RattlerGator Blog

Interesting Prescription

So . . . they punked Barack Obama, huh? Damn fool. Eventually, even the press is going to figure out that Barack Obama isn't nearly as popular as people presume. In America, or internationally. A "popular" President simply doesn't get punked like that.

While talking with a good friend during the last week, I've wondered -- we both have -- about the remarkable squandering of multiple great opportunities by Barack Obama. This friend is much more of a fan of Obama than I am but we both hate to see "the first" fail so miserably, so predictably, in his first year as the Chief Executive.

And fail, he has.

I'm beginning to think some grown up needs to sit down with him and have a detailed discussion on what is, and is not, "presidential." My man (our man) the President doesn't seem to have a clue. Pimping for an American city to host the Olympics is definitely NOT PRESIDENTIAL.

While talking with the same friend I referenced earlier, I decided to send the friend a commentary from Britain's Melanie Phillips -- Who Does He Think He's Kidding? -- because I'm intensely interested in seeing, and assessing, how successfully the opposition is "tagging" Barack Obama. Phillips quoted a devastating Washington Times assessment (they called Obama's efforts "the worst foreign policy ever") and they tagged him thusly:

Actions in Mr. Obama's world are consequence-free. The only country the Obama team has tried to strong-arm is Honduras, which is desperately trying to stave off a socialist takeover by an anti-American autocrat whom the State Department has concluded is worthy of full U.S. support. This has delighted Cuban dictators Raul and Fidel Castro and Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez, who are very willing to let the United States carry their water. Venezuela, meanwhile, has signed a major arms deal with Russia, continues to build the anti-Gringo ‘Bolivarian’ bloc, bullies U.S. ally Colombia and plans to launch its own nuclear program.

Then there is the catalogue of Mr. Obama's embarrassing moments on the world stage, a list which includes: giving England's Queen Elizabeth II an iPod with his speeches on it; giving British Prime Minister Gordon Brown a collection of DVDs that were not formatted to the European standard (by contrast, Mr. Brown gave Mr. Obama an ornamental desk-pen holder made from the oak timbers of Victorian anti-slaver HMS Gannet, among other historically significant gifts); calling ‘Austrian’ a language; bowing to the Saudi king; releasing a photo of a conference call with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in which the president was showing the soles of his shoes to the camera (an Arab insult); saying ‘let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s’; saying the United States was ‘one of the largest Muslim countries in the world’; suggesting Arabic translators be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan where Arabic is not a native language; sending a letter to French President Jacques Chirac when Nicolas Sarkozy was the president of France; holding a town-hall meeting in France and not calling on a single French citizen; and referring to ‘Cinco de Cuatro’ in front of the Mexican ambassador when he meant Cinco de Mayo. Also of note was Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton giving Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov a ‘reset’ button with the Russian word for ‘overcharge.’

The obvious tag?

Incompetent.

I said to my friend that Phillips' opinion, and the Washington Times editorial, are both clearly biased against Obama. His problem, however, is the fact that the above conventional wisdom is increasingly being accepted by independents (Republicans are absolutely mobilized after seeing just a few months of this crowd in action). Independents -- that's where the action is, and they are rendering a harsh judgment of the Obama Administration and Obama himself. Now he pulls this loser stunt with the Chicago Olympics effort.

Fourth among four!?!

When you think about the times and the mood of the country (anti-elitist, anti-incumbent), Obama is (unfortunately for him, and probably unfortunately for African Americans) the ultimate elitist incumbent -- a good, presentable, articulate African American who says exactly what the super elite want him to say and does precisely what the super elite wants him to do -- to hell with whether it upsets the average American and fails to produce political results internally or externally.

That's not a good prescription for the future success of the Obama Administration or the 44th President.

Luckily, along comes Victor Davis Hanson with a very good prescription that recognizes the only possible way for a Democrat to successfully govern as Chief Executive. Read it and weep, Democrats:

1)   Fiscal sanity that leads to federal spending freezes and a balanced budget that in turn soon allows a paying down of the debt.

