Reply With Quote
NoOption plays the post-racial card.
Get over yourselves.
NoOption plays the post-racial card.
no doubt...what if it had turned out different? Aren't you playing the race card when you play the ACORN card? What are they guilty of anyway?
Registering the Dallas Cowboys to vote in Nevada, for one.
I quit feeding this troll...
Accusation...but I think I found some crimes
California law - It is a crime in California to intercept or eavesdrop upon any confidential communication, including a telephone call or wire communication, without the consent of all parties. Cal. Penal Code §§ 631, 632. It is also a crime to disclose information obtained from eavesdropping.
Eavesdropping upon or recording a conversation, whether by telephone or face-to-face, when a person would reasonably expect their conversation to be confined to the parties present, carries the same penalty as intercepting telephone or wire communications.
Precedent has already been set in CA - A California appellate court ruled that a network’s broadcast of a news report that used excerpts from secret recordings during two patient examinations violated the privacy rights of the physician, who had a reasonable expectation that his communications with his patients would be private and not recorded. Lieberman v. KCOP Television, Inc. 110 Cal. App. 4th 156 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003).
Just so everyone is clear on my thinking, I think the ACORN meeting could be considered private as it was in a room with the doors closed.
The hidden video was also illegal (the video part) - However, an appellate court has ruled that using a hidden video camera in a private place does violate the statute. California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989).
Here are CA's penalties - A first offense of eavesdropping is punishable by a fine of up to $2,500 and imprisonment for no more than one year. Subsequent offenses carry a maximum fine of $10,000 and jail sentence of up to one year. Intercepting, recording, and disclosing information each carries a separate penalty.
There are also civil penalties - Anyone injured by a violation of the laws against disclosure of telegraphic or telephonic messages can recover civil damages of $5,000 or three times actual damages, whichever is greater. Cal. Penal Code § 637.2(a). A civil action for invasion of privacy also may be brought against the person who committed the violation. Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.
(source: http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/california.html )
Massachusetts
It is a crime to record any conversation, whether oral or wire, without the consent of all parties in Massachusetts. The penalty for violating the law is a fine of up to $10,000 and a jail sentence of up to five years. Mass. Ann. Laws ch. 272 , § 99.
(same source)
I didn't even look up the Federal statutes regarding this.
I think that O'Keefe and Giles could find themselves in some personal lawsuits as well as criminal penalties. Lawsuits usually include depositions and we might find out who funded these 'investigations'.
It's been mentioned that the videotaping may have been against the law in Maryland, too. I'd frankly be surprised to see any charges against the people running the sting, but stranger things have happened.
Oh, they'll try.
We've gone from actual proof of racist actions and remarks to allowing interpretations as being enough to verify conclusion.
It's always a matter of interpretation; there's no such thing as proof of racism.
I'm only prejudiced against the white half.
I saw a good description of the white, fat, southern pissed off Astrotufers and Beck s
KU KLUX KLOWNS !
Their only difference is that they don't feel the need to hide their iden ies under pointy hoods and bed sheets.
The Left soooo wants this to be abour Race. They will turn just about any criticism or action into a race issue.
I don't think conservatives could ask for a better response to their criticisms. "You call OBAMA a Liar?? You racist you!" "You think ACORN is corrupt? Where's your white hood?"
I can't think of a more deconstructive path for Democrats, than to race bait when criticism comes their way.
So, please...
keep it up
Beck, Dobbs, Fox are mainly attacking browns and blacks.
The Repugs have played the Southern Race Card for 40 years, starting with that wonderful Repug leader Nixon.
Yeah...FOX never attacks white people. Damn repugs are all racists anyway. That KKK grand wazooo dude, Senator Byrd, was just a racist repug posing as a democrat for all these yrs. And all those Democrats who voted against the Civil rights act...were repug posers too. It all started with NIXON!!
I agree that I'm tired of the race card, especially since it's been played lately where it's not applicable. For instance, what does Carter think he'll gain from saying pessimism/aggression towards Obama is due to racism? Does he think that racists will suddenly "see the light"? Or that conservative pundits will turn around and say, "You know, I bet it IS just subliminal racism! That's why we really dislike Obama!"
Was there racism involved in some people voting against Obama? Of course, just like there was some racism involved in people voting FOR Obama. Big whoop.
I agree. I think there are nutjobs on both sides.
It's interesting that a Hitler sign of Obama is racist, but a Hitler sign of Bush is not.
Exactly.
Calling President Obama a Muslin, Kenyan, fascist, communist has absolutely nothing to do with criticizing his policies.
Similarly, criticizing his policies has nothing to do with calling him a Muslim, Kenyan, fascist, communist.
And yet the enlightened progressives would have us believe that the few crazies on the right are the entire right, and that every criticism of the current administration can be dismissed as racism. Quite convenient.
Overblown. Also, not much in evidence in this forum.And yet the enlightened progressives would have us believe that the few crazies on the right are the entire right, and that every criticism of the current administration can be dismissed as racism. Quite convenient.
Perhaps....aside from bouty.
Republicans are racist. We, the more enlightened of the country, voted for a black man. The only reason we voted for him is because he is black. That is how unbiased ( I couldn't find an antonym for racist) we are. You on the other hand did not vote for a black man. Therefore you are racist. Sure Democrats were the ones who wanted slavery. And sure segregationists were Democrats. But we voted for a black guy, regardless of credentials.
I would argue that the vast majority of Senators and Congressmen are not racist. However, I would say that I suspect that they do feel some classism. As for regular humans, racism or prejudice is not tied to creed nor to breed. Its something that every individual is susceptible too and probably has experienced at some time, no matter how "enlightened" they might consider themselves (an example of prejudice in and of itself).
really? i mean, really? "we, the more elightened"? i........i'll just ......i'm speechless.
It's a lampoon, Viva.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
