Saturday, September 13, 2014

Retro Garlic: Governor Gaucho Riding Off Into The Sunset

"Oh woe is me ..."

That about sums up the lenghty outpouring today of the former Governor Gaucho, the Appalachian-Hiking, Secret-Brazilian-Lover Mark Sanford of South Carolina.

He took to Facebook to annouce calling off his pending wedding to that Secret Brazilian Lover, fiancée María Belén Chapur, and rambles through the Fields of Elysia, giving a H/T to God in airing the dirty laundry of his divorce proceedings.

A snippet from his Appalachian-long Facebook post;
"...She wanted full control of their custodial accounts which were very significant in size, I gave it. I did these things for two reasons. One, because my good friend Cubby Culbertson had reminded me that it was all God's - and if he wanted you to have more, you would…and if he wanted you to have less, you would have less. He accordingly strongly advised against spending money and time and controversy fighting over things that God ultimately controlled ... "
To which the kids over on Gawker have some advise for Sanford;

"Lawyers, alas, may actually be more powerful than God."

He tells of his ex-wife putting demands on him, like drug and alcohol testing and this;
" ...Finally, Jenny and her lawyer also go on to ask me to undertake an array of programs and evaluations, each one more riveting than the next ..."
Without using the actual word, acting as a martyred Eddie Haskell, our former Governor Gaucho is actually calling his ex-wife a bitch

With a woe-is-me-smile, and heavy heart.

And, he seems to disengage himself, that all these troubles he's blaming on God, are actually the result of him lying, taking on a Secret Brazilian Lover, and putting on he was hiking the Appalachian Trail, when, in fact, he was flying down, to Rio.

Typical corrupt Republican - it's always someone else's fault.

You can read more about it;

TPM:  Mark Sanford Unloads Custody Battle Details In Agonizing Facebook Post About Breaking Up With His Fiancée

Wonkette:  Mark Sanford Leaves The Appalachian Trail; Also, That Chick He Was Banging   The end of the affair

Oh, the Retro Part;

Governor Gaucho!

Like A Lover

Tuesday, September 09, 2014

Paging Rollo Tomasi

Oh, what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive

Even if you have been paying minor attention, over the past weeks, and months, to the know-famous NFL-Ray Rice Domestic Abuse Scandal - let's get in the vernacular - NFL-RayRicegate is what we can start calling this - Rollo Tomasi is now entering, center stage.

TMZ released a video yesterday, showing for all, the 1-2-combo punches of the now unemployed NFL running back, his then-girlfriend-now-wife, dropping like a sack of potatoes.

It's eeire and heartsicking.

And, when it happened, Rice's then-girlfriend-now-wife made statements about "mutual combat' and was at Rice's side, apparently during the interview with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, and, at a press conference.

I don't know if even the most ignorant and terrible police department would interview a wife beater, with the victim in the room

Rice received, to the outrage of the world, a paltry 2-game suspension, and, actually, no discipline from the NFL team that employed him, the Baltimore Ravens (who were formerly the Cleveland Brown, who then-owner Art Modell moved them in the dead of night to Baltimore).

So, up until yesterday, the NFL, and Roger Goodell, and the Baltimore Ravens all thought they could get away with it.

But TMZ's video, which, according to hotel people where the abuse occured, the NFL never asked for it, has exposed the NFL, Roger Goodell, and the Baltimore Ravens as a gaggle of Roland Tomasi's.

They're not getting away with it.

And, now that we have an NFL-RayRicegate bubbling up, a classic Nixonian "who knew what and when", the weight of their deception is only buidling.

Charlie Pierce has a good take;
" ...The National Football League was exposed as either mendacious or shockingly unempathetic. Commissioner Roger Goodell was exposed as either a liar, or as someone who should not be allowed to count his own money. (Olbermann's right. He's got to go, but he won't, because most of the NFL owners think he's handled the whole thing splendidly.) The Ravens organization was exposed as a rat's nest of soulless, profit-driven drones. (And I hope nobody in the head offices of either the NFL or the Ravens misled the local prosecutors, who now also look like idiots on the national stage, and very likely are looking for someone to blame.) And, finally, Ray Rice is out of a job ..."
Keith Olbermann has called for a bevy of heads

Eric Wilber of Boston.Com has said "Goodell Needs to Go"

Chadd Fin of 'The Boston Globe' offers - No One Looks as Horrible as Ray Rice, but NFL, Ravens Sure Did Try.

When you look at this scandal, and, perhaps, Major League Baseball's plunging it's head in the sand over the steriod abuse, it's blatent how the greed over the billions these sports produce takes priority over the "right thing" to do.

Once in professional sports, there was a man, the first commissioner of Major League Baseball, Federal Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, who was faced with a scandal, and, didn't hesitate what to do, didn't concern himself with the greed of the game, and took definitive, and swift action - For gambling, and changing outcomes of games, he banned eight Chicago White Sox players (many say Shoeless Joe Jackson didn't deserve it), for life, the infamous Chicago Black Sox Scandal.

