Monday, December 05, 2011

#Occupy Free Stuff Poem

OKAY - HERE'S THE PROBLEM

The folks who are getting free stuff,
Don’t like the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Because the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.
And, The folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Want the free stuff to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free stuff,
Want even MORE free stuff on top of the free stuff they’re getting already!
Now….. The people who are forcing people to PAY for the free stuff,
Have told the people who are RECEIVING the free stuff,
That the people who are PAYING for the free stuff,
Are being mean, prejudiced and racist.
So …. the people who are GETTING the free stuff,
Have been convinced they need to HATE the people who are PAYING for the
free stuff because they are selfish.
And they are promised more free stuff if they will vote for the people who force the people who pay for the free stuff to give them even more free stuff.

coyote, Daily Caller comment




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Thursday, December 01, 2011

Obama Kids Will Be Fine When US Fails

Even when Obama's Remarks at a Private Residence in New York are in context, the last paragraph is still incredibly crass.
Our kids are going to be fine. And I always tell Malia and Sasha, look, you guys, I don't worry about you -- I mean, I worry the way parents worry -- but they’re on a path that is going to be successful, even if the country as a whole is not successful. But that’s not our vision of America. I don't want an America where my kids are living behind walls and gates, and can’t feel a part of a country that is giving everybody a shot.




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Obama; or, The Modern Sisyphus

Imagine creating a creature from disparate dead parts, bringing it to life, and, in time, that creature turns on its creator, forcing him to push more crap uphill only to have it role back down just before the summit is reached. That's pretty much the story of Obama and #Occupy and now the monster turns to bite the hand that fed it.
More than 100 Occupy Wall Street protesters marched to a Midtown hotel on Wednesday night to protest a fund-raising event for President Obama.
(...)

Demonstrators held signs that leveled some of the Occupy protest’s most pointed criticism to date of the president. “Obama is a corporate puppet,” one said. “War crimes must be stopped, no matter who does them,” read another, beside head shots of President George W. Bush and President Obama.

One man, wearing a mask of the president’s face and holding a cigar, carried a sign that read, “I sold out!”

Ben Campbell, 28, one of the march’s organizers, said he hoped to prove to skeptics of the protests that the demonstrators were political critics of equal opportunity.

“President Obama is coming to town solely to raise money from the richest of the rich,” Mr. Campbell said.
Did I request thee, Maker, from my clay
To mould me man? Did I solicit thee
From darkness to promote me? --- Paradise Lost



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Friday, November 25, 2011

UC Davis Protester Admits to Purposely Provoking Confrontation

Elli Pearson, University of California, Davis sophomore studying sustainable agriculture/food systems and one of the protesters pepper sprayed by UCD Campus Police, came clean to "Democracy Now!" According to The Right Scoop, Pearson essentially said the student action blocking the retreat of the police was intentional and purposeful. As pointed out in a previous post, "The function of a civil resistance is to provoke response and we will continue to provoke..."


trscoop1 You Tube
Well we were protesting together and the riot cops came at us and we linked arms and sat down peacefully to protest their presence on our campus. And then at one point they were – we had encircled them and they were trying to leave and they were trying to clear a path. And so we sat down, linked arms and said that if they wanted to clear the path they would have to go through us. But we were on the ground, you know, heads down and all I could see was people telling me to cover my head, protect myself and put my head down. And the next thing I know we were pepper-sprayed.
Amy Goodman, the Democracy Now! talking head, asked Pearson,
Did the police say, "We’re about to pepper-spray you"?
In answer, Elli Pearson lied and contradicted the very tape Democracy Now! opened the segment with that clearly shows the police in front of the sit-downers, while tape in my previous post show police in front and behind the sit-downer line and that protesters were warned many times from the time police arrived on The Quad to moments before the spraying; if any student was not aware of the warnings, it was because they were shouting over the police so as not to hear and later claim police gave no warning. It's an old tactic akin to sticking fingers in your ears and loudly intoning, 'la-la-la-la-la-I can't hear you!'
I believe they told maybe one student, or like had some dialogue, but certainly not everyone could hear. It wasn’t like an announcement that was made. And we weren’t aware that we were going to be—I wasn’t aware I was going to be pepper-sprayed until people told me to protect myself. And then I have friends who were pepper-sprayed who said they did not know that that was happening and that that was coming. And we were actually expected—we were expecting to be shot in the back with something, because they were behind us. And we really had no idea what was going to happen.
Because I am nothing if not fair, the entire Democracy Now! interview and transcript can be seen and read here. I would point out that in the Democracy Now! blurb explaining the story just after the video, most probably the only part of the story most folks will read, makes absolutely no mention of Pearson admitting they had surrounded the police, nor saying the cops would have to go through the protesters to get out.
h/t Althouse


The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Walking Through Doors Causes Forgetfulness

Flash mob shoplifting is somewhat popular in many cities across the US. Last Saturday night, a 7-Eleven in Silver Spring, MD was hit by at least 70 people, mostly teenagers, who apparently had attended a nearby birthday party and stopped into the 7-Eleven for snacks and drinks. Police said not all of the teens stole goods, but have identified about 20 kids. Another flash mob in August, hit a 7-Eleven in Germantown taking items without paying.


View more videos at: http://nbcwashington.com.

Some plead poverty, others say they did it for the thrill, others claim the shop owner was mean and had it coming. Now they have a new scientific excuse - walking through doors can cause people to forget.

We’ve all experienced it: The frustration of entering a room and forgetting what we were going to do. Or get. Or find.

New research from University of Notre Dame Psychology Professor
Gabriel Radvansky suggests that passing through doorways is the cause of these memory lapses.

“Entering or exiting through a doorway serves as an ‘event boundary’ in the mind, which separates episodes of activity and files them away,” Radvansky explains.

“Recalling the decision or activity that was made in a different room is difficult because it has been compartmentalized.”
Don't think only criminals catch all the breaks. Just today, I bought a 16-20 pound Thanksgiving turkey valued at $22.23 and the computer charged the special price of only $5.99 even though my total purchase did not meet the required break point of $25. Not as good a deal as shoplifting, but it was good enough for me. I guess the Safeway computer had walked through a door recently.


The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Monday, November 21, 2011

The Great UC Davis Pepper Spray Incident

"The function of a civil resistance is to provoke response and we will continue to provoke until they respond or change the law. They are not in control; we are." - Gandhi, the movie, 1982.

