The Changing Face of America: The New Demographics

America is changing. Rapidly. When the Pilgrims first celebrated what we now call "Thanksgiving" in 1623, the land was populated by indigenous people. The Pilgrims were just a tiny handful of English settlers. Further to the south there were small Spanish settlements, but that was about it. The French and Dutch were just starting to eye this "New World" for a piece of the pie. By 1800, America as it was now known had grown in size and population, but it was still mostly Western Europeans along with African slaves who had been brought over by English, Portuguese, Dutch, Italian, and Spanish explorers and traders.

By the turn of the 20th Century, the native population had been mostly killed off or confined to "reservations". So much for "civilization". America was overwhelming European; 98% by most estimates. They came from everywhere. There was a growing but still small population of Asians (mainly from China) and Hispanics, plus a burgeoning black population. By the start of WWII in 1939, America remained a dominant "European" country. By the 1950's, America represented nearly every population on the planet. By the 1970's all this began to change.

Birth rates among whites began dropping off following the end of WWII in 1945. Meanwhile the black population continued to grow along with rising Hispanic and Asian populations. However, the overall demographics of the country largely remained intact, but for those watching the trends, the eventual outcome was obvious. America would, within half a century or so, cease to be a predominantly European based nation, and with it perhaps begin losing its Western appearance.

Whites would still dominate but as their numbers declined they would reach a point where they were simply a large minority whose political, social, and economic influence wouldn't be as it once was. Most estimates put the tipping point around 2050. However, those estimates didn't anticipate the mass influx coming illegally or the infusion from developing or second tier nations.

It didn't take into consideration either the invasion and collapse of Europe by so-called "migrants" from Africa and the Middle East (many not coming from war impacted countries), nor did it consider the potential conflicts the diversity of religions and ethnic groups with differing values and traditions would bring. Perhaps the most damning factor was that America had previously been a "melting pot" nation, where each immigrant brought their own experiences and values and added to everyone else's with the goal of becoming an integrated "American" and all that entailed.

It now appears that the estimated tipping point of 2050 was too optimistic. According to recent data, the tipping point may be closer to 2035...if not sooner, at least in terms of politics. For instance, while Hispanics have been the largest minority in terms of numbers, having surpassing blacks years before, blacks have outvoted Hispanics. However, it appears that Hispanics may now, for the first time ever, show up in larger numbers than blacks starting in 2020; 13.3% to 12.5% registration. Not that the impact will be all that different since both blacks and Hispanics tend to register and vote Democrat.
What may be most affected, however, are the issues since Hispanics will vote issues which most impact them, specifically on matters of immigration. Several states (most notably California and the western states) already have large Hispanic minorities or even majorities in some cities and towns. Many mostly "red" or Republican states among them. An increase in number could swing those states back to the blue column.

Another factor was the increase in immigration from Asia, principally Chinese. This has resulted in a major increase in Asian communities not just in places especially along the upper West Coast into places like Northern California, Oregon, Washington and Vancouver, British Columbia Canada where they are having the same impact as Hispanics are elsewhere. Again, like Hispanics and blacks, Asians tend to vote Democrat although as a group, they have increasingly registered as Independent.

Also, beginning in the 1960's, immigrants, legal or otherwise, were encouraged to keep their own identity; their own language, culture and values. Instead, we would find ways to adapt to them in order to make them feel more "comfortable" in their new homeland. The result was the creation of a multicultural nation rather than a integrated "melting pot", thus planting the seeds of a potential balkanized American future. Another factor, an ageing population, became a new issue.

Babyboomers, who range in age from 55 to 73, are no longer the largest segment of voters. Millennials are, and they lean mostly Left or even Far Left (much has already been written on their strong support of democratic socialism). As an aside, in a recent survey, Millennials, ages 23 to 38, were asked why they didn't support Hillary Clinton. Their answer? She wasn't socially liberal enough!

However, it's Generation Z, the follow up to the Millennials, who are the ones to watch. They are the most racially diverse of the cohorts, and likely to be one of the best educated (Millennials now hold that title). Nearly half--48%---are racial (including mixed race) or ethnic minorities. They are more likely to come from homes with single parents. They are also more likely than not to come from homes which have experienced some form of poverty and the least likely to own a home (many having been homeless at some point in their lives).

While most Millennials are college educated and earning record incomes, many describe themselves as "poor" due to crushing debt (college); many still live at home with their parents or grandparents. Gen Z, on the other hand, perhaps taking a cue from their elders, are concentrating on the low debt/high pay trade and craft jobs; many of which have critical shortages What's most interesting is that socially and politically, they lean further Left than their older siblings. If that trends holds, we will see two generations track to Left or even the Far Left, not including, of course, the remnants of the Silents, Babyboomers or Gen X.

In terms of voter registration, things are changing there too. Currently the largest political bloc are Independents, with approximately 38% followed by Democrats with 30% and the GOP bringing up the rear. Women tend to be the single largest bloc for the Democrats (mainly due to social issues) with 56% compared to 44% of men; white evangelicals make up the core of Republicans. While the majority of Silents, Babyboomers, and Generation X have clung to their partisan labels, Millennials have eschewed being labeled. Instead, they have opted to register as Independents by and large. The same to be holding true for Gen Z thus far.

Nevertheless,71% of Millennials, regardless of their political registrations, say they would prefer a third party (including an Independent) over either the GOP or Democratic parties. Broken down by race and gender, 80% of whites, 71% of Asians, 67% of Latino, and 65% of black males said they are over the two corporate owned parties. Meanwhile,73% of black females agreed along with 70% of white, 67% of Asian, and 61% of Latina women.

So, where does this leave us? In short, it means that the country most of us grew up with is fading rapidly. White voters are still expected to cast 74% of the ballots in 2020 with Hispanics, Asians, and black making up the remaining 25%, but that's down from the previous years. Going forward, that percentage will continue to decline as the number of minorities, particularly Hispanics and Asians, increase.

How much does this really matter? In terms of the overall complexion of America, not much. The two cohorts--the Millennials and Gen Z---will be increasingly comprised of minority races and mixed parentages. I guess that in that sense, America will remain a "melting pot". Historically speaking, today's Italians are not the same ancient Romans, nor are modern Greeks the same as their illustrious ancestors and neither are the Insular Celts of the UK. Time marches on, and so do people. In terms of the direction America will take, it matters a great deal.

In terms of age, the white population will have grayed due to the fact they had fewer replacement children going back to post WWII. The majority of young adults will be Hispanic or Asian while the black population will remain steady at around 13%. The largest population growth will be from immigrants. In fact, most Americans will be either immigrants themselves or the children or grandchildren of immigrants.

In 2018, 15% of Americans were 65 years old or older. By 2050, 1/5 of the population will be at least 65. Many will be disabled or in need of continual medical care. Currently there is about 33 workers for every American 85 years old and up. By 2050, there will be 13 workers for every America 85 and older. That will likely mean that taxes will dramatically increase to cover the costs while the overall level of care decreases.

Another factor to consider is the continuing decrease of the Mainstream Christian churches. Those churches which remain will likely be more mixed racially. Among Protestants, the Baptist church will be the strongest. Meanwhile, traditional Roman Catholic churches catering to the Hispanic community will thrive. We will also see an increase in mosques thanks to the increase in immigrants from Muslim countries and tendency to have large families. There will also be in increase in Buddhist and Hindu temples as well. But overall, most Americans will be secular or at least hold non-traditional beliefs.

From a political perspective, white evangelicals will remain central to the GOP while white Christians will become a small minority in the Democratic party, with most of its members will be secular or belonging to other religions.

Politically I think America will be very different. Some estimates show as many as 20 states will have majority non-white populations with perhaps another dozen or so have substantial minorities. Among these are the electoral rich states of California, New York, Illinois, Texas and Florida. If the present trends continue, Democrats could emerge as the defacto national party. Of course, the Democratic Party may be quite different from the one we currently have.

Millennials and Gen Z have repeatedly stated that the Democratic Party isn't liberal enough. Both show a strong support for some form of socialism. Also bear in mind that both groups strongly support a new third party and/or support for Independents (indeed, many are already registered as Independent and nationally, both parties are hemorrhaging members). Therefore, there may be some other political party or movement in place of either corporate controlled party. Who knows? Perhaps by 2050 the two demonian parties might the Greens and Libertarians!

As for the Republicans, they will have to either adopt a much more moderate or liberal attitude such as they had in Rockefeller Era or accept becoming a largely regional or local political party. Rigid conservatives and the Far Right will likely find themselves on the fringes and excluded from power.

