God Bless Trayvon Martin

He Encountered Our Collective (Metaphorical) Enemy: Fear!

Justice Dakota

03/23/2012

Seventeen-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot dead in February 2012 in Sanford, Florida, by George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old "community security" volunteer who said he was acting in self-defense.

The only thing we know about this horrific incident is that an ostensibly good and decent young man was shot dead.

The nation grieves for the Martin family. We collectively send our thoughts and prayers to the Martin family. 

All parents in America (White, Hispanic, Black, Asian, Native American, or Other... ) -- all know that their child could have been Trayvon Martin.

Fear, stereo-types, bigotry -- (and did I mention fear) -- contribute to incomprehensible acts of violence.

My "arm-chair" analysis of what happened is as follows: Zimmerman was afraid of Martin, and that caused Martin to become afraid of Zimmerman. One of them had a gun, Zimmerman; and Martin, a good, decent, young man went home way too early!

Martin's tragic demise is illustrative of what is wrong in our society: Fear of "Others."
It's not always about race! It is usually about fear of different things!

Too many people are afraid of different acting, different looking, different speaking, different praying, different playing, different singing ... etc., people.

Those who fear different people cause different people to fear them (because they are different to them). Hence: conflict, wars, and needless killing of innocent children in the streets of America.

I feel compelled to offer a bit of subjective analysis based on my personal experience (for legal reasons, I will keep this as general as possible).

Over the years, I've noticed a tendency of people who have a gun, and a tiny bit of "security" or "protection" or "guarding" or "supervision" authority to, in general, display a little bit of a Napoleon Complex. They sometimes want to stir up trouble to prove the importance of their position or task.

These "security" people sometimes get bored with having authority never demonstrated. Some people like this, look for trouble. Their motive may not be intentionally bad, but they are motivated toward "positional" validation.

Nothing written or said eases the pain and suffering of Martin's family members.

I would like for everyone who knew, loved, and liked Trayvon to know that his killing, despite his innocent, normal trip to a store to buy some skittles, could potentially change an American societal paradigm that, for whatever reason, is increasingly based on fear of others.

Trayvon Martin could change America -- Help make us less fearful!

Also, those who have tiny amounts of authority and guns; people who happen to "feel" small, who are filled with fear. and who tend toward being control-freak, xenophobics --  (and individuals who have a Napoleon Complex) --  should learn how -- to sometimes -- just simply walk away. Their "Crystal Ball" is not science! When they pull the trigger, or simply display their gun, they do it with all the baggage they have carried with them for their entire lives.

Zimmerman could have simply walked away ... and let the police handle the situation ... He will have to deal with his decision to follow a young teenager for the rest of his life! 

Many times, these "enforcers" are not objectively killing a perceived threat -- they are subjectively shooting, or chasing, something they fear.

Fear sucks!

God Bless Trayvon Martin and his family!

Obama and Magic Carpets

Romney Defeats Obama if He Goes Back to the Future!

Justice Dakota

03/22/2012

President Barack Obama, either politically or ideologically, put all his eggs in the one basket of alternative energy. In a sense, Obama believes in a "magic carpet" approach to America's energy future.

President Obama's administration seems to indicate that with investment and research, America will soon, or in a generation, or in several generations, will dominate the world in alternative energy technology. This is a hopeful, wishful, potentially possible (yet possibly impossible), unproven approach to energy independence. It's a big gamble!

The problem is: if we don't invent the magic carpet, President Obama will do just fine -- future generations of Americans may be reduced to striking two pieces of coal together to make fire!

Has anyone considered that nations that are economically expanding and becoming more wealthy (China, India, Brazil ... dare I suggest Russia?) are aggressively pursuing oil and gas? And that nations that do not like to get dirt under their fingernails and are pursuing magic carpets (nations of Europe and the United States) are economically stagnating?

I will keep it simple: abundant, efficient energy creates national wealth (just ask Brazil). In America, national energy wealth improves the lives of each and every American. Energy from oil, coal, and gas is the ultimate egalitarian national model for universal economic prosperity. Oh, and by the way, pursuit of these energy resources creates a lot of jobs -- shovel-ready jobs!

