Duke case - again

Fox News is reporting that the woman who accused (falsely) three Duke Lacrosse players of raping her is writing a memoir.

The story quotes from the official release:

The press release for the memoir says that Crystal Gail Mangum has been "called an exotic dancer and a prostitute, and the public was led to believe she wanted to frame some 'good college students' from Duke and put them in jail. ...

Uhh - didn't she accuse three innocent students of rape? What was her intention? Wasn't she an exotic dancer (the reason she was at the Duke Lacrosse party to begin with)? This really takes gall to come out now and tell this story.

The press release (that you can see up at Free Republic) states that 'she never spoke publicly, that is until now. ' and why is that? Why would someone stand on the sidelines and let three innocent students get pilloried in the press, get attacked by professors at Duke and forced to defend themselves against bogus charges?

The press release notes that "Crystal Magnum is donating one dollar from the purchase of each book to help battered women. " How about donating the money she makes to the three students who suffered because of her? Too harsh? How about donating the money she makes to the police who had to handle her bogus claims rather than pursue real crime? Again, too harsh? How about donating the money to Duke University so it could run a seminar on how not to "pre-judge" just because the accuser is black and the defendants are white. I suppose I am beating a dead horse here.

The real crime of this issue is that it is off the front page but we have learned nothing from it.

OS

Hillary at Wellesley

The NY Times has a story here that chronicles Hillary's visit to Wellesley college. The Times story makes a very interesting point that I thought would be fun to point out.

The story states in part:

"It was Mrs. Clinton’s first visit to the school as a presidential candidate, and she chose it as the place to set out on an ambitious drive to attract more women to what she is underscoring as her historic candidacy. Mrs. Clinton’s campaign is increasingly counting on women, who made up 54 percent of the electorate in 2004, to help propel her into the White House."

So basically Hillary is banking on women to vote for her because she is a woman. Isn't that a little discriminatory and just a bit sexist as she is blatantly assuming that women would vote for her just because she is "one of the girls". I get it of course but can't believe that the media basically have lost any sort of critical thought with regards to this woman. How about Obama expecting all the black Americans to vote for him because he is black? Why assume that a group (I can't say minority as the NY Times notes that women made up 54% of the electorate) would vote like a monolithic block? Instead I would think that the candidate would assume that he (or she) need to appeal to the broadest base possible and sell a platform that the electorate can support. Do we really want to elect someone who panders to a specific group and plays "identity politics"?

Can you imagine a Hispanic Republican assuming that Hispanics would support him (or her) for the sole reason that the candidate is Hispanic? Should the Republican candidate (I can only assume it will be a man as no woman has yet entered the field) assume that all men will vote for him? I suppose that would be a little sexist and I am sure the Times would have a conniption of that actually was stated say by Thompson of McCain or Giuliani.

The media are in the bag for her and they should remove themselves from independent reporting and just join the campaign. Hillary is running for President of the United States and basically is playing the gender card. What is going to happen if one of the Middle East countries won't welcome her due to her gender (it is possible given their view of women) bomb them for their anachronistic views of the sexes? Recall also that Hillary is avoiding attending a Fox News debate because (I guess) of the hostile environment. Take a look at Bush's 8 years if you want to see a real hostile environment. My advice to Hillary (unsolicited of course) is to stop showing cleavage, stop trying to be more man than John Edwards and more racially sensitive than Obama. You are not your husband who was an extremely talented politician (whom I disagreed with on most subjects). Finally, no one cares that you are the first woman running for President or rather no one should care. You should not get any votes just because some of the electorate want to break some gender barrier but get votes because people agree with your policies. But my bet is that the name of the game is "whatever it takes". What an ugly sport politics is.

Outspoken Roman

Justice and Elvira Arellano

I already mentioned this story here but it continues to drive a lot of interest in the media. So to start Elvira Arellano was an illegal immigrant who was arrested and deported last week leaving behind an 8 year old son who is an American citizen. Why the heck are people upset that the United States upheld its own laws? Not only was she an illegal immigrant (i.e. a criminal) she was originally ordered to leave the US back in 1997 but still found her way back to the US (where the hell is that Border Fence that we were supposed to have?) and even got convicted of using a phony Social Security card.

So I came across this article from a Socialist Website noting that (in part) that ““All women’s rights are under attack…whether it’s abortion rights, the right to raise children if that’s our choice—with everything they need for a decent life”. This was part of a talk by Kris Hamel of the Detroit Action Network for Reproductive Rights. Apparently this group has a bone to pick with the US because of Elvira’s deportation.

Where is it in the Constitution that all American Citizens are owed “everything they need for a decent life”? If you said “Nowhere” you would be correct. Instead socialists like Workers World jump onto any cause celeb that they feel will either further their cause directly or help unite disparate groups against the ‘establishment’ indirectly. Why is an abortion rights group aligned with socialists? Elvira Arellano was a criminal and she deserved to be deported regardless of whether or not her cause becomes fodder for people who have not clue what the American Government and Constitution are about. What does the struggle of Elvira Arellano have to do with justice unless the implication is she is owed something just because of her location. This country was not established to give everyone an equal outcome but equal opportunity. Elvira Arellano got what she deserved and everyone’s time would be better served working on the real problems this country has rather than the perceived problems various disgruntled groups have. True justice was sending Elvira back where she came from.

