Archive | Civil Rights RSS feed for this section

The Finalists for “America’s Most Racist” are Mike Lee and the Heritage Foundation

11 May

The Republican party is furiously trying to revamp its tarnished image as racist sycophants who have no use for minorities, who they’ve clearly deemed inferior. The way they’ve chosen to go about this daunting task is to find new and improved policies designed to disguise their racist proclivities. However, this has backfired in ways no one could have imagined, as the fringe element of the party has taken over the asylum.

The winner of the most unbelievably assuming racist, entitled bootlicker has to be Utah Senator Mike Lee. This fine LDS specimen is a tremendous fan of the teachings of Professor Cleon Skousen and advocate of absolutely ZERO gun-control truly feels that provisions must be included in immigration reform to keep treating undocumented workers essentially like slaves. Of course this is perfectly acceptable. When your idol is a zealot, like Skousen, who said the following about slaves: “one of the blessings of slavery” was that slaves’ marriages were fleeting, and suggests that being bought at auction improved slaves’ self worth. The real victims of slavery, were the white owners. The book also referred to black children as “pickaninnies.” The freshman Senator has attempted to modify the Gang of 8‘s attempt at immigration reform by excluding the following professions from requiring any form of documentation:

“cooks, waiters, butlers, housekeepers, governessess, maids, valets, baby sitters, janitors, laundresses, furnacemen, care-takers, handymen, gardeners, footmen, grooms, and chauffeurs of automobiles for family use” from prohibitions against “unlawful employment” for undocumented immigrants.”

It sure sounds like a wealthy person’s list of needed cheap labor. It’s pretty obvious who this entitled Mormon is working for in Congress. Perhaps it could also be something some of his FLDS voters require to maintain their lifestyle while staying under the radar in their polygamous compounds. Who knows? We know he’s a big proponent of anything advocated by the Heritage Foundation and against a pathway to citizenship for undocumented people.

The Heritage Foundation recently came up with their own racially offensive survey on the intelligence quotient of Hispanic immigrants. Jim DeMint, the former Confederate South Carolina Senator, claims legalizing undocumented immigrants will cost $6.3 trillion. He fails to mention this price tag is for a FIFTY YEAR PERIOD. The current leader of the Heritage Foundation has always been the enemy of anyone who happens to be poor, a minority, a homosexual or a woman. For instance, DeMint has said, ‘if someone is openly homosexual, they shouldn’t be teaching in the classroom and he holds the same position on an unmarried woman who’s sleeping with her boyfriend — she shouldn’t be in the classroom.’ He believed the Confederate Flag should fly over the capital statehouse in Charleston and naturally, his state was the last to remove it. You can still see plenty of Confederate flags waving in the air by the residents of the southern state that enjoys 47th in life expectancy and is the 3rd highest in infant mortality.

Former Senator Jim DeMint President of the Heritage Foundation

Former Senator Jim DeMint
President of the Heritage Foundation


So racist Jim retired from the Senate to make more money and have more power to shove his socially and fiscally conservative agenda down the throats of America. He and his ilk believe immigrants are just too damned expensive to the one percent’s ability to rob the coffers of Social Security, which is their ultimate goal. Their Utopian world consists of a Hooverville-esque nightmare for the American plebeian, because the Heritage Foundation is here to preserve America for the privileged white male. Immigrants, especially those Hispanics that maintain his lawn and clean his home, will never, according to his organization, get off welfare and earn an honest living. There are 69.5 million people dependent on the government for subsistence and this is simply too many for his liking.

The problem with Utah Senator Lee is he’s dripping with Mormonism, and truly thinks, like Willard Romney, he is one of “God’s chosen leaders” in these “latter days.” He is absolutely against helping anyone if it should cost him the slightest inconvenience. Hell, he even hates the handicapped. Jim DeMint and his Heritage Foundation, another “Christian” group, has overtly come out against Hispanics in such an offensive way, their only Latino supporters may be GOP hypocritical “Hispanic” Senators, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, who are both of Cuban descent. Ironically, the Cubans are the only Hispanic demographic from which the GOP enjoys support.

If these lunatics keep at it, they will lose not only every subsequent election when demographics are largely against their favor, but their existence as a legitimate political party will disappear. The GOP (a.k.a. the Misanthropic Party) has shown, with the election of Mark Sanford, they love a “good Christian” who begs for redemption but actually deserves none. In fact, pretending to be a good Christian while adhering to absolutely none of Christ’s Sermon on the Mount seems to be their modus operandi. Time will be the Republicans’ biggest enemy as America becomes darker, more diverse and thus their obsolescence is nearly assured.

About these ads

Is a Mormon Theocracy Replacing Law Enforcement in Boulder City, Nevada?

28 Apr

20130428-103638.jpg

Mormons believe that they are the “noble and great ones,” the spirits that god would “make his rulers” on earth. Just like with Abraham, the pronouncement that “thou was chosen before thou wast born” also applies to the pre-mortal status and eventual earthly destiny of each Mormon. This is precisely why they call themselves latter-day saints: they consider themselves an elect breed apart and above all others, holier-than-thou in every sense of the word. These are the End of Days, after all, and God’s chosen people must be in control.

This is a story of how this arrogant theology has perverted and corrupted government, more specifically Law Enforcement, in a city dominated by LDS theological doctrine. One brave man, now Former Police Chief Thomas Finn, has spoken out against this unacceptably insidious behavior and he unquestionably will be vindicated when his story is better understood. News 8 Reporter George Knapp bravely brought this matter to the public forum which inadvertently demonstrated another case of defamation by Mormons when they are hell bent on discrediting someone who is not “one of them.” Mr. Knapp intended only to bring Chief Finn’s plight to the public. Let me make this perfectly clear, Knapp’s objective was not to disparage Mormons in general. However, any time one exposes despotism in any form, it can be a risky endeavor.