2)   An oil/nuclear/coal/natural gas rapid development effort (again, to exploit especially new fields in Alaska, California, the Gulf, and North Dakota) to tide us over until alternate energy and new conservation lessen dependence. The alternative is to dream on about “green jobs” while we go broke trying to pay for scarcer imported oil, and lose our autonomy in the next price hike or Mideast crisis, even as we suffer amoral rants from oil-rich unhinged thugs like Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Gaddafi, and Putin.

3)   A new national consensus on security to decide that when and if we go to war, to see the effort through, on the principle that whatever the mistakes we commit in battle are far outweighed by the cost of defeat.

4)   A bad/worse choice gut check reform on entitlements, especially concerning those unsustainable like Social Security and Medicare, that calibrates payouts in terms of incoming capital—whether by raising age eligibilities or curbing automatic cost of living hikes.

5)   Clear, demarcated, and enforced national borders, and an end to illegal immigration through greater enforcement, employer sanction, border fortification, and a change in national attitudes about unlawful entry.

6)   Zero tolerance on government corruption. There is no reason why someone like a Charles Rangel is still the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

7)   Tort reform, including limits on personal injury settlements and loser-pays law suit reform.

8)   A renewed commitment to national and regional missile defense, on the expectation that the next two decades are going to be terribly dangerous, as lunatic regimes may well threaten to hold an American city or ally as nuclear hostage.

9)   Federal investment in hard infrastructure projects, not redistributive entitlements or Murtha-like earmarks, such as freeways, dams, water projects, electrical grids, ports, rail, etc., with regional needs adjudicated by national bipartisan boards.

10)       A move to lower taxes, preferably by alternatives to the present income tax system, whether by a consumption tax or flat taxes, calibrated to commensurate spending cuts.

This is clearly the path forward we are ultimately going to travel. You can bet your bottom dollar a majority of these points will be undertaken. Obama can lead the parade if he so chooses. Or he can get washed away by the tide of history.

Time to decide, BHO, time to decide.

Food for Thought: Sunday, August 23rd

[1] In discussing the quandary facing America in Afghanistan, and speculating about the replacement of the traditional Commanding General (David McKiernan) with a Special Ops General (Stan McChrystal), Wretchard got my attention with this comment to his own post:

There are two models of peacekeeping: the police model and the Wild West model. In the police model, we delegate the use of force to the authorities and go about largely unarmed. In the Wild West model there is no police. Everyone goes about armed and when necessary, exchanges fire with someone else.

My guess is that the non-proliferation regime is collapsing and that the current political leadership in the West will accelerate its demise. The police model is coming to an end. A lot of pundits have predicted that some time in the next decade, there will be a WMD terror attack on a Western city. What they’ve not predicted is what happens after that. One trajectory from that point is a slow slide into a Three Conjectures type situation. The politicians won’t be able to solve it and then at some point, something will snap and a catastrophe will ensue. At that point either a new and brutal sheriff will emerge from the chaos and the police model will be re-established; The other possibility is that new equilibrium will emerge because the “other side” — whoever that may be, will be struck with a deniable reprisal. In other words, bushwhack will be met by bushwhack.

Suppose for example, Mumbai vanished in a blast with no one admitting responsibility? A nuclear version of the last attack. But what if a half dozen Pakistani cities were to go up with no one claiming the credit. Would the militants stop? Maybe. In the face of that kind of brutal reprisal there would be a lot of internal social pressure to cool it. They’d enforce control internally out of the need to survive. At least for a while. Universal nuclear disarmament except for the police will be replaced by universal concealed carry. We go from the police model to the Wild West model. Instead of a single gigantic Three Conjectures event, you might have a dozen little nuclear exchanges until some way is found to cool things down.

Either way, the current political generation will have failed to meet the test of keeping the peace and we’ll go into an uncertain future where the open travel, trade and security of the last thirty years is replaced by a dark and terrifying era.

My, my. That's quite a prognostication.

