|
Mass Media Confusion
Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground"
statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/21/13 1:40 PM, Eisboch wrote:
Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The undercurrent of Stand Your Ground permeated everything related to the case and the trial and its outcome. |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/21/2013 1:50 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/21/13 1:40 PM, Eisboch wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The undercurrent of Stand Your Ground permeated everything related to the case and the trial and its outcome. That's just plain ignorant. |
Mass Media Confusion
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 7/21/13 1:40 PM, Eisboch wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The undercurrent of Stand Your Ground permeated everything related to the case and the trial and its outcome. ------------------------------------------ Everyone except the jury who found appropriately and according to the court instructions. |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/21/13 2:03 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 7/21/13 1:40 PM, Eisboch wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The undercurrent of Stand Your Ground permeated everything related to the case and the trial and its outcome. ------------------------------------------ Everyone except the jury who found appropriately and according to the court instructions. Had the five white women on the jury been black, the outcome probably would have been different. Sanford has long been a racist town, and sooner or later the names of the jurors will come out. |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/21/2013 2:20 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/21/13 2:03 PM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 7/21/13 1:40 PM, Eisboch wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The undercurrent of Stand Your Ground permeated everything related to the case and the trial and its outcome. ------------------------------------------ Everyone except the jury who found appropriately and according to the court instructions. Had the five white women on the jury been black, the outcome probably would have been different. Sanford has long been a racist town, and sooner or later the names of the jurors will come out. "Why are you so racist and bigoted", I say, while never expecting a truthful answer. |
Mass Media Confusion
|
Mass Media Confusion
|
Mass Media Confusion
|
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/22/13 11:00 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:28:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 7/22/13 1:12 AM, wrote: On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 13:40:45 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. My guess is that "Holder, Sharpton and the rest" believe the Stand Your Ground laws suck, no matter who is availing themselves of them. They seem to be little more than laws that allow you to settle disputes on the street with a gun. "He slapped me, I was scared, so I shot him." The SYG laws encourage bad behavior on the part of gunslingers. How many times would your head have to be pounded into the concrete before you thought you were in fear of your life? You armed yourself and were prepared to shoot someone over an ambiguous internet post. I'm in my late 60's. I've been in some really ****ty places, here and abroad, and sometimes among people that would make most posters here crap in their pants. What I don't do is follow people around, force confrontations with them, and then shoot them if they smack me. So, I've managed to avoid fistfights since I was about 14 years old. I'm not scared when I walk down the streets in, say, Anacostia, and see black teen-agers coming my way. I say "hello," they say "hello." I got lost in DC a few months ago at night and pulled into a convenience store parking lot to ask for directions. There was a really tough crowd in the parking lot, and most of the guys were drinking. Inside the store, the clerks were ensconced behind thick plexiglass. I asked for directions and got help from one of the clerks and one of the customers. We smiled at each other and went on our merry way. I didn't behave like George Zimmerman and I didn't get into a fight. I've been shot at three times, twice while in the United States, and once while in El Salvador, but it was never personal. :) Two of the guys I was working with in El Salvador were shot and killed. I am certainly prepared to shoot and kill a home invader down here. I don't walk the streets of my little neighborhood armed and looking for a fight. |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/22/2013 11:00 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:28:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 7/22/13 1:12 AM, wrote: On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 13:40:45 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. My guess is that "Holder, Sharpton and the rest" believe the Stand Your Ground laws suck, no matter who is availing themselves of them. They seem to be little more than laws that allow you to settle disputes on the street with a gun. "He slapped me, I was scared, so I shot him." The SYG laws encourage bad behavior on the part of gunslingers. How many times would your head have to be pounded into the concrete before you thought you were in fear of your life? You armed yourself and were prepared to shoot someone over an ambiguous internet post. If that is harry you are talking about, he has insinuated dozens of times here that he would be more than willing to find a reason to shoot several posters here over the years... |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/22/13 11:18 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 7/22/2013 11:00 AM, wrote: On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:28:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 7/22/13 1:12 AM, wrote: On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 13:40:45 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. My