20130428-103953.jpg

Police Chief Thomas Finn

Police Chief Thomas Finn has an impressive list of educational credentials

A Few Noteworthy Accomplishments:

•F.B.I. National Academy, 185th Session, Quantico, Virginia 1996
•Master’s Degree, Public Administration, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey 1993 •Certified Public Manager, Rutgers University New Jersey Department of Personnel 1991 •Bachelor of Science, Criminal Justice (Cum Laude), Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 1983

Not only is he extremely knowledgeable on all matters pertaining to law enforcement and criminal justice, he’s a passionate teacher who loves the history and application of law enforcement since our Colonial Days. Mr. Finn had quite a following and was a very beloved Professor at Rutgers University. His lectures were always filled with eager students who found themselves passionate about the subject Mr. Finn taught with such enthusiasm and competence. His history of service from a patrolman in 1980 all the way through his ascension to the Chief of Police in two parts of the country, were always conducted with exemplary service and performance.

Officer Finn was a distinguished chief of police who is another unfortunate casualty of this despotic cult which craves domination of the public domain. I’ve had the privilege of speaking with former Police Chief Thomas Finn about a subject with which I’ve become all too familiar: Mormon Nepotism. Prior to his dismissal on April 15th, this man has never once been fired from any job he’s ever held. Mormon City Attorney, Dave Olsen claimed Mr. Finn was a paranoid, frightened angry man inside. Funny how that sounds terribly familiar. Park Romney said, “… I am personally aware, on the basis of such experience, of the actual differences between what Mormons profess in public and practice in private when they think their agenda is being threatened.” Naturally they will praise the Chief to his face, but look out folks, Sunday LDS services actually discussed their contrived issue of having a non-chosen son of Abraham in charge of the Police Department.

In the past I’ve looked to those with experience to guide me about the workings of the LDS Church. Park Romney, Professor Mark Larsen and Kay Burningham, ESQ. have, with painstaking personal trials and irrefutable logic, elucidated the details of a grotesque fraud of cosmic proportions masquerading under a charitable façade of public spirited nobility. All of my expert reference providers were part of the cult of Mormonism at one time and have since come to the exact same conclusion: it is, without question, an insidious fraud. The aforementioned authors have systematically dismantled all fallacious tenets of the cult and effectively demonstrate how these rules of conduct (or “Doctrines and Covenants”) apply to how LDS adherents run every aspect of their personal and public lives. For example, Among other things, Joseph Smith is reported to have taught, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy.” Broken down more simply, anyone not complying with the Mormon Cult is labeled by the LDS faithful as being influenced by Satan.

We all know full well Councilman Cam Walker, City Attorney Dave Olsen, Mayor Tobler and Mongols Motorcycle Gang attorney, Stephen Stubbs (all Mormons) could never have Chief Finn (a Roman Catholic) removed on the basis of “Satan’s influence” as that would never hold up in court. In collusion, they attempted to label a man who lives and breathes ethical law enforcement, who conducts his personal and professional life “by the book,” as mentally unfit for the job.

To get a better handle on who exactly is Chief Finn, i asked him a few questions pertaining to current issues in the news. When I posed the question to Mr. Finn, ‘do you think the excessive police presence while trying to locate the second Tsarnaev brother was overkill,’ he put things in a perspective that I hadn’t considered. Paraphrasing, he said, if the police had flubbed the case one bit and one more casualty occurred due to lack of thoroughness on their part, they’d never be forgiven. He also believes automatic weapons have no place in the hands of civilians, contrary to what many of his colleagues believe. He’s a no-nonsense man who speaks his mind and believes in integrity in all he does. Literally, this cadre of cohorts have taken the LDS tenet of Lying For The Lord and justified the iniquitous firing of one of the most qualified and best Police Chiefs in Clark County. When Mr. Finn filed a claim with the EEOC in Boulder City, citing Mormonism as the paramount reason for his dismissal, he was most assuredly justified.

According to the log filed with the former city manager, Vicki Mayes, Mr. Stubbs, the Mongols lawyer, was on a quest to find an officer to speak out negatively against Chief Finn. He was unable to find anyone because there were no officers who had any problem with the chief. He even asked if “he could find an officer in Reno to testify against Finn,” would that suffice? For some unjustified reason, after being on a brief medical leave, the day Mr. Finn returned to his job, he was fired. Here’s the story in a nutshell in the words of Mr. Finn:

A two-month investigation by the Attorney General’s Office, followed by a review of the investigation report and interviews of the investigators by District Attorney Steve Wolfson cleared me,and D.A. Wolfson stated exactly what I was saying all along. What is particularly troubling is that the city NEVER asked me why I issued the “email deletion” (regarding the gathering of Mongol Gang Members in 2012) order to my officers. They took Stubbs’ rantings as gospel and moved ahead with the investigation into my “felonies.” Stubbs asked for the investigation in November, it was started by the A.G. in January, I was interviewed in February and cleared in April. Then, EIGHT days (April 15th) before I was cleared of all wrongdoing, they FIRED me!!!
I was appointed to a state commission by two NV governors, served on a national highway safety committee for the International Association of Chiefs of Police for eleven years, was appointed by a NJ governor to serve as a commissioner on a labor-management relations commission, represented the Nevada Sheriffs’ and Chiefs’ Association for two years, and then Boulder City decided to terminate me after seven years of service without giving me a reason.
In the words of one of my favorite humorists, ..if they’ve got nothing concrete on him that would convince the DA of wrongdoing… they are not only holier-than-thou arrogant, but also…. STUPID as hell. To fire someone, especially a chief of police, with no probable cause is as pig-ignorant as Romney telling his donors about the 47% “scum.”
Unfortunately, Mr. Finn and his wife have other plans, and they no longer include Southern Nevada. It is highly unfortunate for all of us he had to go through these trials unnecessarily. Perhaps with greater understanding of Mormon Nepotism, we can avoid situations such as this Boulder City fiasco in the future. No one should ever be persecuted in this country for their religious beliefs and when a group of a particular religious or ethnic majority control all aspects of government in our diverse nation, it will inevitably lead to a compromising of our democratic values and justice.