[2] How about a dose of Bill Kristol? He writes to praise America's loyal opposition:

In opposing Obamacare and supporting victory in Afghanistan, conservatives and Republicans are behaving as a loyal opposition. Those who were worried that partisanship would trump patriotism among conservatives, and that loathing of Obama would overcome loyalty to the country among Republicans, have so far been proved wrong. And those who were worried that timidity would prevent vigorous opposition where warranted in domestic policy have been so far proven wrong as well. The Republican party and the conservative movement are behaving in a way that can make Republicans and conservatives proud.

Hooahhhh!

[3] Football season fast approaches and it may not mean much to you strictly political types but this is clearly the single-most anticipated Gator football season of my life. So, in honor of a primary addiction of mine, here's a tribute to the Gator defense; the unsung (somewhat) heroes of the 2008 championship season:

Come on Big Orange and Blue!

[4] I doubt very much if I commented on this back in May but I certainly meant to. The context is the brutal end of the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka. The comment was delivered at the Belmont Club by one of Wretchard's regulars, a fellow Australian. And the context revolves around lametations related to the well-intentioned scourge that are NGO's and assorted UN apparatchiks [he terms them parasitical international fantasists]:

It is never about people with the parasitical international fantasists: it is about them. If there is ’someone to negotiate with’, then up pops a sleazy slew of greasy Armani suited UN and other internationalist parasites to prolong the agony that they may feast longer on the blood and suffering.

That industrial quantities of ‘little brown people’ may suffer and die during the resultant futile prolongation of the conflict matters not one whit to the jet-setting, white SUV driving, five star hotel dwelling international UN/NGO parasite class. After all, they are getting both a fine lifestyle and the warm inner glow of ‘helping the peace process’.

That neither Europe nor Asia harbours one refugee camp from the vast population displacements and refugee flows of 1945, and that Arab nations harbour swarms of fourth generation “palestinian refugees” from a minescule arab refugee flow from 1948 illustrates the point.

61 years on and the international parasite class (and others, of course) are still living on a temporary situation from 1948 which should have been resolved by 1949!

And let us not get on to the UN and NGO-operated paedophile, sex-slave and drug importation rings in the Congo and other hellholes where such loathesome do-gooders swarm like maggots on a dead dog.

Although such ‘Kumbaya Rednecks’ get the vapours when ones says this, total war has its place. It settles things rather decisively - the national socialists have been very well behaved little socialists since 1945 - a dead socialist being very well behaved indeed….

And that is a rather pleasing finality.

The LTTE got exactly what they deserved, and Columbo is to be congratulated on their victory.

Let the international parasites negotiate with the corpses of the LTTE leadership.

MarkL
canberra>

Now that is a man with an opinion! Some people need to be "killed dead" and that's all there is to it.

Later, Gators.

Very Interesting Turn

The unintended consequences arising from the election of Barack Obama may still not be clear to African Americans but they will soon be undeniable. David Horowitz, for example, gives a sneak peak:

[F]or white people the term "racist" is really tantamount to being called a "ni---er" if you're black, except that blacks are free to call whites racists while whites can't even write the word n-i-g-g-e-r without risking repercussions. Watching this show [RattlerGator: Greta Van Susteren on Fox, interviewing Sgt. Crowley and the woman who phoned 911 about a possible break-in] -- watching this cop be not only unapologetic but demanding that Gates apologize to Crowley and his mother (for the trash-talk Yo Mama),  it occurred to me that a great turn is indeed taking place as a result of the election of Obama.

First we had the spectacle of Sotomayor -- a race-preference lefitst -- backing off entirely from race preferences, and now we have  policemen who normally would just be under fire, saying enough -- we're not going to take it anymore. Saying: For years we've bent over backwards to apologize for racial injustices, some of which occurred and some of which did not, we've taken so many hours of courses and training to be sensitive to minorities, and we're not going to be called racists anymore when we're not. You are a professor making five or ten times what I make. You are in state whose governor is black; you're in a city whose mayor is black. You're pretending you're a powerless victim and at the same time phoning my chief and calling me a racist, telling me I don't know who I'm messing with because your friend who is black is the president of the United States. F--- you! And that's something of a cultural revolution.

