Mike Rowse A voice from New Mexico

23Aug/170

No really, staaaappp!

Okay this is getting completely ridiculous now. ESPN announced that they were removing a play-by-play announcer from the Virginia football game that takes place in a couple of weeks. The only reason they are removing him is because of his name, Robert Lee. This Robert Lee is Asian. But because his name is so similar to the former Confederate General, Robert E Lee, they were worried that his name might cause problems. Initially this was reported in the press release from ESPN which made it sound like, that this was management's decision. As the decision has been ridiculed in the twitter world and other areas, ESPN has said that Robert Lee, the television announcer, approached them about the situation and they reached a mutual decision to reassign him.

This really has to stop. First of all it shows the ignorance of the masses in understanding what Robert E Lee stood for and what he stood against. I will say it again because some of you don't seem to get it, he was adamantly opposed to slavery and had spoken out against slavery before the war. He was also offered the commander in chief position of the Union Army because he was considered a brilliant military strategist and leader. But as was common in those days, people thought of themselves as citizens of their states probably more so than citizens of the United States. Robert E Lee declined the offer because his home state was seceding from the union and he owed loyalty to them. It also goes to show that the reasons for secession were multiple and slavery was a minor concern at the time.

So to say Robert E Lee's name is offensive because it represents slavery is absolutely wrong. The ignorance of people combined with their willingness to commit acts of violence as well as censorship by removing his statues and name and images, which will be shortly followed by removing him from history books, is leading to ridiculous actions like this.

And who is committing the violence? It was not the white supremacist or neo-Nazi group that demonstrated in Charlottesville a few weeks ago. It was the left wing, members of ANTIFA and/or Black Lives Matter. Why did they show up to demonstrate against the white supremacists carrying two by fours with nails embedded in them, covering their face with masks, wearing helmets to protect themselves, and apparently ready to commit violence? They even attacked people who were there spontaneously to demonstrate against the neo-Nazis but were not part of their group.

Quite simply people like George Soros are paying demonstrators to show up and commit acts of violence. To say that Robert Lee, the TV announcer, and ESPN were worried about white supremacists is wrong on their part. Their fear is misplaced. The white supremacists and neo-Nazis responded to being physically attacked by the counterdemonstrators. We have that on video as well as eyewitness reports from independent witnesses. We also have the history of groups like ANTIFA & BLM showing up in multiple places and committing acts of violence.

I heard someone say that white supremacist groups are becoming more active in America. That is not true. What is becoming more prevalent are the violent attacks and hateful rhetoric being spewed by left-wing groups. They show up everywhere ready to commit acts of violence and it's a rare occasion when they don't. Until we begin calling them out and demand that they be prosecuted along with people like George Soros who are paying them to engage in these violent acts it is only going to get worse. We have to demand that our political leaders, along with their friends in the media, open their eyes and tell it like it is. And if they don't we need to vote them out of office or quit buying their papers or watching their news broadcasts so that they lose and revenue. We have the power we just haven't been using it now we find ourselves in this situation.

21Aug/170

Just Stop Already!!!

I was listening to the Ryen Russillo podcast on Friday show during which he was joined by Ellie as cohost. This was the first time I had heard as a cohost of radio shows but she has been around ESPN in various capacities for a while. For the purposes of this post, it is important to note that she is a black woman, which she said she is reminded of every day in both a good way and a bad way. Maybe we’ll get to that part later but this is more about symbolism and as she and Ryan put it, “optics”.

Over the last couple of years ESPN has done what they call a fantasy football marathon. On both television and radio they go for 28 straight hours with various shows talking about players and their impact in various fantasy football leagues, how to run a league, etc. This year’s show included a fantasy football auction during which participants were given a pool of money and could bid upon football players to add to their team. Now this differs from most fantasy leagues in which you have a draft of some type but similar to what the NFL has for the real NFL league.

A very vocal minority was upset about the player auction, which by the way in golf we call it a Calcutta, because they said the optics made it look like a slave auction. Yes, the majority of players in the NFL are black but every player in the NFL was available to be auctioned. I don’t know the exact workings of this auction and how they decided what players to put up for bid but I’m assuming they took the top players in each positional category and the participants had to decide how much they were going to spend on the player if they wanted to get them on their team.

