Guarino

The Greensboro Pulpit Forum and Anti-Cop Vitriol

About 18 months ago, during my stint as a "community columnist" for the News and Record, I wrote a column about the GPD matter.  I opened the column by drawing a parallel between the Greensboro controversy and a supercharged story in New York-- the killing of Sean Bell.  In each case, there was a discernible theme of villainizing and vilifying police.  And in each case, the complaints were magnified by segments of the local African-American political/religious community with a history of troubled relations and perspectives regarding local police.

We have heard some recent news about the Sean Bell case.  The police officers involved were acquitted during their court trial.  Protests ensued on the streets of New York, and Al Sharpton got himself arrested.  There has been talk about efforts to get the new African-American governor of New York State to appoint a Special Prosecutor to take action against wayward police.

Of course, the police commissioner in New York City is Raymond Kelly.   Kelly has a distinguished career profile, with numerous important positions held in the past and several advanced degrees.  But he is still the quintessential caucasian, Irish New York cop.  His race is of considerable symbolic significance when incidents occur during which African-Americans have unwanted interactions with police.  The police department is a white power structure, to be reviled and demonstrated against when bad things happen.

Here in Greensboro, we have had three recent incidents during which the actions of Greensboro police could be theoretically questioned.  Two involved the shooting deaths of a couple of assailants.  The third was the unfortunate death of a man after he had been "tased".

Each of these incidents received some local media coverage, but there was no confrontational, escalating drumbeat against the GPD.   We did not hear of many vocal protests or demonstrations conducted by the Greensboro Pulpit Forum.

Three weeks ago, however, Ben Holder reported that the Pulpit Forum was meeting because of these incidents.  The indication was that trouble was brewing for Chief Bellamy.

Of course, since that time, the Pulpit Forum has become even more thoroughly discredited because of its actions on the matter of the Mystery of the Missing Boxes.  Its credibility is completely shot because of the false accusations made, and the reliance it placed on Julius Fulmore.

The Pulpit Forum, of course, has been the source of some of the anti-cop vilification that has been occurring in the city of Greensboro.  But in the case of the recent deaths, there has been complete silence despite the passage of three weeks since Ben Holder reported about their meeting.  We have not heard about wild protests, demonstrations, riots or baseless accusations.  At least not yet.

When I consider this remarkable silence, I think back to a fairly controversial post I made here about one year ago, when Bellamy, previously serving as an interim, was officially appointed police chief.  That particular post attracted a lot of criticism.  It was intentionally "edgy", because I was trying to highlight the folly of our local political culture, which tends to act, in a self-interested way, based on some of the most misguided tenets of liberalism. 

Here is one of the statements I made:

Bellamy will be in a much stronger position than Wray was because he will be given a pass on racial issues-- profiling, brutality, excessive force, internal matters, etc.  The overt symbolism of having a black chief will preemptively defuse the tendency of detractors and the media to magnify such complaints.

I still believe that is true.  Yes, the GPD has received some unflattering local mainstream media coverage, but it never elevates to the magnitude of a persistent drumbeat designed to bring down the police chief.  Except with respect to the Mystery of the Missing Boxes, which referred back to an incident that allegedly occurred long before Bellamy became chief, the Pulpit Forum has been relatively quiet over the last year on police issues.

Racial peace, thus far, has apparently been purchased-- at least partially-- by having appointed a black police chief.  Yes, crime rages on locally at a rate far in excess of the national average, and gangs reign supreme, but remember that the political culture took care of its own needs.

And consider the contrast with comparatively unenlightened New York-- where Al Sharpton is agitating against the Irish-American police commissioner on the Sean Bell case; and where crime has been decreasing to unimaginably low historic levels because of the work of its police force and the quality of its administration.

It will be interesting to see whether Chief Bellamy will be challenged overtly by the Pulpit Forum in response to the recent incidents.  But the chief has enjoyed the support of at least six city council members.  His service as chief has helped inoculate them against the criticisms they fear most.