What happens if President Obama's magic carpet does not fly? What happens to the standard of living for the average American?

Who would have ever thought that Canada, in terms of tapping national resource wealth, would lead and mentor the United States? When did Americans decide they wanted the United States to be a giant National Forest Preserve? As Donald Trump likes to say, "The rest of the world is laughing at us because we are so stupid."

People hate numbers so I will make this short: Estimated U.S. oil shale reserves total an astonishing 1.5 trillion barrels of oil – or more than five times the stated reserves of Saudi Arabia. Most of the nation’s oil shale reserves rest under the control of the U.S. government – a legacy of a 95-year old Congressional Act.

In an effort not to over-simplify the issue, oil shale extraction is more expensive and requires more sophisticated technology (technology we have). Canadian Tar-Sand oil is more expensive and required enhanced technology. The Canadians did it, why can't we?

Does Obama hate oil and love magic carpets? He killed the Keystone Oil Pipeline. He recently toured a solar company that employs about five people, and he is still trying to articulate why the federally subsidized (around $500 million) Solyndra solar company failed.

Governor Romney, if you hear me: You defeat President Obama if you "Go Canada on him!" You need to go back to the future!

America is blessed with almost unlimited natural energy resources. That means jobs, wealth, and an increased standard of living for every single American -- almost immediately! Tax that energy a little bit to fund the potential for magic carpets in the future (plus double down on the national debt with all that wealth-creation).

Romney, my man, that is the "Game Changer" for you!

I've Never Met a Real Conservative!

{At One Time Ted Haggard Was Considered a "Real Conservative"}

Justice Dakota

03/21/2012

I, and most rational people, have always known Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senator Rick Santorum had no chance at the Republican Nomination for President of the United States.

We know Santorum is a religious radical! Americans, in general, don't like Religious Radicals! So, Santorum is out. (The following video of a pastor in Louisiana introducing Santorum would make most Americans a little nervous).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2emBxDOY7g

Americans of all stripes can sense hate and intolerance. Americans (Democrats and Republicans) are especially uncomfortable when xenophobia comes from the pulpit or the political podium.

Newt was never serious. Worse yet, he is so severely flawed as a national candidate he has potentially embarrassed the Republican Party. He is now not even running for the Republican nomination -- he is running to prevent someone else from being nominated. Again, I am not a psychologist, but that suggests either anger, hate, bitterness, narcissistic personality disorder, or ego-mania as his primary motivation. Americans tend not to like loud-mouth, mean, know-it-all, angry, saboteurs. So, Newt's out!  

Famous radio and television conservative pundits called the Republican primary process wrong from the beginning. Their fetish for a mythical "Real Conservative (RC)" has become an obnoxious rant. They even attempt to falsify the history of the Presidency of Ronald Reagan in an attempt to convince us that there once was an actual RC Republican.

The American people (conservative, liberal, and independent) are generally not radically conservative or radically liberal. I know that those who make money by fanning the flames of extremism pretend to despise the moderate political cosmology (even while personally living by a moderate political ideology).

Every Conservative I know stutters and mumbles when asked about cutting or eliminating that particular federal program from which they benefit.

I know conservatives (who hated unemployment benefits) who lost their jobs who subsequently appreciated the "safety-net" of "unemployment checks."

I know Social Conservative, "Balance-the Budget," Tea-Party Republicans who work for the government who think it is outrageous when they don't receive an annual pay-raise or cost-of-living adjustment.

In several former government occupations, when I was surrounded by Social and Fiscal Conservatives, I would suggest to them that, because we were paid by the tax-payers, we should collectively request a reduction in pay, or at least request no increase in pay.

The Fiscal Conservatives accused me of being insane, and the Social Conservatives accused me of hating the Lord!

The problem with the "Real Conservative Movement (RCM)," is the same problem experienced by followers of myths and fables during their life-journey: when reality shows its Frowny-Face there are only three options:

1) simultaneously embrace and deny your own hypocrisy;

2) demonize others who behave the same way as you but who are not among your particular group;

or 3) admit that you don't give a poop about anyone but yourself while comforting yourself in the knowledge that the Lord picked you as his special, most favorite, internally-conflicted hypocrite.