Instead, now, we have a gaggle of Rollo Tomasi's.

Sunday, September 07, 2014

Top Ten Cloves: Surprises on NFL Opening Day

News Item:  NFL 2014 KICKOFF

10.  Seattle Seahawks considering using Mercy Rule this season 

 9.  New 49ers stadium has system crash, lose all scores and stats, need to reboot and start game over

 8.  Memo leaked, President Obama authorizing use of Drones if Chicago Bears fall behind by more than  two touchhdowns this season

 7.  NFL anounces relocating championship game to Crested Butte, Colorado, for the Anheuser-Busch-sponsored “Whatever, U.S.A. Superbowl"

 6.  Wes Welker invites fans to his place for "Welker Whatever USA" party

 5.  Tim Tebow now wants to join Dallas Cowboys Practice Squad

 4.  NFL annouces giving all players concussions, that way, everyone even and on the same level

 3.  After hard hit, Ray Rice threatens to beat tacklers wife

 2.  Johnny Football to trademark name, sue NFL unless they change name to National Manziel League

 1.  In major surprise, Washington team changes logo to Sticks-and-Stones

Bonus NFL Riffs

Top Ten Cloves: Ways To Tell Your Next Door Neighbor May Be Conducting Illegal Dogfights

Retro Garlic ... How Much Is That Michael Vick In The Window ...

Top Ten Cloves: Things About Condoleezza Rice Becoming NFL Commissioner

Developing Story! Tancredo: Shut Down Super Bowl; Says Two Black Coaches "Amounts To Segregation"

Flutie Sends "Cease-and-Desist" Letter To Media Over 'Hail Mary' References Regarding Surge

Sunday, August 31, 2014

Ferguson - The Oakland Raiders of Police Departments

For many years, the NFL's Oakland Raiders had the reputation of being the toughest, dirtest team in the league.

They took in rogue players, hit hard, sometimes dirty, and, during that period, permanently paralyzed one player for life.

As then owner Al Davis used to say - "Just win, baby!"

Perhaps we can say the Ferguson Police is the Oakland Raiders of Police Departments - and this doesn't included the recent gunning down and kiling of Michael Brown.

At least 6 Ferguson officers apart from Brown shooter have been named in lawsuits

In four federal lawsuits, including one that is on appeal, and more than a half-dozen investigations over the past decade, colleagues of Darren Wilson’s have separately contested a variety of allegations, including killing a mentally ill man with a Taser, pistol-whipping a child, choking and hog-tying a child and beating a man who was later charged with destroying city property because his blood spilled on officers’ clothes.
One officer has faced three internal affairs probes and two lawsuits over claims he violated civil rights and used excessive force while working at a previous police department in the mid-2000s. That department demoted him after finding credible evidence to support one of the complaints, and he subsequently was hired by the Ferguson force.

With a track record like this, we may surmise that Officer Wilson's shooting of Michael Brown wasn't an isolated case, but, rather, a pattern of systematic aggression employed by the Ferguson Police Department.

Tasering a mentally-handicapped person ... Hog-tying a 12-year-old ... Beating a prisoner, and than charging him with a crime for getting blood on their uniforms ...

Al Davis, and the old Oakland Raiders would be cheering them on ...

Just win, baby!

I don't know if there's enough Mr. Clean products to scrub the Ferguson Police of it's dirty, rogue cops.

Saturday, August 30, 2014

Dropping Shoes

It begins, what we will call the Fallout from Ferguson;

Officers from St. Ann, Glendale off the job after actions during Ferguson protests

"Two police officers are no longer working at their departments due to their actions during the protests in Ferguson.
A Glendale police officer suspended last Friday after commenting on Facebook that he thought Ferguson protesters should be "put down like rabid dogs," has been fired, officials say.
Meanwhile, a St. Ann police lieutenant resigned Thursday after he pointed an assault rifle at protesters and cursed at them, officials said.  Lt. Ray Albers had worked for the department for 20 years ... "

Lt. Ray Albers, thanks to his actions, has a new monniker;

Officer Go Fuck Yourself Is Out of a Job in Missouri

An internal investigation into Albers—whose nickname stems from a memorable exchange in the video ("What's your name?" "Go fuck yourself.")—determined that the 20-year veteran of the force either be fired or resign.
Jimenez told the Post-Dispatch Albers had three prior disciplinary incidents, including one last year in which he "used a wrong choice of words with a resident."
This is only two, however, the local Ferguson weatherman may be predicting cloudy skies, and passing showers of shoes in the immeadiate future ...

