My good buddy (ahem, ahem, cough, cough), doesn’t really seem to say anything in his latest op-ed.
So I guess I’ll have to ride to his rescue, as friends often do.
Murder doesn’t take a day off around here because we can’t seem to get rid of our dindus. Mind you, our dindus, for some odd reason, have been especially agitated over the last five years, especially over the last three years, for some reason I can’t seem to (cough, cough, Trayvon) put my fingers on (cough, cough, Fergaza Strip).
I do see something a wee bit contradictory here. Messenger, in a round about way, claims that Dotson is just peddling excuses when, among other things, he leans on the “weak gun laws” crutch, but then, just a few words later, he gushes all over Lyda’s “courage” because she stayed in the city and “started a political career” to combat violence. Putting the pieces together, most of her anti-violence political energy ever since she first won alderwoman in 1997 was been to caterwaul about guns.
Backing up for a moment, Messenger alludes to Dotson leaning on the crutch of “pointing out that the city’s homicide numbers are skewed compared to most big cities because of the city’s separation from St. Louis County.” That’s the excuse the CVC cooked up more than three years ago, and it only took me a few moments to blow through it.
One more thing:
Politics won’t fix the city’s murder problem. Neither will a new chief. The challenge is greater than that. Step one is to follow the advice of Dan Isom, the chief who preceded Dotson.
“How much do you care about every person who has lost their life in the city of St. Louis?” Isom asked at a mayoral forum in February. Each of the 47 people who as of Friday had lost their lives in the city has a story. They were utility workers and sportsmen. They were students and basketball players. They were husbands, and wives, who leave behind, perhaps, a spouse who will dedicate her life to solving the violence that has plagued this Midwestern city for decades.
The problem is that Isom is the only person of major public consequence who wants us to think about the victims. Because if we actually did start thinking about the victims, then we’ll notice things and conclude that most of them are the same kind of thugs that murdered them. Most of the rest are innocent white people, which then forces us to think about anti-white hate crimes, which of course ((())) and Co. absolutely don’t want.