Dr. Ben Carson Denounces The Government That Made Him a Success

8 Apr
ben_carson

Gay Marriage is a slippery slope to bestiality: Dr. Ben Carson with President Bush

Dr. Ben Carson is the new poster boy for the Right Wing Conservative movement. He is the total package for a party that desperately needs a new face: an African-American neurosurgeon who is an outspoken social and fiscal conservative who denounces the entire apparatus of government. At this year’s National Prayer Breakfast, he condemned the welfare state and the growing acceptance of marriage equality likening it to bestiality and NAMBLA.

It seems he joins the ranks of so many Conservatives who are part of the Slippery Slope brand of thinking. Once you allow gay marriage, what’s next? Marrying children, animals, inanimate objects…..heaven knows what’s next!? Their ultra-fundamentalist biblical way of thinking has perverted so many into adopting this false equivalency of marriage equality leading to pedophilia or bestiality. Watch his interview with Hannity.

 

What makes this man such a paragon of Republican virtue is how he loathes the entire welfare and government assistance that afforded him his current success. Carson has said, by the time I reached ninth grade, mother….received nothing but food stamps. She couldn’t have provided for us and kept up the house without that subsidy.” “As I’ve said, we received food stamps and couldn’t have made it without them.” Carson, in his book, tells how his grades improved tremendously when a government program provided him with free eyeglasses because he could barely see. Now he derides the “welfare state” and has decided “no one is starving in America” and that government dependence kills initiative.

What’s even more bizarre about this guy is his use of the term NAMBLA. In case you’re unaware of why this is so odd, the creators of South Park even devoted an entire episode to the North American Man/Boy Love Association. It is the most ridiculous comparison of two consenting adults marrying to an insane organization devoted to pedophilia. How can a “brilliant neurosurgeon” think so illogically when it comes to social matters? I suppose the answer is rather simple. He’s a Republican.

Murder, Extra-Marital Affairs are Marks of Prestige in the GOP

4 Apr
colbertscarborough

Stephen Colbert vs. Joe Scarborough

Like a parody news program come to life, the Republican party has featured an array of characters that parallel the wildest reality show stars. Perhaps because the GOP contains representatives that equate the limiting of gun magazine capacities to less than 30 bullets with bestiality, some who want to establish a “State” religion, directly violating the First Amendment and there are others who want to force rape victims to give birth to their rapist’s baby. In order to maintain their stellar reputation as the party of god, they must continue to feature candidates that are as hypocritical as those they represent (yet claim to rebuke).

It isn’t surprising Republicans continue to defend each other, no matter how serious their offenses may be. Stephen Colbert brought to light Joe Scarborough’s close friendship with ex-South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford on his show (which aired April 3, 2013). Naturally, both Sanford and Scarborough are viewed by their party propitiously, even to the tune of being prominent figures in the GOP. Scarborough feels quite comfortable endorsing a man who was abhorred by a nation for his breach of fidelity to his wife and children while governor which involved taking trips to visit his mistress in Argentina on the taxpayers’ dime.

Both men are Republicans, who are held to much lower standards than their Democratic counterparts. Joe Scarborough escaped investigation in a case that would certainly grasp the attention of a nation had it not happened right before the biggest tragedy (9/11/2001) to impact our country since Pearl Harbor. Who better to endorse and befriend the disgraced former governor than a man who escaped prosecution from the inexplicable death of one of his office staffers?

The MSNBC Morning Joe host and ex-Florida Congressman, Joe Scarborough has seldom been questioned about a very suspicious death in his very own Florida office. Friday, July 20th, 2001, the body of Lori Klausutis, 28, was found slumped next to a desk on the floor of Florida Republican Congressman Scarborough’s Fort Walton Beach office where Lori had served as a constituent services coordinator since May, 1999. Her body was found around 8:00 a.m. on Friday morning by a couple arriving for an appointment. She had been dead for some time. A second employee, who would have normally arrived for work at around the same time, was away on vacation. Police cordoned off the area for investigation, later announcing that there was no reason to suspect foul play, nor were there signs of suicide…”The results of the mandated autopsy, however, were deemed “inconclusive”

The Medical Examiner in the Klausutis case was Michael Berkland. He is also the same Michael Berkland who was found to have rented a storage unit where the remains of more than 100 humans were found on August 24, 2012. Medical Examiner Dr. Andi Minyard told the Pensacola News Journal the remains appear to be from private autopsies Berkland performed at local funeral homes between 1997 and 2007. The fact the death of a 28 year old healthy marathon runner was never questioned or investigated is as remarkable as the medical examiner who found no foul play in the case. The lack of scrutiny in this case was absolutely the opposite of the close examination faced by two disgraced Democrats from New York.

Two of the more powerful and influential liberal politicians in recent years were completely decimated by behavior deemed socially unacceptable. Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner were both rising stars whose prominent careers were railroaded by the exposure of extra-marital infidelities. Neither Congressman Weiner or Governor Spitzer were guilty of any crimes/expenditures which cost taxpayers any money.