guess is that "Holder, Sharpton and the rest" believe the Stand Your Ground laws suck, no matter who is availing themselves of them. They seem to be little more than laws that allow you to settle disputes on the street with a gun. "He slapped me, I was scared, so I shot him." The SYG laws encourage bad behavior on the part of gunslingers. How many times would your head have to be pounded into the concrete before you thought you were in fear of your life? You armed yourself and were prepared to shoot someone over an ambiguous internet post. If that is harry you are talking about, he has insinuated dozens of times here that he would be more than willing to find a reason to shoot several posters here over the years... I would not hesitate to shoot a home invader, especially at night where there is nowhere to run to on the top floor of a three story house. You threatened to commit the crime of home invasion, and you also intimated you would send one of your hoodlum motorcycle gang buddies down here to do the job for you. That particular threat resulted in the police visiting you at your house. A home invasion is, indeed, a reason to shoot someone. Keep that in mind in case your paranoia gives you the false courage to make a road trip in order to create mayhem and commit a violent felony. You're a sick little ****head, psychotic or bordering on it, and you'll never get help until it is too late for you or your victim or both of you. |
Mass Media Confusion
In article ,
says... On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:16:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Wow, you are using FOX's tactics to a tee!!! You make it sound like that is the case everywhere, and it's only in Florida. Cite that. http://bit.ly/15btiOy Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. See above regarding ignorance. They act like Florida is the only state with SYG. Please cite which states have SYG laws that disproportionatly benefit blacks. |
Mass Media Confusion
In article ,
says... On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:28:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 7/22/13 1:12 AM, wrote: On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 13:40:45 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. My guess is that "Holder, Sharpton and the rest" believe the Stand Your Ground laws suck, no matter who is availing themselves of them. They seem to be little more than laws that allow you to settle disputes on the street with a gun. "He slapped me, I was scared, so I shot him." The SYG laws encourage bad behavior on the part of gunslingers. How many times would your head have to be pounded into the concrete before you thought you were in fear of your life? More FOXite rhetoric!!! It's been shown in court that Zimmerman's head wasn't "pounded into the concrete". |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/22/2013 11:12 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
I've been shot at three times, twice while in the United States, and once while in El Salvador, but it was never personal. :) Two of the guys I was working with in El Salvador were shot and killed. I am certainly prepared to shoot and kill a home invader down here. I don't walk the streets of my little neighborhood armed and looking for a fight. I believe every word of this. Doesn't surprise me a bit. Too bad you were dealing with amateurs. |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/22/2013 11:29 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/22/13 11:18 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: If that is harry you are talking about, he has insinuated dozens of times here that he would be more than willing to find a reason to shoot several posters here over the years... I would not hesitate to shoot a home invader, especially at night where there is nowhere to run to on the top floor of a three story house. You threatened to commit the crime of home invasion, and you also intimated you would send one of your hoodlum motorcycle gang buddies down here to do the job for you. That particular threat resulted in the police visiting you at your house. A home invasion is, indeed, a reason to shoot someone. Keep that in mind in case your paranoia gives you the false courage to make a road trip in order to create mayhem and commit a violent felony. You're a sick little ****head, psychotic or bordering on it, and you'll never get help until it is too late for you or your victim or both of you. Your imagination is playing tricks on you. One day it's going to get you in REAL trouble. |
Mass Media Confusion
In article ,
says... On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:49:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 08:16:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Wow, you are using FOX's tactics to a tee!!! You make it sound like that is the case everywhere, and it's only in Florida. Cite that. http://bit.ly/15btiOy Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. See above regarding ignorance. They act like Florida is the only state with SYG. Please cite which states have SYG laws that disproportionatly benefit blacks. Do your own research, prove it is not true Yeah, as suspected.... |
Mass Media Confusion
In article ,
says... On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:51:08 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:28:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 7/22/13 1:12 AM, wrote: On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 13:40:45 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. My guess is that "Holder, Sharpton and the rest" believe the Stand Your Ground laws suck, no matter who is availing themselves of them. They seem to be little more than laws that allow you to settle disputes on the street with a gun. "He slapped me, I was scared, so I shot him." The SYG laws encourage bad behavior on the part of gunslingers. How many times would your head have to be pounded into the concrete before you thought you were in fear of your life? More FOXite rhetoric!!! It's been shown in court that Zimmerman's head wasn't "pounded into the concrete". Cite? "Di Maio testified that he did not take into account several witnesses who said Zimmerman was the aggressor in the struggle. He also said, when pressed, that Zimmerman's injuries could have been caused by rolling around on concrete with Trayvon" In short, if you think that the scratches on Zimmerman are the result of having his head "pounded into the concrete", you've never been witness to a real fight, or a real situation like that. |