Final thought – I always here about the extreme right wing of the Republican party. Will Newsweek or Nightline or Time or 60 Minutes feature any stories on the extreme wing of the Democrat Party? Worker’s World would be a good start.

Ann Coulter’s great column on this is out and should be required reading.

Random News

One of my favorite programs has made a hiring decision that makes me uneasy. Apparently Janeane Garofalo has joined the cast of the show “24”. Drudge has a link to a story here. What happened to the radio show on Air America? I guess it didn’t work out. But interesting that a right-leaning show would take on such a leftist in its cast and I wonder how many lefties would do the same? I am also wondering if Joel Surnow (pal to Rush Limbaugh and reportedly a right winger) will discuss politics and how he personally disagrees with her views but how the show is above right/left. My guess is he will not and keep himself above the fray as he seems like decent folk. I wonder if Janeane will do the same? The Ouspoken Roman guesses not. I wonder where this show is going (it has already been reported that the US President will be a woman) and would hate for it to lose its conservative edge (not a political perspective (i.e. against abortion or for limited government)) but its strong national defense perspective) in favor of some sort of social engineering platform. Next up, the main villain in the next season of 24 will be some extreme right-wingers who make up part of the Aryan nation.

Yahoo News is reporting via an AP story that Michael Vick is going to plead guilty in the dogfighting case. Is there any reason why this guy should ever be welcome on a football field again? I am sick and tired of organizations not judging people within the organization making it seem like it is such an enlightened position. Recall Michael Irvin (another buddy of Rush Limbaugh) plagued with drug problems back in 1996. Even after pleading no contest he still was welcome back on the Dallas Cowboys and then was welcome onto ESPN as an NFL Analyst. Why? They should have never hired this guy. Further, Irvin seems to be a bit of a racist. And this guy is in the hall of fame. Yes I think we should evaluate the total person, not just what they do on a football field. Who cares if isn’t fair.

If Democrats don’t vote for Barack Obama, are they racist? According to Elton John, they are if we apply his American Idol standards.

Hillary’s cleavage is news. During the great Mark Levin’s show a caller said that he had seen better cleavage on a plumber. That is a great quote. Who cares what she is showing? Can’t we do better than recycling politician’s families? All we need is for Jeb Bush to run for President again. Seeing the schedule of Hollywood remakes maybe there is no originality out there. Although see my book review of The Ruins. I am so glad that it will be made into a movie. Please don’t screw it up.

Why the hell is anyone involved with the new OJ book (“If I did it”)? Here is a news flash: Yes you did it and yes you got off on the murder charge. Yes race played a part in the decision and yes you are a despicable human being. Props to Barnes and Noble (a chain I really support) who are not stocking the OJ book (story here). In my opinion any money generated from this book is blood money and OJ should be dispatched to the dustbin of American history. I wonder how OJ’s hunt for the real murderer is going? Maybe we can get him involved in the Natalee Holloway disappearance as well?

Are you happy in your job?

Just a quick note that I like going into work and doing what I do. But when I see stories like this one (Headline "Two Deer Island workers drenched in dozens of gallons of sewage".) I appreciate where I work even more. Ouch.

What the heck is wrong with Chris Matthews?

I am not a fan of Chris Matthews or his show “Hardball”. I am really not a fan of MSNBC in general and usually watch CNN or get my news on-line. I will say that I heard Chris Matthews fill in for Rush Limbaugh in the 90’s, right after the Columbine School shootings and I thought he was pretty good (he kept me listening at least) but on TV, he always struck me as a bit of a blowhard. He also has deep ties to the Democratic party and although I don’t begrudge him that, I always wondered when Fox News was being pilloried as the voice of the Bush Administration why the same critics weren’t pointing fingers at Matthews (who has worked for at least three Democratic politicians including being a speechwriter in the Carter White house) and mentioning his apparent loyalties. I guess he was given a pass due to his political leanings.

Anyway Newbusters is reporting a great story (video is here) about an exchange Matthews had with a CNBC reporter, asking her to move closer to the camera and joking about her looks. Basically Matthews engaged in (at a minimum) inappropriate sexually suggestive remarks and I am checking Breitbart to see if anyone is calling for his resignation and the all so necessary public apology. Can you imagine the uproar if Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly had a similar exchange with Megyn Kelly or Laurie Dhue? First off Media Matters would pick it up and then it would be the lead story in all the morning discussions (like O’Reilly’s sexual harassment lawsuit was) and there would be calls for Fox to terminate him, and all that. Fox would be revealed (supposedly) as the anti-women, patriarchal establishment that all their foes thought they were to begin with. But I digress…

I think this is typical of the double standard that is in the News Media today (now referred to as the MSM (or Mainstream Media)). I recall that President Carter (remember Matthews was a speechwriter for Carter) admitted in a Playboy interview that he (President Carter) “lusted in his heart” for women other than his wife. Maybe it is time for Chris Matthews to do the same.