Oh What a Tangled Web He Weaves as He Continues to Deceive.

     Last Friday President Obama made a surprise visit to the White House Briefing and commented on the verdict in the George Zimmerman case in Florida.  Instead of taking the opportunity to unite he continued on his path of division and balkanization, but worse then that he was deceptive in his comments and continued to advance a story that was untrue.  A complete transcript can be  found here. 

    Here is a breakdown of what he said:

" You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago. And when you think about why, in the African- American community at least, there’s a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it’s important to recognize that the African- American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that -- that doesn’t go away."

First of all what happened to Trayvon Martin happened to Trayvon Martin and has nothing to do with the historical experiences of African- Americans.   The pain created in the African- American community is a pain created by the false narrative explicit in this statement by the President.  What is the false narrative:  1.  That George Zimmerman is white (he is not)  2.  That this was the result of racism, which was never brought up by either the judge or the prosecution.  Further, no one has any evidence to support this claim, which is why Attorney General Eric Holder is setting up his email account so if anyone has any evidence of George Zimmerman being a racist they can submit it to the Justice Department.  3.  That the verdict was somehow improper.  4.  The law (self defense) is unjust when used against someone who "looks like the president".

"There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.  And there are very few African-American men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator. There are very few African-Americans who haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often."

There are very few young men (white or black or Mexican like George Zimmerman) who haven't been followed in the department store (I know I was as a teenager, I found it rather amusing).  The fact that older women are cautious around young men was not at all offensive to me then and it sure isn't now.  Might they have a legitimate reason for this concern?  Even Jesse Jackson said he was relieved when the person coming up behind him on the street was white and not black.  Why did he say that?  He must have had a reason.  That said I do believe that this probably happens to young black men more often, but what does that have to do with this, nothing unless you accept the original false premise that George Zimmerman was white and his altercation with Trayvon Martin was racial in nature.

"And you know, I don’t want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the African-American community interprets what happened one night in Florida. And it’s inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear."

Again we continue with the false premise.  Should we interpret what happened one night in Florida to those sets of experience that make up our lives.  If this is the case then allow me to talk like President Obama.  In 1982 my brother was stabbed to death by a 17 or 21 year old black man in Arizona (each claimed the other did the actual stabbing) during a robbery.  So based on my past history I should ignore all the facts and proceed on emotion and bring that experience to bear on every incident that involves people who look like the President or his son that he imagines.  As a mater of fact either of them could have been the President 35 or 31 years ago. 

"The African-American community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws, everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws. And that ends up having an impact in terms of how people interpret the case."

This is where he might have a point.  I do think it is probably time we took a look at the racial application of our laws.  This however is the action of the state, and not just the state of Florida but the state as represented by the President.  That said this also continues from the false premises, George Zimmerman does not represent the state, nor has there been on shred of evidence presented that this attack was racially motivated.

"We understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history."

If this is true, maybe he can explain why that community wasn't like this 60 or 70 years ago.  Why does he always blame this country for problems largely created by his philosophy of government and those who advanced it before his arrival.  Further, are Africans who live in Africa better off or worse off then people who live hear of African decent?

"So -- so folks understand the challenges that exist for African- American boys, but they get frustrated, I think, if they feel that there’s no context for it or -- and that context is being denied. And -- and that all contributes, I think, to a sense that if a white male teen was involved in the same kind of scenario, that, from top to bottom, both the outcome and the aftermath might have been different."

