Gang rape at California high school -- update

By Michael J.W. Stickings

See my initial post here. And read the comments. A couple of the commenters threw race into it, as well as their own racism, implying clearly that the rapists did what they did because of who they are, namely, Hispanics. This sort of racial stereotyping is all-too-common, of course, and it's repugnant, whether the targets are blacks or Hispanics or any other non-white "Other." It is similarly ridiculous to blame, as one commenter did, Bay Area liberals for fostering diversity and multiculturalism, as if the very presence of non-whites in the community is ultimately to blame for what happened.

Such responses are predictable, I suppose, and reflective of the bigotry that still plagues America, but I find them no less appalling for being so.

**********

It is horrible still to think in detail about what happened. One can only hope that the girl is getting the help and support she needs. Our thoughts and best wishes go out to her, as well as those in the community who stand with her in solidarity.

Thankfully, the law is coming down -- hard, which is as it should be:

Police investigating the gang rape of a 15-year-old girl have arrested five people, a police spokesman said Wednesday.

Three juveniles and two adults are in custody in the rape on Saturday, said the Richmond police spokesman, Lt. Mark Gagan. The three juveniles will be charged as adults, he said.

Gagan said the suspects will face several felony charges in the incident, including "rape in concert," and that the suspects would all face the possibility of life in prison if convicted.

*****

As many as 10 people were involved in the assault in a dimly lighted back alley at the school, police have said, while another 10 people watched without calling 911 to report it.

A 1999 California law makes it illegal not to report a witnessed crime against a child, but the law applies only to cases in which the child is 14 or younger.

Police have posted a $20,000 reward for anyone who comes to them with information that helps arrest and convict those involved in the attack.

Hopefully police will continue to round up the perpetrators of this horrible crime -- and that some way can be found to hold accountable those who stood by and did nothing to stop it.

Meanwhile, as CNN is also reporting, a friend of the victim has "blamed school district officials for not doing enough to protect her school -- and her friend. She said none of the four officers who were at the homecoming dance was patrolling the school premises even though there were a dozen young men hanging out just a few feet from the gym entrance. She says school officials chose not to take any action."

Obviously, there's a lot of blame to go around, but there should be no excuses for the crime, and no leniency for the criminals.

Obama does the right thing

By Carl

Here we have a President who paid attention these past eight years:

President Obama traveled to Dover Air Force Base early Thursday morning, where he met with family members and paid his respects as the bodies of 18 Americans killed this week in Afghanistan were returned to the United States.

It was the president’s first trip to the Delaware air base, the main point of entry for the nation’s war dead to return home. The trip was a symbolic one for Mr. Obama — intended to convey the gravity of his decision as he moves closer to announcing whether he will send more troops to Afghanistan.

The overnight trip was not announced in advance. The president, wearing a dark suit and long overcoat, left the White House at 11:44 p.m. A small contingent of reporters and photographers accompanied Mr. Obama to Dover, where he arrived at 12:34 a.m. aboard Marine One. He returned to the South Lawn of the White House at 4:45 a.m.

(emphasis added, for reasons shortly to be clear)

A simple, dignified, and low-key acknowledgement of one of the most terrible days to befall US combat troops since Vietnam.

You'd think the entire nation, as one, would stand beside Obama for this one moment and acknowledge he did the right thing.

Um, well, you'd be wrong.

Nevermind "support the troops". Nevermind the quiet dignity afforded a group of courageous men and women who lay their lives on the line in defense of this great nation. Nevermind that, in symbolism, we see the toll these wars are taking upon us all.

(Side note: I wonder how bad this economic downturn would have been had we not spent ourselves silly fighting, as Vizzin put it, "involved in a land war in Asia"? Just a thought to chew on.)

It's not enough. There's some dark mystery, a hidden meaning, a shade lingering, over each and every action of President Barack Hussein Obama.

A "black shadow" administration, as it were.

Now, it's true: every President has to be conscious of the impact and meaning of his gestures. Presidents are, like it or not, role models and trendsetters.

Imagine, if you will, George W Bush actually successfully riding the Segway. Undoubtedly, it would have been given a marketing boost (and no doubt, Segway had hopes for that).

Unfortunately he fell off, thus propagating the myth that the Segway is difficult to master and putting a crimp in its acceptance and certainly losing the chance to market is as "so simple a moron can use it".

Presidents acknowledging the loss of soldiers, however, is hardly a political novelty, and is often accompanied by frills and ceremony when he does it (as in laying the wreaths on Memorial Day in Arlington).

One has to question the...patriotism...of those who question this gesture.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Let the Senate vote (on health-care reform)!

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Steve Benen:

Democrats and other supporters of health care reform have a very simple message for center-right Dems who oppose fixing the system: just let the Senate vote.

The issue, of course, is cloture. Reform proponents don't need 60 senators to pass a bill; they need 60 senators to simply let a vote happen. The message to Nelson, Lieberman, Lincoln, Landrieu, et al, is, "Agree to let the Senate vote on the bill, and then feel free to vote against it."

Obviously, Republicans are going to fight like hell to blur the difference between the procedural vote and the actual vote. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) of Kentucky said the procedural vote "will be treated as a vote on the merits of the bill." Why? Because he says so.

And Sen. Evan Bayh (D) of Indiana, one of the Senate's more needlessly conservative Dems, apparently wants to help advance McConnell's GOP message.

That's right, Evan Bayh, supposedly a Democrat, is talking, as usual, a whole lot like a Republican -- and, in this case, like the rest of the obstructionists in the GOP.

Remember, this is total nonsense. Senators voting to end debate on a bill, only to ultimately vote against the same bill, happens all the time. Joe Lieberman has done it repeatedly. 

Of course there's a difference between procedural and policy votes. Bayh is helping Republicans for no reason.

It couldn't be simpler -- if legislation Bayh doesn't like comes to the floor, he can vote against it. Before that, he can offer amendments, give speeches, and encourage others to agree with him. Just let the Senate vote.

Pretty simple. And yet Democrats -- who should, one thinks, support a little thing called democracy -- can't even agree that there should at the very least be a floor vote, up or down, on the policy, on an actual reform package. How is it a good idea, other than to kill it, to toss a bill into the morass of procedure, and to deny a vote, a democratic vote, on procedural grounds, or to let a procedural vote be the one vote that matters, as the Republicans and some Democrats want? Shouldn't the people's representatives be given a chance to vote on a bill, up or down -- that is, on the substance of a bill? Yes, but of course the opponents of reform want to require a 60-vote supermajority for passage, not the 51-vote majority that would almost certainly get reform -- meaningful reform, likely with a fairly robust public option -- passed.

And with the likes of Evan Bayh, Joe Lieberman, and other quasi-Republicans around, it's an uphill battle for Democrats.

**********

By the way, Bayh also opened the door for reconciliation, the process that would allow passage of a bill with just 51 votes (or 50 plus Biden, presumably).

Alas, it's not that simple, though it should certainly be on the table.