Episode 48: State Attorney Generals are Not Judges, Tea Party “Terrorists”, and the George Zimmerman Trial
Can a state government decide what law it will and will not uphold? In Pennsylvania, the state Attorney General has promoted herself to state Supreme Court Justice by refusing to defend a state law’s constitutionality because of her own personal opinion of the law. So then, do we need to keep two sets of laws for the state; one with a Democrat as the AG and one when it’s a Republican? When the US Supreme Court said that the people of California didn’t have standing to try to keep their own constitutional amendment in force, they opened the door to this.
The Left’s “Birthers”: 26% of Obama voters think the Tea Party is a larger terror threat than radical Muslims. Yes, really.
The trial of George Zimmerman riveted the nation’s media attention for weeks, which is understandable when the charges are 4 counts of 1st degree murder and 1 count of 3rd degree murder. OK, I’m playing with you there. It was just 1 count of 2nd degree murder that was on the line for George Zimmerman. Those other charges were against Kermit Gosnell, the abortion doctor, who was ultimately convicted of 3 of the 4 murder 1 counts, and the murder 3 count was reduced to involuntary manslaughter. So how did the coverage compare?
And all the while, in that shining beacon of gun-control, Chicago, hundreds of people, many of them Trayvon Martin’s age and race, are shot dead every year. They don’t get media coverage, or marches, or Attorney General Eric Holder’s attention, or a moment of silence at a Beyonce concert.
You can listen to “Consider This!” on the Blubrry Network if you like. You can find podcasts and save them to your MyCast list, and come back anytime and listen to the latest episodes.
Similarly, Player.fm allows you to subscribe to podcasts and play all the latest episodes from your browser.
The Stitcher Network is another possibility. Again, you can find podcasts, add them to your favorites, and then either listen to them on the web site, stream them to your smart phone, or to some snazzy GM, Ford, and BMW car. If you do download Stitcher to your phone, please use the promo code “ConsiderThis” to let them know where you heard about it.
Of course, you can always subscribe via iTunes as well. And please leave a comment letting them know how you like it. I really appreciate listener ratings on iTunes, which can also lead to having more listeners, and more ratings! Keep the ball rollin’!
And if you have some other podcatcher or RSS reader, click here to get the direct feed and paste it wherever you need it.
I would love it if you would spread the word about the podcast! Click the Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Digg or LinkedIn icons below (or all of them!) to recommend “Consider This!” to your social media audience.
The Supreme Court said that the people of California have no standing to defend a constitutional amendment that they passed if the state won’t defend it. It’s now open season on laws that state administrations don’t like. Exhibit A.
Pennsylvania attorney general Kathleen Kane announced Thursday afternoon she will not defend the state in a federal lawsuit filed this week challenging the constitutionality of the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, calling the prohibition “wholly unconstitutional.”
Who promoted her to judge? Whether or not it’s unconstitutional is not her call to make. The Attorney General represents the state and defends its laws; all of the state and all of its laws.
If a state Attorney General refuses to defend those laws, that’s an abdication of his or her primary responsibility; their oath of office. AGs do not (or at least should not) have this prerogative. Otherwise you’ll have one set of laws when one administration is in power, and another set for another administration.
The Supreme Court said that they’re leaving it up to the states to decide what marriage is. But are we leaving it up to the state governments or to the state’s people?
A Rasmussen poll release on June 27th found that 26% of Obama voters think Tea Partiers are a bigger terror threat than radical Muslims. Fred Thompson asked in a tweet, “So… how many people were killed by exploding Constitutions?”
The George Zimmerman trial just sucked the life out of any other story during the weeks it was going on, so I imagine I have to say something about it.
Much has been said about the “if onlys” in this case. If only George Zimmerman hadn’t left his house. If only he had stayed in his truck. If only he hadn’t started following Trayvon Martin. He knew the police were on their way. That’s the truth. There simply are no winners in all of this. This tragedy would have been averted if just one of those things had happened. I will say that it’s not against the law to do any of those things, but each of them was perhaps ill-advised. And if only Trayvon Martin, a stone’s throw from the house he was returning to, hadn’t stopped, doubled back, and pummeled George Zimmerman’s head into the concrete, he himself would still be alive today. I will say that it’s not against the law to pummel…well, let’s just say that we shouldn’t forget that the legal defense offered was self-defense. Seems like many of the protesters of the verdict would prefer if we did away with the idea of self-defense, and get a conviction anyway. Until, of course, they needed it.
This trial riveted the nation’s media attention for weeks, which is understandable when the charges are 4 counts of 1st degree murder and 1 count of 3rd degree murder. OK, I’m playing with you there. It was just 1 count of 2nd degree murder that was on the line for George Zimmerman. Those other charges were against Kermit Gosnell, the abortion doctor, who was ultimately convicted of 3 of the 4 murder 1 counts, and the murder 3 count was reduced to involuntary manslaughter. So how did the coverage compare? A Nexis news search done by CNS News of certain major media at the national level in the first seven days of each trial, including the day before each trial started, showed there were 5 stories on the Gosnell case and 203 on the Zimmerman case. That’s a ratio of almost 41 to 1, for those of you playing along at home.
During the Gosnell trial, the media had brushed off criticism by saying they’d covered the arrest, so they were off the hook. But the Zimmerman trial proves that they will cover a “local crime story” (which was one reporter’s term for the Gosnell incident), but only certain, hand-picked ones. Which ones are chosen tip their hand to their biases. Oh yes, they say, we cover all the stories. What they ignore or try to diminish is that, as the gatekeepers of the news, they get to determine what you see, or how much of something you see. For the Gosnell trial, most media spent more time reporting on why they weren’t reporting on it. Meanwhile, NBC threw enough resources at the 911 tape for the Zimmerman trial so it could be doctored to make him sound like his neighborhood watch uniform was a white, pointed hood.
And all the while, in that shining beacon of gun-control, Chicago, hundreds of people, many of them Trayvon Martin’s age and race, are shot dead every year. They don’t get media coverage, or marches, or Attorney General Eric Holder’s attention, or a moment of silence at a Beyonce concert. You tell me why.