On Friday Nov. 18, University of California, Davis Campus Police, on orders from the campus president, moved in to break-up the Occupy camp site on The Quad. This followed the eviction of protesters from Mrak Hall on the 16th. In a General Assembly, Occupy voted to reconvene on The Quad within 24 hours of the eviction. While setting-up at their new digs, Campus Police warned they were violating campus regulations which would be enforced. UCD Aggie TV's Ani Ucar reports -



The pepper spraying incident has gone viral so that is the only thing people around the world know of the incident. Police brutality on peaceful demonstrators is the last thing the world sees and hears. But that's not what happened.

Part 1, in we learn: The altercation with campus police was intended as indicated by the bearded guy at :13 when he declared that "this will reflect poorly on every person from the administration that watches this happen"; that Campus Police officially warned the students and assorted they were in violation of California Penal Code 409 and to disperse three times before any action was taken; that 3 persons accosted Campus Police and were arrested long before any pepper spray was deployed.



Part 2, in which we learn: Protesters invite other students to come join the throng and surround the Campus Police; again protesters ignore another order to disperse while shouting, "Set them free" and "Whose university? Our university!" [note: UC Davis belongs to California to which student's pay money for the privilege of attending and can be revoked]; the officer-in-charge individually warns the arm-locked protesters on the walkway they will be subject to forced removal if they do not disperse and several people of the first group leaves the walkway and others take their place while the others chant "Cop off campus!" apparently ignorant these cops are the Campus Police Dept., the campus their job site; the OIC again warns the students at 12:44, the exchange ended in a bit of laughter.



Part 3, in which we learn: The protesters use the human megaphone to say, "I propose that you talk to us [ garbled and unclear] off the quad" ; again Campus Police warn the protesters they will be shot with pepper spray; sideline protesters tell the arm-locked to cover themselves knowing they are about to be sprayed with pepper.



4th Video, in which we learn the students were asked up close and personal if they knew they were about to pepper sprayed to which the protester cheerfully agreed, "Okay, just making sure, just making sure, you're shooting us for sitting here ... no, that's fine, that's fine. You're shooting me for..."; the sitting protesters cover "your eyes, cover your nose protect yourselves"; Campus Police make one last attempt to physically remove them, but meet resistance and further taunts of "Shame on you!" and a crazy woman wailing and screaming, "These are children!"



The students were warned they were in violation of California Penal Code 409. What it is and what it says:
California Penal Code Section 409:
Every person remaining present at the place of any riot, rout, or unlawful assembly, after the same has been lawfully warned to disperse, except public officers and persons assisting them in attempting to disperse the same, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
What is it that is llegal? How are riot, rout, or unlawful assembly defined?
California Penal Code Section 406:
Whenever two or more persons, assembled and acting together, make any attempt or advance toward the commission of an act which would be a riot if actually committed, such assembly is a rout.
California Penal Code Section 407:
Whenever two or more persons assemble together to do an unlawful act, or do a lawful act in a violent, boisterous, or tumultuous manner, such assembly is an unlawful assembly.
California Penal Code Section 408:
Every person who participates in any rout or unlawful assembly is guilty of a misdemeanor.
What happens to the official who does not respond?
California Penal Code Section 410
If a magistrate or officer, having notice of an unlawful or riotous assembly, mentioned in this Chapter, neglects to proceed to the place of assembly, or as near thereto as he can with safety, and to exercise the authority with which he is invested for suppressing the same and arresting the offenders, he is guilty of a misdemeanor.
The protesters got their provoked response. Whether the aftermath of public opinion is in their favor is still debatable; I have seen it go either way over the last half century, but I know it was just this kind of incident that turned public opinion to favor the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s and the anti-Vietnam War demonstrators in the early 1970s. Authorities are in a Catch-22 in these situations; if they don't respond, the demonstrators escalate until non-response is no longer possible while any response is immediately forced into violence by the demonstrators who then cry police brutality, claim peaceful assembly and that is the last thing the public sees and hears.

Update: UCD student Elli Perason admits to Democracy Now! on tape that protesters deliberately provoked police.


The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

John Kennedy Warned of the Television-Political Complex

Paul Schutzer: Kennedy-Nixon Debate with Howard K. Smith as Moderator, Sep 26, 1960
A year before Senator John Kennedy and Vice President Richard Nixon faced off in the first televised debate on September 26, 1960, Kennedy wrote an article for the November 14, 1959 issue of TV Guide in which he contemplated the influence television would have on politics, and vice versa. He noted that years before, President Wilson had taken to the train in a cross country appeal to the nation in support of the League of Nations and suffered a stroke as a result of the strain, whereas, President Eisenhower was able to speak to millions of people about the current national labor situation in a single 15 minute TV address without having to step out of his office.

Kennedy observed television was not just a communication marvel, but one, he warned, which could create a political identity for candidates, deserved or not, irrespective of their records and opinions - the image, the brand - that would be fixed in the public's mind. "It is a medium," he wrote, "which lends itself to manipulation, exploitation and gimmicks. It can be abused by demagogs, by appeals to emotion and prejudice and ignorance.

Political campaigns can be actually taken over by the “public relations” experts, who tell the candidate not only how to use TV but what to say, what to stand for and what “kind of person” to be. Political shows, like quiz shows, can be fixed-and sometimes are."


Unlike the current White House resident who seems to revel in denigrating Americans, most recently calling them "lazy", Senator Kennedy reminded the good folks of this country, "It is in your power to perceive deception, to shut off gimmickry, to reward honesty, to demand legislation where needed. Without your approval, no TV show is worthwhile and no politician can exist."

Noting the anniversary of Mr. Kennedy's TV Guide article, Mother Board, was good enough to provide the article along with an excellent commentary that should be read, too. Here is the JFK article in full:
A Force That Has Changed The Political Scene

By Sen. John F. Kennedy
Democrat, Massachusetts

The wonders of science and technology have revolutionized the modern American political campaign. Giant electronic brains project results on the basis of carefully conducted polls. Automatic typewriters prepare thousands of personally addressed letters, individually signed by automatic pens. Jet planes make possible a coast-to-coast speaking schedule no observation-car back platform could ever meet.

Even wash-and-wear fabrics permit the wilted nonstop candidate to travel lighter, farther and faster.

