Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: Stories: News+Opinion: Haire of the Dog

Re: “What, if anything, could exonerate Michael T. Slager?

"What, if anything, could exonerate Michael T. Slager?"

A majority Republican jury.

26 of 44 people like this.
Posted by Pronghorn on January 8, 2016 at 4:33 PM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

"Therein lies the rub."

Knowing this author is, in fact, completely full of shit, I'd be surprised if he's really read Hamlet. More likely, he's referencing what he understands to be a well-known quote ("It's from Shakespeare, actually").

Posted by bigc420 on January 1, 2016 at 5:28 AM

Re: “The tragic but undeniable truth about Scott Weiland and Stone Temple Pilots

What an idiot this guy is. As a side note (I hadn't seen this discussed in above comments), Scott Weiland's changing vocal style has been highly praised for its depth and versatility...certainly didn't contribute to the "downfall" of the band. From a commercial standpoint, the band was doing fine. Its issues were largely internal and related to artistic direction -- the common sort of issues that contribute to the breakup of a band. Fucking idiot, God dammit this self-indulgent bastard hasn't a clue.

17 of 17 people like this.
Posted by bigc420 on January 1, 2016 at 5:22 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

I'm just shocked that Slager's attorney is claiming that his client is innocent. I mean... if his lawyer says so, then we must have this whole thing wrong! Makes me wonder about Jerry Sandusky now, since his lawyer was so certain, too.

1 of 1 people like this.
Posted by factoryconnection on December 21, 2015 at 9:49 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

"s garland 1962 yahoo"

I think you meant sgarland1962@yahoo.com

I don't want you to miss out on spam.

3 of 3 people like this.
Posted by Ron Liberte on December 19, 2015 at 7:15 PM
Posted by Pronghorn on December 19, 2015 at 1:05 PM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

Pronghorn. ...I won't talk to you any more. Thanks for the "debate"

0 of 3 people like this.
Posted by gentlemanandscholar on December 19, 2015 at 12:47 PM

Re: “The tragic but undeniable truth about Scott Weiland and Stone Temple Pilots

Shit article. Phony journalism..

23 of 24 people like this.
Posted by Brian Thaddeus on December 19, 2015 at 12:00 PM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

The fries can be made crispy, TROLLSLAYER.

1 of 1 people like this.
Posted by Pronghorn on December 19, 2015 at 11:46 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

Unless you are a chain smoker ( and like soggy fries!) I would avoid that particular Huddle House.

4 of 4 people like this.
Posted by TROLLSLAYER on December 19, 2015 at 10:48 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

Pronghorn,
Thank you for your response. I'm not quite sure what you mean about joining me....at the restaurant you mentioned. Is that a serious offer? It seems like it could be sarcasm or some sort of challenge for a confrontation. Your post about pornography doesn't quite tell me what "side" you are on, either.

My meaning, in case it wasn't clear, was to join me (to counter-protest) the next time one of these incidents occur....prompting (what I perceive) another community outrage aimed at racism. I apologize if my meaning wasn't clear.

0 of 1 people like this.
Posted by gentlemanandscholar on December 19, 2015 at 9:17 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

chrishaire,
Thank you for your reply. Of course I respect your opinion but I provided several citations which support my opinion. You have not.

0 of 1 people like this.
Posted by gentlemanandscholar on December 19, 2015 at 9:09 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

Very thought provoking article Haire. Allow me to share some:

1. Ahhhh. {turns over shot glass on the bar} Cheers and Merry Christmas to the Charleston City Paper Comments Section.

2. Yeah, that watermelon's not looking so sinister today.

3. Great article on the history of political correctness (the term) from WaPo's The Fix. I think it was yesterday. Term first used to describe life in Stalin's USSR. Close cousin to Orwell's Newspeak. I think all ideas must be expressed, including the hateful, or people explode. We cannot and should not ever try to come to any consensus about which words are to be banned, anymore than we should agree which books are to be burned.

4. People who cannot handle comments sections are weak minded and insecure about their ideas and beliefs. The reaction they are having is fear. They are the type of people who want thought to be controlled.

5. The name of of the game is "gotcha". The twitterazzi are waiting to pounce on any mistake and force shame and economic ruin. I think much of Trump's success can be attributed to the joy the public is finding in his upending of the consensus press narrative. The same reporters who hate comments sections assure us that THIS TIME is the time Trump falls, as we watch him continue to rise.

3 of 4 people like this.
Posted by Fish Pimp on December 18, 2015 at 8:00 PM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

"(In case you might want to join me sometime instead of just posting comments!)"

I'd love to join you. Folly Road Huddle House™?

Posted by Pronghorn on December 18, 2015 at 2:44 PM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

Ladies and gentlemen, you have now seen the clearest case of White Man Denialism ever presented in these comments.

He even gave sources and shit.

2 of 3 people like this.
Posted by mat catastrophe on December 18, 2015 at 1:11 PM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

Gentleman,

Shaun King is black. His mother had an affair and he's the product of that affair.