Spitzer-Weiner

Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner

Neither Weiner nor Spitzer has publicly announced any plans to return to public office at this point. It is very telling how quickly the GOP seems to forgive and forget the most egregious of offenses while Democrats are held to a different standard. Mark Sanford is now officially the Republican nominee for South Carolina’s First Congressional District, garnering the endorsement of his “good friend” Joe Scarborough. He received a generous amount of free air time and softball questions on his Morning Joe program. The topic of note today was his great proclivity towards honesty and running a fine campaign. The gushing over a man with very questionable moral fiber is not surprising coming from someone who may have gotten away with murder. There have even been rumors floating around that Scarborough is considering a Presidential run in 2016. People at NBC know that questioning anything about the Klausutis case will get you banned from the network, so nobody brings it up anymore. I suppose he is the ideal candidate, replete with scandal and plenty of corruption.

I’d like to just sit back and watch this train wreck unfold. But we all must stay diligent and support our Democratic candidates. Hopefully, Sanford will be defeated by Elizabeth Colbert Busch, the sister of Stephen Colbert, who will be facing Sanford in a special runoff election for Tim Scott’s old seat. It would be tremendous to have more blue in red South Carolina.

colbert busch

Elizabeth Colbert-Busch (D) and Mark Sanford (R)

Good Luck With Your Rebranding, Republicans

19 Mar

If you checked out some of the highlights (or lowlights as I see them) from CPAC 2013, you might catch a hint of a half-hearted admission that something has got to change in the Grand Old Party. A political party that sounds reminiscent of the antebellum plantation mentality (that still permeates much of rural America) has deduced, from election post-mortem analyses, the future looks anything but promising.  This was discussed, but honestly, there are no plans to modify thinking on a scale necessary to rebrand the party to fit the needs of the majority of voters.

The most telling evidence the GOP is not ready for prime time can be found when interviewing a few CPAC attendees about what they thought of Senator Rob Portman (R-Oh) coming out in favor of gay marriage. Because he learned two years ago his son is gay he felt understandably sympathetic to the rights of homosexuals marrying and this simply did not sit well with conservatives. Please pay close attention to the comment of the woman at the 02:15 mark of the video.

The Frederick Douglass Republicans are those who have hijacked the black leader’s name because he was a successful businessman who must have espoused all the Republican and Libertarian values of our great Capitalist society.  This largely unknown group thinks President Obama is nothing like this man because he is so anti-business, the Koch Brothers have only increased their wealth by 43% since 2010, so that Socialist in the White House is very anti-business.  Hypocrisy abounds as the group  does not emulate Mr. Douglass in most regards.  At one of the CPAC forums, an audience member asked a rather shocking question with regards to the treatment of slaves.

Stunningly, many Conservatives believe not only should homosexuals stay in the closet like they did in the 1950′s, but slaves should have been grateful for food and shelter which they received from their captors.  Unfortunately, this type of fringe thinking is no longer on the outskirts of the party.   It’s obvious the Teaparty and Fundamentalist wing of the GOP is calling the shots.  However, in a society that is evolving towards acceptance and tolerance of all and departing from Biblical Draconian law, the GOP has little hope for evolution (ironically, many deny the concept altogether).

Misogynist Libertarian Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

Misogynist Libertarian Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

Much ado has been made by both liberals and conservatives over Rand Paul and his espousal of the idealistic Libertarian values of freedom and liberty.   After his pointless and costly 13 hour filibuster, he was the winner of the CPAC 2013 straw poll for 2016 GOP presidential nominee.  The Kentucky Senator believes corporations should be free to dump as much toxic waste into our rivers as they wish, no taxes should be paid to help our fellow citizens in need (especially to receive healthcare) and education should not be paid for by the state.  In a nutshell, he wants the government to stay out of our affairs.

He has sponsored the Fetal Personhood Amendment to give a cluster of embryonic cells the same rights as a human being.  However, before we commend him on his “pro-life” stance, he also feels a person of color could or should be excluded from any private establishment, like a restaurant, simply because the owner should have the freedom to discriminate if he so chooses.  The free market should eliminate the need for all government regulations and if active discrimination is rampant in this country once again, so be it.  This is not a man who believes in the pursuit of happiness.  He believes in the pursuit of happiness for a select few.

Isn’t the goal of the GOP, convening with their best and brightest as they did this past weekend, to increase their membership and numbers?  Has anyone in this party considered that restricting or outlawing birth control while simultaneously cutting funding for poor and unwanted children will most likely  increase the number of Democratic voters?  Minorities are generally immigrants and one of the stars of the GOP, Donald Trump, even said (out loud) that naturalizing 11,000,000 immigrants will only add that many more “Democrat” voters.  I’m having a hard time following their logic, as logic seems to evade this party entirely.

As long as women are not in control of when they give birth, discrimination and overt racism are acceptable and religious dogma supersedes equality for humanity, the Republicans are content.  The rest of the country, however, is not of this mindset and any rebranding should include a tabula rasa for the entire GOP.  This antiquated way of thinking must change, and it looks like the odds are pretty slim the hard-liners of the party will have such an epiphany.

Dividing the Progressive Movement by Standing With Rand Paul Insanity

8 Mar

Drones were devised for the purpose of conducting strikes and surveillance over territories deemed too perilous for our own pilots. Unpleasant as it may be to imagine, we have many enemies, through much fault of our own, who wish to harm Americans worldwide. Since their invention, the American military has utilized drone technology in countries like Yemen and Pakistan because the countries are a safe-haven for terrorist activities and they’re very remote. Manned military strikes are exceptionally treacherous. The mere existence of drones is simply for the purpose of launching these offensives in areas that are foreign, so by design, they’re not for domestic use. Perhaps on rare occasion, if a foreign combatant threatened the U.S. and there was no other way (which is quite outlandish) a president could use any means necessary to protect our citizens. However, it never was an issue which an economically hampered America should concern itself with, especially in light of all the other threats which endanger Americans, like teachers in South Dakota legally allowed to carry firearms while instructing children. This is a smokescreen, nothing more, and it is embarrassing progressives fall for such nonsense.