But nothing compares with the revolutionary impact of television. TV has altered drastically the nature of our political campaigns, conventions, constituents, candidates and costs. Some politicians regard it with suspicion, others with pleasure. Some candidates have benefited by using it – others have been advised to avoid it. To the voter and vote-getter alike, TV offers new opportunities, new challenges and new problems.

But for better or worse-and I side with those who feel its net effect can definitely be for the better – the impact of TV on politics is tremendous. Just 40 years ago Woodrow Wilson exhausted his body and mind in an intensive cross-country tour to plead the cause of the League of Nations. Three weeks of hard travel and 40 speeches brought on a stroke before had finished “taking his case to the people” in the only way then available. Today, President Dwight Eisenhower, taking his case to the people on the labor situation, is able to reach several million in one 15-minute period without ever leaving his office.

To cite another example: The most dramatic political trial in our history was the Impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson in 1868, avidly followed by all the Nation. Newspaper accounts were decidedly partisan – those who wished to see and judge for themselves flocked to Washington by carriage and train. But even if every seat in the Senate galleries had been occupied by a different person every day for the two months of trial, no more than 3000 people could have witnessed that historic event. But In the month of May 1954, an estimated 70 million TV viewers watched part or all of the Army-McCarthy hearings.

These hearings, the Kefauver crime hearings, the McClellan rackets hearings, the conventions of 1952 and 1956-these and other “political TV spectaculars” have given the American public new ideas, new attitudes, new heroes and new villains. Less dramatic but also important have been the televised panel press conferences, the debates, interviews, campaign speeches and even the political commercials. Many new political reputations have been made on TV-and many old ones have been broken.

The searching eye of the television camera scrutinizes the candidates-and the way they are picked. Party leaders are less willing to run roughshod over the voters’ wishes and hand-pick an unknown, unappealing or unpopular in the traditional “smoke-filled room” when millions of voters are watching, comparing and remembering.

The slick or bombastic orator, pounding the table and ringing the rafters, is not as welcome in the family living room as he was in the town square or party hail. In the old days, many a seasoned politician counted among his most highly developed and useful talents his ability to dodge a reporter’s question, evade a “hot” Issue and avoid a definite stand. But today a vast viewing public is able to detect such deception and, in my opinion, willing to respect political honesty.

Honesty, vigor, compassion, intelligence – the presence or lack of these and other qualities make up what is called the candidate’s “image.” While some intellectuals and politicians may scoff at these “images” – and while they may in fact be based only on a candidate’s TV impression, ignoring his record, views and other appearances – my own conviction is that these images or impressions are likely to be uncannily correct. I think, no matter what their defenders or detractors may say, that the television public has a fairly good idea of what Dwight D. Eisenhower is really like – or Jimmy Hoffa – or John McClellan – or Vice President Nixon -or countless others.

This is why a new breed of candidates has sprung up on both the state and national levels. Republican Governors Rockefeller (New York) and Hatfield (Oregon) successfully countered the Democratic trend in 1958 with particular reliance on TV appeal. The list of fresh Democratic faces who understood – and scored on – this medium in 1958 is almost endless: including new governors such as Edmondson of Oklahoma and Patterson of Alabama, new senators such as McGee of Wyoming and Hart of Michigan, new mayors such as Gracy of Baltimore (1959)-as well as a host of others, elected or reelected in 1958 or earlier.

Most of these men are comparatively young. Their youth may still be a handicap in the eyes of the older politicians – but it is definitely an asset in creating a television image people like and (most difficult of all) remember.

This is not to say that all the politicians of yesteryear would nave been failures in the Age of Television. The rugged vigor of Teddy Roosevelt, the determined sincerity of Woodrow Wilson, the quiet dignity of Lincoln and the confidence-inspiring calm of FDR-all would have been tremendously effective on TV.

Can you imagine the effect of televising FDR’s “Fireside Chats”? How different history might have been had a nationwide TV network carried Bryan’s Cross of Gold speech – or the Teapot Dome investigation – or Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address.

But political success on television is not, unfortunately, limited only to those who deserve it. It is a medium which lends itself to manipulation, exploitation and gimmicks. It can be abused by demagogs (sic), by appeals to emotion and prejudice and ignorance.

Political campaigns can be actually taken over by the “public relations” experts, who tell the candidate not only how to use TV but what to say, what to stand for and what “kind of person” to be. Political shows, like quiz shows, can be fixed-and sometimes are.

The other great problem TV presents for politics is the item of financial cost. It is no small item. In the 1956 campaign, the Republican National Committee, according to the Gore report, spent over $3,000,000 for television-and the Democratic National Committee, just under $2,800,000 on television broadcasting.

If all candidates and parties are to have equal access to this essential and decisive campaign medium, without becoming deeply obligated to the big financial contributors from the worlds of business, labor or other major lobbies, then the time has come when a solution must be found to this problem of TV costs.

This is not the place to discuss alternative remedies. But the basic point is this: Whether TV improves or worsens our political system, whether it serves the purpose of political education or deception, whether it gives us better or poorer candidates, more intelligent or more prejudiced campaigns – the answers to all this are up to you, the viewing public.

It is in your power to perceive deception, to shut off gimmickry, to reward honesty, to demand legislation where needed. Without your approval, no TV show is worthwhile and no politician can exist.

That is the way it always has been and will continue to be – and that is the way it should be.
And there is the rub - it is in our power to detect lies, reject contrivance, expose tricks, to reward honesty and decency. Can Americans still do that? Will Americans still do that?


The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Congress Caught Trading Stock on Insider Information

Steve Kroft of CBS 60 Minutes reported (transcript) tonight that, ‎"[I]t is not illegal for member of Congress to make stock trades using inside information they learn while working on legislation" because legislators are not part of a corporation and insider trading laws only apply to corporate employees.