In the political context, as in a "diet/food" context, "moderation," I believe, is associated with reason!
                            ______________________________________________

(P.S.:  In November 2006, a male alleged that Haggard had paid him to engage in sex with him for three years and had also purchased and used crystal methamphetamine. Eventually, Haggard acknowledged almost all of the allegations against him, including using meth.

Haggard's immediate response was denial. He told a Denver television station, "I did not have a homosexual relationship with a man in Denver . . . I am steady with my wife. I'm faithful to my wife." Haggard also said, "I have never done drugs--ever.")

Follow the Rules?

Newt, Santorum, Paul Supporters ... Would-Be Rule Breakers?

Justice Dakota

03/17/2012

Rightly or wrongly, I tell my children to follow the rules!

Senator Rick Santorum is talking about how Puerto-Rico Peeps should be required to speak English, and how he would like to prevent Professor Stephen Hawking from enjoying pornography and strip-clubs.

Speaker Newt Gingrich is talking about how he can become the Republican Presidential Nominee despite winning fewer states, receiving fewer popular votes, and being awarded fewer delegates than either Governor Mitt Romney or Santorum.

Newt wants to have a "60-day conversation" prior to the Republican Convention to, apparently, talk about Newt.

Congressman Ron Paul does not have a chance at the nomination; however, his supporters agree with Santorum and Gingrich who have indicated they want to have a "meeting" to discuss how each of them should be the Republican Nominee for President of the United States despite losing the National Republican Primary contest.

At some point, will Republicans demand that their votes count? Paul has won fewer votes and delegates than Newt; Newt has won fewer votes and delegates than Santorum; and Santorum has won fewer votes and delegates than Romney. So what are the "Losing Three" complaining about other than the fact that they are losing? (Note: Congressman Paul seems not to be complaining -- his followers do that for him).
 
Romney keeps amassing more votes and more delegates than his opponents. And, Romney is playing by the rules!

When did the Republican Presidential Primary process devolve into an "Emerging Nation" nomination process -- a process where power-hungry, narcissistic, ego-maniacs invent their own rules as they go because they care more about their personal power, wealth, fame, etc ... -- more than they care about the collective good of the country?

American Political Parties (historically) have attempted to enforce rules. (Are we a nation of men? Or, are we a nation of laws?)

Regarding the nomination of presidential candidates: Do the parties represent rules to be followed; or do they "Kiss the Ring" of the newest megalomaniac politician with a compelling personality disorder?

Try selling this model to a "Third-World" country!

(Guess what? Missouri is having a Caucus, "Beauty Contest," and a Delegate Election):

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/us/politics/in-missouri-the-gop-fight-for-delegates-enters-round-2-post-beauty-contest.html?_r=1

Does anyone really want to see Newt be the Master of Ceremonies (MC) at a "60-day Conversation" about his "Grand Ideas?" Is it becoming pathetic, and potentially anti-democratic and disrespectful, to every Republican who has voted for someone other than Newt or Santorum?

It is not cool for a political party to articulate a narrative that individual votes and pre-established rules of political competition should be discarded for "politicians of personality."

In reality, the country needs to get over religious bigotry, ad hominem attacks, Clowns, and "the cult of personality" if we are to ever have a chance at re-gaining our Political and Economic Super-Power status!

Santorum Always Blows it ...

When it Matters!

Justice Dakota

03/15/201

For a "Brief History of Time," almost like Stephen Hawking, I was thinking that I have been too hard on Social Conservatives ...

Side-Bar Alert!: Cambridge University reports that physicist Stephen Hawking, who goes to sex-clubs, admits that the professor has been to the sex club, but denies that he’s a frequent guest ...

For a brief second, I thought, the Real Conservative Movement (RCM) "Spear-Heads" of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and every "tool" who is trying to copy their 20-year-old, out-dated, bigoted, and ad hominem approach to political analysis had found "Reason ..."

Then, while doing research on unemployment; lagging American gross domestic product (GDP); American deficits and national debt issues; America's lack of a national (rational) energy policy; and, Peyton Manning's future career ... 

... About that particular time in history, I wanted to give the RCM and the Social Conservatives a break and allow them to freely  condemn someone for something  ... I wanted to lay off the RCM for a while ... but then ...