Well, well, well. Isn't that interesting? Are white people rediscovering their backbone -- without embracing an ugly malice toward some? I hope so. I think so.

And it's about damn time.

I'm thinking about Sandra Day O'Connor at this moment and her pivotal role on the Supreme Court near the end of her term. She opined that affirmative action had a remaining lifespan, if I remember correctly, of perhaps 25 years at the most. That end may (may!) be fast accelerating right about now and the anointed one is playing a crucial role, albeit unintended, in that acceleration.

My, my, my.

Food for Thought: Third Week Into May 2009

[1] This is a pretty good parody of what would have happened to Sarah had she made the goofs BHO has made:

President Palin's First 100 Days

This helps explain Obama's surprise ranking (to some) at 7th of of the last 9 American Presidents in popularity at 100 days in office, me thinks. The earthquake looms, however. Because race is rarely far from my consciousness, this jab resonated with me:

RACE, ALL THE TIME
Eugene Robinson worried in the Washington Post about Palin’s emphasis on race. “Look, she gets 95 percent of the working-class white vote. She promises next month to talk to the ‘Christian world’ from Estonia, of all places. Hello? She goes to the Summit of the Americas and immediately puts race on the table — as if we are supposed to separate those with European heritage from those without. Then she tells al Arabiyya that she hopes to heal the rift with Europe ‘because of my own shared European heritage that seems to resonate in ways I hadn’t imagined throughout the EU.’ I guess we’re learning that those ‘gaffes’ last year on the campaign trail, like her ‘typical black person’ remark and Todd’s ‘I am finally proud of my country again’ nonsense were not gaffes at all.”

Booyah!

[2] This dude happens to get the ultimate story correct but still can’t see the forest for the trees:

Cheney Baits Dems Into Torture Trap

There are a multitude in that crowd who don't even believe we should have a CIA, Obama -- in his heart-of-hearts is one of them -- and reckless numbers of people ignored this fact in the last election cycle. Frankly, I'm still amazed at the large number of white people who made so large a mistake at such a moment in our history. My bias makes me give African Americans a pass on this issue although I recognize other Americans may have had a strong a pull to make history by selecting BHO. It was a different type of intensity, however.

[3] Mark Steyn is again right on the money

The Torture that is Nancy Pelosi

Here's a long snippet:

Alarmed by her erratic public performance, the Speaker's fellow San Francisco Democrat Dianne Feinstein attempted to put an end to Nancy's self-torture session. "I don't want to make an apology for anybody," said Senator Feinstein, "but in 2002, it wasn't 2006, '07, '08 or '09. It was right after 9/11, and there were in fact discussions about a second wave of attacks."

Indeed. In effect, the senator is saying waterboarding was acceptable in 2002, but not by 2009. The waterboarding didn't change, but the country did. It was no longer America's war but Bush's war. And it was no longer a bipartisan interrogation technique that enjoyed the explicit approval of both parties' leaderships, but a grubby Bush-Cheney-Rummy war crime.

Dianne Feinstein has provided the least worst explanation for her colleague's behavior. The alternative – that Speaker Pelosi is a contemptible opportunist hack playing the cheapest but most destructive kind of politics with key elements of national security – is, of course, unthinkable. Senator Feinstein says airily that no reasonable person would hold dear Nancy to account for what she supported all those years ago. But it's OK to hold Cheney or some no-name Justice Department backroom boy to account?

Well, sure. It's the Miss USA standard of political integrity: Carrie Prejean and Barack Obama have the same publicly stated views on gay marriage. But the politically correct enforcers know that Barack doesn't mean it, so that's okay, whereas Carrie does, so that's a hate crime. In the torture debate, Pelosi is Obama and Dick Cheney is Carrie Prejean. Dick means it, because to him this is an issue of national security. Nancy doesn't, because to her it's about the shifting breezes of political viability.