Big Government reveals
Former Speaker of the House–and current Minority Leader–Nancy Pelosi apparently bought $1 million to $5 million of Visa stock in one of the most sought-after and profitable initial public offerings (IPO) in American history, thwarted serious credit card reform for two years, and then watched her investment skyrocket 203%.
(...)
In early 2008, Nancy Pelosi and her real estate developer husband, Paul, were given an opportunity to buy into a Visa IPO. It was a nearly impossible feat–one that average citizens almost certainly could never achieve. The vast majority of purchase opportunities went to institutional investors, large mutual funds, or pension funds. 
Despite Pelosi’s consistent railing against credit card companies, on March 18, 2008, the Pelosis bought between $1 million and $5 million (politicians do not have to report the exact amounts, only ranges) worth of Visa stock at the IPO price of $44 per share. Two days later, the stock price rocketed to $65 per share, yielding a 50% profit. The Pelosis then bought Visa twice more. By their third purchase on June 4, 2008, Visa was worth $85 per share.
From 60 Minutes,
We know that during the healthcare debate people were trading healthcare stocks. We know that during the financial crisis of 2008 they were getting out of the market before the rest of America really knew what was going on. 
In mid September 2008 with the Dow Jones Industrial average still above ten thousand, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke were holding closed door briefings with congressional leaders, and privately warning them that a global financial meltdown could occur within a few days. One of those attending was Alabama Representative Spencer Bachus, then the ranking Republican member on the House Financial Services Committee and now its chairman. 
These meetings were so sensitive-- that they would actually confiscate cell phones and Blackberries going into those meetings. What we know is that those meetings were held one day and literally the next day Congressman Bachus would engage in buying stock options based on apocalyptic briefings he had the day before from the Fed chairman and treasury secretary. I mean, talk about a stock tip. 
While Congressman Bachus was publicly trying to keep the economy from cratering, he was privately betting that it would, buying option funds that would go up in value if the market went down. He would make a variety of trades and profited at a time when most Americans were losing their shirts.
Bachus' office released a statement saying, "that he never trades on non-public information, or financial services stock. However, his financial disclosure forms seem to indicate otherwise. Bachus made money trading General Electric stock during the crisis, and a third of GE's business is in financial services."

Speaker John Boehner's financial records show investments at political and financial advantageous moments.
During the healthcare debate of 2009, members of Congress were trading healthcare stocks, including House Minority Leader John Boehner, who led the opposition against the so-called public option, government funded insurance that would compete with private companies. Just days before the provision was finally killed off, Boehner bought health insurance stocks, all of which went up. Now speaker of the House, Congressman Boehner also declined to be interviewed, so we tracked him down at his weekly press conference.
Kroft: You made a number of trades going back to the healthcare debate. You bought some insurance stock. Did you make those trades based on non-public information? 
John Boehner: I have not made any decisions on day-to-day trading activities in my account. And haven't for years. I don't-- I do not do it, haven't done it and wouldn't do it.
Later Boehner's spokesman told us that the healthcare trades were made by the speaker's financial advisor, who he only consults with about once a year.
Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been particularly lucky at picking winning investments in initial IPO offerings.
"In 1993, Pelosi purchased IPO shares in a high-tech company named Gupta, watched the stock price leap 88% in 24 hours, then seized the profits by selling the stock the next day. The Pelosis did the same thing with Netscape and UUNet, resulting in a one-day doubling of their initial investment. Other fast and lucrative IPO flips included Remedy Corporation, Opal, Legato Systems, and Act Networks."
Later, in December 1999, Pelosi executed a stock purchase
"of between $250,000 and $500,000 in shares from high-tech company OnDisplay. A few months later, OnDisplay was bought by Vignette, which resulted in up to $1 million in capital gains for the Pelosis. What was unusual about the transaction is that Vignette’s IPO was underwritten by a major campaign contributor and longtime friend of Nancy Pelosi, William Hambrecht."
Then in November 2007,
"Pelosi bought $500,000 in the IPO for Quest Energy Partners before proceeding to champion the natural gas-related legislation that stood to significantly benefit the company. When Tom Brokaw asked her whether her significant personal investments in natural gas represented a conflict of interest, Pelosi shrugged off the question by hiding behind the crony capitalist’s false credo: "That’s the marketplace.""
Over the years, bills have been introduced to make insider trading as illegal for members of congress as it is for anyone else, but Congress makes the rules and they have let such bills die before they are introduced. This latest report demands that many heads should role in this scandal and a general house cleaning is in order, if not with immediate resignations and impeachments, then most certainly by popular vote in November 2012.




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Obamacare Headed for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is expected to announce as early as Monday, following a closed door consideration hearing last Thursday which, if any or all, of the six challenges o the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act submitted for review. Only four justices need agree in private to move the petition to a full court hearing. If the court accepts any of the petitions, it's expected the subject will dominate the remaining months of the 2012 election cycle with the court hearing oral arguments in April and a possible decision sometime in June.
The string of appellate victories may not predict how the Supreme Court will decide the case. But some legal observers believe the recent decisions lay out a road map for preserving the law that may appeal even to some of the Supreme Court's more conservative members.

"They show that smart, principled conservatives can decide this is within the broad reach of Congress' power, even if they might think it is bad policy," said Richard Garnett, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame who was a clerk to former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist.

When the states and the National Federation of Independent Business filed suit in March 2010, they questioned whether Congress, under the guise of regulating commerce, could place an unprecedented requirement on Americans to buy health insurance starting in 2014.

The so-called individual mandate was designed to spread risk more broadly and control insurance premiums, enabling the federal government to prohibit insurers from denying coverage to patients with preexisting medical conditions, a key promise of the law. Without a mandate, some Americans might avoid buying insurance until they got sick, dramatically driving up premiums.

The insurance requirement became the focus of the litigation and initially sparked a partisan split among trial judges. But more recent rulings from appellate courts around the country have significantly muddied the liberal-conservative divide.

Only the U.S. appeals court in Atlanta has struck down the mandate, in a 2-1 decision with one Republican appointee and one Democratic appointee in the majority. They called the law "breathtaking in its expansive scope."

Two other appellate courts with prominent judges appointed by Republican presidents have categorically rejected the legal attacks on the insurance mandate.
Polls continue to show that the majority American opinion is hostile to Obamacare with 54% of likely voters in an October Rasmussen poll somewhat favoring repeal while 42% strongly favor repeal of the law as opposed to 39% somewhat opposing repeal and 27% in strong opposition. Because SCOTUS is a non-elective office, justices can consider the cases free of public and political influence - at least, that was the Founder's thinking. In real life, we are all pretty sure how Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, Justices Thomas and Kennedy will vote. There will be metaphorical blood.