So now people are upset and ESPN has apologized for holding what appeared to be a slave auction even though there were white players auctioned as well as players of other ethnicities. But of course the optics or the way it looked is what’s more important to those who are complaining and not going deeper than the surface to see whether or not that was the intent of the organizers and making a decision about whether this should be offensive or not.

Now Ryan Russillo try to dance around and say he thought people were overreacting by he didn’t want to offend anyone so if he was trying to say that people were overreacting it didn’t come across very clearly. And he admitted that is difficult for him as a white male to understand how people could be offended and to empathize with them. Once again it’s bunch of bull crap that means we cannot learn about things in this world that we have not experienced. But Ellie said that it was a fail by ESPN and she understands how so many people compare this to a slave auction. I guess the players put up for bid were enslaved, showed up in chains maybe or were on the auction block against their will not having chosen to play football.

But Ellie took this in a couple of different directions including saying the combine that the NFL holds every year where they put players to mental and physical tests to help rate their future success in the NFL could also be seen as having ties to slavery. Many positions in the NFL require a high level of athletic ability which can be demonstrated in some part to the physical testing the players endure at the NFL combine, where they engage in things like speed tests, strength tests etc. There are also mental tests and interviews that they participate in, which I don’t think ever occurred in a slave auction. But because the majority of players are black, Ellie and others have said this could be reminiscent of what happened at slave auctions 200 years ago.

Ellie also said that she grew up in Georgia and she knew it someone had a Confederate flag sign in their yard or on a flagpole in their yard, she knew that that person did not want her there. Really? Because the Confederate flag did not stand for slavery when it was used it has been turned into that by ignorant people who have no clue as to what the Civil War was originally fought over. Many people use that Confederate flag similar to the “don’t tread on me” revolutionary flag to say they are rising up against governmental tyranny. Many people do not even associate that flag with promoting bigotry, discrimination, or slavery.

But I have a very strong feeling based upon other comments she made that she supported Hillary Clinton in the last election. While Hillary Clinton had a campaign button with her logo on it but the background was a Confederate battle flag. Does that mean that Hillary is racist or bigoted and doesn’t want people like Ellie around? Well if Ellie is going to be honest intellectually, then she has to say the same thing about Hillary Clinton. She won’t of course because Hillary is a Democrat and one of the most liberal areas. Remember she was married to the “first black president”. Who by the way also had a similar campaign button in 1992.

They then turned the conversation to a street in Boston named Yawkey Way. The street is named after former Boston Red Sox team owner Thomas Yawkey there is quite a bit of controversy right now over the naming of the street and an effort to change it because Thomas was a racist. Now I don’t know if he ever espoused racist viewpoints are supported racist policies but I understand he refused as long as he could to higher black players for the Boston Red Sox. Boston does have a reputation for being a racist community and maybe he was making a business decision not wanting to upset his loyal fans or maybe he agreed with them.

But the fact is that he did a lot of good in Boston and was apparently a very charitable man. I understand he was involved in a lot of community organizations, donated to hospitals and other charities, and so on. But a group of people wants to rename the street that is named after him because of his racist views. Once again they are ignoring probably 90% of what the man did and focusing upon the 10%. Certainly if he was actively or even in actively racist that is not a good thing and people should know that. But life is not simple nor is a black and white. It is gray. We cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater and remove all things that might be offensive even if they are true.

But back to Ellie and her comments regarding Thomas Yawkey. She said she is more offended by the Confederate flag because to keep her down because of her race and it directly affects her. She is not as offended by the street name because that does not directly affect her. Isn't it kind of odd for a liberal to say they can put their nose in somebody else’s business? That's what liberals do all the time. But in this case shouldn't she speak out against racism, if she believes Thomas Yawkey was racist? I think that's the right thing to do. But again liberals do not have principles, at least not in the way most of us do. It depends upon the situation whether or not they agree or disagree with a specific behavior.

Quite simply the furor over the NFL auction conducted on ESPN or the street name in Boston or the Confederate battle flag being displayed are all overreactions by people who represent the minority of Americans who are easily offended by things they don't understand. They have a victim mentality and want to cry Wolf every opportunity they get and destroy other people that they do not like. There are much more serious and real problems in this world that might get solved if these professional victims and agitators spend all of that effort trying to solve the real problems of the world.