As with most changes, especially of the type I've discussed, we can expect conflict across numerous lines, be it socially, economically (current data also indicates a much wider gulf between the working poor/chronic poor and the uber-wealthy), political, racial, immigrant versus citizen, rural versus urban, or along religious lines (especially if Muslim extremists attempt to impose Sharia law on non-Muslims along with their historical conflicts with Hindus and Buddhists as they have in other countries).

Come Thanksgiving in 2050, America and indeed the world will be as different to us as the one the Pilgrims celebrated in 1623 and world they left behind. America will no longer be a nation with either a racial or cultural majority. There will be larger populations of other religions than we've ever experienced before as a country. We will likely have two or even three primary languages. To survive as a nation, we will have to focus more than ever on what unites us or face internal conflict and the breakup of the United States.



6 demographic trends shaping the U.S. and world in 2019


Trends in Party Affiliation Among Demographic Groups

Millennial Poll: Strong majority want a third political party

America: This Is Your Future

America's Changing Religious Identity

Slipping Off the Mask of Identity Politics

We've all heard the terms---LGBQT Equality, Alt-Right, Black Nationalism, Senior Entitlements, Veteran Needs, and countless others. These are all examples of the latest trend on modern political landscape--- Identity Politics. In fact, identity politics can now be used to define issues germane solely to seniors, urban vs rural, education, culture, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, and so on.

There's really nothing new about identity politics. It's been around from almost the moment we started coming together to form villages, towns, and cities thousands of years ago. Mankind is tribal. We've always been tribal. We are hardwired to be tribal. Tribalism is what has protected us, provided for us, sheltered us, and enabled us to develop sub-specialties which led to the creation of economies and thus civilizations. Identity politics is our incarnation of tribalism.

The modern notion of tribalism or identity politics began in the early 1960's with the likes of King, Abernathy, Randolph, Young, Wilkins and the Civil Rights Movement they led which sought to create social and economic parity between the black community and white community. This later resulted in the creation of a competing parallel moment which sought to replace the white, mostly male, political, social and economic leadership with a black counterpart. In fact, in some cases, it sought to create a competing counterculture; a separate society which wanted instant change "by all means possible". This was the black nationalism of Huey Newton and Malcolm X. Nevertheless, the concept of modern identity politics was born.

The term itself is thought to have first emerged in 1977 as part of a political manifesto put out by Barbara Smith, one of the founders of a black Lesbian feminist group, the Combahee River Collective, which also had a strong Marxist bent to it. What's different is that today's version is more about the creation of a very narrow demographic which is focused on just a few issues for their own benefit at the expense of all other issues and groups.

Under Classical Marxism, the notion of identity politics was already well defined. It was the working class---the proletariat---against the bourgeoisie; that is, the owners and Capitalists. However, the objective was to change the social structure in order to benefit all not just the working class. Under National Socialism (aka "Nazism"), it was about removing one group---the Jews---and replacing them with another group---the "Aryans", and with it, creating a new social, economic, and political order.

Nowadays, it's not about changing the social order. It's about substituting one group for another so society itself doesn't change. Just one's place in it. The Far Left, as well as the Democratic Party, are often accused of promoting identity politics, both in terms of claiming solidarity with each group and sub-group's goals while at the same accusing Conservatives and the Republican Party of backing the Alt-Right or Alternative/Far Right, which is the politically correct term associated with "white nationalists", "white supremacists", "white nationalism" and others on the so-called Far Right (we are to believe this includes the Tea Party, pro-life, and those who are anti-illegal immigration or pro 2nd Amendment).

Of course, it should go without saying that there are those on the Right who maintain that the extreme Left and Democratic Party are trying to promise everything to everybody in order to cobble together a new political base which includes black and Hispanic nationalist groups like Black Lives Matter and La Raza, as well as those who have pro-Marxist or pro-socialist leaning, radical feminists, pro-choice, and pro-amnesty group along with those who'd like to restrict or prohibit gun ownership and stifle free speech. Even those like Antifa, which often behaves like the Fascist it says it opposes, are being courted.

Regardless of who accuses who of what, the end result has been a further division of this country by those who are solely interested in their own issues at the expense of everyone else. It's not like these groups are able to achieve any real political clout beyond the regular news cycle. Nevertheless, the corporate media makes them seem larger and more powerful than they actually are. The real special interest group, the moneyed powerbrokers, continue on with politics as usual.

These other groups do nothing more than serve as a distraction from what's really happening behind the scenes in Washington and on Wallstreet. We find ourselves fighting against each other on issues and causes which mean little or nothing. The identity politics of old may have organized around one segment of society, their ultimate objective was to transform society as a whole for the betterment of all; not to the exclusion of all as it is today.

It's time we take stock of what we have in common with each other and not in the manufactured differences which the media promotes. As long as we remain divided, we cannot focus on the crimes and violence being committed at home and abroad in our name. Only by coming together as unhyphenated Americans will we be able to address these modern day robber barons; the globalists who seek to undermine our national sovereignty, undercut our Bill of Rights, and usurp our Constitution.

We've become an Oligarchy. Power is in the hands of a ruling political class comprised of plutocrats and an elite clique of very powerful and wealthy CEOs. There is still time to take our country back and restore what we've lost, but the sands are quickly running out of our nation's hourglass. We're seeing our freedoms chipped away piecemeal. There's an invasion taking place in Europe and countless attempts to repeat the experience within our borders. Jobs, especially union jobs, are exported overseas, leaving many Americans scrambling to find ways to pay their bills and keep food on the table while taxes and public utility rates increase in order to pay for these unwelcome changes.

Even our children and grandchildren aren't safe. Through the inclusion that's identity politics, we have drag queens reading to our kids...in school libraries... about the normalcy and joys of gay relationships . Some have even been putting on excerpts from their routines! I couldn't care less about someone's sexual proclivities, but damn, should children be exposed to this stuff at such a young age? Others are trying to claim that pedophilia is normal; just another "sexual orientation" like any other. The hell it is!

Being called a "racist" is now justified if you, for instance, happen to disagree with someone of another race (this works only one way of course). It seems to be a handy little tool to get what you want or to get out of trouble. Reverse racism has become acceptable to the point where whites and even Asians are expected to feel ashamed of their racial and/or ethic heritage. There are even white females who feel that they're "obligated" to have sex with a minority male in order to "atone" for some mythical transgression of their ancestors. Shouldn't we simply focus on ending racism period? At one point, not that many years ago, racism had all but vanished.

There are those who seem indignant that the majority of Americans support protecting our borders, our national sovereignty or not using taxpayer money to support those here illegally. Those individuals talk about so-called "migration rights" as if a secure border is somehow a bad thing. There are religious organizations and church who think they're are exempt from federal laws concerning immigration; that we should "embrace" foreign languages, values, and traditions at the expense of our own. Even some cities and states believe they can ignore federal immigration laws with impunity, and still have the audacity to demand more federal dollars to cover the cost! This is yet another form of identity politics.

When it comes to religion, it's just as crazy. Under the facade of modern identity politics, Christians, as well as Jews, Hindus, and Buddhist, among others, are expected to curtail their religious practices so that one group doesn't feel "offended" or excluded. There are even LGBQT and feminists groups who support this when, in truth, that religion would murder the other two without a second thought because that's part of its guiding dogma. It would be their "religious duty"! Again, identity politics.

The irony (and humor) here is nearly overwhelming. It would be like "Hasidic Jews for Nazis" in 1934. Meanwhile, the US is attempting to impose "democracy" on a people who barely have any concept of democracy while attempting to gain control through military means of their natural resources.

We are under surveillance in some form or fashion nearly every moment of our lives (for our own protection we're told). We watch helplessly as wars and conflicts are orchestrated under the banner of "spreading democracy" or overthrowing some tyrant (which, as usually the case, we helped to install and whose usefulness has expired) while deals over the control of resources and assets are made in boardrooms and on Capitol Hill.

The United States was intended to be a unique experiment in the history of Mankind. It was to be a place where anyone from anywhere, regardless of their circumstances, including race, religion, or ethnic group could come and start over. All we asked was that you leave behind your past prejudices and hatreds; that you accepted our laws and values, and you did it legally. There was no room for hyphenated loyalties. You were an American or you weren't. Naturally, it helped if you spoke out language. Whatever you brought with you in terms of traditions and so forth was blended in with every other immigrant. It was called the "The Melting Pot", and it made us a great nation.

Today, we're told to embrace "multiculturalism"; where everyone could bring a piece of their home country with them, along with all its petty bias and hatreds. You could even bring a system of religious laws not compatible with democracy, and yet we're told to accept those differences as if nothing will ever happen. Identity politics once again. Of course, all we have to do is watch world news to see that's not true. The social and religious values are different; often brutally so. The work ethics is different. One society believes in hard work and self-improvement while the other believes in getting by off of others.

