Skullduggery

With the decision not to indicted police officer Wilson supporters of the contention that Michael Brown was an innocent victim of white police brutality are saying there must be skullduggery occurring in the grand jury decision aided by city, county and state officials. The one thing that seems clear is that after supporters of the “rascal prejudice” theory examine the forensic evidence they will have to reluctantly come to the conclusion that Michael Brown with his blood on the police officers, gun, clothes, outside and inside driver’s side door was the aggressor. Further when Michael was shot in the finger he withdrew his two hundred ninety pound body from the window of the police car and started walking or running down the street. The doubters will have to acknowledge [to themselves not the media] that Michael turned around when the police officer warned he was going to shoot and moved toward officer Wilson and the policeman shot at Michael until he fell dead.

There is no good thing that can come from a person’s death even when the shooting victim is the clear aggressor but the facts are the facts.

The other conclusion is that we have a major race problem in this country, somewhat mollified over the last six decades by laws on the books and monitoring by associations of African Americans to make certain communities meet the letter of the law. Now you can add another issue to the minority community. It is best explained by the Reverend Al Sharptons observation last week that with the growth of the Hispanic community in this country the African American is going to become a “second class” minority with less influence in the government at all levels but especially the federal government.

It is a conundrum that leaders of the religious, political and U.S. citizenry must find a way to address. My advice is we keep our cool and try to work through the problems considering the facts and what we can do from a practical standpoint. It is also my counsel to those who view the Michael Brown case with a jaundiced eye. Look at the facts Michael was in the wrong.

Look before you leap

During this Sunday’s morning show “Meet the Press” a spirited debate was carried on between former New York mayor Giuliani, a lawyer for the Michael Brown family and a black professor from Georgetown University regarding the actions or inactions of the grand Jury consideration prosecution of a Ferguson police officer for shooting and killing Michael Brown. Rudy Giuliani pointed out that he didn’t understand why the panel wasn’t talking about the fact that blacks kill 93% of all blacks and in the case of the Ferguson shooting it was the exception not the rule. A near riot broke out with the professor from Georgetown and the Brown family attorney Hysterically saying the comparisons are unfair and by inference racist. Not so fast!

Have we already forgotten Detroit Michigan? Over the years the city became primarily a city of black citizens [85%] and the elected offices and administrative offices became populated by black and mixed race individuals. The results were corruption on a magnitude not experienced before with the most recent black mayor in federal prison for bribery, fraud and other crimes against the citizens of the city of Detroit. It caused the state to have toke over the education budget and program because of bickering and abuse of city funds. Black police chiefs forced to resign or imprisoned for taking bribes and finally the largest city bankruptcy in this country of billions of dollars. It’s not that blacks are corrupt, it is that the opportunity for stealing is easiest when there is no “loyal opposition” to create checks and balances essential for good honest government.

So before you decide the answer is to vote special interest into power in your city whether it is racial, religious or other special interest groups remember Detroit and look before you leap.

Do you really believe it?

How many of the five million people granted some level of immigration immunity tonight by President Obama would actually register with the federal government to receive the advantages of quasi citizenship?

Let’s see, they must register their personal information including the number of children and their names, then pay back taxes, pass criminal background checks, notify the federal government when they move and where they move and provide proof of employment. Or would they rather stay off the federal government radar, work for tax free dollars, allow them to help relatives to cross the borders illegally and live and/or move from one state to another as their whim moves them. They would be secure in the knowledge that they will be able to receive health, education and welfare benefits in many of the states even though the President will claim they will not receive federal benefits such as health services.

Of course the small percentage that do sign up for amnesty will represent a political activists group that in six years will become a target for liberal politicians. Democrats Chuck Schumer and Dick Durban running for President in 2020 will insist that even though those who fall under the Presidential Executive action were only granted quasi-permanent residents it is unfair to prevent them from voting in federal elections. Why you ask, because it would be discrimination against people based on race, religion or other such claims. What do you believe will happen?

Why

He is an Ivy League grad, an MIT professor and one of the key architects of the “Afford Care Act” better known today as Obamacare. In the last four days three separate videos show this man, Jonathan Gruber has said that the administration had to dupe the public regarding who is paying for the costs of paying for Obamacare. If you doubt the claims that have been made about professor Gruber’s statement you can access them on Youtube, Fox News Network or MSNBC but you won’t find this story on the traditional news network shows. Why?