15Aug/170

Random thoughts and quick hits

the Democrats and liberals have become so wound up in identity politics, which is their formula for keeping them in power, that they don't know anything else. That's why they haven't really had a message about how to improve the economy, international relations, any problem is faced assassination for 40 years. But you know the one biggest problem with identity politics we can never be united again as long as that is the primary motivator for our politicians. Because the inherent message in identity politics is that if my group get something then your group doesn't or vice versa. It's as if there is a finite amount of opportunity or wealth or anything else and that my group must get it in order to keep your group from taking it away from me. Until we go back to identifying ourselves as Americans, were going to have the strife that we are seeing now in America.

Kind of along the same lines is that we are often told at least we white males are often told, that we can't understand the plight of any minority. Whether that be an ethnic minority women, whatever the identified group is, we can't understand their plight. The inference is that we are the root cause of all problems facing any demographic group in America. But it goes deeper than that. By saying that, for example, I cannot understand the plight of black men in America, you are saying that I do not have the ability to learn. I don't have the ability to observe, to read, to listen and to use consequential thinking skills to be able to understand the plight of any downtrodden individual or group. That is completely incorrect. We all have the ability to learn. We may not be able to feel the way they feel because of the experiences they've had but we can come darn close. Yet, while the liberals tell me that I can't understand their plight, they can tell me they understand everything that motivates me, everything that I feel, everything that I think, etc. So how does that work?

Marshawn Lynch, the current running back for the Oakland Raiders said he will not stand during the national anthem at NFL football games. He said one of the main reasons he will not stand is because of America's past transgressions when it comes to race relations and his inability to forgive and forget. So I guess his ability to look at history and see how we have improved, even though there is more improvement to be made, and his ability to forgive is nonexistent. I'm not asking him to forget what has occurred in America but and asking him to think about all of the products we may ask how much more needs to be made in other parts of the world. I'm asking him to look at history and see that it was not just white men that participated in the slave trade. Is he unwilling to forgive his black ancestors in Africa that sold the slaves to white European males? Is he unwilling to forgive the Muslims who enslaved people of all ethnicities, religions, etc.? Or does he even know about the full history of slavery in this world? Maybe not because the left wing is trying to erase all offensive history.

Nick Robertson, a reporter for CNN, said that Bowl Cut Jr. of North Korea will not enter into any agreement with the United States because he doesn't trust us after what we did to Mohamer Qaddafi of Libya. In Robertson's opinion Kin Yung Un believes that Qaddafi did everything the United States asked yet we still had him killed. Or in the alternative he was killed by his own people and we stood by and watched not living up to the perception that we were going to protect him. So North Korea won't give up their weapons and become peaceful because he believes that we will allow at the very least his people to rise up and overthrow him. He enjoys a very lavish lifestyle and doesn't want to give it up. But you're also assuming that Bowl Cut Jr. thinks rationally. We have practice a policy of appeasement for 25 years and North Korea has never lived up to their end of the agreements. The ultimate endgame has to be to remove the dictator from power in North Korea. Because as long as he lives there and has complete control over his people they will never rise up. The difference between North Korea and Libya, the biggest difference, is that the people of Libya had contact with the outside world the people of North Korea have very little idea what the rest of the world is like and don't know anything about freedom. Besides, Kim could take his wealth and find refuge in another country and let the lifestyle he wants. It's been done before Nick, check your history.

27Jul/170

This is the world in which we live

I was listening to Mike & Mike on ESPN radio Thursday morning. They were talking about Atlanta Falcons' wide receiver Julio Jones. Jones is in the news because he lost an earring. Apparently not just any earring either. It was a diamond earring worth $100-150,000. Jones at first said $150K then later reports said $100K. It doesn't matter, it's an expensive earring. Just one earring by the way; not a set.

For me, there are two aspects to this story; first that Julio Jones, one of the best receivers in the NFL is going to be the poster child in upcoming rookie camps when they begin talking about managing your money. I'm not going to look up the stats but we've talked about it before; something like 70% of NFL players are broke within 5 years of leaving the league. Certainly while we focus on the high profile players that make tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, there are a lot more who make several hundred thousand a year. Either way their take home pay isn't as much as you think, after paying their agent and advisors, then federal and state taxes, they are hit for as much as 50% of their check or more.

But I don't care how much you make, if you are spending $100-150,000 on a SINGLE EARRING, something tells me you are not making smart financial decisions that will ensure you have an income in future years. And how much do you want to bet that he didn't have a rider on his insurance policy specifically covering his high dollar jewelry? So now he's out at least $100K not to mention the cost of hiring a dive team to try and find it. He lost the bling while riding a jet ski. Not sure how he expected a dive team to find a tiny earring on a lake/river bottom, but hey, it's his money.