This is the other side of identity politics. It says that all societies have equal value and thus are fully compatible with ours; that no society is better than another. This doesn't encourage building a stronger society, but one which will result in a balkanized nation. Of course, by breaking us down into the smallest denominator, we're more controllable; more manageable, and if you're setting at the very top of the food chain and your goal is absolute control, then that's exactly what you want.

Veterans Day and Why it Should be Special

A repost from November 10, 2018

82 million. That's the number, give or take a few hundred thousand here or there. 82 million. Written out, it's just an eight and a two followed by six zeros. A really big number, but not overly impressive in a day and age where we talk about a Gross National Product (GDP) of $20.3 trillion dollars, or a national debt of $21.6 trillion dollars or a national revenue of $3.6 trillion dollars. But those are financial numbers; figures so large that it's hard for the average American to wrap their head around. However, the 82 million I mentioned, while smaller, is perhaps an even more significant number than the national debt or rate of unemployment or interest or whatever else.

So, just what is this 82 million that makes it so special? Simply this. It represents the number of American military personnel who've died in the defense of this country. It represents individual lives lost do to war and the anticipation of war. It represents individuals dreams, hopes, and aspirations lost forever. It represents lost smiles, laughter, and conversations. It represents lost potentials; potentials which could have created jobs, make new discoveries, or cured diseases. The 82 million also represents the lost of fathers, brothers, sisters, sons, wives, and daughters, not to mention aunts and uncles. Its represents a lot of lonely days, nights, months, and years, and doesn't even begin to cover the number of tears shed for each one of those lives. The sad or perhaps profound thing about that number is that it's only an approximation; a "best guess" since it doesn't cover those who suffered daily for years from the injuries suffered in war, either physically or mentally; individuals who died as a result of diseases, chemicals, or unsuccessful surgeries. It also doesn't include the disabled who, while alive, continue to suffer their entire life for service to this country.

Yes, it's true that they receive a modest amount of monetary compensation and somewhat reasonable medical care (varying greatly from medical facility to medical facility). In fact, thousands die annually just for waiting for medical care. A 2005 Veterans Affairs report from the Inspector General estimated that some 300,000 veterans died while waiting for medical care. At a single VA facility in Los Angeles, 100 former servicemen and women died while awaiting treatment...in 2017. That was 43% of those on the waiting list.

Auditors found that 82% of veterans waited a month or longer for an appointment, with the average wait time being three months. Given the ages and health condition of many of these veterans, that's simply longer than they have (almost 50% of all veterans are 75 or older). Worse is that incorrect or fraudulent record keeping have kept some veterans from seeking medical care from civilian doctors or treatment centers.

In the United States we have approximately 130,000 and 200,000 homeless veterans existing in the streets on any given night. According to the National Coalition for the Homeless, that represents in the area one quarter of all homeless individuals. While veterans comprise just of 1/3 of the total US population, homeless veterans comprise 43% of all homelessness. That figure doesn't cover those who are able to obtain short term temporary shelter. To make matters worse, the Veterans Administration predicts that at least 400,000 veterans will experience homelessness during the years.

Ninety seven percent of homeless veterans are men. 46% are 45 years of age or older with 41% being between the ages of 30 and 50. While just 3% of homeless veterans are women, they are more likely to be married and to suffer from some sort of mental illness. 46% are white males while 45% are black or Hispanic. 47% are Vietnam Era veterans; 15% are pre-Vietnam while 17% are post-Vietnam. 67% served three or more years in the military while 89% earned a Honorable Discharge. 85% have a high school diploma or GED compared to just 56% of the general population. Lastly, and more tellingly, 76% of all homeless veterans suffer from drug, alcohol, and/or mental illness; of these, many are unable to get or keep the help they need as a result. 18% of all adult suicides are a veteran.

In terms of general demographics, there are approximately 18.5 million veterans in the US today with three states, California, Texas, and Florida have over one million veterans each. 1.6 million of these are women. 6.7 million are Vietnam War veterans. 78% of all veterans are white, white 11.6% are black. 6.1% are Hispanic and 1.6% are Asian. 0.7% are Native American with the remainder being some other race. There are 4 million service connected disabled veterans (including yours truly).

Veterans Day grew out of Armistice Day which marked the end of World War One. Of the 4,743,826 Americans who served in that war, none are alive today. Of the 16 million US service personnel who served in World War II, only 496,000 remain (they are all in their 80's or older), and we're losing around 348 every day. Let that sink in for a minute or two. Those young men and women you see in those documentaries are all in their 80's and 90's. They were the "Greatest Generation" in every sense of the word, and yet we're losing them at a rate of just over 14 "heroes" (in my opinion) an hour...every single day.

Let's look at another interesting figure for a moment. There has been a few politicians of late calling for or encouraging violence while blaming the other side for not being "civil". The result has been a serious increase in acts of violence and intolerance of differing opinions. In some cases, there have been threats of physical harm (or death), acts of vandalism, mass shootings, and so forth. In short, the US is starting to look like the era just preceding the Civil War. In fact, historians and political scientists will tell you that American is more broadly and more deeply divided at any time since the late 1850's. We are being divided at every possible point while politicians and various faux groups are fanning the flames (thank you Citizens United). Do we really want that; another Civil War? I don't think so.

A lot of Americans don't realize that the Civil War (1861-1865) was the bloodiest war that the US has ever fought. The Korean war cost 36,516 American lives. The Vietnam War took 58,209. WWI claimed 116,516 souls, while WWII resulted in the deaths of 405,399 American servicemen and women. Yet, the American Civil War, which ended over 153 years ago, still holds the record with 620,000 died, not including those who died of disease or injury later, and we are still feeling ramifications from that war all these years later. We're suddenly seeing the destruction or defacing of monuments and memorials, the removal (and prohibition) of Confederate flags and symbols, as well as the dropping of mascots and changing of school names, streets, and the rewriting of American history all in the name of political correctness.

Why, after all these decades and all these generations is this happening? It wasn't an issue at the end of the war when feelings were running high. It wasn't an issue during Reconstruction. It wasn't an issue when the 13th Amendment was enacted. It wasn't an issue during the Spanish-American War, World War One, World War Two, the Korean War, or even Vietnam. It wasn't an issue during the Civil Rights Era, with the Freedom Riders or any of the great Civil Rights leaders, during the Watts riot or the Chicago Police Riot of 1969. It wasn't an issue during the latter 1960's or 1970's either. It wasn't even an issue during the mid 1970's and forced busing. In fact, by the late 1970's race relations were actually pretty decent overall.

The point, of course, is that these calls for violence, intolerance, restrictions on free speech (not everyone's, just certain groups and individuals), protests, vandalism, all organized and paid for by shadowy political organizations, the media, and various politicians, have the potential to ignite a war which would surpass the Civil War. Do we really want that? So far, the ideological Right and Center have been very quite while the far Left has been on "hate-fest". These are mostly naive young adults who are full of themselves and determined to impose their views and ideas on everyone else, even if it means various forms of domestic terrorism, all dressed in their black hoodies and hiding behind masks. Aren't they just the cutest?

The corporate owned media seems intent on encouraging them while downplaying or ignoring their actions. That doesn't mean the Right gets off scot-free. They too have been engaged in name calling like accusing the Left of trying to impose "socialism" or Communism which is utter nonsense. As anyone who's bothered to read a history book knows, "socialism" and Communism both prohibit Capitalism, with the rich usually murdered. Now, what do you think the chances of Wallstreet folding are? What do you think the chances of America's ruling financial elite suddenly and willingly giving up their wealth, the power, or their control are? Yeah, see my point?

At the same time, the Left likes to call President Trump "Hitler" or anyone on the Right (or whom they disagree with) for that matter a "Nazi", which is just as silly. They also accuse anyone they disagree with as being a "Fascist", yet they are the ones engaging in Brownshirt behavior. However, even if it were slightly true, then they wouldn't be any one of them not in prison, in a concentration camp, or simply stood up against a wall an shot. In short, they wouldn't be afforded the opportunity to peacefully protest or verbally attack anyone.

America is, as you know by now, an Oligarchy whose ruling elite are a small percentage of very wealthy individuals and corporations. Their goal is control pure and simple. They already control business, the media, the government, both political parties and their politicians. They use the US military as their personal enforcers to ensure governments and groups fully "cooperate" and that everyone remains on the Petrodollar which keeps the US economy afloat. What they need from us is chaos. They need to divide us every way possible and to create a situation to bad that we demand the government "do something", and trust me they will, but not in the way you hope or expect.