A Kentucky Republican launched a filibuster for what he considers a noble Libertarian cause, emphatically asserting domestic drone strikes should be illegal because they violate due process in a land founded on Constitutional principles. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky/Teaparty) droned on for almost 13 hours over this pressing issue. Paul filibustered the Senate, in protest of ANOTHER Obama cabinet appointment for simple self-aggrandizement and shameless political posturing. He received the following letter a few hours hence from our Attorney General, Eric Holder:

20130310-133423.jpg

HuffPo-Rand-Paul-Filibuster-Drone-Stand

Courtesy of The Huffington Post

The incessant references to Hitler, the mentions of tyranny, liberty and freedom were numerous and based in fantasy and paranoia, as per usual with this Teaparty caucus. Paul also managed to defend awful Supreme Court decisions which were blatantly racist and abhorrent. Nevertheless, he was lauded by progressives who agreed with Senator Paul’s “brave” filibuster, including Van Jones. Much to my dismay, this man aired his pro-Paul sentiments on “CNN Newsroom,” and called the senator “a hero” for “sticking up for civil liberties.” Similar praise erupted from Senator Ron Wyden (D-Or) and Code Pink. On Friday March 8th, Arianna Huffington appeared as a panelist on Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO and said: “I want to defend Rand Paul…I think what Rand Paul did was fantastic…What he did was incredibly important. First of all, it completely scrambled that right-left way of looking at politics.” She critiqued Democrats (aside from GOP ally Wyden of course) for not taking a similar stand. Really Arianna? Domestic drone use is a pressing concern? More pressing than another fiscal cliff, environmental insanity and gun violence? Sorry, ma’am, you’re costing us time and money for contrived threats which benefit the GOP by allowing them to divide Democrats and skirt the real issues. President Obama has never once threatened ANYONE domestically with these highly technical killing machines and he has no intention of doing so.

Naturally, the Right Wing couldn’t thank Paul enough for his obstructionism. Fox’s favorite immigrant-loathing “Anchor Baby” Michelle Malkin heaps praise on Rand Paul for singlehandedly saving the Republican Party.

 

Ironically, immediately following Holder’s letter, which negated his entire thirteen hour charade, Mr. Paul fell in line and confirmed the new CIA director at once. After the dramatic episode concluded, we learned that the whole charade was staged for the purpose of showboating and fundraising. Obviously Rand is unconcerned with the threats to American citizens and real civil liberties as he feels it is more important to allow manufacturers of lethal weapons to sell their products unchecked to a nation incited to violence by none other than the racist agenda he promotes.

The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates over 1200 anti government patriot groups in existence today, where the anti-Civil Rights Act agenda of Mr. Paul along with others like Teabagger Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tx) operate in perfect symbiosis. Not only is he opposed to the 1965 law which is THE cornerstone of anti-racism legislation in America, but he opposed VAWA, denies abortion as a right and believes Biblical Law should replace the U.S. Constitution. He believes in low taxes for the rich and wouldn’t hesitate to cut funding for the poor woman he forced to birth a baby (after he defunds all women’s care facilities), because this is what Jesus would do. Maybe I forgot how Rand Paul sees Jesus: A White, Southern, GOP, and male chauvinist Jesus, not that Aramaic Semite from the Middle East who preached tolerance, humility and poverty.

Heaven forbid the first black president, or any president, chooses to use a weaponized drone on a person or group threatening the safety of the United States from within. We have an audaciously well-armed police force, FBI, ATF, CIA and four branches of the world’s largest military to defend our citizens. If at any time, a president chooses the drone option for domestic use, we are in so much trouble, I think Rand Paul’s freedom (to wear any animal on his head) is the last thing we need to worry about. Things are about to get real. I’m sure his outlandish soliloquy gave President Obama plenty of time to contemplate a domestic drone-strike option. He is far more tolerant than I would have been, as he dispensed with Senator Paul’s histrionics with a simple NO. Progressives and supporters of Democratic principles should have done the same thing. History will not be kind to the Rand Paul grandstanders of these tough times. This should be the last we hear of this nonsense, but I’m sure it will drone on ad nauseum.

Gerrymandering and Jim Crow: The Republican Plan to Keep America White

27 Feb

As it is appearing with greater frequency, the commonly used term “gerrymandering” is an unusual practice indigenous but not exclusive to these United States. The odd practice of drawing voting districts in a random shape for a particular party’s advantage is named after Elbridge Gerry, a Massachusetts Governor and the fifth Vice President of the USA under President James Madison. He redrew his own district in the shape of a salamander,

20130227-085237.jpg

The original “gerrymander” in Massachusettes circa 1812

so in 1812, the idea of gerrymandering was born. This is a legal way of redistricting which is used by both political parties in our country. Unfortunately, in most Republican implementations of gerrymandering, the motives are insidiously racist. No representative historically is unwilling to abdicate power, so the Republicans have gerrymandered their districts to maintain sovereignty over a changing demographic that should technically deem them unelectable. With Machiavellian strategizing, the GOP has continued to maintain control of the House of Representatives which is certainly not of, by and for the people.

With the relevancy of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) on trial this week, it is vital more people understand exactly what damage the Roberts Court could inflict on our Civil Rights. The unlikely hero of the Affordable Care Act’s landmark decision, Chief Justice Roberts will play a different role in Shelby County v Holder. He will, once again, prove to be a painful reminder of the Bush Administration that appointed him.

This is a fight that’s been near and dear to Roberts’ heart since he was an attorney for the Ronald Reagan Administration. In 1982, Roberts led the fight against the VRA’s Section 2, which prohibits denial of voting rights “on account of race or color.” In the case of Shelby County, a largely white suburb of Birmingham, the number of instances between 1975 and 2007 where election laws were judged to have discriminated on the basis of race occurred 20 times. But I suppose with the election of President Obama, Roberts and his cohorts are purporting the myth that racism is no longer a problem in the areas which Section 5 was designed to protect.

