Philly Polticis: The Good, The Bad, and the STUPID!

The Good:

1. Ballot Battles! 

Milton Street, despite most likely forging his petitions as well as not even living in Philly, was somehow approved to be on the ballot. The upside? The Nutter Campaign is battling his petition and residency! I was recently harassed by one of his petitioners before the deadline (I'll leave it there, maybe tell the story one day soon), and on top of the fact that I don't think he should be elgible to run at all... Well, it's a red-letter day for me!


Czar, pardon me, City Councilman Darrell Clake has just had his petition challenged as well! You may know Darrell Clarke as the City Councilperson from the 5th District who's chief accomplishment's are trying to track when you buy cigarettes, alcohol, and Sharpie Markers, wanted to ban Satellite Dishes, passed a hate crime bill that was simply redundant and pointless, as well tried to pass a promoters bill that would have harmed Philly only because he didn't like the fact he couldn't park closer to his house. 


His petition is being challenged by his only challenger, Suzanne Carn, who's husband is former state Rep. Andrew Carn. I hope it works and we see Clarke have to pack his bags and go!


2. The Corrupt Establishment Is LEAVING!


Councilpersons Joan L. Krajewski , Donna Reed Miller, Frank DiCicco, and Anna Verna are GONE! Their done! Retired! Adios! For the record, I met Anna once when I was running, and she was very nice, same with Frank DiCicco who tried to help me lower the age requirement. That aside, politically, I am glad to see all four of these people go. We need some fresh blood in City Council, and a more progressive governing body to challenge Nutter!

The Bad: 

1. The Philadelphia Republican's can't seem to get their stuff together!


WHAT THE HELL?! Come on, it's wide open! You're up against someone who promised hope and change, and instead all we got were new tax ideas that were terrible and stupid and treated us like kids! He lied to the city about stopping casinos! The guy is as popular as a wet sock, but no one is really challenging him because, frankly, who wants this mess?! The Democrats in Philly are about as progressive as a donkey stuck in mud, and the best the Republican's can do is somebody no one's heard of?!
 
 Plus, they never even bothered to give me a call or send me an e-mail! I'm on Facebook! Call me!


2. Charles Ramsey might be leaving. 

Even though I was tough as hell on the guy before he got here, I have to admit, he's done a good job, and he's tried his damnedest to try and clean up the local police department. If he goes, hopefully we'll get someone who's just as good, if not better.


The STUPID: 

Simply put: The fact that Milton Street was allowed to get on the ballot without the Election Office VERIFYING everything first! WHAT THE HELL!

Oh: And ANYONE who thinks Milton running is "entertaining"! What the hell is wrong with the people in media thinking it's a GOOD thing? The guy's a criminal, a jerk, and an incompetent politician!

HAPPY NEW YEAR! Don't Kill Anyone!

Well, 2007 didn't end with a bang! The murder rate in Philadelphia has actually sunk for the year. In 2006, the city saw 406 murders and in 2007, we saw a drop to 392.

During most of the 4th Quarter of 2007, Philadelphia saw an overall drop as well, and... well, I don't know why. Maybe the drop is because everyone is just sick of all the crap that's been attached to it, or maybe more criminals are getting arrested and staying in prison. Maybe they're all in Camden.

At any rate, Philadelphia is considered the worst of the Ten Largest Cities, but that really doesn't mean much overall since we're still 5th out of all the major cities. Detroit? More like DEADtroit! HA! Not fun when it's you, huh? And, oh my, WASHINGTON D.C. is STILL worst than Philadelphia, despite a hand gun ban and Charles Ramsey declaring MULTIPLE CRIME EMERGENCIES!

So, something in Philadelphia is working, and we don't know what.

Ramsey Loves the Police State Idea!

About two weeks ago, I discussed in length and in great detail the Crime Emergency Plan, what I felt was wrong with it, how the Ramsey's could impact it, and what could be done instead.

Despite all of this, he still wants to declare it!

"Declaring a state of emergency is fine with me," Ramsey, the former Washington police chief, said in an interview Friday. "Crime is at an unacceptable level. . . . It's certainly something we have to get a handle on real quick."

How Ramsey will carry out the emergency response is less certain. He spent much of last week getting his bearings in his new city - meeting with Johnson and the department's command staff as well as attending several district roll calls to introduce himself to the rank and file.

Again, we're left scratching our heads on how, exactly, this will happen. Despite how "peaceful" where you live is, it could still be declared "dangerous". What if your in an area and don't know it's under lock down, are you still in trouble for being out there late?

This plan is FLAWED! This idea is FLAWED! Ladies and gentlemen, I implore you, write Nutter yourself, tell him NOT to declare this Crime Emergency! IT MUST BE STOPPED!

