Thursday, October 11, 2012
Boy 14 Killed by CBP in Nogales, Sonora, Mexico
When I read the reports in Spanish and English several question leap to my analysis: 1) How exactly did the boys get back over the massive wall to Mexico? The reports say all this was witnessed, and as I see it (based on the report) one can't exactly "flee" back to Mexico when faced with a substantial wall, unless of course they built a massive ramp, dug a tunnel under the concrete foundation, used an acetylene torch to cut a hole, or set a new pole vault record. 2) Why was the boy shot on the Mexican side? Twelve bullet holes in a wall behind him? Logic seems to tell me that anytime there is gun fire, anyone throwing rocks "flees" rather than stays to face a bullet, so why not fire over his head? 3) He was shot eight times? In the back an head? This is troubling to say the least. 4) This location I know well, it has the new style of wall, and therefore should be all the more difficult to breech. 5) Because of the proximity to the main gate (a mere three blocks south), I believe this abuts the US government's own parking lot, so it seems odd ( to say the least why drug smugglers would be operating so close to the main gate, that is guarded vigorously.
I have just returned from the physical site. The evidence gets worse. There is a 50 foot hill that rises above the site with the new wall rising from the top of the hill. Why this is negative is in order to shoot the boy, CBP agents would have had their noses against the wall on the US side, shooting down on the victim, this mean a random shot from a substantial distance from the wall on the US side could not have killed the boy. Eye witnesses state that four boys arrived on the scene and began throwing rocks. This is also difficult
to swallow as all four would have had to scale the hill, furthermore the fence though it does have slits would have protected the officers. Additionally Nolan Ryan throwing rocks from the street level where the boy was killed could not have hit an officer. The boy would have had to negotiate not just the 20 ft wall but the 50 ft steep hill to return to the street, cross it, and finally be shot. Finally, on the US side the hill is no mean task to climb either.
Wednesday, October 03, 2012
Debate # 1
As someone who is a Democrat and voting for the President, it was a disappointing night. In fact, I suspect that no one thinks President Obama won the day. Romney finally emerged as the formidable challenger we expected but failed to see before this evening’s debate. Romney was glib, forceful, and articulate. The President was disjointed, inarticulate, and frankly looked he had an illness. There will be no fist bumping in the Obama camp tonight, and high fives all around in the Romney camp. The situation is not expected to get better as the Vice Presidential debate up next. This will pit the Vice President (who is known to make a few gaffs) against a feisty Paul Ryan on the Romney side. To be honest, the debate was painful to watch for this Democrat.
The troubling facts are that while Romney preformed better than expected, the President did not preform anywhere near his potential. Key issues such as saving the auto industry, the 47%, prescription drugs, Bain Capital, on Massachusetts that being 47th out of 50 states in jobs, student loans, were either omitted entirely by President Obama, or glossed over to be effectively inconsequential. While Romney chanted “not true” dozens of times, all the President seemed to be able to muster was a series of “and ums” while looking like he pulled an all nighter. The good news, is that everyone including the Romney camp is aware that the President had an off night. We know this was not our President firing on all cylinders. The reality is that though Romney won the debate tonight, he was not specific regarding his programs, though he was specific in his accusations. The President has the luxury of having a well oiled machine and very definite programs that anyone can find online, but unfortunately he only mentioned that once.
The facts are now being bantered about on social media, and the facts will come out by the fact checkers. Romney can promise the middle class a new Mercedes Benz, but he can’t deliver. Romney can insist there is no 5 trillion, but there is. Romney may be better versed in economics than the President, but the President has teams of experts. The housing market is returning, jobs are sluggish, but improving steadily, these are realities that Romney can only deny, yet the facts support the President. You see, Romney can make all kinds of promises, but he can’t deliver. Congress being in gridlock is not the President’s fault despite what Romney says. Romney insisting he can end gridlock by reaching across the aisle, is absurd, you see, making grandiose statements, is not the same as delivering, the President is delivering.
If you have not seen Alan Sorkin’s The Newsroom, you should, sure its a bit high brow, but it addresses the wake of the news, admirably. The news team in several episodes recognizes that the current debate format is weak, and suggests a better one that takes candidates off their talking points, a concept worth considering. Mr. Jim Leher turned in the worst performance by a moderator I can remember. He was limp, failed to keep to his schedule, allowed both candidates to roam off topic, and asked questions that a primary student would receive a fail on. Let’s hope the President gets out of the funk that swallowed him by the next debate.
Labels: Charles Spencer King, debate, Leher, Obama, Romney, The Newsroom