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Friday, November 11, 2011

The Edification of Maria Bartiromo

Newt Gingrich educated Maria Bartiromo, CNBC November 10th Republican presidential nomination debate co-host, on history and economics. He was also amused at her "funny" defense of the liberal news media.



Polls released Friday, show Newt Gingrich is now trailing only Romney for the Republican nomination.
By the numbers: Mr. Romney, 23%; Mr. Gingrich, 19%; Mr. Cain, 17%; Texas Rep. Ron Paul 10%; Texas Gov. Rick Perry, 8%, and Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, 5%. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum got 1% apiece.



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

1000 Employees to Lose Jobs to ObamaCare

But, no worries - ObamaCare guarantees the newly unemployed skilled workers will have health care for life.
Stryker, the Kalamazoo-based maker of artificial hips and knees, will cut 5% of its global workforce by the end of next year to reduce costs in the face of new fees on device makers required by the U.S. health care law.

The job cuts will reduce annual pretax operating costs by more than $100 million beginning in 2013, when the medical-device excise tax is scheduled to take effect, Stryker said Thursday in a statement. Stryker had more than 20,000 employees as of Dec. 31, according to Bloomberg News data.

Stryker expects to record $85 million to $95 million of the expense in the fourth quarter of 2011.

"These actions are part of our ongoing focus on quality, innovation and cost, and position the company to continue to provide strong, consistent growth in a changing environment," CEO Stephen MacMillan said.
Sure hope the former Stryker employees won't be needing hips replaced with one of the squeaky models they themselves made. Along with having their health care saved by the very program that put them out of a job, they experience the ignominious irony of having their self-made $40,000 squeaky hips implanted.





The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

#OccupyAwkward

(Photo by Eric Thayer/Getty Images)
Occupy Oakland deposited $20,000 in a Wells Fargo Bank just days after vandalizing a Well Fargo branch during a large downtown street demonstration. On Wednesday, 4 Nov, one Oakland Wells Fargo branch had windows smashed by what was described as mostly peaceful demonstrators.
An Occupy statement said the money only will be with Wells Fargo temporarily while they work to establish an account with a credit union or community bank. Protesters said it was the easiest way to access the money to bail out people from jail.
Ruben Pulido, a Wells Fargo spokesman, said,
the move demonstrates that Occupy Oakland recognizes the value and service the bank provides its customers.
Classic.


The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Tuesday, November 08, 2011

Scrooge Obama and the Merry Christmas Tree Tax

Barack Obama Christmas Tree
For his first Christmas in the White House, Obama gave to us Mao, transvestite, gay, and Obama tree ornaments. On his third Christmas in the White House, Obama gives to us a Christmas Tree Tax. The Foundry of the Heritage Foundation says the Dept of Agriculture is imposing a 15¢ tax on all fresh Christmas trees sold by sellers of more than 500 trees/year who are then free to pass the 15¢ fee along to consumers of Christmas trees, primarily Christians presumably.

David R. Shipman, Acting Administrator of Agricultural Marketing, said the Sec. of Agriculture will appoint a Christmas Tree Promotion Board (Christmas Tree Czars?) to administer a
"program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry’s position in the marketplace; maintain and expend existing markets for Christmas trees; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Christmas tree industry." And the program of "information" is to include efforts to “enhance the image of Christmas trees and the Christmas tree industry in the United States."
Or as Doug Powers put it,
"The alleged point of the fee… or tax… or levy… whatever — is to stem the growth of the artificial tree industry to promote the sale of real trees (by making them a little more expensive?)"
Media Matters correctly points out that the Christmas tree lobby has been pushing to create a fresh Christmas tree marketing campaign since 2008, the final year of the Bush Administration.
USDA received a proposal for a national research and promotion program for Christmas trees from the Christmas Tree Checkoff Task Force (Task Force). The program will be financed by an assessment on Christmas trees domestic producers and importers and would be administered by a board of industry members selected by the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary). The initial assessment rate will be $0.15 per Christmas tree domestically produced or imported into the United States and could be increased up to $0.20 per Christmas tree. The purpose of the program will be to strengthen the position of fresh cut Christmas trees in the marketplace and maintain and expand markets for Christmas trees within the United States.
So, it could have been worse - a 20¢ tax; I feel so much better. And Media Matters cites other examples of agricultural commodity Checkoffs that
include the egg, beef, pork, mushroom, milk, and honey, etc. industries. We're all familiar with the Dairy industry's ad campaigns; "Milk Does a Body Good" and "Got Milk." "Pork: the Other White Meat," "Beef: It's What's for Dinner" and "The Incredible Edible Egg" are recognizable slogans developed and funded by Checkoff programs. These four 'big guns' collect between $45 and $91.2 million in assessments annually.
Hey! Is that why the price of all those products have increased to the point of unaffordability for many millions of Americans? I used to buy a lot of eggs, beef, pork, mushrooms, milk, and honey; not so much any more. This is why I'm not an economist in government. I would have thought to increase the sale of fresh Christmas trees, one would lower the cost of the fresh trees and increase the cost of the artificial trees the fresh Christmas tree lobby is trying to destroy.

Merry Christmas from Scrooge Obama.

UPDATE: The U.S. Department of Agriculture is going to delay implementation and revisit a proposed new 15 cent fee on fresh-cut Christmas trees, sources tell ABC News.

The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Wednesday, November 02, 2011

Democrats Say They Don't Want Jobs Bill Passed

Obama is keen on waving around his big stack of paper with the jumbo binder clip like a pimp with a wad of cash, but it's really only a roll of blank paper with a hundred dollar bill on the outside so folks think he's really got some. So what's the deal with the Jobs Bill?
Democratic operatives are quick to note that they never expected to pass the jobs bills through the Senate, adding that the multiple roll calls will put Republicans on the defensive and force them to explain on the 2012 campaign trail why they voted no on measures that poll well with voters.

Read the whole thing: Dems seek to fracture Senate GOP unity, by Alexander Bolton, The Hill



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Tuesday, November 01, 2011

California Democrat Assemblywoman Charged With Grand Theft

Alleged leather pants thief, Assemblywoman Hayashi
Mary Hayashi, the California Democrat Assemblywoman for Hayward, Oakland, Pleasanton, San Leandro, San Lorenzo, and Castro Valley and wife of former public-interest attorney Alameda Superior Court Judge Dennis Hayashi, was arrested and charged with felony grand theft.

