Saturday, July 03, 2004

pat buchanan

is he a prick for the sake of being a prick? he was talking to the founder of 'black cops against police brutality' (a policeman himself) last night, and instead of talking about the problem of police brutality, he touched on it and then attacked the guy. here are the talking points, with answers in bold:

why black cops and not cops against police brutality? i created the group and i wanted to call it that.

would you help people that aren't black?
yes. we helped a white guy that got shot a hundred times recently, and help people of all colors.

look at this video (of a cop hitting a guy on the legs with a flashlight). is that police brutality? yes. if you strike with the flashlight it is automatically police brutality, as we are trained not to use it as a weapon. (pat: i can't tell if it's a flashlight)

so why don't you go after the real problem of black-on-black crime? because my group is committed to stopping police brutality.

so you don't think that black-on-black crime is important?
i didn't say that. of course it is. my group speaks to another problem.

so black-on-black crime isn't as important as police brutality?
i didn't say that. they are both important problems. my group focuses on police brutality.

well i don't see why you ignore black-on-black crime. gotta go.

while not verbatim, this was a good representation of the event.

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by