Mass Media Confusion
"iBoaterer" wrote in message ... "Di Maio testified that he did not take into account several witnesses who said Zimmerman was the aggressor in the struggle. He also said, when pressed, that Zimmerman's injuries could have been caused by rolling around on concrete with Trayvon" ----------------------------------------- That is a total misrepresentation of Di Maio's testimony. I watched and listened to every word of it. First of all, there is no evidence or testimony that supports your statement, "several witnesses who said Zimmerman was the aggressor". The only thing the prosecution could get from Di Maio was an acknowledgement that his testimony was focused on the moments before and including the shooting, not what led up to it. The claims that Zimmerman was the "aggressor" is pure speculation. By "aggressor", I mean pushing, shoving or throwing a punch and not simply asking "What are you doing here?" There's nothing illegal or aggressive about that. |
Mass Media Confusion
On 7/22/2013 2:15 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:51:08 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:28:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 7/22/13 1:12 AM, wrote: On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 13:40:45 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: Although I agree with those who say we don't need "Stand Your Ground" statutes outside of your home, I don't understand the media attention and activist groups (led by people like Al Sharpton) who are using the Zimmerman trial to promote the elimination of SYG. Zimmerman's defense was *not* based on SYG grounds. It was based on self-defense. This was a purposeful and strategic decision by his defense attorneys. The reason he was acquitted by the jury was due to the stupidity of the state's prosecution team of attorneys. *They* are the ones that put into evidence all of Zimmerman's accounts of the events, thereby allowing de facto testimony by Zimmerman without the ability to cross examine him. The defense attorneys made good use of this blunder by calling other witnesses to testify that gave credence to Zimmerman's account of the events, raising sufficient reasonable doubt to generate a "not guilty" verdict. Typical of any unpopular decision or circumstance (to them) , the liberal media and activist groups are totally misinforming the public on the facts. The strange thing is black defendants have availed themselves of SYG defenses at a higher rate than white people. Holder, Sharpton and the rest seem to be ignorant of or simply ignore that fact. My guess is that "Holder, Sharpton and the rest" believe the Stand Your Ground laws suck, no matter who is availing themselves of them. They seem to be little more than laws that allow you to settle disputes on the street with a gun. "He slapped me, I was scared, so I shot him." The SYG laws encourage bad behavior on the part of gunslingers. How many times would your head have to be pounded into the concrete before you thought you were in fear of your life? More FOXite rhetoric!!! It's been shown in court that Zimmerman's head wasn't "pounded into the concrete". Cite? There is no cite.. There was one witness that felt the "pounding" was one or two blows and didn't think they were that hard.... But nobody ever said Zimmermans head wasn't "pounded into the concrete". Loogie, or harry or whoever said it, lied or only listens to MSNBC... |
Mass Media Confusion
In article , says...
In article , says... (Snip) I'm not scared when I walk down the streets in, say, Anacostia, and see black teen-agers coming my way. I say "hello," they say "hello." (Snip) When in college in Washingon, DC, I drove an ice cream truck in summer in Anacostia. Nobody bothered me, everybody paid, nobody stole from me. Were you driving the special ice cream truck. They guy who was driving the ice cream truck in my neighborhood, just outside of DC, when I was a kid was selling dope too. |
Mass Media Confusion
In article , says...
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:48:22 -0400, Gogarty wrote: When in college in Washingon, DC, I drove an ice cream truck in summer in Anacostia. Nobody bothered me, everybody paid, nobody stole from me. Were you driving the special ice cream truck. They guy who was driving the ice cream truck in my neighborhood, just outside of DC, when I was a kid was selling dope too. I am talking 1950. What was dope? My biggest annoyance was to turn into a block and see the Good Humor man disappearing around the corner at the other end and all the children eating Good Humors. I can't even remember the name of the ice cream company I worked for. My father made me put the truck in the garage so the neaighbprs wouldn't see it. My biggest casualty was when my younger brother helped himself to a popsicle and left the truck ice box door open. That was more than sixty years ago. Anacostia was a totally different place in the 50s and early 60s. In the late 60s it became the combat zone it is today although some parts are probably being gentrified and the criminals are being pushed out into PG county.. My sister went to Anacostia high and lived in the 3300 block of C street SE in the 50s. It was a pretty nice neighborhood in a working class kind of way. I lived right off Benning Road for the first 12 years of my life. We had black people right behind us but they were working class folks just like us. It was the welfare state LBJ created that led to the downfall of that area. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ng-road-local- satire-at-its-best/2013/04/26/3527b3aa-aea8-11e2-98ef-d1072ed3cc27_blog.html |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com