Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Free (The Editorial Me)

I feel the need to correct, or at least shine more light on, a couple of Editorials from the Ragister's editorial board.

The Register's Editorial: No winners in outcome of Zimmerman trial

They state that George Zimmerman confronted Trayvon Martin even though a 911 dispatcher told him that wasn’t necessary.

Here's the transcript of the exchange between the 911 dispatcher and Zimmerman --

"Are you following him?"
"Ok. We don't need for you to do that".

Chief prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda conceded in his closing argument that these words were ambiguous.

In all actuality, a case can be made that Zimmerman did as he was told --

No evidence at all is ever produced that Zimmerman followed Martin after the above exchange with the dispatcher. In fact, towards the end of the call, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher that he has lost sight of Martin. Clearly Zimmerman could not follow Martin if he couldn't see him. Further evidence of this is that Rachel Jaentel's testimony indicates that Martin had likewise lost sight of Zimmerman until shortly before the start of the confrontation.  In other words, after telling the dispatcher "ok", Zimmerman did not follow Martin nor did Martin perceive he was being followed.

In another Editorial

The Register's Editorial: Why is majority rule a crisis for the Senate?

Citing the Constitution of the United States, the Ragister states --

The Constitution gives the Senate the power to act as a check on the chief executive’s power to appoint key executive branch officials and federal judges. The Constitution says the Senate shall give its “advice and consent” on those appointments, meaning it should either approve or deny them by majority vote.

They continue --

Nothing in the Constitution requires a supermajority to approve confirmations, let alone routine legislation. If the founders had such a rule in mind for the Senate, they would have put one in, but they did not. Indeed, the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote in Congress for only six reasons, including ratifying treaties and removing federal officers by impeachment.

The filibuster is simply a Senate rule...

For the Ragister, and many others, there's the rub and the scientific community is united in that fact.

The Constitution states -- Article 1 Section 5, Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings

The Senate alone decides how it will, and in some cases won't, operate.


Post a Comment

<< Home