But it does make you wonder whether a superpower with this kind of leadership class should really be going to war at all. Over at The New York Times, the elderly schoolgirl Maureen Dowd riffed off Cheney's defense of waterboarding and argued that, no matter when the next terrorist attack comes, the former vice-president would be the one primarily responsible. He is, she said, "a force multiplier for Muslims who hate America".

Really? Last week, while Speaker Pelosi was preoccupied with her what-did-I-know-and-when-did-I-know-that-I-knew-it routine,The Daily Telegraph in London reported what is believed to be the second mass poisoning of Afghan schoolgirls, this time at Ura Jalili High School for Girls in Charikar. Fifty students had to be hospitalized after a mysterious "poison gas" infected the classrooms. As you may recall, under the Taliban it was illegal for girls to attend school, and Afghan insurgents have made a sustained effort to make the price of female education too high. So, in an effort to identify the poison, blood samples have been taken to Bagram air base to be analyzed by the U.S. military, taking time off its hectic schedule of mass torture.

Does waterboarding so outrage the Muslim world that it drives millions of young men into the dark embrace of al-Qaida? No. But the media fetishization of U.S. "torture" is certainly "a force multiplier" for Muslims who don't so much "hate" as despise America, not least for its self-loathing.

I'm tired of this foolishness. I was tired of it when they first politicized the war for freedom and I'm damn sure tired of it now.

[4] Hang in there, people. Things are starting to percolate around the country and folks are waking from their slumber.

The Supremacy of Everyman

I believe in American exceptionalism.

If you've read my "about" page (and scrolled down far enough), you know that. Today I read a post from Wretchard that concluded with this line:

One of the most ironic things about American exceptionalism is that it is based, I think, on the supremacy of Everyman.

Roger that, Wretchard, roger that! That is the greatness of this unique country and it is weird in the extreme to have a President elected solely because of that exceptionalism -- and he has no appreciation of the fact. He bows to whom? He apologizes to whom? He's beholden to whom?

And . . . he has yet to explain 20 years of Jeremiah Wright!

I've been posting very lightly for months now because I'm back working in government. It has been fascinating to re-enter that world, engage in the everyday conversations we all must have (I'm not complaining, I love such things), and relish the inevitable Republican-Democrat sparring that was mostly good-natured (after they got over the shock that I seriously was a Republican!).

I'm now in the process of learning a new job with broad areas of responsibility and I'm much less able to focus on politics. I presume I'll continue blogging but who the heck knows? I am, however, becoming more convinced that our cherry-picked proxy of a President will not go un-checked and when they start tagging average, everyday Americans as out-of-the-ordinary racists -- that's simply not going to fly.

People are tired of that mess.

I don't have any illusion that we've moved beyond racism. But it's a dead-end street that ends with ever-more attempted intrusions by government into our professional and personal lives. That's not the way to go.

Eventually, the supremacy of everyman -- and no man -- (which is the core American instinct) is simply going to say . . . enough! I have a friend, also a black Republican, who thinks the party needs to do more to attract African Americans.

I believe just the opposite. On the Republican Party--African American spectrum, there has been far too much of this:

Republican Party >>> African Americans

and not nearly enough of this:

Republican Party <<< African Americans

If you talk to black people, there seems to be absolutely no conception of personal responsibility for walking away from the political party that was nominally "ours" for 100 years prior to the Sixties. Nor is there a sense of personal responsibility for engaging the party as an individual. The weirdness of that never seems to get unpacked.

There are some racial attitudes among a growing element in America that are surely hard to stomach. But when times get tough, people lose tolerance for preferences. And preferences become toxic to groups associated with them. Especially by groups who feel they are being doled out at their expense.

I don't get the sense that black people are paying any attention to these historical facts at all.

That, to say the least, is not wise.