Meanwhile, up river from Ferguson, in the saintly Twin City of St. Paul, MN, police there engaged in some unnecessary racial profiling, and unnecessary use of force;

Police Tase Black Man Who Was Sitting On A Chair While Waiting To Pick Up His Kids

Let's bring in Les McCann and Eddie Harris for the soundtrack.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

2nd Amendment: You Have The Right To Be Stupid, To Traumatize A Child

Absolutely, utterly, tragic!

Shooting instructor dies after being accidentally shot by girl

An instructor who was shot by a 9-year-old girl who fired an Uzi at a northwestern Arizona shooting range died Monday night at University Medical Center in Las Vegas.
He said the girl safely and successfully fired the 9 mm weapon several times when it was set in the “single-shot” mode.
He said the weapon was put into the “fully-automatic” mode before the girl fired again with the instructor standing off to her left. The weapon recoiled and drifted left as the girl squeezed off an undetermined number of rounds as she maintained possession but lost control of the Uzi as it raised up above her head.
“The guy just dropped,” McCabe said of shooting instructor Charles Vacca, 39, of Lake Havasu City, who suffered at least one gunshot to the head.
The Bullets and Burgers website markets a unique shooting experience for customers.
“Our guests have the opportunity to fire a wide range of fully automatic machine guns and specialty weapons,” the website states. “At our range, you can shoot FULL auto on our machine guns.
“Let ‘em Rip!”

Well, this Bullets and Burgers place certainly lived up to it's motto - it ripped, alright.

Ripped apart the instuctor, that is.

Susie Madrak, over on Crooks and Liars, pondered;

"Maybe the kid's hands were greasy from the burgers and slipped?"

Why, good God, does a 9-year-old need to learn how to shoot an Uzi? ...Are the well-armed Miltias drafting them that young?

And, sorry about the dead instructor, but, shouldn't he have known, from his training and experience, to stand behind the person - in this case, a 9-year-old firing an Uzi for the first time - shooting? Shouldn't he have been helping her to control the weapon, holding her hands or arms, not to let the recoil spray bullets all over the place?

That error in judgement cost him his life.

And, we have to speculate, ruined the life of the 9-year-old girl, who, will likely, be tramautized by this for years to come, replaying the incident over-and-over in her head ...  Having nightmares about it, hearing a car backfire, or other loud noise, flood her again with the images of squeezing the trigger of the Uzi, feeling her losing control of it, ... Seeing the bullets hit the instructor ... Seeing him dead on the ground ... Seeing the puddles of blood ...

Even if she does get the counselling, and help, and, by some miracle, gets to live a normal, productive life (and the odds are long on that, I would suspect), she will have this memory for the rest of her life, and with it the sadness, the hurt, the guilt.

Maybe, when she is older, she will begin to question why her parents allowed her to do this. Was it a gift for doing well in school? Had she been interested in learning to shoot guns and this was the next step up, an automatic weapon, a machine gun?

Some gift, some learning curve, if that be the case.
"Children need to understand the concept of safety before they are allowed to shoot, Frichette said.
Also, they must be “physically and mentally prepared” before they are allowed to shoot a fully automatic weapon. This includes a 4-foot height requirement, he said, adding that even then, they have to master other weapons such as a semi-automatic .22-caliber rifle before they’re allowed to shoot a fully automatic.
He added that a petite-looking child would likely only be allowed to shoot a semi-automatic rifle.
The Review-Journal contacted several other gun ranges in Las Vegas. One did not return a call and officials at another two declined to comment."

Parents of this now traumatized 9-year-old, even if they are responsible gun-owners, should, perhaps, be charged with Child Endangerment.. Again, why does a 9-year-old need to learn to shoot an Uzi, a machine gun?

The standard in this country, to obtain a driver's license, is 16-years-old (some states do have it lower, age 14)

And, with that, one must first obtain a Learner's Permit, and one must have training, or practice with a licensed driver.

Afterall, an automobile can be a dangerous weapon, if one doesn't know how to operate it, to be knowledgable of the rules and regulations of driving, speed limits, when to stop, etc.

They must demonstrate, at the time of their License Test, the ability to be able to handle the automobile, safely, and with the appropriate knowledge of the rules of the road.

That would appear to be a practical standard for allowing children to shoot guns.

I don't know for sure, but I hope Bullets and Burgers aren't operating a Driving School.

Related Links

Friday, August 22, 2014

Bet On Manslaughter Charges, Or No Charges At All

Editor's Note - I'm returning to The Garlic after my prolonged absence, due to the continuing battle with a chronic illness (Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy {or a chronic case of Guillain–Barré Syndrome} - 4.5-years and still dealing with copious pain, cramping and major fasticulations, not to mention, 4.5-years of disrupted sleep).

Currently, for the past 10-months, after 22 different medications (which either did nothing, or gave me horrible side-effets), plus six-months of Intravenous Immunoglobulin treatment, I am on Morphine, which gives me some relief of the pain.