The second point and the one that's more disturbing to me is what Mike Golic & Mike Greenberg said about the incident. They wondered if someone on the dive team actually found the earring and decided to keep it. They also discussed what they would do with the earring if they had found it, knowing full well to whom the jewelry belonged. Both of them opined that they would not only be very tempted to keep the earring and sell it, which most of us probably would ponder that thought. But they both said they would likely keep the earring. Additionally they both said they wouldn't begrudge anyone keeping the earring especially if it would help them pay their bills or if it would improve their lives. Really?!

Mike & Mike acknowledged that keeping the earring would be tantamount to theft, which is correct. But to them, like most liberals, you have to look deeper than just the act and have to look at the motivation. So just like those who support illegal immigration, or James Comey saying Hillary's intent wasn't to break the law, if your heart or motives are pure, then do what you'd like. Unless of course you are a conservative and then if you even jaywalk, you should be hung.

I believe, maybe naively, but I believe the vast majority of citizens would return the earring and condemn anyone who kept it. Even if that's not true, one this is true; our society has fallen so far when we think it's OK to steal from someone just because that person is successful. Never mind all the hard work; never mind the market determined that person's skills were worth the money; never mind that the wealth accumulated by that person creates jobs for others; it's OK to steal from them or charge them more. It's OK to hate them as well.

A society cannot sustain positive growth without collective moral standards that strive to treat all equally; that hold members accountable for their actions, no matter their status in the hierarchy we've created. History has shown us the consequences when we lose our collective morality, when we become lazy, when we erase consequences for anyone. Because you see, God or nature or whatever force you believe runs the universe doesn't lose it's moral compass and will hold us accountable for our actions, whether we do or not.

11Jul/170

Bowl Cut is gaining ground

North Korea has been developing both nuclear weapons and missiles for a long time, with help from China and Russia; but also with the assistance of the United States and its allies. This latest test should worry not only South Korea, Japan, Australia, but the U.S. as well. The missile flew higher and further than any other North Korean missile had as of yet.

The missile, a Hwasong 14 flew far enough to reach Alaska but according to a number of independent intelligence agencies, the missile could be capable of flying over 6000 miles. That would mean it could reach the west coast of the United States. Now while most of us wouldn't mind seeing California's crazy liberals fall off the face of the Earth, we want to be responsible for it; not North Korea. The reason many analysts are concerned is that normally North Korea doesn't test the full capability of it's missiles, neither does any other country for that matter, at least not right away. So if they stick to what they've done in the past, experts think Best Korea's Hwasong could be capable of reaching the mainland. It definitely can reach Alaska and it flew higher than anyone thought it could fly. Bonus: it's also capable of carrying a nuclear warhead!

Is anyone surprised? You shouldn't be. Going back at least to Bill Clinton's presidency, we have continually made agreements with Bowl Cut and before him, his dad to provide them with coal, fuel oil, food and even building generating plants, in exchange for their promise to scrap their missile and nuclear weapons programs. Which not only never happened but Best Korea never even slowed down their development. In fact, they sold much of what we sent to them in order to fund their weapons programs. Talk about ignoring history. And now American's might lose their lives because of it; but that's happened before, hasn't it?

To make matters worse, President Barrack Hussein Obama scrapped our ICBM missile defense systems in order to appease Russia and other countries; proving that we were not a threat to them and we wanted to live in harmony. We still have some short range missile defense programs which work very well. In fact the system in Alaska was tested earlier this week and shot down several short range, low flying missiles. They are now 14-0 in that department. But this system can be used against any ICBM missiles that not only North Korea possesses but those held by China, Russia, Iran... thanks Obama. There's your real legacy.

10Jul/170

Quick hits: where would you like to visit but not live?

I was listening to a radio show and the topic was about travel. The question came up, "where's a place you love to visit but would never want to live there?" It's an interesting question and many of the answers were fairly obvious, New York City, several places in Europe, Mexico and other Central American countries and so on. but one caller had a very unique answer that embarrassed the host but also made the host laugh uncontrollably. This gentleman's answer was, "a vagina". you can completely understand that if you are a guy.