In truth, we are in a new war. Not quite a Marxist "class" war, or a race war. It's not a gender war, or one of religion, a war to subvert our laws, or even of "American" vs. "non-American". It's a war to fictionalize us at every step; to break our moors from family, Faith, community, ancestral, regional and even national pride until we have no one left to turn to but the State. The State will provide for us, protect us, educate us, nurture us, and even bury us. All is requires is our obedience and submission. To put it another way, the Left wing of the ruling Oligarchy wants to impose a softer and kinder form of Fascism with us becoming their serfs. The Right wing of the ruling Oligarchy wants to impose a more restrictive form of Fascism with us becoming their serfs. See the difference?

The war were engaged in now, whether we acknowledge it or not, is for the present and future of America; whether we return to a Constitutional Republic or continue down the road to some form of Fascism (for comparison, read up on the late Roman Republic). 82 million Americans gave their lives for our freedom. Countless others have given their minds and bodies. Many more struggle through their own private hell. We should honor them on more than just one or two days a year. We owe them this country and our freedom for all they've done. Don't let a handful of greedy individuals, politicians, and special interest groups take it away from them...or us.



IG report: 300,000 Veterans Died While Waiting for Health Care at VA

Inaccurate VA wait times preclude thousands of vets from getting outside care, probe finds


National Coalition for the Homeless: Homeless Veterans

National Coalition for Homeless Veteran: FAQ About Homeless Veterans

Let's Talk Race Relations

There's been a lot of talk of recent about race relations. Most it has come from the perspective of primarily the black community complaining about the decline in police and community relations as the number of violent incidents involving black youths and police officers increase (though related incidents such as protests, rioting, and looting are downplayed or ignored). There is also a lot of chatter about the Oscars and the fact that for the second year in a row, all of the nominees are white. Therefore, as a result, many entertainers---the majority of which are black but not all---intend to boycott the event, while there's anticipated to be several outbursts when the TV event airs live on February 28th. Other issues have been raised which has been given a racial twist; perhaps too many for the space I have, but hopefully we can at least touch on a few.

A discussion about race has often been seen as akin to skipping through a cow field. Despite the scenery, odds are pretty good that you're going to step on something and at the very least, there's going to a stink by the time you're done. As I stated above, much of the talk has originated from members of the black community while very little has come from whites, which gives the impression that whites either don't care or are supposed to just not say anything. So, with that in mind (along with the cow field analogy), let's take are shoes off and go for a stroll.

I grew up in the deep South during the 1960's while the Civil Rights movement raged all around me. I was interested in the movement,

though a bit puzzled too. When I was in the 6th Grade, I had a older black teacher---Mrs. Knight. I don't know much about her except that she seriously hated Republicans (more on that shortly). Where we lived was mostly a low income military oriented neighborhood; most everyone was either in the military or recently retired from it. Just a mile or so away was an area of town called "Sweetwater" which was predominately black and poor; dirt poor. My neighborhood and Sweetwater shared a common 7-11 Convenient store, so it wasn't uncommon to see blacks and whites standing in line together to buy lunchmeats, bread, chips or Icees. I also had several friends who happened to be black. In fact, most of my friends were poor---black and white, along with some middle class kids. Some were Irish or Italian Catholics, Protestants, Asian, Native American and even Hispanic (there were very few Hispanics there at the time). We all had fun, talked, played. and did the usual stuff kids do.

Throughout school in fact I had classmates who were a mixed lot. No one cared. No one refused to sit by or play with or talk to any of the other kids because of it. There was never any discrimination when we went to lunch or the restroom. Nothing. The only difference any of us noticed was that some got off at different bus stops or walked a little further than others. Now, Mrs. Knights was a bit different. I don't think it was that she didn't like white children. I just think she hated Republicans. Strange isn't it? We had a 5th/6th grade "Presidential Election". I wanted to be "Robert F Kennedy". I had been following his campaign and I just plain liked him. I remember staying up that fateful night in June and watching live as he gave his last speech in the Ambassador Ballroom before exiting to what would be his death. I had previously watched as he announced the death of Martin Luther King just a month before and all the subsequent riots just as I watched the murders at Kent State by the Ohio National Guard and the Chicago police riots during the Democrat Convention as well as the Weathermen, sit-ins, Anti-Vietnam War protests, SLA and Patty Hearst (little did I know then, but I would later serve on the security detail in her wedding) as the '60's morphed into the '70's. It was exciting and dangerous times and I was totally engrossed in all of it.

Anyway, with RFK assassinated, I was technically "out" of the race. However, when we later got around to the general election, I noticed no one had chosen Richard Nixon, so I did. Well, that didn't sit well with Mrs. Knight. She loudly proclaimed---repeatedly---that she wasn't going to have a "Republican in my classroom" (which naturally sealed the deal for me). Well, a lot happened and let's just say that Mrs. Knight was "invited" not to return the following year and I "won" the election. Throughout my life, I've had friends of all races, religions, ethnic groups and sexual orientation. It really never made any difference to me. I've always found that there's good and bad in every group. When I was in college, I took courses in diversity training and employment law. I spent, as part of my work career, being a employee representative. I would sometimes catch employers saying or doing something which I thought wasn't right, and I never hesitated in saying or doing something about it. Obviously, I didn't endear myself to management very often. I even served on public boards which represented predominantly black and/or poor residents as well as seniors, women and the handicapped. I always thought everyone was entitled to a fair and honest chance---until you prove me wrong.

I served on a two police related projects. One was police and community relations committee which arose from some incidents similar to Ferguson and Cleveland. The other was a police advisory board and a special merit review board. In both instances, I would hear first hand---without the media spin---about situations police officers, EMS or the fire department would engage in every day. Frankly, I don't know how they do it. I'd sit and listen as they recounted encounters---occasionally with terrible outcomes---and watched their expressions as they relived each moment; searching in their mind's eye at the same time whether there was something they could have done differently. I think I can safely say that none of these officers started out at the beginning of their shift with the thought that someone would be harmed by the time it was over.

I don't know what really happened in Ferguson, Staten Island, in that park in Cleveland or any of the other places. I've read the stories. I watched on TV. I saw the raw video footage (when available). I read the testimonies. Often, there is far more to what happened than what the media tells us (and remember the media is about ratings because ratings drive revenue and the media tends to report from a particular political perspective). Do I agree with the outcomes? Most of the time, yes, after I sorted through the available evidence, but on occasion, no I don't. One some occasions, the verdict is just wrong. I don't know if it's a cover-up, just an ill informed jury or review board with an agenda. But I can say this---when a police officer tells you to stop, you stop. When you're asked for information, you provide it without any lip. You don't act aggressively or start waving your arms around or acting like you're going to run. You keep your hands where the officer can see them. I've often heard that some parents---especially black and Hispanic---teach their children not to trust or respect the police.

Well, that's a good way to get your children into trouble down the road, if not worse. If you think you were treated badly, report them (get their name and/or badge number). Better yet, hire a lawyer. Yeah, you might lose, but at least you won't be in the morgue. On a related matter, I think it's a pretty stupid idea that if you feel the need to protest, to loot or burn down local businesses (not to mention cutting fire hoses or throwing rocks, bottles or Molotov cocktails at cops, EMS or the fire department). What's even stupider is expecting taxpayers to clean it up or prohibit businesses from not moving out, making the situation worse than it was before. Just plain ole stupid.

As for the Oscars---grow up. Just because all the nominees are white doesn't mean there's some conspiracy going on, especially in uber-liberal Hollywood of all places and not when the President of the Academy for Motion Picture Art and Sciences, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, is both female and black. It sounds to me like a bunch of spoiled kids not getting their way. Perhaps the reason there were no black nominees or black oriented pictures nominated was because no one turned in a performance that any of the randomly chosen Academy members who voted thought was worthy of a nomination. Maybe there weren't any pictures which were of sufficient quality compared to the others which were nominated. Ever think about that? Are we now supposed to have a quota system of nominees based on race and/or gender instead of performance or quality?

Listen, there are the BET Awards and Miss Black America Pageant and I'm willing to bet no white, Asian, or Hispanic was either nominated or won...ever. There is the Hispanic Choice Awards, arts and entertainment awards program for Hispanics, as well as a "Miss Latina" beauty pageant and I'm pretty certain no Asian or non-Hispanic person received an award or even a nomination! By the way, there is also a "Miss Asian American" and a "Miss Native American" beauty pageant too. There is a Black Achievers and a Hispanic Heritage Award programs as well as a Black Heritage Month and a Hispanic Month (sorry Asians and Native Americans, no month for you...yet). In fact, there are television and radio shows and networks as well as movies dedicated to Asians, blacks, and Hispanics only. There are magazines and Internet sites dedicated to practically every group out there. The Grammys are open to every group and every group has won at some point. There is even a special category for primarily a black/urban/Rap genre. There are special categories for Latin music, but not one dedicated for white, Asian, or Native American performers. There are numerous professional or social organizations and associations available for the LGBT community, for Asians and Hispanics, as well as for Native Americans and blacks. There are grants and funds available for practically every group as well. However, there is one overarching exception to all this...whites.

