Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And I'm saying that his official spokesman seems to be feigning ignorance.
Or he simply just didn't know. Guess that possibility would never cross your mind.
I didn't know about it, till I heard it on the radio this morning. The incident happened a week ago. The teens were arrested within hours of the incident. So there wan't any media coverage or outrage, because the perpetrators were ALREADY caught, and ALREADY providing confessions.
Quote:
Obama spoke early on in the Trayvon Martin affair.
After the media outlets put it out there.
Quote:
I find it strange that the news of one shooting makes it's way in to the oval office but this one seemingly goes unnoticed.
because, this one, the perps were caught, they admit to shooting him, and now will be tried as adults.
Trayvon, the police hemmed and hawed, didn't want to treat it a as crime, and the local authorities didn't want to do anything.
BIG difference in the two cases, and anyone trying to relate the two are stretching beyond the realm of logic.
This is why Presidents should never interject themselves into national or local stories such as Trayvon Martin or the Cambridge cop thing a while back. People will come to expect a comment on nearly every tragedy that means something to them, and the President should have higher priorities than to constantly reassure people, "If I had a son he'd look like [blah blah blah]". This kind of talk can be unintentionally divisive.
Because he didn't hesitate to comment on the Trayvon Martin matter but his official spokesman seems to be feigning ignorance on this story. The double standard is rank.
He commented on the trayvon martin case close to a MONTH after the incident. What double standard is being used here?
the reason the media was up in arms about Trayvon was that the POLICE weren't going to pursue his death as a crime.
BIG difference here!
Actually the police did investigate and concluded there was no crime, unfortunately they bowed to pressure and eventually did charge Zimmerman. The result of the trial that followed confirmed the Sanford PD made the correct call at the beginning.
Here's the thing. As far as I could recall, Bush was never asked any raced based questions by the media. But everytime something occurs that could appear to start a race discussion, media ask the President and he walks right into their ratings game.
So freaking what? He's a human being and has opinions like you and i. No one is stopping you from going to the media or strating your own podcast/ website etc, and voicing your opinions.
Actually the police did investigate and concluded there was no crime, unfortunately they bowed to pressure and eventually did charge Zimmerman. The result of the trial that followed confirmed the Sanford PD made the correct call at the beginning.
Actually no. The Sanford Police initially suggest a charge...but the prosecutor said no. And the prosecutor continued to say no until overridden by the state at the insistence of the Governor.
Actually the police did investigate and concluded there was no crime, unfortunately they bowed to pressure and eventually did charge Zimmerman.
Two separate things.
Police can't charge anyone with a crime, that is the duty of the State/city prosecutors.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.