Neiman Marcus security, reported the Sacramento Bee, stopped Assemblywoman Hayashi (D) at 12:15pm Sunday, was placed in custody by San Francisco police, and released seven hours later with bail set at $15,000 pending further proceedings November 15.

When Assemblywoman Hayashi (D) was detained, she was in possession of a shopping bag containing unpaid-for apparel including leather pants, a black skirt and a white blouse with a total value of almost $2,500.

Assembly Speaker John A. PĂ©rez will wait for the criminal justice system to work, but he "believes that Ms. Hayashi has the same right to due process as every person in California. This is a serious matter and must be resolved through the appropriate setting of the courts." Although the arrest will not disqualify Assemblywoman Hayashi (D) from serving the public interest in the Legislature, the "repercussions could hurt her political career, however, even if she is not forced from office. For most public officials, the publicity is far worse than the penalty," said political analyst Bob Stern.

Grand theft in California carries a maximum sentance of 3 years in prison, but first time offenders get off more lightly. And with the state releasing non-violent prisoners, and the testimonial of Hayashi spokesman, Sam Singer, "She is one of the most respected members of the Assembly – a fine, upstanding citizen and a role model," she may serve no time at all, despite the videotape showing her walking past several cash registers with the merchandise in hand. Also in her favor here in Liberal California is that Democrat Assemblywoman Hayasi was born and raised in South Korea, was the first Korean-American woman elected to the state legislature, and shared her story in an obligatory immigrant to success book, "Far From Home: Shattering the Myth of the Model Minority."

And shatter the myth she did, despite voting 'yea' in 2010 on a bill to raise the California minimum threshold for prosecution of felony grand theft from $400 to $950. She should have known that $2500 is way over the limit.




The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Anonymous Unmasked


Anonymous, The Mask

Anonymous, The Man (Zucotti Park)

















The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Lying Fat Bastard John Murtha Also Scum Sucking Criminal Prick

John Murtha, Democrat dead prick Senator, used his Senate power position, and people with disabilities to make himself, his family, and his cronies wealthy. He most grievously used his USMC history to slander and libel United States Marines with murder charges during the Battle of Haditha in Iraq. Every accused Marine was exonerated and Lying Fat Bastard Murtha never apologized for ruining the lives and good names of the Marines or the Marine Corp.
Last week’s release of FBI documents finally put in writing what nobody had ever said on the record: The FBI suspected that former Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and lobbyists close to him were running a scheme to funnel earmarks to sham companies and nonprofits to benefit the lawmaker’s friends and former staffers.

Bits and pieces of this story were kicked around for years before Murtha died in February 2010. The Los Angeles Times, Roll Call, the Washington Post and others had documented the odd appearance of earmarks for tiny defense contractors that just happened to open an office in western Pennsylvania and just happened to hire one of the lobbying firms close to Murtha and just happened to begin making campaign donations to Murtha and other Members of Congress close to him.

Reporters could do little but assemble the coincidences and couldn’t prove there was anything wrong with the bigger picture.

But it turns out the FBI was reading the stories and was very interested — interested enough that the Justice Department had opened a criminal investigation into Murtha and some of the lobbyists in his orbit, a fact that never leaked while Murtha was alive.

In part, the probe never leaked precisely because he was alive.
(...)

In a memo dated June 19, 2009, FBI field agents requested the bureau “open a full public corruption investigation” regarding KSA Consulting, the lobbying firm that employed at various times the Congressman’s longtime defense aide Carmen Scialabba and the Congressman’s brother, Robert Murtha, widely known as Kit.

The FBI field agents concluded that “the relationships between Congressman John Murtha ... and employees and partners of KSA Consulting provide for a potential Honest Services Fraud ... if Congressman Murtha influenced the awarding of contracts to KSA-controlled entities or clients, in exchange for some personal benefit to the Congressman. KSA principals may also have committed Honest Services Fraud by lobbying Murtha to direct earmarks to KSA clients who ‘passed-thru’ the funds to subcontractor firms that did little actual work and were owned by KSA principles.”
Roll Call has more of the FBI's investigation of fat bastard Murths's criminal doings that included the use of PAID - Pennsylvania Association for Individuals with Disabilities - to cover his criminal activities. The best and most appreciated public service Lying Fat Bastard John Murtha ever did was die.



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Geitner: Higher Taxes Mean Weaker Growth and Longer Unemployment

With 85% of Americans believing that the economy is getting worse, or will stay the same, as polled by CBS and reported by Norah O'Donnell report tonight, no one can be blamed for thinking that Liberal/Progressive Democrats in Washington don't know anything about economics. Sometimes, however, someone slips up on the socialist narrative and tells the truth - higher taxes mean fewer jobs, weaker economic growth, and increased unemployment.

That's what Treasury Secretary and tax scofflaw Tim Geitner said tonight in an interview with Norah O'Donnell.


CBS News

Between time stamps 1:07 and 1:33 -

O'Donnell: Are you convinced we've hit rock bottom? Could there be a second recession?

Geitner: I think that the strength of the economy right now depends on two things - it depends on how successful Europe is in resolving its financial crisis. But, it also depends on people in Washington. And again, if Congress does not act on these proposals in the President's Jobs Act, then taxes go up for all Americans - most Americans, they go up for most businesses, growth will be weaker, Americans will be out of work longer... [CBS seems to have edited out the end of his statement.]
Busted.



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Obama Administration Debates Anthrax Experimentation on Children

Gen. Shiro Ishii, Unit 731
The Obama administration is wrestling with the thorny question of whether scientists should inject healthy children with the anthrax vaccine to see whether the shots would safely protect them against a bioterrorism attack.
The Obama administration often reminds me of the German health system of the NAZI era when step by teeny-tiny step otherwise good and ethical people became inured to the pain and barbaric treatment of others, or the horrid experiments of Shiro Ishii's Unit 731 of the Imperial Japanese Army that infected prisoners of war with plague, cholera, anthrax, and many other pestilences to see how the diseases progressed. There should be no debate at all - this is just wrong on its face; even broaching the subject is just wrong.

In fairness and to maximize the redistribution of risk, Obama should volunteer Sasha and Malia before anyone else is asked to have their children used as guinea pigs.
The other option is to wait until an attack happens and then try to gather data from children whose parents agree to inoculate them in the face of an actual threat.
Despite all the talk and hype of anthrax attacks since 2001, there has never been an anthrax attack that has encompassed an area large enough to do any large scale damage. This is no longer an era in America when government can test dangerous materials on citizens  as was done with nuclear radiation on thousands in the 20th century or the several decades that Black men were subjected to the ravages of untreated syphilis in the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male."