Barack Obama and Gay Marriage

The California Supreme Court decision yesterday heightens awareness of the gay marriage issue in the presidential campaign. 

In the case of Barack Obama, we have been treated to a media campaign, and coverage consisting of mellifluous generalities and depictions that are meant to be pleasing to the eye.  And certainly, the senator wields a personal style that tends to win people over.

Remain mindful that there is a difference between style and substance.

What compounds the problem is the nature of his political rhetoric.  He would have us believe that he represents the end of division and partisanship, that he would lead us all to common ground.  That would necessarily mean he will eschew divisive positions, and refrain from seeing them through to completion.  But the fact is that he has very well-defined positions that many would regard as quite divisive.

A couple of days ago, we spoke about his position on the abortion issue.  But on gay marriage, Obama is just as bad.  And the American people have not yet heard a word about it.

An article from WorldNet Daily demonstrates he would try to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.  This means that states like North Carolina would be forced to recognize gay marriages from other states where it is legal.  In addition, he says he would use the presidency as a bully pulpit to promote gay adoption.  He wants to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military; and takes a series of other positions in service of the gay political agenda.

Then there is the matter of judicial nominations.  It has previously been demonstrated elsewhere that he would almost certainly nominate judicial activists to the Supreme Court.  This is of significance if the high court takes up the matter of gay marriage.

Only five years ago, he was teaching constitutional law classes at the University of Chicago.  A test he administered to his students asked about jurisprudence on gay marriage.  The right answer to his test question?   Essentially, that the equal protection clause should make gay marriage legal.

Yep, that's old Barack Obama.  The media candidate who will transcend division.  The moderate-appearing candidate who will unite us.  Indeed, he will even redeem us.

The California Gay Marriage Decision: The Court of What's Happening Now

The California Supreme Court presumed today to write new law, ushering in the brave new world of gay marriage for our nation's most populous state.  An activist majority on the court decided to sway with the prevailing cultural breezes.

For those who maintain that it will not happen in North Carolina, I suggest the opposite.  It, in fact, will eventually happen here if we persist in electing judges who will be predisposed to this type of mischief.

Protest Petitions, Simkins and TREBIC

Keith Brown has an op-ed piece in the paper today advocating for protest petitions as Guilford County's delegation to the state legislature get ready to consider the matter. 

It would be very helpful for the City Council to pass a resolution in favor of the state legislature reinstating this important vehicle on behalf of the residents of the city of Greensboro.

This would not be without its political costs, however.  The two major power groups that together form a machine to govern the city are the city council members representing the Simkins PAC and those representing development interests.  These two groups oft overlap.

Protest petitions would diminish the power somewhat of each of these two groups.  TREBIC has already weighed in, and its interests in this matter are self-evident.   But the Simkins PAC's power would also be  diminished somewhat, because its elected officials would then be less able to make things happen for development interests.   The strength of the informal arrangement between these two groups would be weakened a bit. 

Yet another reason to root for protest petitions.

Addendum: Mark Binker reports it will not happen this year.

Barack Obama and Pro-Abortion Politics

NewsMax reports today that NARAL Pro-Choice America has directed its endorsement to Barack Obama.  The organization had been holding its cards close to its vest because of internal division, awaiting the emergence of a reasonably certain nominee.   Some of its people had wanted to support Hillary.

But the fact that NARAL was initially split on whom to direct its endorsement does not mean that Obama is not ardently pro-abortion.  In fact, he is.

Last summer, Senator Obama spoke before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund--  a fund which helps the notorious organization achieve its objectives.  Planned Parenthood, of course, is the largest abortion provider in America.

What did Obama tell them?

