosecution then revealed that Dorothy Ferrell had written a letter to District Attorney Spencer Lawton requesting "a favour" and his "help" with her own difficulties with the law. She was on parole at the time. She wrote in the letter: "Mr Lawton if you would please help me, Ipromiseyou, you won’t be making a mistake" [emphasis in original].
After this revelation, Dorothy Ferrell was recalled to the witness stand, outside of the presence of the jury. She denied having made the telephone call, but admitted to having written the letter. The judge then offered the defence the opportunity to cross-examine Dorothy Ferrell in the presence of the jury, but they did not do so, instead calling for a mistrial on the grounds that the prosecution had withheld information from the defence. The trial judge denied their motion for a new trial.
In her affidavit signed in November 2000, Dorothy Ferrell recalled that she had been staying in a hotel opposite the Burger King restaurant on the night of the shooting. She said that she heard a woman scream and gunshots. In her affidavit, she recalls seeing "more than two guys running away", but states that she did not see who the gunman was. After the crime, she was asked to go down to the police station, where she was made to wait until she gave a statement. The affidavit continues:"I was real tired because it was the middle of the night and I was pregnant too… I was scared that if I didn’t do what the police wanted me to do, then they would try to lock me up again. I was on parole at the time and I had just gotten home from being locked up earlier that year.
When the police were talking to me, it was like they wanted me to say I saw the shooting and to sign a statement. I wanted to be able to leave and so I just said what they wanted me to say. I thought that would be the end of it, but it turned out not to be the end."
Some time later, a police detective visited Dorothy Ferrell and showed her a photograph of Troy Davis, and told her that other witnesses had identified him as the gunman:"From the way the officer was talking, he gave me the impression that I should say that Troy Davis was the one who shot the officer like the other witness [sic] had… I felt like I was just following the rest of the witnesses. I also felt like I had to cooperate with the officer because of my being on parole…I told the detective that Troy Davis was the shooter, even though the truth was that I didn’t see who shot the officer."
In her affidavit, Dorothy Ferrell recalls her fear that if she did not repeat her statement at the trial, she would be charged with perjury and "sent back to jail". She says that she spoke to two lawyers who said that she could be so charged and could be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison.
"I had four children at that time, and I was taking care of them myself. I couldn’t go back to jail. I felt like I didn’t have any choice but to get up there and testify to what I said in my earlier statements. So that’s what I did."
On the question of the telephone call made to Troy Davis’ defence counsel at the time of the trial, Dorothy Ferrell’s affidavit adds that:"I didn’t make that call to the house of the attorney but my friend made the call after she and I had talked. I told my friend about how I had testified to things that weren’t the truth and I was feeling bad about it. That’s why she made the call."

Darrell "D.D." Collins
Affidavit, 11 July 2002
Darrell Collins was a friend of Troy Davis who was with him on the night of the crime. At the time, he was 16 years old. In his affidavit he said that the day after the shooting, 15 or 20 police officers came to his house, "a lot of them had their guns drawn". They took him in for questioning, and the affidavit continues:"When I got to the barracks, the police put me in a small room and some detectives came in and started yelling at me, telling me that I knew that Troy Davis…killed that officer by the Burger King. I told them that… I didn’t see Troy do nothing. They got real mad when I said this and started getting in my face. They were telling me that I was an accessory to murder and that I would pay like Troy was gonna pay if I didn’t tell them what they wanted to hear. They told me that I would go to jail for a long time and I would be lucky if I ever got out, especially because a police officer got killed… I didn’t want to go to jail because I didn’t do nothing wrong. I was only sixteen and was so scared of going to jail. They kept saying that…[Troy] had messed with that man up at Burger King and killed that officer. I told them that it was Red and not Troy who was messing with that man, but they didn’t want to hear that…
After a couple of hours of the detectives yelling at me and threatening me, I finally broke down and told them what they wanted to hear. They would tell me things that they said had happened and I would repeat whatever they said."
Darrell Collins said that he signed a typed statement without reading it, and was then allowed to go home. According to his affidavit, he was questioned again about a week later by the police who gave him another typed statement to sign. He said he again signed the statement without reading it. The affidavit continues:"I testified against Troy at his trial. I remember that I told the jury that Troy hit the man that Red was arguing with. That is not true. I never saw Troy do anything to the man. I said this at the trial because I was still scared that the police would throw me in jail for being an accessory to murder if I told the truth about what happened…
It is time that I told the truth about what happened that night, and what is written here is the truth. I am not proud for lying at Troy’s trial, but the police had me so messed up that I felt that’s all I could do or else I would go to jail."