Seriously, it might have different if Trayvon Martins attitude had been different.  It might have been different if he just went home if he was being followed, after all he was out of the sight of Zimmerman for at least 1 and 1/2 minutes and he was less then 500 feet from his door the last time Zimmerman seen him, plenty of time to just go on home.  Now I will commit the sin that all the liberals have done from the beginning and assume something that I don't know for a fact.  Maybe if he would have stopped by the car and said to Zimmerman (while they were both on the phone) Why are you following me?  Then Zimmerman would possibly have said "you where acting suspicious and I am part of the neighborhood watch" and Martin being an understanding person could have said "well I am not from this area and normally I live in (wherever) but I got in some trouble today at school and my mom sent me to stay with my dad, and he went out so I went to the store to get this ice tea (holds up ice tea) and this (holds up skittles) and the reason I was walking so close to the houses was I was trying to keep out of the rain.  I am staying at (whatever the address is) and I am on my way there now"  Zimmerman to the police dispatcher "never mind I just talked to the young man he is new to the neighborhood and was near the houses trying to stay out of the rain.  Sorry for the bother."  Zimmerman to Martin "Hop in I'll give your a ride".  That might have been the way it turned out except for society and Martin's culture, reinforced here by the President (virtually guaranteeing that this will happen again) made Martin react just as the Presidents friend Henry Gates did when the police arrived after he broke into his own apartment.  Both of these incidents would probably have ended different if the person were white because the person would have reacted to the situation differently and thus instead of escalating the situation would have defused it instead.

"Number one, precisely because law enforcement is often determined at the state and local level, I think it’d be productive for the Justice Department -- governors, mayors to work with law enforcement about training at the state and local levels in order to reduce the kind of mistrust in the system that sometimes currently exists."

I think the training needs to start in the homes of African Americans.  Its time that African Americans examine their racism.  Buying the false premise that all this hogwash the President spewed came from (that it is a white/black thing) white people have been examining their attitudes about race for 60+ years I think its time that African Americans do a little introspection of their own.  After all Trayvon Martin acted just like Henry Gates the only difference is that Martin was a little less educated and a little less mature and attacked physically instead of verbally.  Why is crime so much greater in some communities then in others?  Attitude of the people who live there has a great impact.  I was taught to do as the police told you and cooperate, even if they are arresting you wrongly, that can be sorted out later (that's why there are lawyers).  I don't think that's the message the President is presenting here.  He has however diverted our attention from things that might help to things that don't make a difference.  Suggesting that training the police would prevent a private citizen (Zimmerman) from doing anything, further demonstrating the false narrative that the President is advancing all through this statement.

"You know, when I was in Illinois I passed racial profiling legislation. And it actually did just two simple things. One, it collected data on traffic stops and the race of the person who was stopped. But the other thing was it resourced us training police departments across the state on how to think about potential racial bias and ways to further professionalize what they were doing."

"Along the same lines, I think it would be useful for us to examine some state and local laws to see if it -- if they are designed in such a way that they may encourage the kinds of altercations and confrontations and tragedies that we saw in the Florida case, rather than defuse potential altercations.
I know that there’s been commentary about the fact that the stand your ground laws in Florida were not used as a defense in the case."

"And for those who resist that idea that we should think about something like these “stand your ground” laws, I just ask people to consider if Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk? And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman, who had followed him in a car, because he felt threatened?"

I grouped this together to point out first that what cops do are don't do was irrelevant to this case and that it is just a continuation of his previous actions regarding Mr. Gates ie. the cops are always to blame (in this case even though they weren't there).   Then he amazingly tells the truth, stand your ground law was not used in this case then goes on to show he doesn't know what it means (which is unlikely since he was a co sponsor of the stand your ground law when he was a state senator in Illinois article can be read here).

Whatever happened on the night of this incident everyone (or almost everyone) knows that this was a tragedy for all involved.  One cannot help but feel sympathy for the family of Mr. Martin and even for Mr. Martin himself, no matter what the errors of judgment he made on that night.  Further, I feel sympathy for Mr. Zimmerman who was forced to take a life on that night to protect his own.  I doubt that there is anyone involved who doesn't wish that night would have turned out differently, but nothing the President said addresses any of the problems that caused the night to turn out the way it did on this occasion.  Did Zimmerman make errors of judgment as well I think the answer is yes he did.