Speaking of listening to radio shows, I was listening to one of the music channels on XM radio and the host was interviewing a band from Europe who had just released a new album and was beginning their first tour in the United States. One of the first questions to the lead singer was where are you from? He said Amsterdam. Not being a radio host myself I understand wanting to make a connection with your guest because it makes for more interesting radio and this host was no different. He said excitedly that he loved Amsterdam and had visited there, especially enjoying their attitudes towards marijuana and prostitution. Unfortunately that did not sit well with this guest. He was indignant and said all Americans are alike when it comes to visiting Amsterdam, all they care about our hookers and weed. He said there is much more to Amsterdam then hookers and weed. The host tried to save the interview but this rock singer continued to denigrate Americans and their stereo typical opinion of Amsterdam. The host finally shot back asking him what's so great about Amsterdam besides those things, is that the transit system that would prompt me to visit Amsterdam? What other attractions are there? The guest said the transit system is pretty good. The host shot back, yet the best thing about that is it takes you to the hookers and the weed. Interview over. That's good radio.

When did we have to start putting up so many warning signs and attaching so many warning labels? I have talked about it before, one of the biggest reasons is the lawsuits from the ambulance chasing attorneys. I've been staying in a hotel for a few days and going up and down the stairs I noticed at every landing there is a sign that says, "caution; slippery when wet". Who doesn't know that floors or stairs become slippery when there's water on them? But again somebody somewhere got sued and now businesses have to spend money on things like this. But it also got me to thinking it's not just the lawyers to blame it's also our education system. Think about this; at some point a mud sucking, bottom feeding attorney had to convince a jury that not only was his client a complete moron, because he didn't understand that stairs are slippery when wet, but the attorney had to convince the jury that most of our population are complete morons who need to be protected from just about everything. You have to blame our education system and our parenting styles for that. That jury and subsequent juries had to believe that most people are not capable of learning after watching someone slip or slipping themselves on its service like that. I'm just saying.

True bravery: what is it? You might say fighting in a war or overcoming your biggest fears but I have another definition for you. Think about a husband arriving home after a long boys night out, especially if his wife wasn't happy with him going out. He walks through the door and she begins yelling at him and beating him with a broom handle. True bravery is the husband still having the backbone to ask, "are you cleaning the house or flying somewhere?"

Watching another riot at the G 20 summit in Hamburg Germany and I started wondering, how is it that these people believe throwing rocks, destroying property, and attacking police are going to bring about peace?

27Jun/170

Let’s get real, John was right

With the left it is always about identity politics. They are the ones that continually put labels on someone and they are the ones who framed every discussion about some identity. The latest victim of the smear campaign is John McEnroe who is under fire by the left, at least some of the left, for saying that Serena Williams would be ranked number 700 in the world if she played the men’s tennis tour full-time.

Now let’s put this in context; McEnroe was appearing on an NPR show to promote his latest book. I believe the host’s name was Lulu Navarro Garcia. The topic turned to Serena Williams and her place in history. McEnroe said she is the greatest female tennis player ever, bar none. Navarro Garcia asked why he felt it necessary to qualify her as the greatest female player in the world and not just the greatest tennis player. McEnroe replied quite simply, she’s not the greatest tennis player in the world.

McEnroe said that he was not trying to take away from Serena and that on any given day she might be able to be some of the best men’s players in the world. However if she were to play the men’s circuit full time she might be ranked like number 700 and the world simply because it’s a different game. He went on to point out that no female in any sport could be consistently successful in the men’s version of that sport.

What the WNBA champion stand a chance against the Golden State Warriors? Not even close. With the Connecticut lady Huskies be able to compete against the University of Kentucky or Duke men’s teams? No not a chance. In fact the most dominant team in women’s college basketball over the last 15 years probably could not beat a good Division II team. The best female golfers of all time have tried to compete on the men’s tour with little or no success. They certainly couldn’t compete for the win.

This is not to denigrate women’s sports but to point out, as Michael Willbon put it, women physically are not yet capable of competing over the long haul against men. At least not at the elite levels found in college sports and the professional ranks. Certainly there are examples of female athletes at the high school or lower levels competing with the male counterparts but we know from biology that women tend to develop more quickly physically than teenage boys do.