Then, I came across this ...  

By Steven Nelson
The Daily Caller

Associate Editor

03/14/2012

Internet pornography could conceivably become a thing of the past if Santorum is elected president.

The unapologetic social conservative, currently in second place behind Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination, has promised to crack down on the distribution of pornography if elected.

Santorum says on his website, “The Obama Administration has turned a blind eye to those who wish to preserve our culture from the scourge of pornography and has refused to enforce obscenity laws.”

If elected, he promises to “vigorously” enforce laws that “prohibit distribution of hardcore (obscene) pornography on the Internet, on cable/satellite TV, on hotel/motel TV, in retail shops and through the mail or by common carrier.”

Nice! Thanks, Rick! We had been focused on how to re-establish America as an economic and political Super-Power! But, if you want to think about Internet porn ... well, then ... uh ... good-luck ... weird?

By the way, Santorum ... check this out:

"Astrophysicist Stephen Hawking spends a lot of time talking about the universe and what it might all mean but when the former “Newton Chair” holder of Cambridge University isn’t talking to sold out crowds he can be seen spending his time in sex and strip clubs."

"The Daily Mail is reporting that the 70-year-old has visited various swinger clubs, sex clubs and strip clubs over the years including a Southern California swingers party which he was brought to by his nurses and assistants.

Whoa! I am Officially Freaked Out! Not by Stephen, but by Rick!

Americans Don't Like "Meanies"

Ad Hominem Attacks Will Re-Elect Obama!

Justice Dakota

03/15/2012

President of the United States (POTUS) Barack Obama, is really good. He may be the best campaigner ever. And, people like President Obama. I like President Obama -- and, if you are slightly open-minded, you probably like the POTUS as well (at a personal level).

President Obama is smart, articulate, young (for a President), cool (and, old-folks, please don't try to define "cool" -- you know it when you see it ...), attractive, healthy, active, and ostensibly a good husband and father.

As America's first black president, Obama is a historical figure above and beyond his role as POTUS. It's a big deal for a person who would have been considered a slave and three-fifths human in terms of representation in 1787 (The Three-Fifths Compromise is found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution) to become POTUS in 2009!

Americans know that Obama as President of the United States is a big deal. President Obama gives us a sense of pride by reminding us that we are collectively stitching a horrific, historic, national wound.

The contemporary political problem with POTUS is that he happens to be ideologically extremely left-wing, and he has governed during an exceptional period of American economic decline. From a policy standpoint, it is reasonable to argue that President Obama has contributed to America's economic decline.

However, because Obama is generally liked and respected, only Governor Mitt Romney, despite the current economic mess that must now be owned by Obama, has a chance to defeat him in 2012.

Romney (strategically or intuitively) knows Americans hate "Meanies." Is it possible that Romney's integrity, intelligence, and personal disposition will not allow him to engage in ad hominem attacks? 

Definition: Ad hominem

1. directed against a person rather than against his arguments

2. based on or appealing to emotion rather than reason

The Real Conservative Movement (RCM) which idolizes the Right-Wing Social Conservative Republican Primary voter, seems to worship the ad hominem attack. They love appealing to emotion (fear, mostly) as opposed to reason.

Apparently, Romney is the only Republican candidate for president who does not have a "political potty mouth." I for one appreciate his "Gentleman" approach toward his political adversaries.

Think about it: Social Conservatives in South Carolina loved Newt's barking at the press! They loved Newt's ad homenen attacks on President Obama and other Republican candidates. The audience responded like a crowd at a professional wresting match when Newt, as opposed to addressing a question regarding his second wife's allegation that Gingrich wanted an "open marriage," blamed the mainstream media for detracting from the issues.

But, wait a second: I thought Southern Social Conservatives cared about things like family values, non-traditional marriage arrangements, etc.?

Is it any wonder that Newt has only subsequently won one other state -- his adopted home state of Georgia where he does not live and was not born? Is anyone surprised that, but for his ego and/or narcissistic personality disorder he would have dropped out of the race after losing in Alabama and Mississippi?

Once the universe broadens beyond the Southern Social Conservative Republican Primary voter, ad hominem attacks appear desperate, mean, irrational, and are not politically effective.