Will our daughters grow up with the same opportunities as our sons? Will our daughters have the same rights, the same dreams, the same freedoms to pursue their own version of happiness? I wonder because there’s a lot at stake in this country today. And there’s a lot at stake in this election, especially for our daughters. To appreciate that all you have to do is review the recent decisions handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States. For the first time in Gonzales versus Carhart, the Supreme Court held—upheld a federal ban on abortions with criminal penalties for doctors. For the first time, the Court’s endorsed an abortion restriction without an exception for women’s health. The decision presumed that the health of women is best protected by the Court—not by doctors and not by the woman herself. That presumption is wrong.

Some people argue that the federal ban on abortion was just an isolated effort aimed at one medical procedure—that it’s not part of a concerted effort to roll back the hard-won rights of American women. That presumption is also wrong.

Of course, Obama is speaking of the partial birth abortion ruling.  According to his standard of reasoning, it is constitutionally impermissible for the states to decide whether it is legally acceptable to take the life of a late-term baby as it is being delivered, even if the mother's life is not jeopardized.  That decision must be made by the federal courts, according to Obama.

 

We know that five men don’t know better than women and their doctors what’s best for a woman’s health. We know that it’s about whether or not women have equal rights under the law. We know that a woman’s right to make a decision about how many children she wants to have and when—without government interference—is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country.

Throughout the speech, Obama uses rhetorical devices, and plainly inaccurate assertions, to make his case in favor of legal abortion on demand.

We know, we know it’s not just one decision. It’s the blow dealt to equal pay in the Ledbetter [v. Goodyear] case, it’s the blow dealt to integration in the school desegregation case, it’s an approach to the law that favors the powerful over the powerless—that holds up a flawed ideology over the rights of the individual. We don’t see America in these decisions—that’s not who we are as a people. We’re a country founded on the principle of equality and freedom. We’re the country that’s fought generation after generation to extend that equality to the many not restrict it to the few. We’ve been there before and we’re not going back.

I have worked on these issues for decades now. I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught Constitutional Law. Not simply as a case about privacy but as part of the broader struggle for women’s equality.

He speaks about jurisprudence and judicial interpretation as if they are to be assessed by the political outcome they produce.  He doesn't seem to care whether the case is correctly decided.

I’ve stood up for the freedom of choice in the United States Senate and I stand by my votes against the confirmation of Judge Roberts and Samuel Alito [Applause].

There will always be people, many of goodwill, who do not share my view on the issue of choice. On this fundamental issue, I will not yield and Planned Parenthood will not yield.

But I am absolutely convinced that culture wars are so nineties; their days are growing dark, it is time to turn the page. We want a new day here in America. We’re tired about arguing about the same ole’ stuff.

Obama clearly paints himself as an extremist.  A number of Senate Democrats voted in favor of Roberts and Alito.  Obama did not.  Roberts has thus far developed into a fine Chief Justice. 

He pats himself on the back for how inflexible he will be on the issue; and he mischaracterizes the pro-life movement as outdated.

It is time to turn the page on policies that fail to deal with tragedy of ten thousand American teenagers getting an STD everyday... It’s time to turn the page on a policies that provides almost 1.5 billion dollar to teach abstinence in our schools but refuses to teach basic science and basic contraception.

Obama fails to acknowledge that it was the culture of contraception that created the explosion in unwed pregnancies and STD's.  And he fails to point out that Planned Parenthood gets much more funding from the federal government than abstinence programs ever did-- even when the Republicans controlled Congress. 

There’s nothing wrong with science. It’s actually made our lives better. [Applause] Let’s teach science to our kids.

Does this strike anyone else as condescending?  Is he asserting that pro-life individuals are against science?  This is silliness.

The truth is, too often our daughters don’t have the same opportunities as our sons.

Obama's conception of legal abortion on demand and federal funding for contraception is that they are necessary to help women achieve quality.  In fact, the real world suggests otherwise.  In high schools and universities, girls and young women are outperforming (and in many cases, outnumbering) men significantly.  Concerns have been registered over the future many young men may face because of a failure to pursue higher education.