2 of 2 people like this.
Posted by chrishaire on December 18, 2015 at 8:55 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

As you may see, I have been interested in our community's .....ummm....reaction to events? I have much more information with A LOT of research and citations to back it up. I won't bore y'all with any more. Many will disagree with much of my postings but there is A LOT that is well supported. You will notice in the middle of the long comment that there are a couple lines ....
"Officer Slager trying to detain Mr. Scott

Officer Slager fighting for his life (Mr. Scott on top)"

They are accompanied by photos that did not transfer when I pasted. They can be found under a search (Google for me)....."Andy Savage more evidence later"
Look in the "Images"...once you get past all the pictures of Mr Scott in his Coast Guard uniform and all his other "sweet" pictures you can find the pictures of the fight.

Thank you for your consideration,

Scott Garland, USAF, Retired
s garland 1962 yahoo

(In case you might want to join me sometime instead of just posting comments!)

(If someone can clue me in as to how I can post replies to other commenters.....I would appreciate it.)

0 of 1 people like this.
Posted by gentlemanandscholar on December 18, 2015 at 8:03 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

I was the only person at The Citadel on Friday and received much support from passersby. I was also at The Citadel for the news conference and the Marriott last night. Al Sharpton had a meeting with the Conference of National Black Churches after the news conference.
You may have seen some of the news coverage but the media left out several pertinent things that were said by NAN (National Action Network).
Al Sharpton spoke at The Citadel last night. He said that there were numerous racial incidents at the college but he could only cite a single shooting back in 1992 (He said it was in the 80’s). The student who shot Mr. Byrd was tried and sentenced. The perpetrator always claimed it was an accident and there was never any indication that it was racially motivated.
James Johnson spoke Friday. He said that the students were dressed in robes...the pictures clearly show that the students were in pants!
Mr. Johnson also made another GLARINGLY OBVIOUS untruth....he claimed that only 1% of Citadel students are "minority"...The Citadel website has a demographics page (thankfully!). It states that 499 out of 2291 are minority (22%).
Both Mr. Sharpton and Mr. Johnson have used the shooting of Walter Scott by Officer Michael Slager as more evidence of the rampant racism in Charleston. Unfortunately, this is still awaiting trial and the investigation is ongoing.
The video of the shooting has been enhanced to show more detail by the FBI and photos taken prior to the video are available (taken by the person who took the video). They all show Mr. Scott and Officer Slager struggling on the ground.
Something that frequently comes up when I discuss this case is that Mr. Scott was "running away" so he should not have been shot. My answer to this is that Mr. Scott had just violently fought with a police officer....which is felony assault on a police officer. He had already attempted to flee/resist arrest….misdemeanors. Our police force is not paid/allowed/expected to let criminals just get away. Some have said that he was not a danger to the officer or to the public. That is impossible to predict...especially after he assaults a law officer...why would he hesitate to take a hostage or carjack someone? (What if was your daughter he carjacked/took hostage) Some have said that he was unarmed. How was Officer Slager supposed to know Mr. Scott at the time? The definition of unarmed is specific to guns and knives (in general) but again…what if your child was in his vicinity…and he only had his brute strength….want him attacking child…even without a “weapon”?

Officer Slager trying to detain Mr. Scott

Officer Slager fighting for his life (Mr. Scott on top)
Slager/Scott Citations
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/michael-slager…
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/0…
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/walter-sc…
EXCESSIVE FORCE (also known as “Rule of law abuse”)
"There’s no concrete definition of excessive force. Police have to use force to subdue suspects every day. Reasonable levels of force are guessed by cops on the street, second-guessed by police review boards and sometimes tested in civil lawsuits and criminal prosecutions on a case-by-case basis.
Excessive force is a slippery metaphor: experts say it’s any force beyond what’s necessary to arrest a suspect and keep police and bystanders safe. There are some moves, like choke holds, which are altogether barred in certain jurisdictions. 'Excessive’ will have different meanings in different jurisdictions,' says Mark Henriquez, project manager for the National Police Use of Force Database Project at the International Association of Chiefs of Police."
Any sentence may be handed down....including probation. Recently an 18 month sentence was handed down in a Huntsville, Alabama case of excessive force. The article states that Federal sentencing guidelines are 27-33 months. This shows that police officers are held accountable.
http://whnt.com/2015/12/02/former-huntsvil…

0 of 3 people like this.
Posted by gentlemanandscholar on December 18, 2015 at 7:47 AM

Re: “In light of the Citadel 'ghost' photos, who gets to decide if an act is racially offensive?

Again, I apologize for the short post but this deserves my laptop's morning opening rather than trying to talk to my phone. That said, I'm still in test mode, so I will address the Post and Courier comments section. I have stopped using the P&C because when I try to get on there they want to charge me $8.25 to read their stories....and comment. Not happening!

0 of 2 people like this.
Posted by gentlemanandscholar on December 18, 2015 at 7:44 AM
Classified Listings

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2017, Charleston City Paper   RSS