Without having conducted a poll, I suspect average women voters are particularly offended by ad hominem attacks (maybe they have been on the receiving end of such attacks more than most?)

Senator Rick Santorum, in 2007, went ad hominem on Romney's religion. Santorum wrote: "Would the potential attraction to Mormonism by simply having a Mormon in the White House threaten traditional Christianity by leading more Americans to a church that some Christians believe misleadingly calls itself Christian, is an active missionary church, and a dangerous cult?"

Santorum's next paragraph began: "Assume for the sake of argument that there are valid considerations (to the comments noted above)."

Santorum, in his article, drew distinctions between Mormonism and Christianity. Referring to Romney's "Freedom of Religion Speech," Santorum wrote: "He tried to address the questions by discussing Jesus, suggesting that the specific theological tenets of Mormonism are not in any important respect different from those of traditional Christianity. I disagree."

Very, very slick ad hominem attacks by Santorum. A clever, but obvious attempt to bring religious bigotry into the Presidential Campaign. Again, proving (or at least suggesting) that only Romney has the personal attributes (he's not a "meanie") to successfully compete against President Obama in 2012.

What is a Bigot?

A Bigot:

Justice Dakota

03/13/2012

1) A person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

2) A person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

I have a Republican friend who is educated who thinks President Obama is a Muslim Communist. He has indicated that this particular view is shared by many in his Baptist Church Congregation. Whoa!

Oh, and my Republican friend thinks Mormons are cult members -- Wow!? What will he do in November 2012? Muslim Communist versus Cultist? His delimna got me thinking, "It must really suck to be a bigot!" Or, does being a bigot somehow make life more organized?

So I did a little research:

45-percent of voters in Mississippi and Alabama believe Obama is a Muslim, while only 14 percent correctly identified Obama as a Christian (President Obama attends Evergreen Chapel at Camp David, the same church former president George W. Bush attended during his time at the White House).

While researching Religious Social Conservatives, I read a bigoted comment made by the Evangelical pastor Robert Jeffres, a Governor Rick Perry supporter: Pastor Jeffres strongly implied in his introduction at the 2012 Values Voters Conference that Evangelicals would have a choice between a non-Christian ‘good man’ (Romney) and a ‘born-again Christian (Perry).’

In later comments, Jeffres explicitly called Mitt Romney a “non-Christian” and termed Mormonism “a cult.” Nice!

Even though my posts are intended to be political in nature, it occurred to me that we may have a presidential election where a sizable percentage of religious bigots will "infect" the political process.

What happens in the mind of a religious bigot when they perceive the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election a battle between The Boogy-Man and the Demon hiding under their bed?   

I discovered something not-so-interesting: Christians can be divided into two groups when it comes to the age of the Universe:

One group is the young-earth creationists, who take a literal interpretation of Genesis and believe the Earth is around 6,000 years old based on Biblical genealogies.

The other group is the old-earth creationists, who accept the scientific evidence that points to the Earth being approximately 4.5 billion years old because they don't interpret Genesis literally.

Question: If one or the other group of Christians noted above is intolerant toward the other group, then are Christians bigoted against themselves? Mind-Freak Alert! Mind-Freak Alert!

Then, throw into that anti-intellectual spiritual mess: anti-Mormonism, anti-Catholicism, anti-Amish (yes, even the Amish are hated by some), anti-Lutheran, anti-Muslim, anti-Jewish, anti-Buddhism, anti-Hinduism, anti-ME, anti-YOU, anti-secularism, anti-Auntie, anti-Freaking Everything ... Please, bigots, just stop! For the love of God -- just stop being bigots!! 

Not that science matters to religious bigots, but I feel it only responsible to offer the following:

"The scientific consensus, supported by a 2006 statement by 68 national and international science academies, is that it is evidence-based fact derived from observations and experiments in multiple scientific disciplines that the universe has existed for around 13 billion years, that the Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago with life first appearing at least 2.5 billion years ago."

Romney is Mormon! It's okay. President Obama is what he says he is -- a Christian, Very, Very Liberal, Democrat. It's okay.

Lets do politics and avoid religious bigotry. There was a reason our Founders feared the combination of religion and politics. It makes everyone HATE!