Larry Young
Affidavit, 11 October 2002
Larry Young was the homeless man who was accosted and then struck in the face, and whose shouts drew the attention of Officer McPhail. At the trial, he implicated Troy Davis as the man who had assaulted him, but only identifying him by his clothing. His affidavit, signed in 2002, offers further evidence of a coercive police investigation into the murder of their fellow officer, and states that he "couldn’t honestly remember what anyone looked like or what different people were wearing".
"After I was assaulted that night, I went into the bathroom at the bus station and tried to wash the blood off my face. I had a big gash on my face and there was blood everywhere. I was in a lot of pain. When I left the bathroom, some police officers grabbed me and threw me down on the hood of the police car and handcuffed me. They treated me like a criminal, like I was the one who killed the officer. Even though I was homeless at that time and drinking and drugging, I didn’t have nothing to do with killing the officer. I told the officers that, but they just locked me in the back of the police car for the next hour or so. I kept yelling that I needed to be treated but they didn’t pay me no mind. They then took me to the police station and interrogated me for three hours. I kept asking them to treat my head, but they wouldn’t.
They kept asking me what had happened at the bus station, and I kept telling them that I didn’t know. Everything happened so fast down there. I couldn’t honestly remember what anyone looked like or what different people were wearing. Plus, I had been drinking that day, so I just couldn’t tell who did what. The cops didn’t want to hear that and kept pressing me to give them answers. They made it clear that we weren’t leaving until I told them what they wanted to hear. They suggested answers and I would give them what they wanted. They put typed papers in my face and told me to sign them. I did sign them without reading them.
I never have been able to make sense of what happened that night. It’s as much a blur now as it was then."

Antoine Williams
Affidavit, 12 October 2002
Antoine Williams, an employee of Burger King, had just driven into the restaurant’s car park at the time the shooting occurred. At the trial, he identified Troy Davis as the person who had shot Officer McPhail. In 2002 he stated that this was false, and that he had signed a statement for the police which he could not and did not read.
"I couldn’t really tell what was going on because I had the darkest shades of tint you could possibly have on my windows of my car. As soon as I heard the shot and saw the officer go down, I ducked down under the dash of my car. I was scared for my life and I didn’t want to get shot myself…
Later that night, some cops asked me what had happened. I told them what is written here [in the affidavit].They asked me to describe the shooter and what he looked like and what he was wearing. I kept telling them that I didn’t know. It was dark, my windows were tinted, and I was scared. It all happened so fast. Even today, I know that I could not honestly identify with any certainty who shot the officer that night. I couldn’t then either. After the officers talked to me, they gave me a statement and told me to sign it. I signed it. I did not read it because I cannot read.(41)
At Troy Davis’ trial, I identified him as the person who shot the officer. Even when I said that, I was totally unsure whether he was the person who shot the officer. I felt pressured to point at him because he was the one who was sitting in the courtroom. I have no idea what the person who shot the officer looks like."

Daniel Kinsman
Affidavit, 15 October 2002
Daniel Kinsman was with other Air Force personnel in a van in the Burger King car park at the time of the crime. He was interviewed by police. He describes himself as having been "relatively close to the scene" of the shooting, but remains confident that he would "not have been able to make any identification of the shooter due to the poor lighting and the chaotic nature of the scene". In the affidavit, Daniel Kinsman recalls "two things that stand out to this day about what I witnessed at the Burger King". First, as he told the police, "there was and is no doubt in my mind that the person who shot the officer had the gun in and was shooting with his left hand." Second, the gun had a "shiny finish… not dull in any sense of the term." Troy Davis is right-handed.

Robert Grizzard
Affidavit, 23 March 2003
In 1989, Robert Grizzard was a Sergeant in the US Air Force, and was in Savannah for a training exercise. He was in a van in the Burger King car park at the time of the shooting of Officer McPhail. In his affidavit, Robert Grizzard stated:"I have reviewed the transcript of my testimony from the trial of Troy Davis… During my testimony I said that the person who shot the officer was wearing a light coloured shirt. The truth is that I don’t recall now and I didn’t recall then what the shooter was wearing, as I said in my initial statement [to the police].My testimony to the contrary was an honest mistake on my part… As I said in my statement given on that night, I do not and did not remember what the shooter was wearing."