Even Serena agrees with John McEnroe. After hearing what McEnroe said in the interview Serena sent out a tweet asking McEnroe to leave her out of this. However a couple of years ago in an interview with David Letterman, Serena was asked if she could compete with or beat Andy Murray. Serena quickly answered, “no way.” She went on to say that it would last about 15 to 20 minutes and she would lose 6-0, 6-0. She did seem to infer that she might be able to beat a lower level player, maybe around number 100 or so, but she understood that even though she is a very strong, physical tennis player, the strong physical men’s players are bigger, faster, stronger and there are more of them.

Of course some of those in the femi-nazi crowd point to Billie Jean King beating Bobby Riggs back in the 1970s. Okay so she beat a 70-year-old man when she was the best women’s tennis player in the world. Could she have beaten John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, or any of the other top-ranked men’s players at the time? No.

There will come a time and maybe not in the very distant future that certain female athletes will compete on the same level as their male counterparts. Maybe it will come in the running sports or possibly even golf. I think we are also about to see the first female player in the NFL, it will be a kicker and not a position player but I think it will happen.

The bottom line is this, no matter what your gender or other demographic characteristic if you earn the position through your skills and abilities, then you should be allowed to play at the highest levels of your sport. Maybe the more appropriate discussion to have about Serena is whether or not she is the most dominant player in her sport as compared to the best players in other sports. I think that puts her into the discussion with Tiger Woods, Babe Ruth, Wilt Chamberlain, and others who dominated in their field of endeavor. Saying you are the best in your sport is a huge compliment and saying that you are the best female player in your sport is not denigrating to most people, only those who play identity politics with every facet of our lives.

19Jun/170

Colin Kapernik doesn't like the police. I think that's safe to say. He's made it very clear that he thinks police are targeting blacks when they want to shoot someone. He's jumped back into the fray once again after a not guilty verdict in the shooting of a black youth by a police office.

Minnesota Police officer Jeronmio Yanez was found not guilty on charges of second degree manslaughter and two counts of intentionally discharging a firearm that endangers safety. He was found guilty after a trial in which evidence was presented and a verdict was returned. But once again, the left believes they know better than the judge and the jury. I would be that most didn't even read about the evidence presented and don't really care about it since a non-black police officer shot a black youth. That's proof that he was guilty and is a racist in and of itself right?

Kaepernick tweeted out a picture showing two badges, one of which said "Runaway Slave Patrol" and the other was a generic police officer badge. Clearly he was saying that all police officers are essentially out to kill all black because they see them all as runaway slaves. The photo had the caption, "You can't ignore your history, Always remember who they are." He posted along with the photo the following statement: A system that perpetually condones the killing of people without consequence, doesn't need to be revised, it needs to be dismantled.

Again, he clearly knows better than the judge or jury that heard the evidence and returned a verdict based upon the standard of proof required and how that evidence did or did not meet the standard of proof. I don't know if there was evidence that was excluded or anything like that, but it doesn't matter to Kaepernick and his ilk because black people are, in their opinion, being killed by police simple because of the color of their skin. Police are nothing more than runaway slave units hell bent on returning blacks to some plantation in the south.

Guys like Dan Lebatard defended Kaepernik saying he was just reacting to a truth in society and that white people can't understand what it's like to be a black in today's America. That we must either sit back and accept what Kaepernick says because we are white and can't understand or that Kaepernick can't be criticized because we are white and he's black and his perception is his reality. BS.

We can assess the situation and see if police really are targeting blacks simple because of the color of their skin; shooting blacks simply because they escaped some plantation that we know nothing about. But let's look at history: wasn't it white people who looked at slavery in America and said, "we don't like that" and then did something about it? Wasn't it white people in America who said Jim Crow laws, segregation and legalized discrimination were wrong and did something about it? That doesn't seem like a group of people who just threw up their hands and said "we can't do anything about this problem or that we don't even see a problem."

No, if we analyzed the evidence and thought that police were targeting black people without due cause, we would do something about it. But we don't see that because it's not happening. Simple saying that more blacks are shot than whites isn't good enough. Liberal policies have kept more blacks in poverty and put them in situations where they feel like they don't have any other choice but to engage in criminal activities which makes it more likely they will get shot during the commission of a crime.

And when we do see that officers overstepped their bounds, they are usually convicted of crimes. If the system miscarries justice, which happens, we are outraged and try to fix the system so that it doesn't happen again. That's what we do as Americans, whether we are white, black, brown etc.

22May/170

Diversity of opinion? Really?