As a general description of what happened in US human experimentation, Wikipedia explains the experiments involved
the deliberate infection of people with deadly or debilitating diseases, exposure of people to biological and chemical weapons, human radiation experiments, injection of people with toxic and radioactive chemicals, surgical experiments, interrogation/torture experiments, tests involving mind-altering substances, and a wide variety of others. Many of these tests were performed on children, the sick, and mentally disabled individuals, often under the guise of "medical treatment". In many of the studies, a large portion of the subjects were poor racial minorities or prisoners.
If we no longer need to test cosmetics and chemicals on small animals, why do we still need to test deadly diseases on small people? We've already slipped the slippery slope with torture, what it is and isn't, who can and cannot be tortured, who can be killed by silent death from the sky and who cannot. This is a time when we must be fully cognizant of how near the bounds of decency truly are and still maintain our humanity.


The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Senate Voted to Cut Farm Subsidies

Appalachian Pumpkin Patch Landscape - Walt Curlee
By a vote of 84-15, a Senate coalition of conservative Republicans wanting the federal budget cut and liberal Democrats wanting to tax millionaires, voted Friday to cut off farm subsidies to farmers already making a million dollars or more.
"Rather than taxing millionaires, the first thing we ought to do is quit giving them subsidies," said Sen. Tom Coburn, the Oklahoma Republican who offered the amendment to the massive spending bill the Senate was debating into the early morning hours Friday.

President Obama and his congressional allies have tried to impose a surtax on those with million-dollar incomes, but Republicans and a few Democrats have blocked those efforts each time, showing little stomach for tax increases.
However, another Coburn amendment to withhold federal dollars from slumlords who run dangerous public housing projects, failed 59-40.

Apparently, one Senator didn't show up for work Friday, but it's a good start anyway.



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Obama: You can clap. Go ahead. Please!

A graying President Obama speaks at a fire station in Chesterfield County, Va. (Jay Paul / Getty Images / October 19, 2011)
Obama ended his most recent Big Black Bus Tour in at Fire Station 9 in North Chesterfield, VA., where he pitched his jobs/tax plan to about 100 people. When he got to the part of his patter where he says, "A fair shot for everybody; a fair share from everybody. That's the principle that built America," one or two people applauded.

Obama then said, "You can go ahead and clap. Go ahead, nothing wrong with it."

Pitiful, pitiful, pitiful.



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Obama, the Numbers, and All the Right Choices

Obama told ABCs Jake Tapper during an exclusive Nightline interview Oct. 18, "I guarantee it's going to be a close election because the economy is not where it wants to be and even though I believe all the choices we've made have been the right ones, we're still going through difficult circumstances."

An excellent infographic from Ace of Spades says different.

[Infographic] The Obama Presidency - By The Numbers

JohnnyShop flicker



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Saturday, October 15, 2011

OWS Wants Economic Equality and Real Democracy -- Oh, and Free Tibet

Occupy Wall Street went global early this morning and organizers hope for non-violent demonstrations in 950 cities in 85 countries, not the "more than a thousand countries" claimed by Diane Sawyer of ABC Small World Tonight News. How many cities, countries, and people will actually participate over the weekend is anyone's guess, however.

MSNBC is reporting early Saturday morn -
In Sydney, about 2,000 people, including representatives of Aboriginal groups, communists and trade unionists, protested outside the central Reserve Bank of Australia.

"I think people want real democracy," said Nick Carson, a spokesman for OccupyMelbourne.Org. "They don't want corporate influence over their politicians. They want their politicians to be accountable."

The crowd cheered a speaker who shouted, "We're sick of corporate greed! Big banks, big corporate power standing over us and taking away our rights!"
(...)

In Tokyo, where the ongoing nuclear crisis dominates public concerns, about 200 people joined the global protests Saturday.

Under the light drizzle, the participants marched outside the Tokyo Electric Power Co., which operates the tsunami-hit Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant, chanting anti-nuclear slogans, while opposing the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade bloc that Japan is considering joining.

"No to nuclear power," the marchers chanted as they held up banners.
(...)

In Taiwan, over 100 people gathered at the Taipei 101 skyscraper, home to the stock exchange, chanting "we are Taiwan's 99 percent", saying economic growth had only benefited companies while middle-class salaries barely covered soaring housing, education and healthcare costs.

They found support from a top businessmen, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp Chairman Morris Chang, who told reporters in the northern city of Hsinchu that Taiwan's income gap was a serious issue.

"I've been against the gap between rich and poor," Chang said. "The wealth of the top 1 percent has increased very fast in the past 20, 30 years. 'Occupy Wall Street' is a reaction to that. We have to take the issue seriously..."

In Manila, about 100 members of various groups under the Philippine left-wing alliance, Bayan, marched on the U.S. Embassy Saturday morning to express support for the Occupy Wall Street protests in the United States and to denounce "U.S. imperialism" and U.S.-led wars and aggression.

They carried a large banner that said, "Resist imperialist plunder, state repression and wars of aggression," and another expressing "Solidarity action for Occupy Wall Street."

They also chanted "U.S. troops, out now!" in reference to the presence of hundreds of U.S. soldiers, mostly in the southern Philippines, involved in anti-terrorism training of Filipino troops. One man carried a placard saying "Genuine people's democracy lives in the streets."
(...)

In South Korea, activists began gathering on the streets of Seoul.

The Korea Herald newspaper reported that a coalition of 30 local civic groups planned to hold a two-day protest in the main financial district of Yeouido and other parts of the capital.
(...)

"The situation is the same in South Korea (as the U.S.), where the financial institutions have speculated to earn high profits in a short time, creating victims," the coalition said in a statement, the Herald reported.

The protesters want compensation for people who lost money in the banking crisis.

Seoul police warned that damaging public facilities, occupying roads and assaulting police officers would not be tolerated, the Herald said.
(...)

Protesters in London vowed to occupy the London Stock Exchange Saturday. Nights of rioting rocked the British capital in August after the fatal police shooting of a 29-year-old man.