I hope to start posting regularly in the days, and weeks, ahead

The events of the past two weeks in Ferguson, Missouri has pulled me off the sidelines, as, clearly, there are two camps set up;

 1. That Michael Brown was an innocent young black man gunned down by police


2. Faux News and the Rightwing Freak Show standing behind the police, that the killing was justified.

It is clear, all the facts are not known of what transpired, and what facts are known, are being contested, primarily, by Faux News and the Rightwing Freak Show.

One major fact not known, and according to news reports today, is that the police officer who gunned down Michael Brown, Darren Wilson, hasn't even been interviewed yet by the police or District Attorney, so his side of the this story is still unknown.

What is known is;

Michael Brown, and Dorian Johnson were walking in the street and Officer Wilson drove by, telling them to "Get the fuck off the street", drove on, apparently noticed they were still in the street, and backed up (almost hitting them according to a witness)

Next, some sort of altercation between Brown and Wilson followed, with Wilson, alledgedly, grabbing or pulling at Brown, through the window of his patrol vehicle, and, alledgely, a gunshot going off.

That was followed by Brown and his companion running away, and Officer Wilson, apparently, getting out of his vehicle and following after them, alledgely firing his gun.

And here's where things get murky - some reports say Brown turned with his hands up, others have said Brown was charging, or moving toward Officer Wilson, at which point, Officer Wilson fired his gun, hitting Brown multilple times (6-8 times, acording to reports), including two bullets in Michael Brown's head.

I'm no Legal Scholar, and I don't play one on TV.

Considering the number of bullets that hit Michael Brown, one might expect that Officer Wilson is going to use the "Feared for Safety" defense.

Afterall, Michael Brown was black, and very large, something like 6'4" tall, and close to 300lbs.

Whoa, very scarey, right?

However, one fact that seems to be consistent is that, after the altercation, whatever it was, at the window of Officer Wilson's patrol vehicle, Brown and his companion ran away from the vehicle, and it was Officer Wilson who got out of the vehicle and pursued them.

(Not known, or at least, I haven't seen any reports, if, at that time, did Officer Wilson radio for back-up?)

That would make Officer Wilson the aggressor.

So, to get all Columbo here, Excuse me, one more question, but if Brown and his companion went running away, wasn't Officer Wilson in the safety of his vehicle?

He could have stayed there, until back-up arrived and then pursued Brown and his companion.

And more so, let's say, as then pro-police narrative has it that Brown, after being pulled by Officer Wilson, was going after Wilson's gun, and a gunshot went off in the vehicle.

I would think that would warrent Officer Wilson radioing in for back-up. That he would stay in the safety of his vehicle until help arrived.

But rather, the story goes, Wilson got out of his vehicle, pursued Brown and his companion, and only shot because Brown was "bum rushing him at full speed", while other witnesses say Brown had stopped and was turning with his hands raised, or in the process of raising them, when Wilson unload his bullets into him.

So, as we stated earlier, all the facts in this case haven't been aired.

And now, the Grand Jury has been convined, and, as we all know, the long-running joke is any District Attorney can get a ham sandwich indicted.

So, what narrative will win out?

1. That Brown struggled for the gun, ran, but than charged back at Officer Wilson, who had left his vehicle to pursue Brown?

2. Or that, after whatever the altercation at the window of the vehicle was, Brown and companion ran, Wilson got out his car and pursued, Brown stopped, raised his hands, and was gunned down like an animal?

Number One will, likely have the Grand Jury returning no indictment, that it will be ruled justifiable use of force.

Number Two may bring about a Manslaughter Charge, that, Officer Wilson was performing his duties as a police officer, and some force was required, but that he stepped over the line and used too much force, that it wasn't his intention to kill Michael Brown.

The District Attorney, being, essentially, on the same side of the Police (not to mention having to run for election) may be reluctant to bring a Murder Indictment against Officer Wilson (inlcuding, as reports have said, his father was a policeman, killed in the line-of-duty, by a black man).

I believe, much is going to rest on that Officer Wilson got out of his vehicle and pursued.

That, it would seem, take away any defense of being "in fear for his safety", making him the aggressor in this.

The Distict Attorney can split hairs, making it a Manslaughter Indictment, citing that Officer Wilson either didn't call, or wait, for back-up, and pursued, and while legally allowed to use force, used too much force, and must be held accountable for that.

That still is going to put him on the wrong side of the Police Force, who will yelp that he isn't the one to judge what kind of force to use, that he can't judge what it is like in the heat of performing one's duty, the split-second judgements a police officer has to make.

Fine, they have a right to express that opinion.

Just as much as people have the right to say that Officer Wilson wasn't justified in gunning down Michael Brown like a rabid animal, including firing two bullets into his head.

With shooting like that, hard to say he was trying to capture a suspect.

Paging Lady Justice ...