But how does gerrymandering work to the advantage of Republicans and how is it relevant to this latest SCOTUS battle? In North Carolina, where the two-party House vote was 51 percent Democratic, 49 percent Republican, the average simulated delegation was seven Democrats and six Republicans. The actual outcome? Four Democrats, nine Republicans — a split that occurred in less than 1 percent of simulations. If districts were drawn fairly, this lopsided discrepancy would hardly ever occur.

20130228-063221.jpg

A typical gerrymandered district in North Carolina

Gerrymandering is a major form of disenfranchisement. In the seven states where Republicans redrew the districts, 16.7 million votes were cast for Republicans and 16.4 million votes were cast for Democrats. This elected 73 Republicans and 34 Democrats, not exactly proportional.

Why would Shelby County object to federal oversight? If they don’t plan on reinstating unfair registration requirements, poll taxes, literacy tests and the like, why would it matter if your electoral processes are supervised by the Federal Government? These folks have and always will be proponents of States’ Rights. States’ Rights is code for we are going to allow discriminatory disenfranchisement to proceed unchecked in our jurisdiction and we’d like you all to butt out.

The best example of racially motivated redistricting was evident in the Texas redistricting after the 2010 census. For the first time, the Republican state is populated by a majority of minority residents. However, the final tally redrew Texas to now have 25 congressional districts that lean Republican and 11 that lean Democratic. A representative government is the antithesis of Rick Perry’s racially motivated voting map.

20130228-090638.jpg

Areas subjected to Section 5 supervision during federal elections

Most of the areas on the map are in the south, but there are a few northern rural areas included, as historically, violations of Section 5 were common. All the evidence we need for determining the necessity of Section 5 was very evident this past election in the voter suppression attempts in Florida and Ohio that were thwarted by federal intervention. The GOP must be stopped because democracy isn’t waiting in line for several hours just to vote. This was a big problem in 2012 where voters in districts heavily favoring minority voters waited as long as nine hours just to cast their ballots.

In a shocking but not uncharacteristic display of racial callousness, extreme right wing Justice Antonin Scalia claimed the Voting Rights Act is a “perpetuation of racial entitlement,” which explains why he found a landmark law preventing race discrimination in voting to be suspicious. Simply by derogatorily using the term “entitlement,” conservatives show the disdain they have for allowing ALL citizens of any color, creed or gender to exercise simple rights which Americans have fought so hard to attain.

This plan may very well backfire on Republicans where Teaparty hard liners dominate the party’s agenda and prevent any candidate with sane and moderate views to win on a national scale. A recent example is Richard Mourdock of Indiana who was the Teaparty’s choice to replace Senator Dick Lugar. However, his insane fundamentalist opinions on rape allowed Joe Donnelly, a Democrat, to win in a Republican-dominated district. By gerrymandering themselves into an ultra-far right platform while the rest of society at large seems to be evolving towards a Progressive agenda, they will eventually redistrict themselves into obsolescence. If SCOTUS acts responsibly and rules against Shelby County, Alabama, it may help drive another nail into the GOP coffin. If the Court decides in favor of a racist, regressive Voting Rights Act violation, things will get very messy for both sides. Those who fought bravely to protect the sacred right of voting (which is not an entitlement), like Representative John Lewis, will not back down from this fight. Whether the GOP likes it or not, progress can not be stopped entirely, but they sure as hell can slow it down which seems to be their only advantage in a battle they are destined to lose.

The GOP’s “Concern” About Mental Health Is a Diversion From Their NRA-Inspired Gun Policies

18 Jan

20130121-112451.jpg

The invocation of Ronald Reagan’s legacy is a tactic utilized by the Right to more or less humanize their devastating Draconian cuts to basic health and human services, including mental healthcare. This is quite astonishing as Reagan was, perhaps, the most inhumane leader with regards to caring for the least among us and those with legitimate mental health issues. The party of Jesus, (GOP) as we all know, acts quite contrary to his teachings. Monies are always cut in mental healthcare (ESPECIALLY FOR WAR VETERANS) and redirected to fund more private, for-profit prisons instead of properly helping those in need. The unfortunate consequence of defunding such programs have a dire impact on the afflicted and their families. The lack of stable housing and work will certainly exacerbate and create depression and mental illness, substance abuse, family break-up, and crime.

Here are the facts:

•In 1978, HUD’s budget was over $83 billion.

•In 1983, HUD’s budget was only $18 billion.

•In 1983, general public emergency shelters began opening in cities nationwide.

•In 1987, Congress passed the Stewart B. McKinney Act, providing $880 million in homeless assistance funding (2004 constant dollars).

•In short, Reagan deliberately created “homelessness” by cutting $65 billion of housing money and replacing it with $880 million in shelter funding.

The lost funding has never been replaced, and the percentage of low-cost/subsidized housing has been dropping ever since. 100,000 units of low-cost housing have been lost since 1996 alone. When Reagan defunded mental health care and threw the mentally ill onto the streets, he was saying it was not his problem and the American people went along as he de-railed what was an improving situation for those with mental health issues. Now, more than thirty years hence (and countless massacres by those possibly afflicted with mental illness), the GOP/NRA is suddenly saddled with immense concern for the mental well-being of Americans.

The NRA and most of the GOP is obsessed with trying to minimize all the devastation caused by military-style, high ammunition-capacity firearms. They pervertedly believe this problem will be alleviated by fewer restrictions on guns, and accessories which facilitate mass killings. Add this to their shameful history of defunding, defrauding and devastating mental healthcare and we can predict exactly what they’ll do for those needing psychological care and protecting the innocent: absolutely NOTHING.