"We have people from all walks of life joining us every day," said Spyro, one of those behind a Facebook page in London which has grown to some 12,000 followers in a few weeks.

Spyro, a 28-year-old who has a well-paid job and did not want to give his full name, summed up the main target of the global protests as "the financial system."

Rome is girding for major protests by demonstrators known as the "indignati."

Italian TV reports from Milan on Friday showed about 20 young people trying unsuccessfully to enter a building where Goldman Sachs has an office, and spraying red paint on the entrance.

In Germany, where sympathy for southern Europe's debt troubles is patchy, the financial center of Frankfurt and the European Central Bank in particular are expected to be a focus of marches called by the Real Democracy Now movement.
(...)

In Canada, protests were planned for Saturday in cities including Montreal and Vancouver. In Toronto, demonstrators plan to gather at Canada's main stock exchange.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he doubted Canadians would be as angry as their neighbors to the south as Canadian banks have not received a U.S.-type bailout.
From CNN -
United for Global Change -- the central site for the international movement -- said 951 cities in 82 countries will take part in the rallies.
(...)

In Japan, about 200 people marched through Tokyo carrying various signs, including "No More Nukes and "Free Tibet." The crowd included children jumping and skipping behind the adults.
(...)

Australian cities of Melbourne and Sydney joined rallies against "corporate greed" as protesters aligned themselves with the global movement.

"Our protests are to show our solidarity with Occupy Wall Street and also protest various problems -- from indigenous issues in this country to government problems," said Alex Gard, one of the Melbourne organizers. "We know we have it better than the protesters in the States ... but there are still problems in this country."

Organizers urged protesters to bring sleeping bags and other soft items to sleep on.
(...)

In South Korea, Arthur Fragoso rallied with a small group outside a bank in Seoul. He said his protest is a solidarity move with the Occupy movement and not a reflection of any discontent against his government.

"We are protesting mostly for economic issues worldwide," he said.
(...)

[I]n the Indonesian capital of Jakarta, about two dozen people -- some wearing masks -- gathered near the U.S. Embassy.

"We wanted to show that the American regime, its system of imperialism needs to be destroyed," said Rudi Daman, leader of the International League of Peoples' Struggle.
(...)

Protests were planned in other countries, including major cities in Kenya, South Africa, Britain, France, Russia, Mexico and Venezuela.
The impetus for protest was wearing out according to some analysts, especially in the protest's countries of origin - Greece and Spain. The austerity measures have caused despair, slashed wages and pensions, and created hundreds of thousands of unemployed, the momentum for sustained action dwindled. University of Piraeus Professor Mary Bossis told Michel Rose of Reuters, "More people agree with these protests than actually take part. ...There is anger, there is rage ... but what it takes to overturn the current situation is missing."

We can jeer and mock and analyze 'til the cows come home, but we cannot deny that people all over the world are dissatisfied with their lot and are wanting something different; what that "different" should be is still very nebulous. The one idea the disparate groups do agree upon is, "Enough is enough." The demonstrations are far flung and scant in participation, yet there is an undercurrent that may, and probably will, carry society's flotsam for a considerable time, perhaps rendering some fragile countries to tatters.

The ultimate danger inherent in any movement the wishes for revolutionary type change is that they may just end up getting what was wished for and regret it without the do-over option.



The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.

Pallywood Comes to Occupy Wall Street NYC

Images of National Lawyers Guild legal observer, Ari Douglas, being run over by a New York City policeman on a scooter were splashed across the Internet late Friday morning. The Gothamist reported, "We're still trying to determine how badly he was injured, but one witness speculated that he broke his leg." For the rest of the day, the leg was broken based on this one speculation. Hours later, Gothamist updates the post to include, "some doubt has been cast on earlier reports that he was seriously injured."

Photo: A protester is pinned down by an NYPD scooter during an Occupy Wall Street march Friday. Joe Marino for News

Here's the video OWS claims to show Douglas' leg being run over:


YouTube

Pretty damning stuff of police brutality, if this is all there is. Zainab Akbar, another legal observer for the lawyers guild verifies the video images, "He was observing the protest and he was run over by a police motorcycle. His leg was stuck under the bike, and he kicked his leg to get the bike off his leg, and then the police attacked him and shoved him into the ground and put a night stick against the back of his neck." Douglas was arrested and taken to Bellvue Hospital for treatment of his injuries that Paul Browne, NYPD spokesman explained were scratches to the observers face suffered when he resisted arrest and "he faked everything else."

There's another video view that shows a different story that has many other people saying an Oscar is coming Douglas' way for his great soccer style Pallywood pratfall.


OWS_PoliceScooter from The Local East Village on Vimeo.

Joe Marino, Daily News photographer, witnessed the event and his statement backs the police. "The bike definitely hit him," Marino said adding that the scooter cop did not roll over Douglas' leg. Marino continued, "I saw him sticking his legs under the bike to make it appear he was run over."

Two stories each backed by video evidence, but which is true? Or, are both videos portraying the truth? From the Vimeo video we can see these images:

The first screen capture at 23 secs shows both of Ari Douglas' feet next to the scooter's front wheel.



The second capture also at 23 secs shows Douglas' feet next to the front wheel and parallel to the scooter and policeman with neither foot under the bike.


The third at 25 secs shows the front scooter wheel has moved passed Douglas' feet.

In photo four, 26 secs, we can see Douglas on his right side completely clear of the scooter with the officers leg extended, left foot off the foot rest.
Also at 26 secs, the fifth shot shows Douglas drawing his right foot up toward the officers leg which is planted on the pavement. At this point, Douglas is completely free of the scooter's rear tire. The red arrow points to area that Douoglas' right leg finally ends up behind the officer's leg. See Marino's photo at the top of this post that shows the individuals' legs cross positions relative to one another.





The last shot, from the You Tube video at 17 secs, shows Douglas' right leg apparently with the scooter's rear wheel on his right leg. How did it get there?






As the previous images show, Douglas was parallel to the bike and completely free of any bike entanglement. In the end he is 90 degrees to the bike with the rear wheel apparently on top of his right leg. My own interpretation accords with the statement of Daily News photographer, Joe Marino, when he says that Douglas deliberately stuck his leg under the scooter so that it would appear he was run over in an act of police brutality. However, the crucial moment and the images that could dispel all doubt is obscured by the all the media image hounds blocking the view.





The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.