Civil Rights and a Possible Crime Emergency: Part 2

THE CHARLES RAMSEY EFFECT

Hello, and welcome to Part 2 of my discussion of the Crime Emergency and the Crime Emergency. Yesterday, I discussed the basic civil rights issues that I feel could be threatened by declaring a Code 10, and asked the question of how long this would last and if it was needed.

Today, we'll start the discussion on the new Police Commissioner, Charles H. Ramsey. But before we do, I want to mention a few things first that I forgot to mention yesterday.

A large amount of my problem with this is, of course, Civil Rights. In all of my writing yesterday, I neglected to mention something that has been bugging me about all of this. Back in May, when Nutter's "Stop-and-Frisk" program was being called to task for violating civil rights, supporters brought up a Court Case where it was declared constitutional.

It was Nutter himself who coined this phase: "It's a Civil Right not to be Shot."

This bumper-sticker phrase was done so well, it is next to impossible to argue against it. To do so seems to allow for the same type of argument used by Conservative Republicans when you disagree with them; "What, do you mean you WANT people to be shot? You don't think it's wrong to kill and murder people?! No wonder you didn't win the election, you cold hearted bastard!"

The fact of the matter is, you don't. You have a right to live, a right to the pursuit of happiness. You have a right to be free and happy, and to live in a safe environment.

You don't have a right to not have bad things happen to you.

Being shot is something that can be prevented. In terms of federal legislation, you could easily create tougher gun laws, make better living conditions, and do everything you can to make the world a better case. At the same time, it is up to society to make sure that we are all raised well and correctly, that we allow everyone to be safe and happy.

The pursuit of happiness. To me, this is the very basis of our democracy and the idea that this nation is built upon. "Do as you will, but harm none." Not just a good idea, but words to live by if you ask me.

And this brings us to Charles H. Ramsey.

While police chief in Washington D.C., "on September 27, 2002, the MPD made a mass arrest of a large group of demonstrators who had assembled in DC’s Pershing Park to protest the World Bank and IMF meetings. The police enclosed over 400 people in the park and arrested them without ever ordering them to disperse or allowing them to leave the park. Many of the arrested were not actually demonstrators, but were journalists, legal observers, and pedestrians. On January 13, 2006, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that the arrests violated the Fourth Amendment and that Chief Ramsey could be held personally liable for the violations."

http://www.philebrity.com/2007/11/15/good-news-about-the-new-guy-he-loves-your-civil-liberties/

In his time as chief, he declared Crime Emergencies as well. Not just once, or twice, but at least 4 times. My answer is to focus on this using the proven method of community policing and cracking down on minor crimes (Broken Windows Theory). When it comes to the Community Policing aspect, Ramsey has been declared an innovator for using it. Nevertheless, we have a new commissioner that has used Crime Emergencies in the past to reduce crime as well. According to the last record I could find, the one he declared in 2006 lasted over 2 months and, during the last week of it, there were 3 teenagers shot and killed.

http://newsroom.dc.gov/show.aspx/age...4/release/9745

At the same time, what was the result of civil liberties because of it? Admittedly, referring to the September 2002 protests where he was held accountable for the unlawful arrests of people there may be a bit much, it still need to be taken into account.

More than anything, we need to consider the effects this will have on the people on Philadelphia, and ask if there is no other way to combat crime here. There is massive personal rights we would eliminate in order for the proposed safety this could bring, and should not be done unless it must be.

I, personally, considered declaring a Crime Emergency the last result, the final straw when all else fails. In the eyes of some, this may be the case, but this is not a matter of organized crime, either. I feel this type of action should be reserved if the killings were more organized and done by a group of connected people. It has been proven that most murders are done, in fact, but random people.

Has this city as a whole really lost it's way so much that we must put everyone on lock down? Do you feel, personally, that you deserve it as well?

The questions I raised, about how long it would last and how it would be implemented, and valid questions and I simply wonder where the political discussion is on this. The elephant in the room of the Nutter election is that he wants to declare a Crime Emergency, but has not once explained how he would do it. Not once. The only parameter given has been that it would be in "targeted areas", and those areas were never explained.

While I may be asking for a hard answer from Mayor-elect Nutter, I am asking for an educated guess on your parts. I'm looking at what has happened in Washington D.C. and the fact that 4 Crime Emergencies were declared by this Chief by 2004. I'm also looking at the overall result in it which was a drop in murders on a whole.

But why did it take 4 of them? How long did each one last? Do they really work as well as it appears? Was the reduction in homicides there largely because of the fact that they declared a crime emergency or was it because of more community policing? Do you think it was a combination of the two?

Tomorrow, we'll probe a bit more and try to wrap this up.