Citizen Held To Higher Standard Than Maryland Governor
Aug 7, 2008 Political
A Maryland man, Walter Abbott, was arrested earlier this year for sending an email to Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley threatening to “choke the life out of him. Abbott is a business owner who is losing work because of illegal immigrants. He took exception to the governor’s pro illegal immigrant stance and support for CASA de Maryland. In the email Abbott stated:
“If I ever got close enough, I’d wrap my hands around your throat and choke the life out of you, you piece of sh*t American sellout.” Baltimore Examiner
Abbott was charged with threatening a public official and conveying a threat. His initial bond was $2 million but it was reduced. He was placed on home detention and that was eventually removed and he was allowed to work, with stipulations, prior to his trial.
His trial was to begin yesterday but has now been postponed until October. Abbott faces up to six years in jail and a $5,000 fine for his threat.
Given that the Governor has police officers around him all the time, it is unlikely that Abbott could have ever acted up the threat and his claims are that he was blowing off steam over losing work because of illegals. This will play out in court as it should but is this a case of hypocrisy?
Governor Martin O’Malley is a hothead and has been known to express his anger. In fact, O’Malley made a public threat to two radio show hosts, on the air, for everyone to hear. In 2002, after a family was firebombed and killed by a drug dealer who the family had reported, O’Malley was getting beaten up by the media. He was the mayor of Baltimore at the time. He got into his car after a meeting and heard the discussion between Rob Douglas and Chip franklin then of WBAL (both have taken other jobs). He became angry and ordered his driver to take him to the studio.
O’Malley demanded to address the issue on air to the surprised staff at the station and was afforded that opportunity. He got into some heated discussions with the hosts and took particular offense when Douglas remarked that if the residents keep voting in the same nitwits year after year they get what they deserve.
O’Malley decided that after the exchange it was a good time to leave and he parted with this:
“On that note, that probably is a good way to exit,” he said. “And gentlemen, if you enjoyed that, come outside after the show, and I’ll kick your ass.” Baltimore Sun
What is the difference between this threat by a public official and the one toward a public official? O’Malley is just as wrong in threatening the show hosts as Abbott was for threatening O’Malley. O’Malley was not arrested, held on a $2 million bond, and then placed on home detention. O’Malley never faced six years in jail and a $5,000 fine. In fact, he went on to win the Gubernatorial election.
O’Malley is a public official and one expects better behavior from those elected to lead. Regardless, how can they punish Abbott for his threat while ignoring the threat of the then mayor? It is a double standard and the whole issue smacks of hypocrisy.
O’Malley has armed guards and the show hosts did not so the threat to them was even more likely to be carried out than the threat to O’Malley. If O’Malley’s defense is that it was just a comment of frustration then they must allow for that in Abbott’s case.
Personally, I wish Chip Franklin would have taken him up on the offer because I think Franklin would have beaten him half to death and shut that smug mouth of his up. I would have paid money to see Franklin kick O’Malley’s ass all over Baltimore. [Note to law enforcement: This is not a threat from me. I am merely expanding upon O’Malley’s desire for the fight and what I would like to have seen as a result of it]
I hope the defense brings this up in court. Even if it does not make much difference in the trial it would be nice to have them point out the blatant double standard and demonstrate how the elected elite get away with those things for which we are held accountable.
Tags: chip franklin, hypocrisy, maryland governor, O'Malley, rob douglas, threat, trial, wbal
Obama Flip-Flops on Danger Posed by Iran
Jun 4, 2008 Political
While working to secure the Democratic nomination back in May B. Hussein Obama said that Iran was a tiny nation that did not pose a threat because it is smaller than the Soviet Union.
“Iran, Cuba, Venezuela? These countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don’t pose any serious threat to us.” WND
To B. Hussein (at that time), Iran was a small nation that did not pose a serious threat to us and therefore we should get them to the table and talk out a solution, without preconditions, of course.
Amazingly, B. Hussein has now taken a different approach to the tiny country that posed no serious threat:
“The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat,” Obama said in a speech to a conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobby group. Newsmax
In May Obama took heat for his statements and John McCain used those words to point out Obama’s inexperience. This must have resonated with Obama because now he is talking more like a hawk than a dove. The question is, what changed in the last few weeks to move Iran from no serious threat to one that is grave?
Perhaps it is that Obama was speaking to an Israeli group. Obama has been losing support among the Jews because of his indifference toward Israel so he took the opportunity to talk about the grave threat and how he will stop it. He did not make this claim a few weeks ago. Back then he made light of the threat. He claims to be a different kind of politician but he panders like the rest of them. He talks of change but the only thing that has changed here is his message based upon his audience.
The other reason might just be that we are moving into the general election phase and there is no way Obama can match McCain on national defense. McCain spent more time as a POW than Obama has as a Senator and McCain understands the threat and what we face. Obama simply lacks any experience in this area and his inability to see the Iranian threat early on is proof of that.
I also wonder what he means by “eliminate this threat.” Does this mean that the military option is on the table? Does it mean he will talk to Iran and see if he can negotiate with them to get them to stop building nuclear weapons? If negotiations fail will he use force?
All of these questions need to be answered but the first one that he must address is why he changed positions on the threat posed by Iran. This is a guy who voted against a Senate Resolution designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization but in his speech he said that very organization had been rightly labeled as a terrorist organization. Which is it Mr. Obama? Were you against terrorist labeling before you were for it? [NPR]
Obama claims to be about Hope and Change but hoping that Iran will change direction on nuclear weapons will not make it so.
* Obama said that Iran was not a serious threat but then said the danger is grave. One fo the definitions of grave (and the one he intended) is significantly serious. I guess he was against serious before he was for it.
Related item:
Wake up America