Oprah and Chris Brown/Rihanna

Most everyone, I presume, has heard that Oprah is dedicating her show Thursday to the issue of Chris Brown beating up Rihanna, in general, and domestic violence, in particular. Tyra Banks, apparently, is the hook they are using to script the thing out. This may or may not be a good thing, we'll have to wait and see, but for the first time in a long, long time Oprah is going to be appointment viewing for me. I can't see the original show that afternoon but will be able to see the local 10 p.m. re-airing of her daily program.

Take this to the bank: I will have some very definite comments afterwards based on what I see.

Food for Thought: Middle February 2009

Two snippets that are running through my head at present; hopefully I'll be able to expound upon them later.

First up is this nugget:

---

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded- here and there, now and then- are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.”

— Robert A. Heinlein

---

And the second entry concerns the great Richard Wright, quoting the author of Richard Wright: The Life and Times, Hazel Rowley:

---

 

JJM Was racial tension in America primary in Wright's decision to move to Paris?

HR Yes, absolutely. Being a famous writer didn't change the color of his skin. Although he had plenty of money, it was absurdly difficult for him to buy a house in Greenwich Village. If he was having lunch with his agent or publisher, they either had to eat in Chinatown or Harlem or risk going to a restaurant and being asked to leave. Taxis didn't stop for him. If he walked into a hotel foyer to meet a white friend, everyone would freeze and stare at him. If he used the hotel elevator, there would be complaints. When he walked in Greenwich Village with his wife, they were harassed. When Ellen went out with their daughter, they were followed by taunts. It never stopped, never stopped. He was tired of being worn down by it all. And he worried about his kids.

---

This was something of a discussion on New York City, mind you. During Black History Month and all other months of the year we might hear quite a bit about racism and it is almost always symbolized through some Southern vignette. Almost always.

Why is that, I wonder? Gotta go, no time for more right now.

Food For Thought: Last Day of January 2009

Here are a few things floating around in my noggin that will help jar my memory years down the road:

• For the record, I'm pulling for the Arizona Cardinals and I believe they will pull out the win over Pittsburgh. The Steelers have been fortunate as hell this year and I'm not sure I've been able to overcome my shock from watching Dallas give them a win. Go Cardinals!
• Hubris will be the downfall of Barry O, just you wait and see
• I have no tolerance for the robot-like reliance by so many Democrats on the so-called "best and brightest" line to explain away all manner of missteps by nominees or designees that must be overlooked or excused because of the dire economy; that seems to have it exactly backwards to me -- tell Daschle thanks, but no thanks
• Yes, the Republicans should try and block this package passed out of the House and called a stimulus; pare it back and make it an actual stimulus package
• Go Cardinals! Beat Pittsburgh!
• Congratulations to Michael Steele; I don't know much about the man but I sure wish him well; one request -- please do not be afraid to take Obama to task when the circumstances warrant such and they already warrant such
• I rarely listen to talk radio but it sure seems to me Barry O gave Rush Limbaugh a tremendous gift with Barry O's attempted dissin' of the King of the EIB Network; I'm just hoping a fair and balanced party somewhere is keeping a running tab of the truly bipartisan efforts of Dubya and the overtly partisan attacks of you-know-who
• Of course, I agree with Andy McCarthy, I think it was, in National Review who praised Obama's political skill precisely because of his overtly partisan opportunism
• What follows will be the only link in this post because it is the one component I really want to draw attention to -- Wretchard's Devil in the Dark post on January 27th; fantastic reading

Well, that's it for now. Later, Gators.

Savagery

*********************************************************************************

UPDATE:

These are the killers

 

I really had no doubt; two of them were in the Sergeant's chain of command. The couple had only been married for two months. One of the guys referred to himself as CripGeneral and another guy was known as Psycho. If you are black, served in the military, read this story and then saw the picture of the victims -- you'd probably conclude then and there what the deal was. They sexually violated the woman and shot them both in the head, okay? Further, name and context can sometimes lead you astray but black people kinda have this (guessing the race of a perpetrator) down to a pseudo-science and all of my instincts lead in the same direction just from reading the names of the perpetrators in the story below and seeing a picture of the victims. Such sadness caused by such genuine evil.