Whites are the only group which are not allowed to be self-represented. In the past, it was argued, that was because whites were a racial majority or that they held key positions, therefore special hiring quotas were put in place, which later applied to women as well because they were a minority. Perhaps that was a good thing since it served notice that individuals could not be kept out because of the race, gender or other factors including sexual orientation or religion. However, it didn't always ensure the best candidate was hired or was awarded the government contract.

Nowadays, of course, whites aren't a majority. They are close to being on par with Hispanics. Within the next 20 years, Hispanics will hold a slight majority. Meanwhile, blacks are now the third largest racial group in the US (behind Hispanics) with Asians closing in. In fact, white males are an official minority while women make up a significant presence in the workplace---47%---though they still lag behind in certain fields such as science, mathematics, and engineering (and women still---despite various laws--- are not paid equal to their male counterparts regardless of race and still lack many of the key leadership positions in business). So, where was the outcry from the Hollywood types for the lack of Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans that weren't nominated? I don't recall seeing any of their faces. Did you?

The point I'm making here is threefold. I couldn't begin to care less if one group has its own awards or radio and television networks. It doesn't impress me that there is a specific music or movie genre dedicated to a particular group, or even if there are associations and funding aimed to benefit a specific minority. I don't even care if everyone has their own beauty pageant! However, if you're going to allow one (or more) to have them, then you need to allow all to have them. There are events where everyone participates, but there are equivalent events which by their nature discriminates legally, but everyone has been conditioned to say and do nothing. It's almost common to hear whites called "racist" (like the Oscars or political talk shows for example) or there's a disagreement of opinion (sort of like saying "and your momma too". Same goes for "white privilege"). So, let's quit with the double standard when it comes to race and calling people "racist" or claiming "privilege" just because you didn't get your way or someone disagrees with you. We're either all equal or we're all "entitled" equally.

Secondly, you can dislike cops or the legal system all you want, but when you're told not to do or to do something law enforcement (and EMS or the fire department) or a judge, simply do as you're asked and keep quiet unless you're asked for information. Pay attention to what's going on around you. Keep your hands where they are visible and no exaggerated movements. While we're at, if you don't like your prospects, then instead of blaming society or others, try paying attention while you're in school.

I've heard too much about certain minorities harassing, bullying, or beating up fellow minority students because doing well in school is viewed by these losers as "acting white" or "trying to be white" as if failing in life is some commendable achievement to be proud of. Get a good education while you can, especially if it's free. If you're out of school and things aren't working out, consider going back and making a change with your life. Remember, you get only one chance at this life. This isn't a dress rehearsal. Education is still the best path to a better and healthier life, and there's no better revenge than living well.

Lastly, there really are no real differences between people except how they present themselves and how they treat others. If you act like a thug or jerk, odds are pretty good that's how people will perceive you and that's how they'll treat you. If you treat people like they're different, there's a pretty good that's how people will start to act. Everyone deserves the same equal chance to prove themselves, be it as a neighbor, employee/employer, or as a friend. It's up to them what they do with that chance.


United States Department of Labor, Women's Bureau
http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/Qf-laborforce-10.htm


The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education
http://www.jbhe.com/features/65_gradrates.html


Bullying Bruises Grades for Black and Latino Students
http://www.livescience.com/15694-bullying-black-latino-grades.html


A Neutral Look at Police Brutality
http://graphs.net/police-brutality-statistics.html


The Justice Blog: Police Violence and Race
https://systemicjusticeblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/perceptions-of-race/


Who's Boycotting the Oscars So Far
http://www.thewrap.com/whos-boycotting-oscars-so-far-and-whos-just-mad-photos/

Ferguson Missouri: A Tragedy in the American Heartland

I'm not going to pretend I understand what's going on in Ferguson Missouri or that I've got a handle on what took place like the corporate media's talking heads are doing. Even the local authorities don't seem to have all the facts in yet, or if they do, they're keeping them close to their Kevlar vests. Before August 8th, all I knew about Ferguson Missouri was that it was the hometown of aviation great and WWII hero, Jimmie Doolittle. What apparently happened on August 8th, and I emphasize the word apparently, is that Officer Darren Wilson saw two black males walking down the middle of the street, stopped and told them to get on the sidewalk. Either one or both of the males smarted off to the officer and the exchange quickly became heated, and ultimately lead to a scuffle with one of the young men, Michael Brown, and the officer. At some point during the tussle, an attempt to take the officer's service weapon was made; the officer, however, was able to retain control of the weapon and fired several shots. After that point, events become confusing.

Brown may have turned to run before being shot or he may have backed off, was shot, turned to run then stopped and dropped to his knees with his hands raised and was shot (perhaps again). Or it have been some combination. There were apparently two witnesses whose stories don't quite jive. What wasn't, however, known, at the time by Officer Darren Wilson, is that Michael Brown and perhaps the other individual had just robbed a convenient store (which appears to be supported by surveillance video), however, it seems that others in the neighborhood not only knew about the robbery and who was involved, but what was actually stolen! What Brown didn't know was that the police officer who stopped him was unaware at the time of the robbery. Therefore, that may explain his actions, at least in part (however, it would have been a whole lot smarter to have played it cool and been exceedingly polite to the officer just in case he didn't know, but evidently Brown though it was better to act aggressively). Now, that's enough of the back story as I'm going to get into at this point because what I'm most interested in is what happened next.

From the day of the shooting, irrespective of any justification or not, until now, there has been looting, theft, vandalizing, and arson. Most of the residents (numbers vary, but evidentially several hundred) organized to immediately protest the shooting, which they have every right to do. However, it was the looting, the brazen theft of property, and arson that came next that I want to comment on. How does throwing Molotov cocktails and bottles and rocks at police officers show respect for Brown? How does overturning cars and trucks and setting them on fire provide any kind of dignity to Brown, his family, or to the community? What does the owners of these businesses have to do with the actions of Brown, or the police officer? Why are they now being turned into victims of this tragedy?

As we now know, Michael Brown wasn't the angelic choirboy that he was initially portrayed as; the "kid next door" headed off to college in the hopes of a better life. However, the violence shows nothing but total disrespect. It makes the community look like a bunch of thugs. If there was any serious intent on putting a positive spin on this, the looters and arsonists totally blew it.
On the other side, we have police officers---150 of them---who totally overreacted with their "Judge Dred" paramilitary tactics. There is no need for a police department to pretend they're the Marines storming some beachhead. Did they seriously have to dress up their officers in battle gear? To me, that would seem to be nothing more than an attempt to intimidate the crowd. Personally, I would have seen it as an open challenge, which the crowd did as well. And what's with the flash bang grenades and rubber bullets? Was it really necessary to roll out the armored personnel carriers complete with manned machine gunners on top? Did they actually think they were going to mow down dozens or even hundreds of demonstrators? This isn't 1968 and Ferguson Missouri isn't the Democrat National Convention in Chicago. All it did was escalate the situation. Seriously, we need to have a national discussion about the militarization the local police departments.

As for what should have been done after the first night's rioting, was to impose martial law and mandatory curfews with stringently enforcement until cooler heads had a chance to prevail. Mayor James Knowles and community leaders, along with the heads of the fire and police departments, should have met in private to discuss ending the violence and a peaceful way forward, and then made a joint public announcement. Protests still could be permitted during daytime hours, but anyone who came out at night should be presumed to be up to no good and dealt with accordingly.

I think that Missouri Governor Jay Nixon was justified in removing the local police from the situation and replacing them with the State Troopers. Clearly the local police had no clue as to how to handle the situation and there appears to be some sort of underlining pre-existing mistrust of the Ferguson Police. Perhaps the governor was thinking that a "kinder and gentler" approach would work better, especially when the head of the Missouri State Patrol, Captain Ron Johnson, is black and, therefore, might be in a better position to develop some sort of rapport with the mostly black demonstrators. But quite obviously that didn't happened and it doesn't appear likely too at this point. Once credibility and trust are lost, there's hard to recapture again regardless of the color of one's skin.

As for providing the name of the police officer involved, that too was badly handled by the local police. By withholding the name, it gave the appearance that the Ferguson Police Department was closing ranks in order to perpetrate some sort of cover-up, and in these type of situations, appearances are perceived realities in the absence of facts. A prompt open admission of what transpired and the name of the officer involved (along with a brief bio) would have created the appearance of transparency, although it may not have prevented those whose sole intent was to use the event as a cover for committing crimes, it would have helped defuse some of the anger.