My theory is that the mainstream media is very supportive of the ACA and its author Barack Obama. The media doesn’t want to draw attention to the fact that one of the key architects of the ACA said repeatedly that the authors of this major law duped the American voters. In one of the videos Professor Gruber said that then Senator John Kerry made the helpful suggestion that the authors refer to the funding of the law as a tax on insurance companies rather than on the health care plan/the public. Professor Gruber said that they could not have passed the law except for the fact that the public was dumb enough to buy the premise. MSNBC did cover the story briefly with and interview with Professor Gruber in which he stated that the first video release was a “slip of the tongue” but that was belied by two more videos released where the professor was speaking at a conference/public meeting and repeated his contention that the American public needed to be ignorant of the facts about Obamacare or they would never have agreed to the law being passed.

Is this what we expect from independent media news sources, I think not but it is what we are going to get from a left leaning news sources.

If the Americans want to be better governed

I frequently quote from “The Economist” on political matters or governing issues for our country. As you might expect the magazine had a lot to say about the mid-term elections, just as l reporters, bogglers and politicians did. Of the many pages dedicated to fact and opinion about the affect of the mid-term victory by the conservatives one statement struck me as a simple fact; If American’s want to be better governed-which is what they voted for this [last] week-they need to change the way they elect their leaders. *

Among other observations in “The Economist” was “Mr. Obama cannot escape the humiliating verdict on his Presidency.” The magazine goes on to observe that the out come of the election was a mandate for moderation.

Our observation is that the way the conservatives under the umbrella of the Republican Party can achieve a successful governing mode is to put forward bills created in the House of Representatives with some democrat party support to the senate and the senate in turn passes amended bills to the President for signature.

The conservatives should not pursue impeachment proceedings against the President, they should not attempt to repeal Obamacare but rather use the purse strings to curtail parts of the law that they see as in conflict with the public’s wishes. It is possible that the United States Supreme Court may make changes in Obamacare next June that will do more than anything a Republican control congress can do.

Importantly the Republicans must keep the American public informed on all the bills they are trying o pass. If and when the President refuses to sign a particular bill the leaders of Republican party in both houses must make a full course press to the public to show why these bills that are being rejected by the President are good for jobs, freedom and the country.

I know it sounds simple because it is a simple but I believe it is a potentially effective plan for reestablishing the conservative controlled congress as a solid and effective governing body.

*The Economist November 8th-14th 2014 issue.

And then there were 3000

On June 20 I wrote in my blog; firefoxe.me an article titled “Military Advisors” that concluded with the observation that the Obama administrations decision to send in 500 military advisors to Iraq would lead to thousands. Welcome to November 9, 2014 as Obama authorized additional troops bringing the troop count in Iraq to 3000. Of course the administration said these were not going to be “troops on the ground,” what do you think and will this be the end of sending troops in the Iraq/ISIS war? I don’t think it is the end of sending troops into the middle east and as I predicted it will be necessary to send in thousands more of troops if we intend to stop ISIS and save Iraq.

The culprit

There is no question that over the last 20 years polarization has evolved in political thinking by the general public.

We as individuals and the media have talked about the new speed of information delivered to the public and the multiple options in receiving that information. I believe that the fragmentation of the media vehicles created the extremes of thought promotion virtually opening the door to every “special interest” group known to man and a few new ones.

What has happened that may not have been expected is the polarization of thinking by a large part of the population, the advocacy of certain political views by various media outlets and the desensitization of a large swath of the public or worse maybe a disinterest in the political process that results in the governing of the country.

The polarization is aggravated by the constant flow of information and misinformation. Constant reinforcement that
“Their” position is right, that the opposition is wrong. What is particularly disturbing is the that politicians don’t have a chance to breath, to negotiate with the opposition party on real issues without being exposed in the press or on social media. The results are defensive positions by politicians further reinforcing the polarized positions that result in predictable voting. The culprit is the accelerated option of information across the many media options.

This brings me to the eligible votes, approximately 60% of our eligible voters actually vote. Currently the voters are divided on a philosophical line of about 39% for each “side.” This means that the independents or undecided are 20% or more of the voting electorate and hold the balance of power. More importantly it means that 40% of the eligible voters are not interested enough or in my mind here is the key, they are not well educated enough to know that they can make a difference both in their everyday life and in the lives of their children and their children’s children.

The education problem will not be solved in junior college or even four-year universities that will wipe out the ignorance or create an understanding of their voting opportunity and responsibilities.

The education needed is basic, it starts in the first grade through high school and let me repeat it is basic education with books and teachers reinforcing the strength of our country and the positive objectives as stated in our constitution. Maybe if we achieved these simple but important objectives we might cause a few more or the millions that don’t vote to start voting and make a contribution to the well being of this country and his or her own future.

Recasting the education program as I suggest is an achievable almost simple goal. However the very polarization I’ve dwelled on in this blog earlier may be the cause of us failing to achieve the basic education program necessary to help break the control of our government by two groups diametrically opposed to each other. Can we break this cycle?