This was a horrible, yet revealing, performance by Barack Obama.   The rhetoric he employed is quite unlike that which we see displayed in front of the American people on television.  Unfortunately, however, this is his message when he speaks before one of the national Democratic Party's key interest groups.

And it is probably a lot closer to his true worldview than the homogenized picture to which we are regularly treated in the media. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Protest Petitions, the City Council and TREBIC

Keith Brown has been doing some excellent work in advancing the protest petition issue.  Protest petitions are a vehicle for citizens to challenge development proposals affecting their respective neighborhoods.  A law passed over three decades ago exempted Greensboro from protest petitions even though they are legal throughout much of the rest of the state. 

Keith recently posted regarding a Mark Binker article in which Senator Phil Berger was quoted.   Berger said that it would be helpful if the Greensboro City Council would pass a resolution requesting that the city once again be subject to protest petitions.

This needs to be a high-priority item of business for the City Council to tackle.  The council should pass this resolution.

Unfortunately, I am advised that TREBIC sent a communication to our state legislators today, using ample bold-faced type, urging them to refrain from advancing the protest petitions proposal for Greensboro.  (Bubba has the details.)

Concern has recently been expressed regarding the new development approved on Horsepen Creek Road.  Perhaps it is time to level the playing field a bit, and increase the level of accountability to the community that otherwise politically influential interests should have to demonstrate.

Mike Baron, Greensboro Water Demand and Polygraphs

Most of us know that Mike Baron has, at least for a time, cranked down active work on his blog.  I am very grateful to Mike for his courage in speaking out regarding what has been amiss.  He has given us all a real education regarding water demand in the city of Greensboro; what factors drive water consumption; and what our city government has been doing on these matters.  And he has demonstrated a real artistic flair in presenting his information.  We owe him a huge debt of gratitude.

Mike has even offered to take a polygraph to demonstrate the veracity of the story he has told.

He has been battling various medical problems, and I hope readers will keep him in their thoughts and prayers.

Thanks, Mike.  Hurry back when you think the time is right.

GPD Sexual Assault Case Part of a Pattern

One of the accused officers in the GPD sexual assault case is Allen Wallace.  I was reminded yesterday reading comments at Ben Holder's blog that Wallace was the subject of one of the segments in the Jerry Bledsoe series.  And today, Ben provides a list of previous infractions or personnel actions involving this officer:

10/06/00: Administrative Investigation Sustained: Divisional Reprimand Recommended by Captain A.C. Stewart, Appealed and Disciplined reduced to first level Reprimand by Assistant Chief A.L. Scales.

8/31/01: Administrative Investigation Sustained: Discretion (Photos on Website) First Level Reprimand.

3/14/02: Violation of D.D. 1.512, Duty Responsibilities. This is just entirely too long to rehash. read Bledsoe's story here for full recap.

3/25/03, Counseling for improper driving.

9/15/03: Counseling for parking Ticket Violations.

My summary of the Bledsoe installment that discusses Allen Wallace is found here.  But the point is that Wallace's actions-- whatever they may have been-- in the alleged sexual assault case did not occur in a vacuum.  Yesterday, I pointed out that Chief Bellamy must satisfy a greater-than-50% standard of administrative proof before taking any personnel action.  Of course, many would argue, as Ben seems to, that Wallace's employment history should be taken into account.  We should be reminded, however, that North Carolina is an employment-at-will state.  This means employees can theoretically be terminated at any time, for any reason, as long as there is no discrimination.

In today's paper, we heard from the GPD and the deputy city manager:

"They will be held accountable for their mistakes," Assistant Chief Ron Rogers said Saturday...

Deputy City Manager Bob Morgan said the city will be vigilant about correcting issues exposed by the six-month controversy.

"We will do a thorough investigation," Morgan said. "We stand ready to make a tough decision, the right decision, based on the facts."

To what extent should we feel reassured that any discipline meted out will not be a mere slap-on-the-wrist?