The tragedy in Ferguson Missouri, which has a total population of just over 21,000, with blacks comprising 67.4% compared to whites, who make up 29.3%, isn't just the shooting and death of an unarmed young black man in one Southern town, regardless of whether or not he had taken part in a "strong-arm" robbery minutes before. The facts at this time indicate that Officer Wilson was unaware of the robbery or the two suspects, although Michael Brown didn't know this as his subsequent actions may have indicated. Yet, the community, or at least a segment of the community, already knew what had taken place and was neither surprised or outraged by the robbery as they were about the shooting. That makes perfect sense in that one involved theft of property and a physical assault of a store owner, and the other involved the loss of life. But also, what does this say about the public acceptance or even acquiescence of a crime? What does this whole situation say about the public's trust, or simple common respect of the police or it's elected officials? According to the 2000 Census, approximately 17.6% of the residents in Ferguson were living below the poverty line; of this, 23.2% were 18 and younger and 13.6% were 65 and older. While living in poverty does create frustration, does it ever justify violence or even disrespect for authority, and what part, if any, does poverty play in this?

Was Michael Brown trying to surrender when he was fatally shot? Was Officer Darren Wilson justified in shooting Brown? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Only a court of law will ultimate decide. Expressions of outrage through peaceful protests are certainly justified. But what is not justifiable is the vandalizing of cars; the destruction and burning of private property; the looting of stores which is nothing more than simple boldface theft of the type which led to Michael Brown's confrontation with Officer Wilson, and ultimately to his death. Is that the remembrance Michael Brown that the community of Ferguson is trying to covey to the world? I hope not.

Again With the Race Remarks?

Seriously, again? First there was the media circus surrounding Paula Deen who said that she would like to experience the old Antebellum South. Well, that resulted in a court case, cancellation of her shows, endorsements, and countless tearful apologies. Then came the good old boy and Patriarch of the Duck Dynasty empire, Phil Robertson, who was stated that he wondered if blacks were better off before the federal government got involved, starting in the 1960s (and he went on to say that homosexuality was contrary to God's laws). Then came Cliven Bundy, the Texas rancher who became a mini-folk hero within the Patriot Movement for standing up to the Bureau of Land Management. Bundy, made a similar comment when he too wondered out loud if "the Negro people" weren't better off as slaves rather than depending on government subsidies.

Now comes the owner of the Los Angles Clipper's basketball team, Donald Sterling. Mr. Sterling's comment had nothing to do with nostalgia or economic wellbeing. Nope. Sterling allegedly told a female friend to stop bringing blacks to his team's games. Apparently, this isn't the first time a comment like this has been made, but it sure looks like it will be the last time, at least as owner of the LA Clippers. The players reacted just like one would expect them too---not well. First there was the pre-game warm-up without the team's jerseys. Then during the game, they wore black wristbands and black socks with the team's red uniform. By the way, they lost 118 to 97 to the Golden State Warriors. The player's union is investigating to see what action can and should be taken, and the NBA is looking into a suspension and forcing Sterling to sell the team. Can't say I blame them can you?

But, what I'm interested here is what is behind these comments. What would make these celebrity types make such inflammatory comments? Frankly. I can at least understand, but certainly not agree with, the comments of Deen, Robertson, and Bundy. All three individuals are from the deep South where things are slow to change and comments like they made are still far from uncommon (Deen is from Albany Georgia and lives in Savannah Georgia. Robertson is from Vivian Louisiana, and Bundy is Western Texas, though the standoff was at the family ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada). Secondly, they are all in the age bracket where they would very much remember the pre-Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's. Deen and Bundy were born in 1947; Robertson in 1946, and just for the record, Sterling is 80. All three members come from small towns and fundamentalist backgrounds. They experienced a very different South at an age and time which has left a certain impression on their personalities.

The comments made by all three weren't intended to be hurtful or spiteful. Though crudely put, they were actually attempting to show some compassion. What do I mean? All three were making comments about whether federal subsidies---handouts to some---have actually done more to hurt blacks (and poor whites, Asians, and Hispanics for that matter) by creating a sense of dependence rather than encourage independence and promoted fatherless families because the families without a male head of household could receive more benefits than one with a male head of household. Dependence breeds a sense of decreasing personal expectancy but also an increase in a sense of "entitlement".

Yes, some have done well and have broken the cycle of poverty, but many more haven't, and it's more prevalent in the Old South than anywhere else in America. Look at Appalachia. When Robert Kennedy and President Johnson visited in the 1960's, we as a nation were shocked to see the level of poverty people were living in; the lack of proper housing, including electricity, plumbing, poor nutrition, lack of adequate medical and dental care, mediocre education, the lack of infrastructure, and most of all, the lack of jobs. The ones that were available usually paid little and were dangerous. In other parts of the South, many of the same conditions applied. This, of course, was reason behind LBJ's "War on Poverty". Here we are in 2014 and not a lot has changed. Education still lags in the rural South. Unionization, which usually brings better pay and benefits, is non-existent while unemployment across all racial lines remains high. While there has been some improvement in medical care, it's still woefully inadequate. Housing and infrastructure such as roads have improved, at least in places, but there's much more to be done.

Finally, there is still that deep dark secret which lingers in the hearts of many Southerners of the Old South; of plantations, shady trees, large verandas, elaborate socials, delicious home cooking, and a strong sense of family and tradition. Much of it is myth. Only 4% of the Old South ever owned slaves, and of those, it was 2 or less with the owner working shoulder to shoulder in poor soil and sharing the same hardships and even the same meals. Only 1% were living the "Gone With the Wind" dream. The War of Succession and subsequent imposed Reconstruction devastated the South and its institutions, both the bad ones and the good, and 150 years on, the Old South still hasn't fully recovered. Perhaps it never will.

Could they have said it better? Without a doubt. In fact, in this era of hyper political correctness, they should have simply kept their little ole cotton pickin' mouths shut (Robertson's comment extended to beyond race to include his religious views about gays and Bundy referred to blacks as "Negro", which is an old Spanish word meaning "black" and is the proper racial designation but not considered "PC"). Is it right that that they have to curtail their comments while those of other races, religions, or sexual orientation don't get called for making similar comments? No, of course not. We need to accept that discrimination in any form, either overt or subtle, is not a one way street, and despite what Attorney General Eric Holder has said in the past, hate crime laws work both ways, and should be enforced accordingly.

As for Sterling, this will be played out for at least the next several months. The outcome will not be good, at least for him. The Clippers will survive as a team, and may go on to win more games and maybe a championship or two, but under new ownership. And while this editorial was meant only as a possible explanation, the fact that I'm having to add a disclaimer clearly indicates that we as a society are sadly far from "post-racial". But, perhaps too this will give us an opportunity to have a open and honest discussion about not just a differences, but about our similarities.


David Sterling's Alleged Racist Comment
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_25644156/listen-alleged-recording-los-angeles-clippers-owner-david

Clippers Stage Silent Protest
http://www.aol.com/article/2014/04/27/clippers-stage-silent-protest-to-owner/20876579/

For Silver, removing Sterling as Clippers owner easier said than done
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140428/donald-sterling-los-angeles-clippers-adam-silver-nba/

The Instagrams That Sparked Sterling's Rant
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2614336/Obama-wades-Clippers-row-racist-comments-attributed-Don-Sterling.html

Donald Sterling and Cliven Bundy: Is Age a Factor?
http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/28/donald-sterling-and-cliven-bundy-is-age-a-factor/

Crossing the Divide

50 years ago, society attempted to end racial tensions by ending segregation. 40 years ago society tried to put minorities, as well as poor whites, on par with the rest of society by instituting the "War on Poverty", ended "poll taxes" to give equal access to the ballot box everyone, and instituted a hiring quota system---Affirmative Action--- to ensure equal access (some would argue "preferred" access) to certain jobs---individual and commercial. 30 years ago, we instituted forced busing to bring about education parity. We have since introduced "No Child Left Behind", and other various programs, and yet we still have sectional poverty no better than some third world nations, high levels of crime, violence, and unemployment, failed schools and failing students, decrepit neighborhoods, broken homes, taxpayer dependency, and children having children, which only perpetuates the cycle.

We've seen the education performance of students decline as academic rigueur and discipline is thrown out the window. The only thing "common" is equal underachievement for all. Underperforming minority students often threaten and intimidate other achieving minority students for acting "too white" , as if being a societal failure and more often than not, a statistic, is a goal to be proud of. Minority studies have been introduced in various colleges, yet outside academia, they have little economic value, while minority and low income students should instead be encouraged to major in high demand professions which will improve their social and economic standing. Despite federal hiring quotas and spending billions on "urban renewal" to refurbish downtowns over and over again, inter-cities continue to look more like blown out war zones than centers of economic growth.