********************************************************************************

I don't want to make too much of this but I have been so emotionally affected by it, I feel compelled to post something. An incredibly savage and senseless murder in California. Marines! October 2008 timeframe, with Obama riding high in the polls and "Yes, We Can" chants everywhere. Remember? Hope over fear, right? But look, and read, closer. I know this is a subjective snapshot. I know that. This is also quite real, however.

Racial animus is evident when you simply look at the victims (and consider the context, of course):

---

RIVERSIDE, Calif. — Prosecutors said Wednesday they are seeking the death penalty for four Camp Pendleton-based Marines, including one from North Carolina, charged in the execution-style killings of a fellow serviceman and his wife.

Sgt. Jan Pietrzak, 24, and his wife, Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak, 26, were found gagged, tied and shot in the head Oct. 15 in the living room of their Winchester home. Investigators said the house had been ransacked and a fire had been set, an apparent effort to destroy evidence.

The four defendants are eligible for the death penalty because of the multiple murder and other special circumstance charges they face on top of their first-degree murder charges, Riverside County District Attorney Rod Pacheco said.

“The absolute innocence of a beautiful, loving couple compared to the savagery of the actions of these four equally responsible defendants leads to one conclusion — that this is a death penalty case,” Pacheco said in a statement.

The defendants’ attorneys did not immediately return messages Wednesday night.

Pietrzak, who was born in Poland and raised in Brooklyn, N.Y., joined the Marines in 2003 and served in Iraq from July 2005 to February 2006.

He was stationed at Camp Pendleton, where he worked as a helicopter airframe mechanic and supervised two of the defendants.

Quiana worked for the Riverside County Department of Public Health.

The defendants include Lance Cpl. Emrys John, 19, of Maryland; Lance Cpl. Tyrone Miller, 21, of North Carolina; Pvt. Kevin Cox, 21, of Tennessee, and Lance Cpl. Kesaun Sykes, 21, of California.

---

I have an impossibly difficult time looking into her eyes.

As black people, we often carry around burdens we, rightly or wrongly, think white people don't have to bear. We feel judged by the actions of black people unknown to us or our families. We're victims of this racial game. But is victimization a zero-sum game? What would Reverend Lowery say in response to that question, I wonder?

I'm ashamed of these guys who killed this couple and I know in my heart of hearts that racial animus was behind the savage attack. She's a beautiful woman and white boy scooped her away. If not from them, from some other black dude. That's the real deal. We, as in the United States of America as a public, are collectively real quick to try and make white people bear the burden of race hate but become deaf, dumb and blind when the "usses" among us who happen to be African Americans or other persons of color generate the hate.

At this point in time, I'm hoping like hell we can (as a nation, with respect to race and things racial) manage ourselves through this Presidency. However, (1) too many more of these Reverend Lowery moments or (2) too much continuing economic crisis, and the blowback is not going to be miniscule or pretty. Savagery of another sort looms on the horizon, far closer than we might suspect.

About Rev. Lowery's "White" Comment

Just a quick note and a prediction: The line by Lowery about white's was unfortunate and wrong. It also evidenced an extremely poor understanding of time and place (in more ways than one). Yes, we're going to have more color-coded moments such as that, both intentional and unintentional. There probably is no way to avoid that.

For now, I'll just leave it at that except for this quite un-original prediction: the mythical notion of the post-racial Barack Obama will be exploded in fairly short order. By the time the next congressional election cycle comes around this notion will be openly mocked with concrete examples of overtly racial acts or statements (as demonstrated by Reverend Lowery) surrounding Obama's presidency. Many, if not most, black people have a curious blind spot to racially discriminatory acts or statements that flow from black to white. The antenna is always up for stuff that flows from white to black but reverse the flow and many, many people have no idea why someone would be the slightest bit bothered by x, y or z.