3. ‘Party’ testimony
In the hours before the shooting of Officer McPhail there was a party in the nearby neighbourhood of Cloverdale, Savannah. As Michael Cooper and a group of friends were leaving the party in their car, shots were fired, wounding Cooper. Troy Davis was convicted of aggravated assault for the shooting.
At the trial, Darrell Collins repudiated his initial statement to the police that Troy Davis had shot at the car. He testified that he had not seen Troy Davis with a gun on the night of the shooting. Michael Cooper testified that he had not seen who shot him. In a 2002 affidavit (below), he repudiates a statement he allegedly gave to police implicating Troy Davis. Benjamin Gordon testified that he had not seen who shot Cooper, contrary to a statement he gave to police after the crime. In a 2003 affidavit (below) he states that the statement he gave to police (when he was 15) had been coerced. Craig Young testified at trial that a statement he gave to police in which he stated that Troy Davis had threatened some guests at the Cloverdale party and that Davis had told him that he had fought with another guest were false and coerced by the police.
In a 1995 affidavit, April Hester (below) stated that Sylvester Coles was at the Cloverdale party.

Joseph Blige
Affidavit, 1 December 1995
Joseph Blige, who was 15 years old at the time of the crime, went to the Cloverdale party. He was in the car that was shot at, and in which Michael Cooper was wounded. His affidavit stated that neither he nor anyone he was with at the party "had any words or any problem with Troy Davis".
"As we drove off Michael yelled something out the window and shooting started. Our car was hit at least six times. I heard more than six shots. I head more than one weapon being fired. At least one of the weapons being fired was an automatic. It could not have been a revolver because the shots came too fast.We drove Michael to the hospital. The police talked to us there in the hospital parking lot. A sergeant picked up a bullet from behind the panelling in the door of the car. There was [sic]different size bullet holes in the car. The sergeant saw all the bullet holes. He saw the blood in the car. I do not know what he did with the bullet he picked up. The police did not want to keep the car for evidence. We left in the car.
The next morning the police got me from Yamacraw and asked me lots of questions about the shooting of the police officer that happened at the bus station. They even tried telling me they knew I shot the officer."

Michael Cooper
Affidavit, 10 February 2002
Michael Cooper was shot and wounded on leaving the Cloverdale party. Troy Davis was convicted of the shooting at his trial for the murder of Officer McPhail which happened later the same night. In his affidavit, Michael Cooper states that:"I have had a chance to review a statement which I supposedly gave to police officers on June 25, 1991. I remember that they asked a lot of questions and typed up a statement which they told me to sign. I did not read the statement before I signed. In fact, I have not seen it before today. In that statement, the police said that I told them that Mark [Wilds] told me that Troy shot me. I never told the police that. Mark never said that to me. What is written in that statement is a lie. I do not know who shot me that night. I do not know it now, and I did not know it then."

Benjamin Gordon
Affidavit, 10 February 2003
Benjamin Gordon, who was 15 years old at the time of the crime, had been at the party in Cloverdale and was leaving in the car with Michael Cooper when the latter was shot and wounded. In his affidavit, he states that "the shooting came from the shadows next to the street", and that "I never saw who did the shooting". The affidavit continues:"Later that night, police officers came and dragged me from my house in Yamacraw. There were police officers everywhere after the police officer was killed and it seemed like they were taking everyone in Yamacraw to the police barracks for questioning. I was handcuffed and they put a nightstick under my neck. I had just turned sixteen and was scared as hell. The police officers took me to the barracks and put me in a small room. Over the next couple of hours, three or so officers questioned me – at first, they called me a motherfucker and told me that I had shot the officer. They told me that I was going to the electric chair. They got in my face and yelled at me a lot. The cops then told me that I did the shooting over in Cloverdale. I just kept telling them that I didn’t do anything, but they weren’t hearing that. After four or five hours, they told me to sign some papers. I just wanted to get the hell out of there. I didn’t read what they told me to sign and they didn’t ask me to.
When it came time for trial, I was in jail, and the sheriff’s office transported me to the courthouse. A person in a suit told me to say to the court what I had told the police. I believe that person was with the District Attorney’s office.
No one working on Troy’s case even came to speak to me before trial. If they would have, I would have talked to them and told them what is contained in this affidavit."



The underlying theme here is police coercion and intimidation. They wanted Troy Davis' name on the case and they got it by intimidating and coercing witnesses. This is some shameful shit right here.

Any other case where the initial affidavits and testimony crumbled apart like aged cheese would have been thrown out and retried, at the very least. Instead, Troy Davis is slated for execution between the 21st and 28th of this month, barring a miracle from what could be his last meet with the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole. If this happens, it will be a gross miscarriage of justice that will taint Chatham County and the state of Georgia for decades to come.

Apologies for the formatting errors, if there are any.
top