Posted on 03/23/2012 3:19:52 PM PDT by AnybodyButBarry
In remarks after President Obama made his first public comment on the matter, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum said Friday that the handling by Florida law enforcement of the Trayvon Martin case has been “horrible” and that the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law should not apply to the shooter, George Zimmerman.
“Well, ‘Stand Your Ground’ is not doing what this man did,” Santorum said Friday morning at a campaign event in Monroe, La. “There’s a difference between ‘Stand Your Ground’ and doing what he did. And it’s a horrible case. It’s chilling to hear what happened, and of course the fact that law enforcement didn’t immediately go after and prosecute this case is another chilling example of horrible decisions made by people in this process.”
Zimmerman, a 28-year-old neighborhood watch captain, has not been charged in the shooting.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I thought it was two?
I like your point!
Ya, Newt made a similar statement about “stand your ground” not applying here.....read the linked article for his statements.
True.
We have the one drop rule for blacks that more or less says that a single black ancestor makes someone black. I think Hispanics have that rule in reverse, whereby a single white ancestor makes someone white. Weirdly enough, Eva Longoria (star of Desperate Housewives) had her DNA tested and was discovered to have 70% European ancestry:
If that's true, he's bigoted, and I'm VERY glad he isn't my candidate.
I hate it when people try to get ahead of the curve (like Obozo), because it means it’s “all about them”.
Just so we know, of the 10 kills and 46 injured in Chicago last weeked, What color were they and the color of their shooters?
Wait... why is it that so many here are willing to give Zimmerman the benefit of the doubt when the media tries to hang him, yet it doesn’t seem as if the same doubt would be given to a police officer or federal agent involved in a shooting when the media tries to hang them?
I read a few articles and they mostly were the same. And then I read one where there was blood/wound on Zimmerman’s head and his back had grass on it - like he was wrestled to the ground.
So it was different that the other articles where they definitely were bias and how he had candy in his hands and close to his father’s fiances home.
What the officers saw at the scene and Zimmerman’s testimony, they didn’t arrest him. The media should give all the facts and leave out the bias to stir the pot. I doubt Santorum really knows went down but spoke out anyway just to be relevant.
It sure has been mishandled...like the parents and the media not wanting anyone to see the real kid or find out why he was suspended for ten days.
I don't think it was calculated - I suspect Rick holds the general north eastern prejudice about white southerners being a bunch of trigger happy cowboys. Which is worse - pandering or reflexive regional prejudice? I couldn't rightly say. However, as a Santorum supporter, I take comfort in the fact that there are so many issues on which I agree with him that the few issues where he goes off the reservation won't be a deal breaker for me.
As compared to...
So tell us, how did the wounds to the back of the shooter’s head occur? Since you know what happened.
Was the voice on the 911 call Trayvon’s or Zimmerman’s? Since you were there.
The only reason Zimmerman is getting any benefit is the presence of evidence from eyewitnesses and a 911 recording. Without that, he'd not be getting any benefit.
Exactly - the republicans give lip service to a smaller federal government, then decide to stick their nose in a matter that is a local and state issue. Wish someone would have the right principles and stick to them.
Lynching isn't all it's been cracked up to be. Here are the stats from the left wing reference source Wikipedia, featuring data from the black-run Tuskegee Institute, indicating that an average of 40 blacks were lynched a year over an 86 year period:
Not all lynchings in the United States were targeted against African Americans. Between 1882 and 1968, the Tuskegee Institute recorded 1,297 lynchings of whites as well as the 3,446 lynchings of African Americans during that period.[1][13] By the 1890s and after the turn of the century, the vast majority of those lynched were Black people,[14] including at least 159 women.[15] Lynchings of other minority members, such as Mexicans and Chinese, have been shown to have been undercounted in the Tuskegee Institute's records.[16]
That ratio between white and black lynchings isn't that far off from the ratio of white to black stranger crimes (i.e. crimes not involving family members or friends). It's not politically correct to say this, but it wouldn't surprise me if the vast majority of the people lynched were serious criminals, leavened here and there with cases of victims who were truly innocent.
The city of Sanford has all kinds of material up on their web site. If I were home on a computer I’d put up the links. The media rabble rousing is especially egregious given how much good raw data is there.
Thanks AnybodyButBarry.
Step into this? Come on.
He'd done better juggling flaming chain saws.
Santorum must be a total fool.
Ya throw raw meat, ya better expect flies to land on it.
Who's his PR man? Chuckoo?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.