Among most young adults, and even some older adults who grew up during segregation and the Civil Rights Movement, race has become a nonissue. Close friendships across racial lines is more common than not. Inter-racial dating and marriage, once not just frown upon, but outright illegal, is scarcely even acknowledged. Many individuals, who've survived the bullying by their peers not to succeed in school as the risk of "trying to act white" have entered into professions their grandparents could only dream of, be it corporate, law, medicine, science, entrepreneurship, or academia; many achieving the highest levels in their chosen profession. Today, it's not uncommon to have black, Asian, or Hispanic civil, military, business, or political leaders. America even has a bi-racial president (what is unusual, however, is that despite making up over 50% of the population, we've yet to have our first female head of state in stark contrast to numerous other and less "democratic" nations). The "race card" has been all played out, especially as economic parity improves.

Today, minorities can claim their own TV and radio channels, magazines, movie and music genres, social media sites, awards, pageants, associations, events, and so forth (though whites ironically, are precluded from doing so in the name of "equality"). Still, such promotions seem increasingly little more than quaint holdovers aimed at dividing society--- a commercialized version of "separate but equal"---rather than uniting us as a People. As a friend of mine once said, "the only color that matter is green".

So, the question is "why"? Why the continuing divide? Is it, as once believed, that the races ultimately cannot not long lived side by side; that eventually one will have to emerge as dominate and the others as subordinate or even perish as a race unto itself? Why, after the billions spent rebuilding, are minority dominated areas still poor and crime ridden? Why is alcoholism, single parent households, drugs, and academically failing students (with higher than average dropout rates) considered the norm in low income and minorities communities, along with the imprisonment a large segment of its population ? And, while we're at it, why is academic underperformance considered acceptable when it neither enhances the critical thinking skills of the student nor properly prepares them for life in society? Why is academic mediocrity rewarded while excellence is quietly discouraged out of fear of making someone or some group "feel bad" about themselves? Why is the failed political philosophy of "throw-enough-money-at-it-and -it- will -fix -itself" still pursued ? For that matter, why are individuals allowed or even encouraged to adopt a dependence on federal government handouts to the point of subservience when programs enhancing work skills and self reliance would be more cost effective and personally enriching while peripherally reduce crime, lower unemployment, create more jobs, and ultimately increase the overall tax base?

As the saying goes, "a government big enough to give you everything is big enough to take everything from you". From this writer's perspective, all we've succeeded in doing is to dismantled the family unit, created an economic dependency no less addictive as any drug, destroyed all sense of individual self-worth, morals, or personal responsibility, devalued life, and created a sub-culture which feeds on instant gratification at any cost, while at that time penalized those who continue to seek economic and personal self-worth. It matters little to the slave or serf their master's name except that freedom is denied.

President Bush Doesn't Speak For Me

I read the following article on Alternet, and found it very interesting. Charles Evers is a long time community activist. He is Black. His brother was murdered by racists. And he is a Republican. Check out his story and find out what it means to be apart the "Big Tent":

President Bush Doesn't Speak For Me
By Rose Aguilar,
AlterNetPosted on July 22, 2005, Printed on July 30, 2005 http://www.alternet.org/story/23600/