Another issue the pharmacy-subsidizing GOP (and often Democrats too) won’t address is the over-medication of our children for behavior issues. The pharmaceutical industry has profited immensely from these psychostimulants readily prescribed for ADD and ADHD diagnoses. Without long-term study and the lack of reporting on the matter, we don’t know how adversely they will impact brain chemistry into adulthood.

Maybe it’s not video games or movies that cause these unfathomably egregious acts of violence. Maybe it’s because, according to the United Nations, the U.S. produces and consumes about 85 percent of the world’s methylphenidate (Ritalin). Also commonly prescribed, SSRIs (Selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors or serotonin-specific re-uptake inhibitor) are a class of medications which have been shown to be a commonality among those who commit violent acts in schools. People who have used these medications might not be the best candidates for ordering a personal arsenal of military-grade weapons and ammo. Perhaps the NRA’s definition of someone who should pass a background check needs some work. As proposed by our President, maybe no one should own weapons the military uses which are specifically designed not just to kill, but to obliterate other human beings en masse.

Studies with regards to mental health issues and guns must include the socioeconomic factors of poverty, the insanely unfair for-profit prison system and the highly subsidized pharmaceutical industry that receives an obscene amount of corporate welfare. Restrictions and regulations are the enemies of Republicans, as they firmly believe both impinge on capitalism and “job-creation.” Since this tenuous concern of the GOP is so very obvious both historically and currently in the areas of mental healthcare matters, shouldn’t they be omitted from the decision-making process? As one who firmly believes history repeats itself when the lessons are not learned from the past, I believe the GOP/NRA-ILA is the last group who should debate and legislate this matter. We all know how anti-education they’ve proven themselves to be as they have embarrassingly omitted unpleasant facts and re-written history in our children’s textbooks. They’ll do the same thing to our mentally impaired citizens as they did to the Iraqi people: attack and destroy them simply because they have the power to do so.

Gun Appreciation Day Perpetuates Violence and Paranoid Dystopia

9 Jan

20130110-093341.jpg

In order to completely disrespect every family who is currently grieving over the loss of a family member, (a child in particular) to gun violence, the Council on Promoting Gun Violence and Exploiting the Dead (my embellishment) has decided, in their infinite paranoia, to declare Saturday, January 19th “Gun Appreciation Day.” to be ironic, these fine folks chose the very weekend we celebrate the birth of a champion of non-violence, MLK. These people, who clearly pervert the Second Amendment, must make certain if any crazed, violent loon has the inclination, he or she has access to as much ammunition and high-powered weaponry as they so desire.

The number of people in America killed by firearms is extraordinary compared to other nations. If we’re not a bloodthirsty culture, as wars seldom reach our shores, we need to look at everything we can do to safeguard our people. These gun rights rather than human rights advocates clearly have a violent, profit-driven agenda in mind.

General Stanley McChrystal, a member of our conservative armed forces said, “we need to take a look at why we’d even consider allowing these (military-style assault weapons) in our society… I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets, and particularly around the schools in America,” McChrystal continued. “I believe that we’ve got to take a serious look. I understand everybody’s desire to have whatever they want, but we’ve got to protect our children, we’ve got to protect our police and we’ve got to protect our population. And I think we’ve got to take a very mature look at that.”

Prominent leaders’ assassinations have been the catalyst for legislative action via public outrage in our past. The 1960′s were a volatile time where we lost some of America’s greatest leaders to senseless gun violence. Martin Luther King was fatally shot by sniper’s bullet on April 4, 1968. Death was the result of a horrific gunshot wound (to the chin and neck with a fatal transection of the lower cervical and upper thoracic spinal cord and other structures in the neck), a violent end to a life of noble purpose. Just two months later, RFK was also taken out by an assassin with a gun. The nation’s hopes and dreams for peace died right along with him.

The Johnson Administration passed new gun control measures, reasonable means to minimize tragic shootings, without denying Second Amendment “rights.” Johnson’s bill banned all mail-order and out-of-state sales of handguns, shotguns and rifles; prohibited the sale of guns to minors; and required national registration of all guns and licensing of all gun owners. No reasonable citizen could argue these measures were, and still are, very logical. Unfortunately reason, logic and mental health are sadly lacking from so many who pervert the second amendment to mean they should own as many military-style automatic weapons as they can fit in their closets next to their Confederate memorabilia and Hank Williams Jr. concert shirts.

Johnson’s words were as apropos then as they are today.

“The voices that blocked these safeguards were not the voices of an aroused nation. They were the voices of a powerful gun lobby, a gun lobby, that has prevailed for the moment in an election year. . . . We have been through a great deal of anguish these last few months and these last few years – too much anguish too forget so quickly. So now we must complete the task which this long needed legislation begins.”

Somehow reason prevailed and we were able to pass some common sense safety measures.

During Vietnam War protests, outrageous gun violence was an issue compromised mainly of police brutality. The incident at Kent State, May 4, 1970 focused our gun injustices on our police and authorities’ lack of restraint. The number of massacres at the hands of police, however, pales in comparison to the carnage of all the mass shootings we’ve experienced in the last twenty years. The gun lobbyists claim violent video games, lack of prayer and lack of universal gun ownership are more to blame than the easy acquisition of high-powered firearms which they proliferate at thousands of gun shows .

The NRA has immense political power, and associates themselves with unsavory, paranoid lunatics like Alex Jones and the Chairman of National Gun Appreciation Day, Larry Ward. Their type of manufactured dystopian hysteria creates a culture more concerned with contrived future scenarios than the problem of constant gun massacres. This is evidenced by comparisons of President Obama to Chairman Mao, Stalin and Hitler. Generally, once Hitler is used as a reference, proponents of such absurdity have lost their argument and their minds.