It never ends. Democrats on the Senate finance committee were hearing testimony about tax reform proposals and thought there were some very good ideas from the five people who testified. However every one of them said that was not enough ethnic diversity among the five witnesses. One senator said there were not enough African-Americans, Asians, Latinos, or women on the witness list. The same senator said that he thought there were some very good ideas spanning some broad viewpoints. But then immediately said that because of the lack of diversity in the ethnic and gender areas of the witness list that there really was not true diversity of opinion.

So once again the liberals are showing you what they truly believe as opposed to what they say. Those senators believe that if you have a certain skin color or gender that you must agree on every issue. They don’t really want a diversity of opinion they just want to look at the panel and say there are people that look different so there must be diversity. Never mind that Maxine Waters and Condoleezza Rice, both African-American females, hold philosophically diverse opinions on almost every issue. Never mind that George Soros and Arthur Laffer hold significantly different viewpoints on economic issues. Yet both are white men. Apparently words don’t mean anything it’s only the demographic characteristic that’s important.

Here are a couple of facts about this situation: the Democrats had equal input into the witness list and who could be called to give testimony. If they had truly wanted to see ethnic or gender diversity, they could have provided it. However once again they manipulated the situation so they could grandstand during their opportunities to speak. This was organized prior to the hearing by the Democrats to try and embarrass the Republican majority.

Let’s not forget that tax reform will benefit all of us, regardless of the color of our skin, or sexual orientation, or gender. I have not seen anyone put forth a tax reform bill that provides benefits only to certain that is that these or other demographic groups. It’s all based upon income without regard for any demographic characteristic.

While we are at it, let’s talk about this whole identity politics movement. We as a country and a society have made a great deal of progress in civil rights over the past 50 years fighting primarily against the Democrat party who have tried to stall the march towards equality. Remember it was them who put in place all of the Jim Crow laws and other laws that promoted and allowed segregation and racism. Why aren’t the people pushing for a quality celebrating how far we have come as opposed to continuing with this victim mentality?

And if we really have not made progress as they claim, we have been following their tactics and their plan to achieve racial equality for three or more decades. If it’s not working then let’s try something new to improve the status of race relations and the standing of minorities in America. Once again it just shows you that it’s more about having power as opposed to achieving a true goal.

15Mar/170

Poor little snowflakes

our society is not doing a very good job of raising our children. Now this is a complicated issue that I'm going to blame parents not necessarily for doing the wrong thing in their day to day lives in raising their kids but allowing the government and especially our schools to not only indoctrinate our children but to raise a generation, probably multiple generations, of children who are afraid to do anything because they might get hurt: whether that be physically or emotionally.

Gold Ridge elementary school in Folsom, California is just the latest in a very long string of schools that is molly coddling our children. The school's principal sent home a letter recently telling parents that children will no longer be allowed to play tag on school time or property. So when recess comes around any child being caught playing tag will be disciplined; I'm sure that discipline will escalate each subsequent time a child is caught playing this dangerous game. And that's exactly the reason for them banning the game of tag from school grounds. It's too dangerous and children get hurt.

This comes not too long after the same school band touch football because, once again, children could get hurt. It's a dangerous dangerous game that could result not only in physical harm to children but if there are children who are not as physically gifted as others they can suffer emotional trauma as well. Maybe it's because they are getting picked last or maybe it's because they aren't given the football to run or throw or catch. What? Do they not have safe spaces?

So now what we are telling kids is that they should go back to their cell phones and play video games, text their friends, or search for Pokémon. What happened to the way we were raised? Is it any wonder that kids today are physically inept and more sickly than they used to be? Teachers used to tell us to go rub some dirt on it and get back in there. Sometimes it was a significant injury and they took us to the nurse but nobody freaked out over it by telling everyone else that you cannot play because one little snowflake got hurt.

I remember a time in elementary school, I think I was in the fourth grade and our outdoor basketball courts were built on a slope. That meant that one and had to be built up about 2 1/2 to 3 feet in order to make it level. One day I ran to Harvard and as I was about to fall off the raised and, I grabbed the pole that held the backboard it spun me around and as I fell I scratched my stomach from the belt line all the way up my chest. It was a nice scrape but there was really no bleeding. I do remember kind of losing my breath. The teacher on duty at the time came over pulled up my shirt saw that it was no big deal and told me to go back to playing basketball. When I got home I showed my mom and she had no problem with how it was handled. I'm sure many of you had similar situations that were dealt with the same way and guess what the world did not end.