Now what do I think really happened that night (although I have no absolute proof) based on the evidence and speculation on my part.  George Zimmerman spotted Trayvon Martin walking near the houses in his subdivision and perceived it to be suspicious.  There had been many break ins and he was part of the neighborhood watch although on this night he was on his way to the store and not on neighborhood watch (I know this is news to many, tells you how good our news media really is doesn't it).  I think Martin was probably walking close to the houses to try and stay out of the rain as much as possible.  Zimmerman called the police and watched as Matin approached his vehicle. 
As a side note here for those who are not aware Zimmerman didn't bring up race, the dispatcher asked him what race the person was (for those who think that isn't important, how will the cops know who to look for when they show up) he said "I think he is black" (I know some have only heard the doctored (they say edited) NBC 911 tape that takes out the dispatcher asking what race he is and making it look like Zimmerman said "He is acting suspicious, he looks black".  This kind of race baiting is something the President could have addressed but didn't.   Martin passed the vehicle and started to run Zimmerman got out to pursue him when the dispatcher heard Zimmerman's breathing become heavier he asked "are you following him"  Zimmerman "yes"  Dispatcher "we don't need you to do that"  around 13 seconds later his breathing returned to normal.  He then lost sight of Martin and continued to talk to the dispatcher for another 90 seconds.  That is the evidence here is the speculation I think Zimmerman walked around the Apartment building to looked down the sidewalk in the middle to see where Martin went not seeing him I think he intended to walk around the building and go back to his car but half way down the sidewalk Martin jumped him from the bushes. Knocked him to the ground (despite the pictures you have seen Martin was 6'2" Zimmerman only 5'7" ) and commenced to beating him (here we have some evidence Zimmerman's knuckles not skinned Martins knuckles very skinned, and we have the witness that said that Martin was straddling him and raining down blows toward him.  At this point Zimmerman is able to get his weapon out and shoot Martin in the chest (the ballistic evidence also supports this as the expert testified that the muzzle was in contact with his hoody sweatshirt and the shirt was between 3 and 4 inches from his skin which is consistent with some one leaning forward over the shooter).

This was a tragedy the only winners here are the race baiters and there cronies, and it appears the President is one of them.  

For those Who Support Minimum Wage Increases a Question?

Answer Me This About Mandated Minimum Wages

by Don Boudreaux on July 15, 2013

in Prices, Reality Is Not Optional, Seen and Unseen, Wal-Mart, Work

Here’s a letter to WTOP Radio:

You quote minimum-wage supporters who assert that hiking that wage will raise the pay of low-skilled workers if the legislation targets “industries that can afford to increase wages” (“Wal-Mart faceoff with DC fuels minimum wage debate,” July 15).
You should ask these minimum-wage supporters the following questions: “If government enacts legislation setting the minimum price that people can pay for a new car at $50,000, do you – you confident supporters of government-mandated minimum prices – believe that this legislation will result in people paying $50,000 for the likes of Toyota Corollas and Ford Fiestas?  Or do you realize that if government obliges car buyers to pay at least $50,000 for a new vehicle, these buyers will choose to buy no low-end cars and opt (if they buy a new car at all) instead to purchase a new BMW, Lexus, or other luxury model?”

And here’s a follow-up question that you should ask: “Do your answers to the above questions change if the minimum-car-price legislation applies only to high-income people?  That is, do you think that merely because an attorney or surgeon earns, say, an annual salary of one million dollars – and, hence, can “afford” to pay $50,000 for a Corolla or Fiesta – that that wealthy car buyer will be prompted by minimum-car-price legislation to fork out $50,000 for the likes of a Corolla or Fiesta, especially given that he or she can buy the likes of a BMW or Lexus for the same money?”
Unless you find a minimum-wage supporter who can plausibly explain why a legislated minimum price for cars will not reduce the income earned by sellers of low-end cars, you should be more skeptical of the analytical abilities of those who insist that a legislated minimum wage will not reduce the income earned by sellers of low-skilled labor.
Sincerely,

Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA  22030

Walmart Myths? An economist responds.

This article appeared in the Washington Post (aka Washington Compost) about Walmart
Corporation.  Here is the response by economist Don Boudreaux from George Mason
University.