In 1963, Charles Evers' older brother, Medgar Evers, was shot and killed by white supremacist Byron De La Beckwith. Beckwith stood trial twice, but in both cases the all-white jury could not reach a verdict. He was finally convicted and sentenced to life in prison in 1994, 31 years after the murder. Before his murder, Medgar established local chapters of the NAACP throughout the Mississippi Delta and organized boycotts of businesses that refused to allow blacks to use their restrooms. After an unsuccessful attempt to get into the University of Mississippi Law School, Medgar was appointed as the NAACP's first field secretary in Mississippi.
After his brother's death, Charles Evers took over at the NAACP and began black voter registration drives. Six years later, he was elected mayor of Fayette, Mississippi, the first black to hold elected office in the state since Reconstruction. Evers, who became a Republican during the Nixon years, also served as an advisor to a diverse group of politicians, including Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Reagan.
Today the 82-year-old Evers is the general manager of WMPR, a community radio station in Jackson, Mississippi. He hosts a radio show on Wednesday nights called, "Let's Talk," and is the author of "Have No Fear: The Charles Evers Story." He proudly displays a number of framed photos of himself shaking hands with a wide array of mostly Republican politicians and civil rights leaders in his office.
ROSE AGUILAR: How did you feel about the Killen ruling? [On June 22, Edgar Ray Killen, a former Ku Klux Klan leader, was sentenced to 60 years in prison for orchestrating the murder of black Mississippian James Chaney and white New Yorkers Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner in 1964.]
CHARLES EVERS: I'm elated. I almost shed tears knowing that they convicted an old racist. It's unbelievable. We've begun to get justice. We've begun to put fear into those whites who think they can do anything they want to a black person and get away with it. Now we got white powerful Mississippians who say, no, you can't do that anymore, and I'm proud of that.
I've been talking to a lot of people about politics and it's interesting to talk to young people. I went to the Jubilee Jam the other night and I interviewed a number of young black men who said, blacks vote Democrat. Whites vote Republican. I told them I've met a lot of whites who vote Democrat and they were shocked by that. Then I spoke to young white men and they said the same thing. They also said they have no black friends. Is that a common opinion?
I'm against an all-white anything or an all-black anything. I'm a Republican, by the way. I feel there should be blacks in every Party. I believe in most of the things Republicans stand for.
Like what?
I'm against abortion. I'm for prayer in schools. I'm for economic independence. I don't believe in welfare. I think it's a joke. I believe welfare makes you lazy and unproductive. The only thing I don't agree with is the war. I think the war is wrong. I think the President is wrong on this. The main thing I believe in is freedom. I don't think the Republicans say it as much as Democrats, but I think the Democrats say one thing and do another. Most of them are white.
There are a lot of black Democrats in Congress. Clinton appointed a lot of blacks.
Clinton was our number one President. I loved Clinton; not as a Democrat, but as a person.
Did you vote for Clinton?
No I didn't. I'm a Republican. I voted for my party.
So you're a party-line voter?
Not all the time, but that time I did.
How do you feel about the Senate's apology for failing to make lynching a federal crime? The majority of the people who haven't signed on are Republican.
I ripped them apart on my radio show last night. It hurts me and it hurts every Mississippian and makes us look bad. I meet with them quite often and I'll tell them they're wrong. The least they could have done was say, "I'm sorry."
What was your turning point? Why did you become a Republican?
I have nothing against the Democratic Party. When I became mayor, I had to run as an independent because the Democrats wouldn't allow us to run as a Democrat back in those days. But once we broke the Democrats down and took over the seat, I was a national committee member, went to Chicago and took the Party away from the old Democrats. And what did they do? They ran to the Republican Party. So my thinking was, once we got blacks into the Democratic Party, let's do the same in the Republican Party and make damn sure they don't get away with nothin'.
That's why I'm with the Republican Party. I want to make sure we have blacks who will stand up in each Party and that's me. I don't bow to none of 'em and my folks can trust me. I will never sell out to them. I tell them what they gotta do for our folk and that's to make sure we're included; not superior, but equal.
So you're basically working to change the Republican Party from within rather than criticize it from the outside.
I can do more destructive things inside than I can out there throwing rocks. So I'm in the Republican Party for the same reason I was in the Democratic Party: to make sure blacks are included, along with everyone else. It's not like I jumped parties. I feel like both parties are not what they used to be or should be. I'll tell them when they're wrong. I couldn't do that as a Democrat.
I'm on the executive committee of the Mississippi Republican Party and I will tell Senator Lott that he's wrong for not apologizing for something his great grandparents did to us. Their excuse is, well, we didn't have anything to do with it. The hell you didn't. You didn't personally, but your great grandparents did. You should apologize. I have no problem telling them that and I'm a Republican. I pay my dues so they can't kick me out.
What changes have you made within the Republican Party for blacks specifically?
They got a Republican that's not gonna let them run over blacks and get behind closed doors and pass laws that he's not gonna go out and tell people about. They know that.
How do you feel about the state of the national Republican Party today?
I think President Bush is way out of line and I don't think he speaks for all Republicans. He doesn't speak for me.
I read the article you wrote opposing the war in the Jackson Free Press. There weren't many Republicans who broke ranks over the war at that time. There were very few Democrats who publicly opposed the war at that time.
I have a radio talk show on Wednesday night and that was my whole show. I'm opposed to the war. I let the President know. I let all my Senators and Congressmen know. It's wrong to kill. We had no more right to go to the war against Iraq than I have to go to war against you. Iraq did nothing to us. Iraq was not responsible for 9/11.
Sure 9/11 was bad. Sure they killed thousands of us, but how many have we killed of them? How much suffering have we caused them? Two wrongs don't make a right. We are just as wrong -- and I want to be quoted on that -- for going in and destroying innocent people as they were coming over here on 9/11. 9/11 is no comparison to what we've done over there and how we've destroyed the old world with our bombs and how we spread hate and how we took Saddam. I was totally against that. When we took Saddam's sons and showed them all over the world. It's just like they used to do to us black folks. They hung us from trees and let them take pictures of us. Same damn thing.
Did you have any reservations about voting for Bush, especially given your strong opposition to the war?
It bothers me. I feel like he's not telling the truth. How can he sleep knowing that he just got hundreds of people killed or destroyed everyday? He is responsible for them being killed. He's responsible for destroying all of those beautiful buildings. That was the founding of a civilization. He destroyed them. Come on, Mr. President. How can you sleep? I'd ask him that point blank. Why don't you end this war? I pray all the time. "Lord, please, let our president bring this war to an end." The United States Senate is just as guilty as Bush. They went right along with him and gave him billions to continue the war.
Come on; your gas and my gas is two or three dollars a gallon. We got poor folks, white and black, who need boxes of aspirins. I'm a veteran of two wars: World War II and the Korean War and guess what? If I need a box of aspirin today from the VA, I'd go through hell to get it. The veteran who comes home with no legs and no arms is pushed aside and can't get waited on. It's crazy. No one will say the truth. Democrats or Republicans. Reid speaks out once in a while, but they chop him up right away.
When I interview people, I bring up some of these issues, but they don't seem to care. Essentially, the facts don't matter. Do you encounter that?
Oh yeah. My thing is, I don't give a damn what people think about me or what I say. To hell with what anybody thinks about me. White, black or polka dot. I'm against the war. I'm against killing. I've lost two brothers on some stupid murder by some crazy racist.
How do the Republicans respond to you when you raise these issues?
They don't really respond. They ignore me, but I'll keep saying it and they know they got one darkie that ain't gonna change. And that's me.
What do you think about the Republicans who say, "We're so inclusive now. We have Condoleezza Rice and many high-ranking black officials."
Bullshit. That's bullshit. We're not inclusive. The Republican Party is not inclusive. The Republican Party does not reach out. We're fighting for them to do that. I'll admit that President Bush did appoint Condoleezza Rice. He appointed Powell, but that wasn't enough. What about the local Republicans? Did he go around the country and campaign for blacks who were running for office? No. They're not inclusive. The Democrats aren't either. Don't get me wrong. I'm a Republican and I'm gonna stay a Republican because they need somebody like me to stay in the Party and keep hammering away.
You feel like you have your issues and priorities and you want to bring them to the Party. Do you ever get a response?
They won't listen to me. Others feel the same way but won't say it. What are you afraid of? I'd rather be dead and in heaven than afraid to do what I think is right. This war is wrong and I'm not afraid to say it. See the picture of me with Bush? His dad and I were very close. I don't think his father wanted him to go to war. The problem is, the Republican Party hasn't done anything to make this country better and I speak as a Republican. I think they're creating so much division among the country. Any time the country is split 50/50, the leader is wrong. What about the other 50 percent? We need a change. I hope the next president unifies the country.
How did you feel about the 2004 election and all the mudslinging? It was pretty ugly.
First of all, I knew that a Democrat was not going to win. I knew that. You know why? This is a racist country. Anybody who runs for president in this country and comes out as strong as the Democrats were about helping the poor folks and black folks is not going to win. It's that simple. Not in America. Two people will never be President in my lifetime. A woman and a black. They can run Mrs. Clinton if they want to. She'll be beaten. America is still a bigoted country. Mark my words. I guarantee I won't live to see it. I would love to, but it won't happen. I told Colin Powell, don't you be a fool. You want to be embarrassed? Run.
Don't you think a black candidate would get a lot more blacks out to vote?
Yeah, but we can't elect a president. If Democrats want to win, talk them into electing a black man for vice president.
Voter turnout is so low all over the country. How do you encourage blacks to vote?
I usually take Medgar and Martin and say, do you care what they fought for? If you don't vote, you show disrespect for them. That's what I say. I don't know if it does any good or not. The least I can do is show Medgar I still care. And Martin. They all were my friends and we all fought for the same thing. Some of the youngsters say, "My vote doesn't count." If your vote doesn't count, how do you think you got where you are? Somebody voted for you.
I came back the other night from Washington and guess what? A young black man flew me back here. He's a pilot on Delta Airlines. We're flying planes. We couldn't even get on a plane forty years ago. When Megdar was killed, I came back from Chicago and couldn't go inside the airport in Jackson, Mississippi. I had to wait outside for my bag. Now we have blacks flying on Delta. We got blacks running airports. We can't forget that. We gotta keep saying that. That's why I hope reporters like you will say that. Show both sides. The negative and the positive.
Today was a historical thing. Can you imagine? A white judge born in Neshoba county gave another white man 60 years for killing a black and two whites. Can you believe that? They'll say a little bit about it. Then it's all over. Now if you came in here and shot me, oh god, every damn press in the country would be here. White woman shoots black man! NBC. CBS. CNN. All of 'em. You couldn't get rid of 'em, 'cause it involves some nigger.
In terms of the media, a lot conservative radio shows have been talking about Senator Byrd and his beginnings with the KKK. How do you feel about that?
That was the thing to do then. I'm not justifying it, don't get me wrong, but that was the popular thing to do to get what you wanted. In order to get elected, you had to talk about niggers. If you vote for Charles Evers, he goin' take your daughter and marry her. We gotta forgive white people, but never forget.
What other issues are important to you? What have Republicans done well in the past four years?
Have they done anything? Our gasoline is three times what it was a few years ago. Unemployment is about four times what it was a few years ago. Hatred is getting worse for both blacks and whites. The Christians are trying to take over everything. We have a mess going and we need to straighten up our act.
One of the major differences between the Republicans and the Democrats I've met is this: Republicans emphasize personal responsibility. They say, "We don't like social programs. Everyone can pull themselves up by their bootstraps." Democrats say people need help.
I partially agree with that. Partially. Give us a chance to pull ourselves up. I don't like a lot of social programs either because it makes you non-productive. Speaking as a black person, welfare is the worst thing that's ever happened to us. My dad always told us, and I'll never forget this, before I get commodities, I'll kill all of you and then kill myself. I was totally against them giving me commodities like meal, sugar and flour. I always want to be able to work and take care of y'all. That's my job. I don't want you ever asking me about welfare. Welfare makes you dependent upon someone to take care of you. Republicans say, "No, we're not giving you nothin'." I like that. My problem is, don't block me. Republicans say, "Go do it yourself," and I say, "Give me a chance to do it for myself."
That's the main point, right? Go to any poor neighborhood, black or white. You'll find old books, run-down buildings, and teachers who have to buy their own school supplies. So at that point, where's the hope? Especially if someone comes from a broken family that's not emotionally available.
My whole thing is if Bush wants to leave no child behind, then prove it. What you're afraid to do Mr. Bush, is to go to the poorest neighborhoods in all the states and find out what district needs the most. And don't worry about the affluent neighborhood. We need to bring up those communities that need it the most. It ain't gotta be black folks. There are a lot of poor white folks now.
Why is it that people tend to not identify with those basic economic interests? They identify with conservative social issues like gay marriage and abortion, but not issues like education and poverty.
They're not popular issues. We need to take responsibility and educate people. That's why black folks don't like me. I always say it's our responsibility to make safe neighborhoods. It's our job to get them cleaned up.
I notice one of the few Democrats on your wall is Robert F. Kennedy.
I was with Bobby the night he was killed. If any Kennedy ran for president, I'd vote for him. The Kennedy's and the Rockefeller's, before anybody else gave a damn about black folks, they did what they could. I took Bobby Kennedy through the delta and he cried like a baby. He said, I didn't know anybody could live like this. He said he just didn't know any colored folks. We were colored back then. He just didn't know.
After having this conversation with you, it's clear that you're a Republican to change the Party from within, but the media makes you sound like you're a hardcore black loyal Republican from Mississippi.
They don't know a thing about me. I am a black Republican by choice and I do it to make sure the Republicans straighten up.
But that should be included in the story.
They won't do that. Go down to the Republican headquarters. They ain't got a single black working there. Not one. I've been giving them hell about that. I gotta keep hammering away. I'm on the executive committee and I keep repeating, "What about a black? It's getting pretty lonely here with all you white folks. I'm the only darkie here." I can say darkie and I can say nigger. I can say what I want about my own folks. And they look at me real funny. They whisper, "Charles you're right." And I say, "Tell the chairman that."
Sounds like you enjoy the challenge.
I love the life I live. The Lord blessed me to be independent. I am independent.
Rose Aguilar is a San Francisco-based journalist gathering stories from people living in states that voted overwhelmingly for George W. Bush. Track her journey at Stories in America.
© 2005 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/23600/