There is utter disbelief expressed by ALL wealthy, industrialized nations looking upon us in horror at this manageable problem. We wanted fewer deaths from drunk driving, and voila, in just thirty years we’ve lowered fatalities by 50% with movements such as M.A.D.D. We raised the legal drinking age and sure enough, death rates fell. Since so many of these crimes are perpetrated by people in their twenties, maybe closely scrutinizing gun ownership by this demographic would be a great way to start.

With the recent unfathomable carnage of Newtown and Aurora, I’m hopeful the level of outrage has reached a tipping point. A recent Newtown visit by Gabby Giffords and husband, Mark Kelly has, once again, exposed the fringe element in the NRA-owned GOP. The Facebook exchange below shows just how convoluted their thinking has become.

20130110-085507.jpg

You can’t engage a cross-section of your acquaintances without running into one or two quintessential “Obama is coming for our guns” morons. If we lessen the exposure and power of these paranoid miscreants, we may be able to make assault rifles and the proliferation of arsenals by the deranged as unfashionable as the Jim Crow South. The only way we’ve successfully conquered opposing forces clinging to outdated and inhumane policies is by collectively expressing our desire for change and forcing legislators to LEGISLATE SANITY!

20130116-034608.jpg

Preventing Shooting Massacres Down Under: A Lesson For America

29 Dec
20121229-125833.jpg

Port Arthur, Tasmania

This article is written by Derek Wood, my friend, who is a resident of Sydney Australia. His plea to our country is based on the following: In 1996, Australia experienced a horrible mass casualty shooting at Port Arthur, Tasmania. Afterwards, Prime Minister John Howard’s government moved quickly to tighten Australia’s gun laws and instituted a mandatory federal buy-back program designed to remove banned guns from private ownership. In the years prior to Port Arthur, Australia experienced several mass casualty shootings. There have been none since.
(An awful coincidence, the killer, currently serving 35 life sentences, is from a suburb of a Hobart called New Town, Tasmania)

It was a sunny Sunday afternoon in Sydney way back on 28th April 1996. I was making my way to the local gym as, in those days, I was a regular gym junkie. Just before I left my home, I heard on the radio that a gunman had been on a killing spree in Tasmania. At that stage only a small number of people had lost their lives. When I got to the gym, the number of deaths had risen to 23. I mentioned this to my gym instructor. His response was that it was the gunman’s form “of self-expression”. The instructor was reading the Celestine Prophecy at the time, which probably explained his comments. I personally preferred the term “madman”.

The gunman was named Martin Bryant and the final death toll was 35. The whole of Australia was in shock. How could anyone kill 35 innocent people? There was an outpouring of disbelief and anger. How could we stop this from happening again?

20121229-124036.jpg

A grief-stricken community unites and takes action

Before, I go any further, I need to give some background information. Australia is very similar to the United States. Both are large countries, both were built from migrants, both have large agricultural areas and culturally we are very similar. Naturally, we speak the same language – well sort of! Guns in Australia are typically kept in the large rural areas. Farmers need to be on alert for scavengers of the animal kind, especially foxes. Although in parts of the country snakes and crocodiles can also be a problem.
John Howard had to act, and act fast. He introduced strict gun laws into Parliament. This had bi-partisan support of the opposition Labor Party led by Kim Beasley. The new gun controls had to also be made law via the State and Territory Parliaments. Initially Queensland and Tasmania were against tightened gun control. A number of citizens were outraged at the new laws. This outrage was fueled by the support of the Christian Coalition and the US National Rifle Association! Finally, the new gun controls were made law Australia wide after a lot of intense debate. In addition, the Federal Government implemented a 12 month amnesty/buyback scheme to allow people to hand in any illegal firearm without running the risk of prosecution. Amazingly, 643,000 firearms were handed in at a cost of $350M.

Since that fateful day in 1996, Australia has not had any gun related massacres.Since the laws were established, it is now extremely hard to buy a rifle or indeed any gun. A number of valid reasons and references need to be supplied before a gun can be sold. Naturally, if there is a genuine reason to have a gun, and the person appears mentally stable, then they will be able to purchase one, subject to State and Territory requirements. It is safe to say that John Howard’s tough stance has paid dividends. Since that fateful day in 1996, Australia has not had any gun related massacres.

I mention the above purely to give any reader from the United States an idea of how gun control can be implemented. Naturally, all Australians were shocked at the Sandy Hook school massacre in Newtown. I have two daughters aged 9 and 10 and I certainly felt shock and sadness, especially as it happened so close to Christmas, the time of family gatherings. I feel for the parents who lost their children and the families of all those that were killed in the shooting.

To outsiders, the United States has way too many shootings. For pro-gun lobbyists to claim the second amendment as a right to bear arms in today’s modern society, is a bad joke at best! The question, a very simple one, how many more people have to lose their lives before action is taken? Yes the GOP and NRA are bed partners, and yes there are lunatics high up in both organisations. But do ordinary citizens really require a semi-automatic weapon to protect their property? The answer has to be a resounding ‘No’. (the mental faculty of anyone who wants a military-style assault rifle should be considered dubious, at best)

The US has to tighten up its gun laws immediately. It is the only way to go, and also to restore faith with the public. Not only does Barack Obama need to act decisively, it also requires the GOP and others to support any proposed law changes. The good old days of “gun toting” are over. Let’s logically move on and ensure that our children and innocent bystanders are not used as “shooting practice” by a madman.

Finally, do not underestimate the rest of the world’s opinion towards the US and its lax gun laws. I can virtually guarantee you that the feeling of most people is that the US gun laws are a complete joke. It is now up to the United States to ensure that the joke comes to an end.

Sadly, requiring the GOP to acquiesce to reasonable gun legislation is a pipe dream. Nothing like these irrational Teaparty antics occur anywhere else in the civilized world. I hope this changes in 2014. Get everyone you know to vote them out in the midterms! (VegasJessie)

Follow Derek on Twitter @Main_Man

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 109 other followers

%d bloggers like this: