Hiding In Plain Sight – Homosexuality In The Church

Posted on May 4, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

Homoseuxality In The Church - Teething Biscuits

Remember these?

If you are reading this and consider yourself to be “straight,” I would like for you to do a little experiment with me. I want you to find a quiet place, calm your mind and think back. Think back as far as you are able. Try to recall your very earliest memories as a young child. What is the earliest birthday party you can remember? Perhaps your earliest memory is of a Christmas or a Holiday or some special event involving your parents. Were you given Pabulum as a young child? Perhaps you remember the slightly sweet taste of a teething biscuit?

While you’re time travelling through the memories in your mind, try and remember the day you decided to be “straight.” Can you do it? Was there some point in time where, if you’re male, you decided you were attracted to females? If you’re a female, was there some point in time you decided to be attracted to males? I have thought long and hard. I have plumbed my memories and I can remember events that happened before I was two years old. Try as I might, I cannot recall ever deciding to like females. Thus has it ever been. I have never been attracted to other men. I have always been attracted to females. It was never a choice. It was simply who I am.

When a person who is homosexual says to me, “I have always been attracted to the same sex,” I find it difficult to dispute them. My own personal experience doesn’t provide a foundation permitting me to make such an argument. No amount of fasting, prayer or restorative therapy will ever make me attracted to another man. Can’t be done. If your experiences are different, please leave a comment. I would like to hear from you.

Homosexuality In Nature

One of the main “non-Biblical” arguments against homosexuality is that it is unnatural. After all, in order to produce offspring, unless a species is capable of asexual reproduction, requires the mating of a male and female of the species. No argument there. Yet, homosexuality has been observed amongst a host of species. Mammals, Birds, Fish, Reptiles and Amphibians. If it occurs in nature, it must be natural. To wit: If you believe that God created all things, you have unimpeachable evidence that God created homosexual creatures. If not, who did?

Misunderstanding The Sodom and Gomorrah Story

homosexuality in the church - Truth About Sodom

Wonder Why You Never Hear This In Church???

Ask almost any “fundamentalist” Christian worth his salt, “why were Sodom and Gomorrah destroyed,” and you’ll get the answer, “because of their homosexuality.” It is a Bible story usually introduced in Sunday School. We have Abraham bargaining with God to save the city because of his nephew Lot. You have God sending his “Angels” to get Lot out of the city. You have the men of the city spotting the Angels and wanting to “know” them. Took me some years to fully understand exactly what that meant. You’ve got Lot his wife and daughters being rushed out of the city in the very nick of time. Lot’s wife looks back and gets turned into a “pillar of salt” and so on.

Homosexuality In The Church - Westboro Baptist Church

Child abuse?

All in all a very interesting story. The bottom line is, homosexuality is so bad, Almighty God came down to wipe not one, but two entire cities off the face of the earth. Even the act of looking back to see the devastation cost Lot’s wife her life. The term we use today for homosexual sex is “Sodomy” and comes directly from that story. Seems like case closed. God hates homosexuals and the Westboro Baptist Church is right! But what if our takeaway from that story is wrong? What if we’ve had it completely wrong for several 1,000 years?

“[KJV] Ezekiel 16:49
Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.”

What’s this? According to Ezekiel – he lived a lot closer in time than we do – says that homosexuality had nothing to do with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Were there homosexuals in Sodom? No doubt there were. There have always been homosexuals. There were homosexuals before the “Great Flood of Noah,” and there are homosexuals after the Flood right up to today. Homosexuality, at one time was a part of Greek culture. If God hated homosexuality, why didn’t he wipe out the Greeks?

Based on what Ezekiel says, God hates people who don’t show kindness and take responsibility for those less fortunate than them. In the Book of Matthew, Jesus gives his Disciples the “Cliffs Notes” for the final Judgement. He goes into quite a bit of detail on what all the nations will be judged on. You can read it in Matthew 25:31-46. Not once does a person’s religion or even whether or not they believe in God come up. In fact, none of the creeds or beliefs so important in distinguishing between the various Christian denominations seem to matter at all! What does matter is how you treated the poor, the hungry, the naked, the homeless, those in prison and the sick. Thus, according to Jesus, salvation is not based on saying “the sinner’s prayer.” It’s not based on joining a church or winning converts. It is certainly not based on how much money you give to a church!

Where Does The Hatred Of Homosexuality Come From?

“[KJV] Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

Homosexuality In The Church - Red Lobster

Gathering place for Saints after Sunday service

Seems pretty cut and dried doesn’t it? Thus sayeth the Lord God! Case closed! Those who believe the Bible always follow whatever God decrees right? Well, it seems there’s some wiggle room. For example, every Sunday around 3 pm, you can go to any Red Lobster Restaurant and you’ll see families dressed in their Sunday finest enjoying a meal together after having attended Sunday morning service. There’s nothing like a hot succulent lobster tail and a side of crab legs with some drawn butter. The only problem is, according to your Bible, eating shell fish is also an “abomination.”

“[KJV] Leviticus 11:10
And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

If we work on the theory that an abomination is an abomination, is one abomination worse than the other? Unless your preacher suffers from an allergy to shell fish, I can pretty much guarantee that he or she has enjoyed lobster and crab. Matter of fact, you may have actually been present with him or her and partaken of these abominations right along with them.

There are a lot of things the Bible forbids that you do everyday and think nothing of it. Do you wear clothes that are made from blended fabrics? Cotton and Wool? Do you have a home garden? Did you plant more than one vegetable in it? These things are forbidden by God.

“[KJV] Leviticus 19:19
¶Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.”

Homosexuality In The Church - Wool Blend Fabric

Nothing like a nice suit.

The same book in the Bible that calls homosexuality an abomination, also calls eating shell fish and abomination, forbids wearing garments made from blended fabrics and prohibits planting more than one type of vegetable in your garden. Go to your closet and check the tags on your clothes. More like than not, you’ve been sitting in church wearing fabrics that God forbids. You probably never gave it a second thought. However, when the subject of homosexuality is raised, you probably become righteously indignant! “Those people are going to Hell if they don’t stop what they’re doing and get right with God!” Question: “Are they going to the same Hell you’re going to for eating shell fish or wearing blended fabrics?”

Homosexuality In The Church

Where would the Church be without the contribution of Homosexuals? I spent the first 30 years of my life deeply ensconced in a fundamentalist, Pentecostal church. Let me add a bit of flavor to what that meant.

If you weren’t baptized – you were going to Hell.
If they didn’t say the right words when they baptized you – yep, Hell.
If you didn’t have the charismatic experience (speaking in tongues) – Hell.
If you went to a movie theater – you were going to Hell.
Women who wore make-up, jewellery, pants – going to Hell. (Seems women had quite a few prohibitions.)
If you didn’t pay your tithes (on your gross) – going to Hell.
If you went to dances (like you school prom) – yep, Hell.
If you listened to secular music (rock, jazz R&B) – ticket to Hell.
If you didn’t confess all your sins (masturbation included) – Hell.

I could go on, but I’m sure you get the picture. So needless to say, for the first 30 years of my life, I didn’t like homosexuals… at all! As far as I was concerned, they were demon possessed deviants whom you should keep your children away from at all costs. Of course, this created more than a little conflict because most of those whom I suspected were homosexual and many whom were confirmed as being homosexual later, were in the Church.

Homosexuality In The Church - Rev. James Cleveland

Rev. James Cleveland could bring a congregation to its feet

They were in the music department. They played the church organ or piano like nobody’s business and could bring the congregation to their feet or move them to tears. They sung in the choir and could lead a song that would almost cause you to see the sky roll back and offer a glimpse of heaven. They served on the “Usher Board” and in later years I discovered that some were in the pulpit preaching.

Because these people were “in the church,” I was duty bound to accept them. After all, clearly God had forgiven them and their past lives were “Under The Blood.” All their sins had been washed away – not their effeminate ways… clearly – but the behaviours were gone. At least that is the way things were supposed to work. However, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck!

I knew of one gentleman whom if I called his name, some of my readers would know him. He got in church, married, raised a family, sung in the choir, was active on the usher board and then one year, he wrote his wife a 7 page letter and was gone. After years of being in the church, he had to acknowledge whom he truly was. The tragedy was, in his efforts to conform and become someone he was not, he took a wife and fathered children. They were devastated when he left.

Jason Collins

That is the other thing we don’t seem to talk about. NBA player Jason Collins came out as being Gay. That doesn’t bother me. However, imagine the surprise of his ex-fiancée! She dodged a bullet there! This is what happens when society – the Church included – demand that people conform to what we consider to be normal. People do try to fit in. In their effort to fit in, many times they will get married thinking that this will change them. It does not. At this point, they’ve now brought someone else into their lives under misapprehension.

Homosexuality In The Church - Ted Haggard

“Pastor Ted” they called him.

Another example is Ted Haggard. Married with a family. Pastoring a thriving church and elected to lead the National Association of Evangelicals. Presumably he led many a person to Jesus Christ. Yet, he was living a lie. He was “bearing false witness” to whom he really is. It all fell apart and he lost everything when it came out that he had been having a three year sexual relationship with his masseuse who also had been supplying him with Crystal Methamphetamine. No doubt the psychological pain of trying to be someone he was not, caused the need to self-medicate.

Bishop Eddie Long

Bishop Eddie Long is another example of a prominent preacher’s fall from Grace. Bishop Long could fire up his congregation and have people falling out, knocking over seats and running to the altar ready for salvation. The man is gifted. He built New Birth Missionary Baptist Church from 300 members into what at one time was a 25,000 member “Mega-Church.” Married with children yet, hiding his homosexuality. It all came crashing down when 4 young men came forward charging that Bishop Long had been having sex with them. He had plied them with expensive gifts, cash money and trips. Forget about his church and congregation for a moment, imagine how his wife and children must have been shattered. Again, another example of someone “bearing false witness” to whom they truly are.

Bishop Carlton Pearson is another example of how homosexuality can affect a ministry. I have heard nothing that indicates to me that Bishop Pearson is Gay or even has those tendencies. His problem is that after reading and studying his Bible, he concluded that the Church has had it wrong for 2,000 years. He was branded a heretic because he began teaching that nobody is going to Hell. He calls this “The Gospel of Inclusion.” What? No Hell??? How will the Church make any money?

Homosexuality In The Church - Bishop Carlton Pearson

Bishop Carlton Pearson. Ostracised because he wouldn’t put Gay people in Hell?

After being kicked out of the church he had been affiliated with and losing everything, a church that ministered to homosexuals asked him to come. This church wasn’t ministering to homosexuals from the standpoint of telling them they were going to Hell or living in sin. They were ministering to them from the standpoint of validating their humanity and reinforcing to them that God loved them equally. Bishop Pearson’s ministering to them was equivalent to burning his bridges with the Pentecostal fundamentalist organizations he was a member of. Heretic for life!

“[KJV] Luke 5:31
And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.“

The peculiar thing is, if one believes that homosexuality is an anathema to God, shouldn’t the Church be reaching out to them in a loving and effective way? Clearly the Church hasn’t been real successful in curing homosexuality. Possibly because it isn’t a disease? Of course, they haven’t made much progress in getting Preachers to stop eating lobster and crab either.

Homosexuality In The Church - Lobster and Crab Legs

A Succulent Feast?

“[KJV] Jude 1:24
Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,”

Homosexuality In The Church - Pastor Donnie McClurkin

Pastor and Recording Artist Donnie McClurkin

The case of Pastor Donnie McClurkin is interesting. Pastor McClurkin has shared his testimony of being healed by the power of God from being homosexual. In his youth he was the victim of homosexual sexual molestation. Evidently this caused him to become a homosexual for a period of time. Then, praise God, he met Jesus and Jesus cured him of his homosexuality. Pastor McClurkin is one of those people who can sing you into heaven. He even moves me and that’s saying something! One of his biggest hits as a Gospel Recording Artist is a song called, “We Fall Down But We Get Up.” He sings that song with the power and the feeling that in my opinion only comes from experience. When he sings about falling down, I have no idea what is in his mind as he sings it, all I know is he’s not singing from theory. He’s singing from the depths of his experience.

Pastor McClurkin at the time of this writing is not married. Perhaps being married is not his calling…

It’s Time For The Church To Come Out Of Its Closet

Before you can get someone “saved” you must first get them lost!

Homosexuality in the Church is almost guaranteed by the way the “Plan Of Salvation” is presented. I’m speaking from the perspective of a man. “Before you can get someone saved, you must first get them lost.” Not only lost, but you have to convince males of their own inadequacy to cope with life’s problems. Whether true or false, it is the nature of men to embrace at their core, the belief in their own self-sufficiency. A man in order to survive must believe in his own self-reliance. His ability to protect himself and those he loves.

In order to convince a man of the need for salvation, the Church must tear this down. It must convince a man that he is not self-sufficient, that he is lost and does not know the way to where he wants to go. In essence to get a man “saved” the Church must first emasculate him. The men most susceptible to this are those men who already possess a fragile sense of their own masculinity. The message of the Church resonates with this type of man more powerfully than it resonates with men who are comfortable in their own masculinity. Thus it should be no surprise that so many men in the Church – those who were not brought up in the Church – are often struggling with their sexuality.

Homosexuality In The Church - Catholic Church Scandal

Jesus loves the little children doesn’t mean what the Catholic Church thinks it means.

When we attempt to suppress our nature, the pressure continues to build until we finally explode. Often this explosion causes much more damage and devastation than had we simply embraced whom we are in the first place. The Catholic Church is dealing with a veritable plague of paedophile priest. They’ve added to their problem by taking the position that their priest must remain celibate. Thus they’re attracting men to their priesthood who are comfortable not being married. What could possibly go wrong?

“[KJV] Proverbs 19:9
A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall perish.”

Homosexuality In The Church - Lab Coat and Stethoscope

If my wearing these made you think I was a doctor, you’d be deceived.

When people attempt to portray themselves as other than what they truly are – no matter how well intended – they are bearing a false witness to those around them. They are lying in word and or in deed regarding whom they truly are. I have never even darkened the hallway of a medical school. If I went out and purchased a white lab coat and bought a stethoscope, I might look the part of a medical doctor. However, if you came to me for advice to cure an ailment, even though the advice I gave might be sound, you would still be taking your life into your hands. Eventually, my charade would catch up with me… most probably at the expense of some poor soul who put their trust in the fact that I looked like a doctor.

So, what can be done about homosexuality in the Church? First, let us admit that it is present. Denial is not a river in Africa. The Church only has two choices that I can see. It either must purge itself of all homosexuals – in essence launch a modern inquisition – or it must embrace them and allow them to be whom they are openly. The first option will undoubtedly result in the destruction of the Church. The second option leaves open the possibility that if God changes people, then God will change them in his own time and his own way. I can imagine little worse than a person who is homosexual joining a church and believing themselves to be “cured,” getting married and starting a family only to realize that they are actually still a homosexual.

Understanding The Second Amendment Correctly

Posted on April 26, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Of all the Amendments to our Constitution, this Amendment comprised of a single sentence has caused more debate and confusion of late than any other. Understanding the Second Amendment correctly is crucial before we can have any meaningful debate on the subject of firearms in our society.

Understanding The Second Amendment

I am sorry to report, it has become increasingly apparent that literacy has gone down since the Constitution and Bill of Rights were penned. I have simply been stunned by what I’ve heard come out of the mouths of supposedly educated people in their efforts to discount the relevancy of the Second Amendment. I’m sure you’ve probably heard some of these arguments too. I will list generic forms of two of these arguments.

The word “regulated” means that the State can regulate what firearms you can have.
The Amendment applies to the State militia – or National Guard – not individual citizens.

The insipidness of these puerile arguments is the hallmark of a poor grasp of grammar, a lack of scholarship and often an indication that the person making such statements is merely parroting some other fool who probably knows even less on this subject than he or she does.

Lets parse the four clauses of the sentence. It is helpful to think of a house. The first clause; “A well regulated militia” could be considered the roof of the house. When the roof is complete the house is protected from the elements. What does the roof rest atop? The upper floor. The upper floor tells us the reason for the roof on the house. “Being necessary to the security of a free State.” Thus, it is the well regulated militia that is necessary to the security of a free State. This is the end product. However, right now, the upper floor and the roof are floating on thin air. Let’s add the ground floor. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Note, it doesn’t say the right of the State to keep and bear arms. It is the right of the people to keep and bear arms. If it were the right of the State, we would have no need to even mention the people. Let’s add the foundation. “Shall not be infringed.”

Working back up from the bottom, if the people’s right to keep and bear arms is infringed, they can never come together to form a militia. If there is no militia, it cannot be regulated, well or otherwise. The end result is that the the security of the free State is at risk.

Why The Second Amendment Came To Be

You must remember the experiences of the men whom we call the “Founding Fathers.” Most people seem to think that the “Declaration of Independence” and our “United States Constitution” were all put together at the same time. The Declaration of Independence was issued July 4th 1776. the Constitution was adopted September 17, 1787 and went into effect, March 4, 1789. The first 10 Amendments, which we call the “Bill of Rights” was ratified by three-fourths of the States in 1791. Thus between the Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution with its Bill of Rights, was a period of 15 years. That’s a decade and a half.

This wasn’t some slipshod, slapped together process. It was based on reasoned debate with the lessons of a recent history that very nearly ended in disaster. The Revolutionary War was not supported by the majority of Americans. There were only 50% at best who supported becoming independent from England. Around 15 – 20% were “loyalist” and the rest were neutral. We were a colony without an organised army – at the time of the Declaration of Independence – fighting a “Super Power” for our right to exist autonomously. Had it not been for citizens forming militias, fighting and dying, these United States would not exist. We would still be British subjects. The “Founders” realized this and thus they made sure that we would always have an armed citizenry by encoding the right of the people to keep and bear arms within the United States Constitution.

The Difference Between The Militia And The Army

The Army is an organ of the State. The Army is paid, equipped and totally supported by the State. The focus is on “uniformity.” This is why you are issued a “uniform” when you’re inducted into the Army. Everybody gets the same buzz cut haircut. You’re issued the same firearms. They all shoot the same ammunition. Everyone receives the same basic training. If your rifle becomes non-functional, you can pick up the rifle of a fallen comrade and you don’t have to figure it out. If you run out of ammunition, a comrade can share his ammunition with you.

The Militia is entirely different. In the Militia, everyone – all able bodied males between the ages of 16 and 45… unless you’ve been “mustered” out you’re still in – brings whatever they’ve got at home. They bring their own rifles, ammunition, clothes and supplies. They’re not paid. They’re donating their services, their resources and often their lives for a cause they believe in. When the Second Amendment speaks of regulating them, it’s talking about organizing and making sure that their weapons are functional. Making sure that everyone brings the needed supplies, ammunition, food, tents and camping equipment. Tactics are taught and practiced. Strengths and weaknesses are noted and squads are organized. Marksmanship is taught and refined. This is what “Well Regulated” means. The establishment of regulations to ensure that everyone shows up with the proper resources.

Dispelling Some Oft Recited Myths

It’s Not About Hunting!

A lot of sophistry is employed by the “anti-gun” movement. When talking about the Second Amendment. Inevitably you’ll hear someone ask, “who needs an assault rifle with a 30 round magazine to hunt deer?” The person generally sits back smugly as though they’ve nailed some profound point. Clearly they haven’t got a clue that the Second Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with protecting one’s right to hunt. Hunting was a foregone conclusion. At the time the Second Amendment was enacted, everybody hunted, if they expected to eat. If there is any hunting involved with the Second Amendment, it provides the Citizens with the means to hunt enemies of our Constitution both foreign and domestic. I’m sure some find this troubling because some of the people most interested in subverting the Second Amendment are also interested in subverting the rest of the Constitution. Yes we still have tyrants and would be tyrants in our Government today.

Another popular argument which I’m sure you’ve heard bandied about by people you would think would have the education to know better is, “at the time the Second Amendment was written, they had muskets.” The gist of their point is, the Founders never could have conceived of the fire power available today. Again a specious argument. The facts are at the time the Second Amendment was written, all the armies of the world – those using firearms – also only had muskets. Thus, the Founders intended that the citizens be armed equivalent to whatever military force they were likely to face.

I’m sure you’ve heard this argument as well. “What about people owning tanks, grenades, or missiles?” The simple facts are, there are people who do own fully functional tanks, live grenades and missiles. To own a grenade requires a federal background check and a $200 tax stamp per grenade. As far as missiles are concerned, there are hobbyist who build and launch their own rockets. If you can build a rocket that will carry 3 people into space – it’s already been done – you sure as Hell can build an explosive payload and fire that rocket along a ballistic trajectory.

Understanding The Second Amendment - Revolutionary War Plantation Cannon

Revolutionary War era, Plantation cannon.

Moreover, private citizens owned cannons before and after the Second Amendment was enacted. These were not little celebratory salute cannons. These were fully functional war cannons, equivalent to anything the military had at that time and they were used to protect plantations. My neighbors notwithstanding, I’m sure that I would be discussed on CNN, MSNBC and several other national news shows if I set up a brace of fully functional Revolutionary War period cannons on either side of my front door. The fact that they too function like the muskets they’re so fond of would make no never mind. They would be beating the drum beat of panic for all they’re worth.

Is The Second Amendment Still Relevant?

Another popular argument, usually made by those who do not understand the Second Amendment correctly is, that it has been rendered irrelevant. Their reasoning is, our military has become so technologically advanced that a citizenry equipped with small arms would be quickly put down by the likes of “Predator Drones,” super sonic jets dropping smart bombs, attack helicopters firing “mini-guns,” basically all the high-tech toys of today’s modern warfare.

That does sound daunting to be sure. Probably as daunting as a ragtag group of colonist going up against the most powerful army at that time back in 1776. However, we do have some “real world” experiences to look at. We’ve been in Afghanistan for over 12 years now. Afghanistan doesn’t have any organized army. They don’t have a navy or an air force, yet the most powerful military known to man has been fighting and dying there for over 12 years. During our adventures in Vietnam, we lost over 57,000 soldiers. Fortunately our medical science has advanced to the point that wounds which would have meant certain death during the Vietnam era, are now survivable. A last count, we’ve got over 32,000 casualties of the Afghan and Iraq wars. Most of them are in hospitals overseas in places like Germany. The actual death toll is around 3,000.

Not all the Afghans are fighting us. Much like our own Revolutionary War, there is only a percentage of Afghans who are hostile. Yet, that percentage, equipped only with “small arms” and improvised explosives are giving us one helluva time. Now consider the fact that there are more armed Americans with better weapons than the Afghans have. Further, factor into your thinking that a percentage of these are combat veterans. They’ve been trained in our strategies, tactics and techniques. Yes, I think the Founders set in place a very effective system to prevent tyranny.

We’ve Evolved Beyond The Need For The Second Amendment

“Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” _George Santayana (The Life of Reason) 1905

If only that were true! Human evolution is a long, slow, laborious process. We often believe that because our technology has evolved, we have evolved. The truth is, we are the same human beings who produced “Alexander the Great,” Genghis Khan, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler. Don’t get me wrong, we’ve also produced Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Clara Barton, Abraham Lincoln and many other great and good people as well.

To believe that we’ve come so far that our citizenry now has nothing to fear from our Government is like deluding one’s self into believing that you’ve managed to tame a rattlesnake. You can let it sleep on your bed, but it’s going to end poorly. I’m told that when President Richard Nixon met with Chairman Mao of Red China, he asked him what he thought of American democracy. Chairman Mao is supposed to have replied, “it’s an interesting experiment. Let’s see how it turns out.”

We forget that there are buildings in Europe, still in use today, that are older than our nation. We really haven’t been around all that long. There are Japanese Americans living today and some who’s parents were rounded up and put into internment camps during WWII. They were born here and were American citizens in the fullest sense of the word. Yet, they received none of the protections they were guaranteed under our Constitution.

Understanding The Second Amendment - Guantanamo Bay Prison Camp

Prisoners In A Permanent State Of Limbo at Guantanamo Bay.

To those who seem eager to operate on our Constitution and strip out the Second Amendment, beware there are Republicans who are equally eager to do away with “due process.” They are quite comfortable with people being designated an “Enemy Combatant,” tortured and held indefinitely without ever seeing a judge. They have no problem with the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay remaining open indefinitely. They have no problem with the Government invading your privacy or inserting itself between you and your doctor. The only thing putting the breaks on these people is the Constitution. Any time a person is ushered into a surgical suite to be cut open, there is a chance the patient will die. While those who object to the Second Amendment are making their cuts, these Republicans will get to make their cuts as well.

Understanding The Second Amendment - Michael Bloomberg

Michael Bloomberg – Mr. 64oz.

Yes, we do have tyrants in government today. Mayor Michael Bloomberg outlawed 64oz soft drinks. Think about that for a moment. With all the other things that were certainly on his plate, he threw his weight behind telling the citizens of New York City, what size drinks they could have. Personally? I find that terrifying! Why? Because it proves to me that he is interested in micro-managing peoples individual choices at a level heretofore unseen. The question is, what all wouldn’t he do if he thought he could get away with it. Now consider that he only accepts $1.00 in salary for the year. Thus, it’s not about the money, it’s about power and control. It has been my experience that those who crave power desperately are usually the last ones you want to have it.

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed

Posted on April 24, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

The Simple Answer Is Not Always Correct

If the why makes no difference to you, we could simply say, they didn’t have the votes, blame it on the all powerful NRA lobbyist and be done with it. However, reality is rarely as simple as it seems.

Ever since the events at the Sandy Hook Elementary School on 14 December 2012, there has been a constant drum beat in the “Liberal Media” for more “gun control” legislation. It has been like having “Kentucky Fried Chicken” for dinner night after night after night. Though it is probably not very healthy, I do enjoy a bucket of KFC on occasion. I like cake and ice cream too. However, if I knew that each night, I was going to have KFC followed by ice cream and cake, I’d begin dreading coming to dinner.

We all – those of us with hearts – bleed whenever innocent children are victims of senseless violence. Those of us who are parents – indeed I’ve personally lost a child to murder – marvel at the fortitude of the parents who lost their children to this senseless tragedy. I can tell you right now, I would never be able to stand before a camera and speak intelligently had my child been a victim. I just could not do it.

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed - Emilie Parker

Poster Child for a tragedy or the marketing of an agenda?

In fact, I am a little offended by the news media as well as political interests, using these parents at a time when they are still wrapped in the fog of their grief, to advance a political agenda. Although there were 26 victims, the media has pretty much settled on the image of little Emilie Parker to be their “poster child” for this tragedy. Blond hair, blue eyes and an infectious smile, I can certainly see why from an advertising and marketing perspective, why they would make such a choice. However, that is the problem isn’t it? Advertising and Marketing. What are they using her to sell us? What about the other victims? Unless you’ve been to a web site or seen a program where they show all their faces, you probably have no idea what they look like. Yet, they died too. Their families are shattered too.

Brady Law Provisions

If we are going to talk about background checks, it might be nice to know what the current law is. Most people who have never purchased or who do not own a firearm, might be surprised to know that all firearms purchases through licensed dealers – gun stores – are automatically subjected to a federal background check. This includes sells made by licensed dealers at gun shows! I’m sure you’ve seen the news stories of people purchasing firearms at what you’re told is a gun show, apparently without a background check. The angle of the camera is such that you’re given the impression that the transaction is being taped by a hidden camera. Remember the admonition to “believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.”

March 30, 1981 there was an assassination attempt on then President Ronald Reagan. His press secretary, James Brady was shot in the head but thankfully survived. Considering the extent of inter-cranial damage he sustained, his recovery has been truly remarkable. As a result of this tragedy, his wife and he – not unlike the Gabby Gifford and her husband – formed a gun control PAC and lobbied the United States Congress successfully to pass stringent gun control laws. The “Brady Laws” were the result of their efforts. A national instant background check system was put in place, run by the FBI. Here are some of the provisions that already exist today. The Federally prohibiting criteria are as follows:

A person who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year or any state offense classified by the state as a misdemeanor and is punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than two years.
Persons who are fugitives of justice—for example, the subject of an active felony or misdemeanor warrant.
An unlawful user and/or an addict of any controlled substance; for example, a person convicted for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past year; or a person with multiple arrests for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past five years with the most recent arrest occurring within the past year; or a person found through a drug test to use a controlled substance unlawfully, provided the test was administered within the past year.
A person adjudicated mental defective or involuntarily committed to a mental institution or incompetent to handle own affairs, including dispositions to criminal charges of found not guilty by reason of insanity or found incompetent to stand trial.
A person who, being an alien, is illegally or unlawfully in the United States.
A person who, being an alien except as provided in subsection (y) (2), has been admitted to the United States under a non-immigrant visa.
A person dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces
A person who has renounced his/her United States citizenship
The subject of a protective order issued after a hearing in which the respondent had notice that restrains them from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such partner. This does not include ex parte orders.
A person convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime which includes the use or attempted use of physical force or threatened use of a deadly weapon and the defendant was the spouse, former spouse, parent, guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited in the past with the victim as a spouse, parent, guardian or similar situation to a spouse, parent or guardian of the victim.
A person who is under indictment or information for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.

This information is already contained in the FBI’s database and is available usually within 30 seconds. Remember, by law every firearms sell through a licensed dealer is submitted to the FBI’s instant background check database. This law was passed by the 103rd Congress, it was signed into law by Bill Clinton November 30, 1993 and went into effect February 28, 1994. It is the current law of the land.

What Is The “Gun Show Loophole?”

No doubt you’ve heard this phrase bandied about quite a bit of late. The anti-gun movement would have you believe that all anyone has to do is wait for a gun show in their area and walk in and purchase whatever type of firearm they want. I even heard someone claim on a national news show, that you can go into a gun show and purchase a full auto machine gun without even having to show any identification. Not only was this just plain ignorant, it was deplorable journalism. This claim could have been put to the lie by simply making a phone call to any gun dealer in the phone book. It certainly sounded sensational though!

What they’re calling the “gun show loophole” is in essence an individual sale between two persons neither of whom is a licensed gun dealer. You might just as correctly call it the “McDonald’s loophole” or perhaps the “Facebook loophole.” Two people can meet virtually anywhere, get to talking about firearms when one of them mentions they have a firearm for sell and the other agrees to purchase it. This doesn’t have to occur at a gun show.

What most people do not realize – take the Indy 1500 gun show for instance – not every person sitting behind a table selling their products is selling guns or is a licensed firearms dealer. The “Indy 1500 gun show boasts it has 1500 tables. Some people are selling knives, camping gear, books, military memorabilia such as medals and patches. There are even people selling fishing equipment. Depending on the rules of the show in question, if one of these persons had a personal firearm they were interested in selling, you could see it sitting on their table. As a private individual, they are not bound by the laws a licensed firearms dealer is. They are a private individual just like you and I. So if when you see a video clip of someone purchasing a firearm at a gun show without a background check – assuming you’re not viewing a staged re-creation – this is what you’re seeing. The same transaction could have occurred at the McDonald’s across the street.

Should Personal Firearms Sells Be Subject To Background Checks?

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed - Background Check Tax

A Tax by any other name.

Good question! How exactly would you enforce that? I have a .22 caliber single shot rifle that was my grandfather’s. It was passed down to me by my father. I will probably pass it down to my son. There is no paperwork on it and as far as I know, there never has been any paperwork on it. As far as the ATF is concerned, this firearm does not exist. It is a family heirloom. Yes it fires and is in good working order. When I decide to gift one of my sons with this rifle, what are the odds we will go into a licensed dealer and pay the tax – that’s what it is – to have it entered into the system and federal background check run? I’ll tell you. The odds are slim to none and Slim left town.

Trying to enforce such a provision in the law would be nearly impossible. The expense would make enforcing such a law prohibitive. We simply do not have the manpower required in local, State or Federal law enforcement for such an undertaking. So whom are we kidding? Did I mention “Sequestration?”

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed

After reading through the provisions of the Brady Law which is current law, what exactly would you like to see added to that? Remember, we’re not talking about an “assault weapons ban” or an “extended magazine ban,” we’re only talking about background checks. Most reasonable people would conclude, the problem is not that we need a new law. If there is a problem, the problem is with enforcement. Any additional laws passed would face the exact same problem. Laws are meaningless if they’re not enforced or impossible to enforce. We call it “The Honor System.”

Senators generally like their jobs. They want to keep them. People feel strongly on both sides of the gun issue. I would give the edge to the pro-gun side. They tend to have longer memories and they do vote. When you’re asking a Senator to put their careers on the line and make a principled vote, it must be meaningful. Simply engaging in what amounts to political masturbation won’t fly. Ultimately, it is an insult to the victims of gun violence. It is passing a law that actually does nothing, and is designed to shut them up and make them go away.

It is worse than most people know. Mother Jones has an excellent expose` on this fact. Senators Joe Manchin (D) and Pat Toomey (R) put their heads together to come up with an amended Bill that they thought would have a chance of passing. The problem is, if anything it weakened current Brady laws. Here are some of their amended provisions from the Mother Jones website:

Exempts many sales from background checks: The bill doesn’t alter current laws exempting background checks for gun transfers between friends and families. It also wouldn’t require checks for other private sales if the guns weren’t “advertised.” That weakens the effectiveness of background check reform in a big way.
Leaves open a gun-show loophole: Because of the private sales exemption, the bill doesn’t entirely close the so-called gun-show loophole, as UCLA law professor Adam Winkler notes. Someone looking to buy a gun could find a private seller and “agree to meet after the show at a convenient location and make the sale, with no background check.”
May exempt background checks in some rural areas: As part of their effort to woo rural senators, Manchin and Toomey may add a measure allowing dealers who live more than 100 miles away from a licensee to skip background checks.
Exempts background checks for concealed-carry permit holders: Gun buyers who got a concealed-carry permit within the past five years wouldn’t have to undergo background checks for commercial sales.
Reduces the time the FBI has to block a sale: Current law gives the FBI 72 business hours to block a sale by a licensed dealer at a gun show if the buyer’s background check is flagged. The bill would reduce that to 48 hours and, after four years, reduce it again to 24 hours. The FBI would still have to destroy information about the buyer’s identity within 24 hours after a sale.
Allows the interstate sale of handguns: Currently, licensed dealers can only sell rifles and shotguns across state lines. The bill would expand that to include handguns. Licensed dealers would also be allowed to sell guns to other dealers at gun shows outside of their home state.
Weakens laws that restrict transporting guns across state lines: The bill would establish a federal regulation protecting lawful gun owners from arrest when they cross state lines with their firearm, which would weaken laws in states with tighter state and local regulations.
Expands legal immunity to private sellers: In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which prevents victims of gun violence from suing gun manufacturers and dealers for negligence. The Manchin-Toomey bill would expand that immunity to private gun sellers who don’t have a commercial license.
Makes a national gun registry even less likely than before: Senators like Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) are still warning that the bill is a step toward a national gun registry—even though it would punish people who try to create one with up to 15 years in prison.
Expands gun rights for veterans in questionable condition: Current law prohibits veterans from buying guns if the Department of Veterans Affairs considers them “‘mentally incompetent’ to manage their own funds,” after which they are put into the national background check database. The Manchin-Toomey bill would allow veterans unfit to manage their funds to continue buying guns while they appealed the VA’s decision, and expand the ability of veterans already in the system to file appeals to have their name removed. It would also overturn a law that bans members of the military from buying guns sold by dealers in their home state. (These Points are directly from the Mother Jones website)

Thus, if you were a Senator, willing to put your career on the line to cast a principled vote, this is not the hill you’d want to die on. Why did the Senate Background Check Bill Fail? It added absolutely nothing to the existing Brady Laws, if anything it weakened them. If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, all your problems seem to look like nails. When you’re a legislator, your first response is to pass a new law. Really? How many laws do we need? Murdering people is already illegal. Even with the threat of the death penalty, it hasn’t seemed to stop murders from occurring.

Gun violence is a symptom of a problem within our society. 24 hours a day we are bombarded by the media with stories designed and tailor made to instil fear in society. From global warming to an asteroid potentially ending life on Earth at any moment, to Yellowstone erupting, North Korea starting a nuclear war, to a fertilizer factory exploding and wiping out a neighborhood. We are being fed a steady diet designed to create fear and panic. In this atmosphere, you’re telling people that they don’t need firearms to keep them safe? That is a heavy lift and a tough sell. Did I mention terrorist running and gunning through your neighborhood, shooting it out with the Police?

Rachel Maddow’s Problem

Posted on April 18, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

Rachel Maddow's Problem - Commencement Address

Dr. Maddow gives a commencement address

I first became aware of Dr. Maddow – yes, she is a bona fide Doctor, she received her Ph.D in politics from Oxford University in 2001 – during the days of the now defunct “Air America” radio network. Air America was an attempt to offer a counter voice to “Right Wing” Talk Radio that was and still is, permeating what is offered all through the day, mostly on your AM dials.

It was a good idea. However, as is often the case, high expectations, combined with a limited investment and a limited amount of time to build an audience with an advertising base, put the success of the venture out of reach. It is difficult to match, in a matter of months or a few years, what your opponents have had decades to put in place. Most investors want a rapid return on their investments. It requires real commitment to take the long view. Evidently, not enough of their venture capitalist could afford that type of commitment.

The Early Days – Air America Radio

Rachel in Seattle

Air America did have a remarkable array of talent. In addition to Rachel Maddow, there were Al Franken, Randi Rhodes, Ron Reagan, Mike Malloy and Thom Hartmann to name but a few. The problem wasn’t the on-air talent. The problem was with a management that didn’t know how to compete in the marketplace they were fighting in. It is easy to say, “radio is radio is radio,” however the reality is, “Progressive Talk Radio” appeals to an entirely different demographic. Different educational levels, different income levels and of course, different lifestyles. Running a “buy gold, because the world is about to end” commercial on a progressive station is not going to meet with the same success as running the same commercial on say, “The Glenn Beck Show.” It takes time and research to find your market and the advertisers to fill that market niche.

Keith Olbermann

Following the demise of Air America Radio, most of the talent landed on their feet and have gone on to continue the “Progressive Fight.” Al Franken ran for Congress and got elected to the United States Senate. Others continued in the radio broadcasting venue and Rachel was brought to MSNBC by Keith Olbermann. As Keith’s understudy, Rachel was great. Keith’s hard hitting, Edward R. Murrow style laced with satire and humor was nicely counter balanced by Rachel’s highly detailed, almost forensic examination of the days events. Keith gave the overview and Rachel connected the minute threads. Keith’s presence kept the news presented on MSNBC fresh, moving and varied. In Keith’s absence, the network turned to Rachel in hopes that she could shoulder the mantle of leadership.

MSNBC Gives Rachel A Home

Rachel Maddow's Problem - Rachel and her Mate, Susan Mikula

Rachel with her Partner? Mate? Spouse? Susan Mikula

For awhile, it appeared that Rachel was up to the task and would be able to continue as Keith’s legacy. Overtime it became apparent that Rachel Maddow desperately needed the rudder that Keith provided. The first intimations of this began surfacing when I noticed that number of stories that Rachel reported on that had to do with “Gay Rights.” Anyone who knows anything about Rachel Maddow, knows that she is unabashedly a lesbian. She makes no pretense of her sexual orientation. Indeed when Rachel first appeared on MSNBC, she wore almost no make-up, no jewellery and in essence approached television as she approached radio. You can pretty much wear whatever you want in radio broadcasting.

Rachel Maddow's Problem - Yearbook Photo

Rachel’s yearbook photo from her “Pre-Butch” years.

Under Keith’s tutelage, she began softening her image. The faintest hints of eye-shadow, foundation, and lip gloss began appearing. On occasion I’ve even seen her sport modest earrings. Rachel is not a bad looking woman. However, the whole “Butch” thing she had in radio, just doesn’t sell when you’re dealing with a highly diverse television audience that can actually see you delivering the news. Nevertheless, without the mentoring of Keith Olbermann, Rachel has slowly degenerated into a “two issue” broadcaster. Like a horn player who only knows how to blow two notes, no matter how impassioned her performance, no matter how much dancing around, it’s still only two notes.

You can count on Rachel to reliably cover Gay rights or Gun control. Show after show after show. Only when something really big intrudes and simply must be covered, will Rachel deviate. Even then, she has been known to frame those events in the context of either Gay rights or Gun control. The recent bombing of the Boston Marathon is an excellent example. The following is a clip from her on-site coverage of the events wherein she works in the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting. Okay, so there was a delegation there. If you polled the crowd, you could find people who lost loved ones during the 9/11 attacks too.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

What happened at the Boston Marathon was an act of terror. The cost in life and lost limbs was high enough without trying to piggyback Sandy Hook to support a personal and political agenda. It amounts to pimping the victims – of both tragedies – to support your own personal agenda. It’s repugnant, crass and just plain wrong.

Rachel Maddow’s Problem

“But here’s the thing about rights – they’re not actually supposed to be voted on. That’s why they’re called rights.” __Rachel Maddow

What I find fascinating is that on almost any given night, you can listen to Dr. Maddow make logical and impassioned arguments for the recognition of the Rights of all people regardless of their sexual orientation. Of course it then follows that Gay people should be allowed to openly serve in our military. They should be accorded the right to marry, and have that marriage recognized by the State. They should be allowed to adopt and raise children. The list goes on.

Rights Are Rights!

Rachel Maddow's Problem - Rachel With Her First Car

Rachel exercising here Right to be who she is.

In principle, I personally support equal rights and equal access for all people regardless of their race, gender or sexual orientation. If you’re a human being, you’re entitled to human Rights. Period. Whether I agree or disagree with your lifestyle or not. What borders on the surreal is in her very next segment, Rachel will shift gears and argue against people’s Constitutionally protected, 2nd Amendment Rights to keep and bear Arms. Yes, those are also a part of the same Constitution that Rachel often points to when she’s arguing that it’s language and interpretation be applied to the Rights of Gay people.

Why am I picking on Rachel? Unlike most of the talking – air – heads reading a Teleprompter, Rachel is a bonafide Ph.D. I’ve noticed she never mentions this and if anything takes pains to de-emphasize her educational credentials. I have and can wink at ignorance. However, Rachel is anything but. Thus, her arguments must be seen as disingenuous sophistry. If the 2nd Amendment can be voted on or misinterpreted, then the Rights of Gay people may also be voted on. Rachel has made it abundantly clear that she is anti-gun and pretty much everything people who are “pro-gun” stand for.

I do not agree with all the various positions of the “Pro-Gun” movement. However, I do understand the clause in the 2nd Amendment which says and was upheld in the “Heller Case,” “…The People’s Right To Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.” Both the President – Barack Obama – and the United States Supreme Court have upheld that the 2nd Amendment outlines an individual Right. It does not apply to a State – National Guard – Militia.

This is Rachel we’re talking about. Doctor Maddow. We’re not talking about someone hired for their photogenic, eye-candy appeal. Rachel was hired because of her intellect, insight and her ability to break complex events down to their simplest components and explain them in a way that common people can understand. Thus, when I hear Dr. Maddow point to the inviolate authority of the United States Constitution and interpret it’s provisions broadly such that not recognizing same sex marriage is discrimination and not equal protection under the law, then try and suggest that the 2nd Amendment from the very same Constitution is up for review, I am forced to question her honesty and suspect her commitment to principle. Rachel Maddow’s problem is, she’s entirely too smart to convincingly play dumb.

Rule By Fear – Boston Marathon Bombing

Posted on April 16, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

First let me say that our hearts go out to all the victims and families of the victims of the terrorist bombing that occurred yesterday. No words will help to ease the pain, the loss or the discomfort of those who experienced this tragedy. We all came together in solidarity to stand with you. In the days, weeks and months to come, let us not forget that out of many, we are one.

Have You Ever Noticed?

As I look back over recent history, I cannot recall a period of time, when we as a nation have not been given a bogeyman to fear. I was born in 1957, the beginning of the “Atomic Age.” I remember the old “duck and cover” drills in elementary school. Looking back, it seems laughably silly to think that hiding under a wooden desk will in anyway help one survive a nuclear war, but that was all we had.

Fear has been used to stampede the American people like a herd of cattle in whatever direction those in power wished us to go. The following political ad is a classic example of this. It was aired only once, but it worked and we still talk about it to this day.

Growing up on the west coast – Seattle Washington – we were told that the entire west coast could drop off into the Pacific Ocean if we had a big quake along the notorious San Andreas Fault. Never mind the fact that what causes earthquakes along that fault is that the tectonic plate is pushing east, up onto our western coast. It was something for us to fear.

I’m not going to go down the entire list of the terror Du Jour we were served up on an almost daily basis. I’ll hit a few highlights. Remember the “Ozone Hole?” They were telling us that this huge hole had opened in our Ozone layer. The ramifications were severe! Millions dying from skin cancer caused by the unfiltered ultraviolet light from our Sun. Crops being burned causing massive famine. We all had to upgrade the air conditioning systems in our cars and in our homes to be able to take the much more expensive and eco-friendly versions of Freon.

You don’t hear anything about that “Ozone Hole” now. However, every few years your air conditioning system becomes obsolete. The bottom line? Pay more money! Remember the “Y2K” scare? Our computers were going to crash worldwide sending us back to the “Stone Age.” People bought generators – yeah, myself included – stocked up on food and waited the stroke of midnight heralding the turn of the new century. Nothing happened. We spent a lot of money though.

The Attacks On 9/11

Whether or not you believe our Government’s account of the events of that day or you’ve actually done some research, one thing that is beyond dispute is, as a nation we made some very bad decisions based on fear. It is not at all clear that we have survived the consequences of those bad decisions. We attacked Iraq for no reason running up trillions of dollars in debt. Don’t think! Be afraid! We’ll point you in the direction we want you to go!

The Camera Never Blinks

Because of our irrational fear, we allowed the Government to rip up our “Bill Of Rights.” Remember the color coded days compliments of our slapped together department of Homeland Security? Patriot Act? Without a peep we have given up our presumption of privacy. Phone calls, emails, even what books you check out at your local library are now monitored. Speaking of monitoring, We’ve allowed surveillance cameras to be put up on almost every street corner and all along our Interstate highways. If the game were Chess, somebody has carefully been maneuvering their pieces into position and checkmate may now be inevitable.

Rule By Fear

Police caught on tape removing the AR-15 from Adam Lanza’s car

It is time to wake up! Remember the “Sandy Hook Shooting?” The very first day, we were told that the shooter was one Ryan Lanza. Later that same day, we learned that no, it was Adam Lanza who for some mysterious reason was carrying his brother’s identification. We were told by the officers on the scene that the shooter – Adam Lanza – used two handguns. We were even given the make of those pistols. One was a Glock and the other was a Sig Sauer. Both were 9mm in caliber. Day one, we were told that an AR-15 Bushmaster had been discovered in the trunk of the car Adam Lanza presumably drove.

For those unfamiliar with firearms, there is a huge difference between 9mm brass and the .223 brass that would have littered the floor had the Bushmaster been used. Without even seeing the guns, anyone, certainly a law enforcement officer would immediately have known that a .223 caliber rifle was involved merely by looking at all the brass lying about. My point is, that is not a mistake anyone even remotely competent enough to respond to that crisis would have made.

Time line of News reporting

By “Day Three” that AR-15 Bushmaster had miraculously floated out of the back of the car and of its own volition, shot magazine after magazine into those children. Why of “its own volition?” Adam Lanza had already committed suicide – so they say – and was long dead. It seems that someone with an agenda needed the weapon used, to be a so called “assault rifle.” We have seen the steady and constant drum beat for gun control. Be afraid, be very afraid… Rule by fear raises its ugly head again.

Sandy Hook And The Boston Marathon Bombing

This proves my point. There is absolutely no connection between these two tragedies. God forbid that the enthralled public have their attention turned away from the ineffective “Gun Control Debate.” Notice how MSNBC host Rachel Maddow deftly links the two together.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

If you lose someone to a tragedy, the circumstances of that tragedy don’t really matter to you. A mother who loses her child in an accident caused by an impaired driver doesn’t hurt any less than a mother who’s child died in Sandy Hook Elementary or someone who’s family member was a victim of one of the bombs that went off in Boston yesterday.

A victim of the Boston Marathon bombing

I have been to the funeral home to say good bye to a loved one far too many times of late. If someone walked up to me at that moment and began to rehearse their own loss I would be deeply offended and if they weren’t careful, they’d be nursing a blackened eye… at the very least! You don’t pimp grief for political gain. Of course, if you have an agenda, you just might do this.

Naivety Is Not A Virtue

“Trust ye not a living soul… and walk even carefully amongst the dead.” __My mother

I have never forgotten this advice and it has served me well. Unfortunately we now live in a world such that when I watch the news, I constantly remind myself that I really have no idea what is actually going on. Why? Because the fool filling dead air has no idea what is actually going on. It will take at least two or three days for them to get the official story together. Will it be the truth? Most likely not. Truth is not necessary when the objective is to rule by fear. You would do well to bear this in mind. Was the bombing of the Boston Marathon an act of international terror, or was it the act of a home grown anarchist? That will largely depend on the results of meetings which are occurring behind closed doors right now.

If there is some political or economic gain to be obtained by naming some foreign based group responsible, that is what the determination will be. If on the other hand, it benefits the powers that be to call this the act of a home grown anarchist, they will no doubt accuse some poor soul and make them disappear under one or more of those laws we let them pass because of our fear.

Black In America – Mark Kelly Finds His Blackness?

Posted on April 10, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

On 8 January 2011, in Tucson AZ, Congresswoman Gabrielle – Gabby – Giffords was shot along with 18 other people during a “meet your Congresswoman” constituent meeting, held in the parking lot of a supermarket. Jared Loughner drew his handgun, shot Congresswoman Giffords in the head before turning his gun on the crowd. Miraculously, Congresswoman Giffords survived and against all odds has made a remarkable recovery.

Gabby’s recovery has doubtlessly been aided by the selfless devotion of her husband, Captain Mark Kelly whom has been steadfast, devoted and constantly by her side. Love has miraculous healing properties. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that they both not only love one another, but are in love with one another. I could not imagine a trauma of this magnitude happening to my wife, but I do know that I would be devastated. I have joked that if anything ever happens to her, they’re going to have to put my hospital bed next to hers.

I not only fully understand Captain Kelly’s new found activism for “gun control,” I would expect no less. You cannot expect anyone to be completely rational and pragmatic about an issue that so nearly resulted in the death of a person they love. Because of this tragedy, Mark Kelly has started a political action committee – PAC – to fight for gun control. Last I heard, they had a budget of over $10 million dollars.

A Crusader Is Born

Mark Kelly presents himself as a gun owner, staunch 2nd Amendment advocate that believes in sensible gun laws. He makes no bones about his owning guns. Evidently he is a fan of the “Government Model .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol. We’ll ignore the fact that had his wife been shot in the head with a .45, she wouldn’t be here today, because I’m sure he would argue that was beside the point. Nevertheless, she was the first person shot and was hit by the first bullet in Loughner’s magazine.

Government Model 45

It is not that the .45 caliber is a more lethal round, it just happens to be larger, heavier and has more kinetic energy. It would not only have penetrated her skull, it would have smashed it and sent bone fragments as secondary projectiles all throughout her brain. The resulting trauma would have resulted in instantaneous death.

Since Captain Kelly is not an uneducated man, one must presume that he knows this. Thus one must question his true motives and commitment to the expressed agenda of his PAC. Firearms are not safe. They’re not designed to be. They are designed to deliver destructive force to whatever target is in front of them. If you believe that guns are the problem, it is intellectually disingenuous to attempt to pick and choose which guns, in which configurations are acceptable. Any firearm can take a human life.

Trading In Fear

One of the main arguments has been the supposed ease with which these so called, “military style” weapons can be obtained. To hear the proponents of total gun confiscation say it, these weapons can be obtained without a background check and absolutely no oversight whatsoever. They’re sold on every street corner across America, right? Most often these suppositions are expressed by people who have never been anywhere near one of these street corners where a transaction of this nature might occur. Imagine Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O’Donnell down in Harlem, Compton, Watts or the South side of Chicago. They must be clairvoyant because they certainly seem expert in what goes on in these neighborhoods.

Of course, isn’t that sort of the whole problem? This entire debate has come about – ironically – not because a sitting congresswoman was shot in the head. Not because a movie theater was turned into a killing zone. I might point out that none of these mass shootings occurred in depressed, inner city, minority communities. This entire debate came about because some young – mostly white – school children were gunned down in an up scale suburban community where, damnit, these things just are not supposed to happen!

Zombie Apocalypse? Or Inner city people coming to get your stuff?

What is the fear? The fear is that our protected – mostly white – suburban communities could become as dangerous as our inner cities. We cannot have that now can we? After all, people move away from the inner cities, pay higher tax rates, pay higher mortgages for the illusion of safety. Though often unsaid, the flip side of this logic is that armed minorities are coming to get you. I’ve put into words what far too many white people feel on a visceral level. It manifests in seemingly one of two ways. On the one hand you have those – many whom have very little of value to anyone but themselves – who are arming to protect their homesteads from the “Zombie Apocalypse.” Of course the Zombies are colorful stand-ins for inner city people who did not prepare for the collapse they’re so looking forward to. On the other hand, you have those who believe we can pass enough laws to totally disarm everyone and thus prevent the whole scenario in its entirety. Of course, both sides are deluded.

Black In America – Mark Kelly Finds His Blackness

Black in America - Mark Kelly buys a gun

Mark Kelly’s trip to a gun store.

In a stunt to generate some publicity, Captain Kelly set out to show on video tape, how easy it is to acquire a military style rifle. With cameras in tow he went into a Tucson, AZ gun store to purchase an AR-15 style rifle. He also purchased a “Government Model” .45 semi-automatic pistol. After filling out the paper work, he was told there was a waiting period on the rifle. It had been taken in as a sell and there is a 20 day waiting period for law enforcement to run the gun to make certain it had not been used in a crime. Uh oh! What’s this? It seems Captain Kelly succeeded in proving that there are laws, regulations and oversight involved in purchasing a firearm.

In subsequent interviews Captain Kelly stated that his intentions were to prove how easy it is for anyone to acquire these types of weapons. Evidently, the owner of the gun store was listening. He contacted Captain Kelly, returned his money and told him that the sell was being cancelled. His reasons? It was clear that Captain Kelly was not purchasing the firearm for his own personal use. Why is this important? Most people are unaware that if you go into a gun store and say that you are purchasing a firearm for someone else – they could be standing right beside you – the store owner is obligated not to sell you that firearm. Why? Because the presumption is that the person you’re buying the firearm for, is not legally able to purchase the firearm for him or herself. Yes, that’s the law… believe it or not.

Reality Check

Colorado Shooter – James Holmes

We often take so much for granted. If I as a Black man, had ordered all the ammunition, firearms, and tactical gear that James Holmes purchased, it would have been delivered by an ATF SWAT team. This is a reality in America that minorities know all too well.

I was out on a shooting range one day when a white guy walked up to me and asked me if I was Benjamin Moore. I had never met him and was surprised he knew my name. Come to find out, we had participated in some on-line forums. He saw me, figured, Black guy, with guns, must be Ben Moore.

We exchanged pleasantries for awhile, then he got around to the question he was dying to ask. “Have you heard about the upcoming race war?” He asked. “What?” I replied. “The race war?” “What race war?” Then he explained that he had been hearing that the Black people were planning to rise up and kill all white people. I nearly busted a gut laughing. When I had finally gulped enough air to speak again. I gave him the facts on what it means to be Black in America.

The first thing I pointed out was that Black people are only 12% of the population of these United States. We do not own any firearms manufacturing plants, nor do we own any munitions plants. Thus, we would have to buy are weapons and ammunition from white people.

Further I pointed out, if Black people were going to start such a war, we would have to start it on a Friday after 5pm and it would have to be over by Monday morning at 9am. Why? Because we’ve got to be back at work, working for “whitey.” We’ve got mortgages, rent, cable bills, car notes the usual. I walked off and left him standing there like a penny waiting on change.

Being Black in America is far different than most white people assume. The entire gun control issue left reason and rationality behind long ago. Now both camps have become fear merchants. The NRA is pushing the coming “Zombie Apocalypse.” The anti-gun side is pushing the same thing with just a minor twist. They pretend they’re rational because they don’t believe in Zombies… yet, they are attempting to convince everyone that they’re in danger from guns. For them, firearms are the Zombies. Both sides are deluded. We need rationality.

Holy Shroud – Holy Fake? What Do You Believe?

Posted on March 30, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

Tis the season we celebrate the Spring Equinox. Of course thanks to the Catholic Church, most people call it Easter. In point of fact the Spring Equinox occurred on March the 20th, but hey! We’re close enough.

Easter is the celebration – helluva thing to celebrate – of the crucifixion, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. “Good Friday” marks his death and “Easter Sunday” marks his resurrection. Each year preachers compete to tell the story in new and more profound ways. I’m not going to compete with them, but I will point out a few rather glaring problems with the entire account.

Problems With The Crucifixion Story

The first glaring problem is the actual historical reason Jesus was supposed to have been crucified. That form of capital punishment was generally reserved for the really bad actors. According to Biblical accounts, Jesus wouldn’t qualify for crucifixion by a long shot. He certainly hadn’t murdered anyone. He had not led or been involved in a revolt against Rome. If they merely wanted to kill a Jew, there certainly was no need to go to the expense – nails were expensive – of building a cross and tacking him up. They could just as easily have run him through with a sword and been done with it.

What we do know according to the Bible is that above his head, they hung a sign which read, “King Of The Jews.” The whole point of crucifixion was that it be an extremely effective form of societal control. You walked by, looked up and read the offense the person had committed and immediately became convinced that you probably wanted to avoid repeating whatever that poor soul had done. This is why when a person was crucified, they remained on the cross until they started to rot. The smell was also part of the process. It served to get your attention.

If being or claiming to be the “King of the Jews” was a capital offense, shouldn’t King Herod have been tacked up beside Jesus? After all, he actually was the “King of the Jews.” If Rome had a problem with there being a “King of the Jews,” Herod would have been crucified long before Jesus.

Then there’s the problem of Jesus being removed from the cross on the same day he died. Remember what the whole point of the exercise was. Crucifixion was not a trivial form of execution. Once the Romans went to the trouble to tack you up… you stayed there. Thus, the story is rather suspect to say the least.

Of course, this brings us to the whole “3 days and 3 nights” prophecy. If Jesus was indeed crucified and buried on “Good Friday” and resurrected “Easter Sunday Morning,” You have a very difficult time getting 3 days and 3 nights out of that time span. You’ll find these and other Biblical errors explored in my article, “Biblical Errors – Why The Bible Is Not God’s Word.”

Holy Shroud – Holy Fake?

Your first clue as to the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin is that the Catholic Church refuses to declare it as authentic. Given all the other – sometimes questionable – miracles they’ve documented, the fact they’re not willing to declare the Shroud of Turin the authentic burial shroud of Jesus should tell you something.

Antipope Clement VII

This might have something to do with the fact, when it first made it’s official appearance in Lirey, France in 1390, Bishop Pierre d’Arcis wrote a memorandum to Antipope Clement VII, stating that the shroud was a forgery and that the artist had confessed. Thus from its very inception, it was found to be a forgery. They discovered the artist who created it and he confessed to having done it. Ordinarily this would be enough and we could close the books on this matter. If only it were that simple… Once faith and belief get involved, the human propensity for ignoring facts in an effort to alter reality to fit their faith can be overwhelmingly powerful. Of course it doesn’t hurt any, that you can make a lot of money putting it on display.

Science Weighs In

Radiocarbon Dating

In 1988 the Catholic Church agreed to allow the Shroud to be subjected to “Radio Carbon Dating.” Knowing that the Shroud had been damaged in a fire they took pains to select a portion of the cloth that was away from the site of any repairs and patches. To wit: they took pains to test a piece of the original cloth. Since this test is destructive, they divided the swath of cloth they were permitted to test and sent it to three different labs. Labs at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology concluded with 95% confidence that the shroud material dated to 1260–1390 AD. This of course makes it about 1,000 years too young to have been the burial shroud of Jesus. Nevertheless, if you don’t like what one group of experts says, keep shopping until you find some experts who will say what you want them to.

Putting faith ahead of reality always ends poorly.

There have of course been later experts who have attempted to impugn the protocols of the original tests, even though they were not involved with those tests, nor were they present to have witnessed any flaws in how the science was conducted. Thus they are in essence proffering opinions about something they simply do not know. Because carbon dating is a destructive test – the sample is destroyed – the Catholic Church is not letting them cut any more pieces of the Shroud. Of course, this hasn’t seemed to present a problem because they’ve theorized that the piece selected for testing “must have been from an invisible repair.” It is this same type of thinking that causes people to fall for those Nigerian scam artists. They so want to believe that someone they’ve never met, picked their email address at random and wants to share 20% of $32 million dollars with them. They focus on the hope and ignore the reality.

Notice Anything Odd About The Image?

Holy Shroud - Holy Fake? Max Von Sydow as Jesus

Max Von Sydow as Jesus in “The Greatest Story Ever Told.”

I’m not talking about the reverse photographic negative effect. That is simply a by-product of the process. I’m talking about the ethnic genotype of the face. The face on the Shroud is that of a white European, not a Semitic person. As a matter of fact, it does bear a striking resemblance to Max Von Sydow’s portrayal of Jesus in the movie “Greatest Story Ever Told.”

Holy Shroud - Holy Fake? Real Face of Jesus?

“Real Face Of Jesus” from the Popular Mechanics project.

In point of fact Popular Mechanics commissioned a study a few years back on “The Real Face of Jesus.” They used forensics and genome typing to come up with a face that matched that of a Jewish male living in that area at that time. Did they come up with what Jesus actually looked like? Of course not. However, the face they came up with is a lot more realistic than any of the white European depictions that are so popular today.

At that time in history, the only Europeans in the area were the Greeks and the Romans. Jesus was neither. Since the Bible goes to great length to give Jesus’ genealogy, if the Bible is correct, Jesus had no European ancestry in his lineage. If the face on the Shroud was actually Jesus’ face or even the face of a Semitic person, it would not resemble the face of a European from the middle ages.

Miraculous Deception

One of the main arguments of Shroud proponents has to do with how the image got on the Shroud. Never mind the fact that the Bible forbids worshipping graven images, according to these people, the last miracle Jesus performed was taking a rather unflattering photograph of himself at the very moment of his resurrection. You hear such things as there was a burst of resurrection energy that imprinted the image of Jesus on the cloth.

They point to such things as the lack of brush strokes, claiming this as proof no human hand could of produced the Shroud. As you know, the only options available to artist back then were paints and brushes. Unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. We are always quick to assume, that we are more advanced, have better technology, know more than our ancestors did. I’m still waiting for someone to conclusively prove how the Pyramids were constructed, how stone was cut and how stones weighing tons were moved at a time when the hardest metal they supposedly had was copper and they had yet to invent the wheel. Perhaps they knew some things we have yet to discover today?

Holy Shroud - Holy Fake? Modern Reproduction of the Shroud of Turin

Modern reproduction of the Shroud of Turin. It has all the same features.

The fact is, the Shroud is easily reproducible today, using the tools and techniques available in 1390. No resurrection energy required. The image has all the same characteristics. It is a negative and when photographed produces a positive image. Since the fellow used as the model is still alive, and doesn’t have the power to walk on water or raise the dead, I think it’s safe to say he’s pretty normal and fairly average.

So, Holy Shroud – Holy Fake? What do you believe?

Gold Scams – Ugly Truths About Gold Investing

Posted on March 28, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

Golden Fleecing

There is little doubt that the global economy is extremely volatile right now. The markets are doing a remarkable impression of a world class roller-coaster. If you’ve been working all your life and have a retirement plan that contains investments in the Stock Market, being on edge is quite understandable.

In the United States we’re crawling our way up out of a recession – no thanks to the Republicans – and things are quite fragile in our economy right now. Ask anyone old enough to understand the global economic crisis and invariably you will hear similar expressions of unease.

Be afraid… be very afraid!

It is this very unease that creates a market niche that companies dealing in “precious metals” are eager to fill. Have you been paying attention? It seems to me that ever since the big “Y2K” scare, when all our computers were going to crash and send us back into the stone age, we’ve had one threat after another. Without putting my tinfoil conspiracy theorist cap on, one could almost get the impression that someone(s) were orchestrating global events to keep everyone right on the verge of panic.

First Y2K, then the “911 Attacks,” then two wars, one totally unnecessary and against a nation that had nothing to do with the “911 Attacks.” This led to a highly strained U.S. Economy. Next the wealth of our nation was siphoned off into the European banking houses through the “Real Estate Débâcle.” One thing after the other. There is small wonder that right about now, for a segment of society, visions of a post apocalyptic future seem all too real.

We see this with the proliferation of survival shows such as, “Dual Survival,” “Les Stroud’s “Survivorman,” “Doomsday Preppers” and others. Don’t get me wrong, I am a firm believer in preparation and self-reliance. There is a fundamental flaw in the logic of people who sincerely believe that gold is going to be of any value in a world that has totally gone to Hell.

Thinking The Unthinkable

Nobody ever thinks about toilet paper. How much do you have stored up?

Let us go there for a moment. Let us embrace with open arms this fantasy scenario wherein we are all in survival mode, fighting to protect our loved ones, foraging and bartering for food and the needed essentials. Suppose I had a large supply of toilette paper. If you doubt it’s value, imagine going a few weeks without it. After you’re good and chafed, you’re going to want to buy some toilette paper.

Will you attempt to give me a gold coin for a roll or two? I’m probably going to ask, “what else you’ve got?” Why? Because gold isn’t of much value in the type of scenario you’re imagining. As of today, the price of 1 oz. of gold is roughly $1,606 US. However, if the world goes to hell, there won’t be any markets artificially inflating that price. I’m certainly not going to part with $1,000 worth of toilet paper for your one coin. Breaking off a piece of that coin would make it even less attractive as a bargaining chip. The simple truth is, a handful of .22 caliber bullets would have more intrinsic trading value than a handful of gold coins. You might even be able to negotiate a one bullet per roll price.

Gold Scams And The Precious Metals Market

The first thing you need to know is, the precious metals market is largely unregulated! Read that again. Convicted felons can and have opened precious metals brokering companies. There are no reporting requirements. No agency inspects the gold to make certain it is of the purity levels claimed. For all you know, you could well be purchasing a gold plated lead slug… and that’s if you actually opt to take possession of the gold you believe you’re purchasing.

Many companies try to push you into what they call a “secure storage contract.” This is supposedly a highly secure storage vault where they will store your gold for a nominal fee. The beauty of this is you never see your gold, you never take physical possession of your gold, all you get are quarterly statements – a piece of paper – claiming how much your gold is worth based on the current market price. What could possibly go wrong?

In point of fact there have been criminal enterprises wherein people have been duped into converting their entire retirement accounts into gold. The broker took the money, and never purchased any gold with the money. People were told their non-existent gold was secure in their vaults and began receiving quarterly statements on their non-existent gold. When that “rainy day” came, as it always does, those poor souls discovered their retirement savings were all gone and in many cases the broker had skipped out with their money. It was only then they learned that gold is not insured under the FDIC.

What about gold backed securities? You’re investing in the stock market and that is regulated so you should be safer right? Here’s the problem with this theory. You never buy high in hopes your stock will go higher. Gold – just like the salesman says – is at an all time high. Will it go higher? It might. However, it also might go lower. All investments carry risk. If you decide to cash in your investments, you’re going to be paid in good ol’ U.S. dollars. If the dollar crashes as the profits of doom are predicting, you’re still back to trying to get value for those dollars.

The simple facts are if the United States goes under, gold and dollars aren’t going to do you a lot of good. You’re back to the example I gave with regards to toilette paper. If a gold coin has no value to me, a paper dollar surely won’t.

Gold Scams – Ugly Truths About Gold Investing

Talk radio is rife with hucksters predicting the end of the world as we know it. “Buy gold” they say. Isn’t it ironic that almost every group prophesying the end of the world or the end of the United States, always seems to want your money to tell you all about the horrors to come. If the United States, or the world is coming to an end, what good is money?

You can hear expert after expert(?) pointing to the beginning of our demise as being the point where we got off the “gold standard.” I’m not advocating the Federal Reserve system by any means. However, we need to interject some reality and some facts. You simply cannot have a global economy based on the gold standard. Money is transferred all around the world in the blink of an electronic eye. This is necessary for our economy to compete.

Nations with whom we do not have an established rate of exchange, we are negotiating with – sometimes minute by minute – the exchange rates between their currencies and ours. You simply cannot ship gold around the world fast enough to keep up. It can’t be done. The global economy would grind to a halt. You might not like this, but this is the reality in which we live. Very few U.S. Citizens are in love with China, yet the isles at Walmart are full all day long with people buying cheap Chinese made goods.

When you go to the grocery store and purchase fresh fruit in December and January, corn on the cob, strawberries and broccoli, precious little of that was grown in greenhouses on U.S. soil. You are reaping the benefits of a global economy. That global economy requires the ability to transfer funds at electronic speeds. You simply cannot do this with gold.

Most of the people lamenting about the U.S. leaving the “gold standard,” simply do not understand economics. They’re no better than the hucksters trying to get you to invest in gold when it is at an all time high, and trying to get you to place your hopes in an unregulated market. We supposedly regulate our Stock Market and you see how it almost destroyed itself and the rest of the American economy. Imagine what could happen to you in an unregulated market.

We cannot eat money

Have Progressives Lost Their Damn Minds?

Posted on March 21, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.

America’s Disgrace

After surviving eight disastrous years of the Bush – Cheney Regime and the near apocalyptic consequences of that, the nation decided to do something different for a change. Instead of electing the next fool in line, we decided to actually put some thought into it. We went with a young African-American Senator. Some might say, he had “limited experience” but he was extremely gifted. He was highly educated. In touch with the youthful vitality of our nation. Full of infectious hope, he would bring new ideas to the table.

No matter how great he is, he still needs blockers.

The weed of racism has deep roots in our American garden and we had to work mightily to overcome the choke hold of it’s grip on our politics. We refused to take “no” for an answer and beat back the doubters with the mantra of “yes we can.” And we did it! Then we all took a rest from our labors. It was almost as though we had passed our star “Running Back” the ball and we headed to the bench to watch the game. Politics like football is a team sport. No matter how gifted one might be, they cannot defeat the opposing team all by themselves. Did everyone really believe that the Republican opposition was going to join us on the benches and sit back and watch President Obama run up the score? Based on our actions, or more correctly inactions, that seems to be exactly what we thought.

Obstruct

The very night of President Obama’s first inauguration, while we wept, danced and celebrated, Republicans were behind closed doors plotting our downfall and destruction. Their primary objective as expressed by Mitch McConnell, “was to make President Obama a one term President.” They purposefully decided not to govern and to obstruct any and everything President Obama has attempted to do.

I’m beginning to suspect the real problem Republicans have is our President happens to be Black!

We have had a record number of filibusters since President Obama took office. They’re on track to shatter that record again this year. We’ve seen Republicans sponsor a bill, then when President Obama says “it’s a good idea” they’ve voted against and killed their own bill. Even bills that used to be proforma – no brainers – such as VAWA – The Violence Against Women Act – have met with stiff opposition. Whom in their right mind wouldn’t vote to pass the Violence Against Women Act? If you’re reading this, you’ve got a mother… guaranteed. That’s a bill you’d vote for if for no other reason than you’ve got a mother.

Racism Exposes Stupidity

Here’s the thing everyone needs to remember. The Republicans control the House of Representatives. Thus there is no need for even one filibuster in the Senate over a bill! If you need to, read that again. Before a bill ever makes it to the President’s desk for his signature, it must first make it through not one, but both Houses of Congress. Thus merely for the sake of seeming reasonable, why wouldn’t you let it pass the Senate with no opposition and let the Republican controlled House of Representatives take the hit for blocking it? Senate Republicans could act responsibly and give the impression that they were reasonable and above the fray. However their innate racism causes them to do things that simply make no common sense and ultimately, are bad strategically. I fully expect Mitch McConnell to lose to Ashley Judd in his next election and it will be his own fault. For those who need a refresher course on how our legislative process works, I present a classic “School House Rock.”

Given that Republicans have all lined up to be fitted with their patriotic, red, white and blue straight jackets, you would think that the Democratic Progressives would be pressing their advantage and mopping the floor with a Republican party in full disarray… They are not!

Have Progressives Lost Their Damn Minds?

When your foe has shot himself in the foot, you don’t rush over and bandage his wounds, give him a shot of morphine and a crutch so he can continue the fight. You put him away… efficiently and with finality. This is not a sport. This is a fight for the future of our nation. If you have the strength of convictions in your political philosophy and ideologies, you have but one objective and that is to shape this nation in accordance with your principles. Make no mistake, the Republicans – if they were not busily engaged in cutting their own throats – would press their advantage without hesitation if the roles were reversed.

Senate Majority Leader – Harry Reid

With the initiation of this most recent Congressional session, the Senate – under the control of the Democrats and Harry Reid – had the opportunity to change the rules and hamstring the rampant abuse of the filibuster process. No need to totally get rid of it. Just return it to the way it used to be. If you want to filibuster a Bill, hold the floor until you either cannot hold it any longer or until you persuade your fellow legislators to come over to your side. The way it currently is, a Senator can filibuster a Bill and the public might not even know which Senator had done this… or why! Have Progressives lost their damn minds? This one is a no-brainer!

The Subtle Bigotry Of Back Seat Driving

Ed Schultz

Have you noticed that there are an awful lot of Progressives offering free advice to President Obama via their talk shows? I’ve been paying attention to politics ever since the first Presidential election I was old enough to participate in. To be sure, there have been Presidents I have thought were excellent and Presidents with whom I had strong disagreements with… of both political parties.

To be sure, the media coverage fell along the lines you might expect. Pundits took issue and disagreed with Presidential positions and other Pundits defended those positions. What I have not noticed, up until now, has been every Tom, Dick and Harry with access to a television camera, telling the President of the United States how he ought to do his job. This is a new phenomenon. Yes, we’ve taken issue with a lot of the policies of nearly each and every President there has been. However, there was always the ever present, silent acknowledgement that the President had access to information that common people simply do not have access to.

Chris – I voted for Bush – Matthews

The game has changed with our first Black President. Progressives have now developed a cottage industry built around telling our President what he ought and ought not do. It is one thing to take issue with his decisions, it is quite another thing to proffer step by step instructions. I even heard Chris – yeah, I voted for Bush – Matthews saying that the President ought to have the Republicans over to the White House more for dinners and get-togethers. Really? Evidently he hasn’t been paying attention to the numerous times the President has done that very thing only to be rebuffed and snubbed by the likes of Boehner and McConnell.

How quickly we forget, the night before President Obama announced to the World the capture and execution of Osama Bin Laden, he was at the annual Press Club dinner, laughing and joking and being the butt of a joke about having forgotten all about Osama Bin Laden. While he laughed at the joke, he knew that an operation was under way to bring Osama to justice.

Moaning About Drones

Katt Williams – Perhaps not as crazy as we think?

This issue is simply stunning in it’s insipid stupidity! When Anwar al-Aulaqi met his richly deserved fate, the first thing by way of an epitaph that popped into my mind were the words of that great philosopher and fount of all things wise – Comedian Katt Williams – “you shouldn’t of been talking shit!” Yes, Anwar al-Aulaqi was born in these United States. At one time he was a United States citizen with all the rights and privileges pertaining thereto. For the sake of this discussion, let us presume that he had at no time renounced his citizenship and was a citizen in good standing.

Anwar al-Aulaqi gone to his own personal Jihad in the sky.

What seems to have gotten the Progressive panties in a knot is the fact that our government killed a United States citizen with “malice aforethought,” and without according to this citizen(?) the due process guaranteed under the United States Constitution. I hope you’ll find my summary of the issues satisfactory. Here’s the point. This happens every damn day in these United States, most often it happens to a Black or minority citizen. When a police officer – agent of the government – guns down an unarmed Black or minority person, that person is just as dead as Anwar al-Aulaqui! That person got just as much due process as Anwar al-Aulaqui. In almost every instance, there was far less justification for this murder at the hands of our Government than there was for the execution of Anwar al-Aulaqui.

I direct your attention to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Article 3 – The Judicial Branch
Section 3 – Treason

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The penalty for Treason is the death sentence. There is no doubt that the actions of Anwar al-Aulaqi met the formal definition of Treason. He was a member of Al’Qaeda. On 5 November 2009, Army Major Nidal Hasan murdered 13 people and wounded 30 at Ft. Hood. He had been in email communication with his personal Imam – Anwar al-Aulaqi.

I personally saw video tapes of Anwar al-Aulaqi calling for the overthrow of the United States and attempting to foment violent uprisings. This is beyond dispute. Had Anwar al-Aulaqi been on United States soil or in a nation with whom we have extradition treaties, he would have been brought to justice in one of our courts of law. He was in Yemen. Our relationship with the government of Yemen is strained to put it mildly. We couldn’t really pick up the phone and have him delivered to us.

Could we have sent in Seal Team 6 to retrieve him? Perhaps. However, that would have been extremely costly and risked not only the lives of some of our nation’s finest, it would have put a lot of civilian lives in peril. Could we have sent in an attack helicopter to take him out? Of course! But what’s the difference? The fact of the matter is, Mr. Al-Aulaqi was brought to justice, efficiently and with the least amount of collateral damage possible. We did not put the lives of our military personnel at risk and we did it for a fraction of the cost of putting boots on the ground. So what’s your complaint? Have Progressives lost their damn minds?

My Rights Are Better Than Your Rights

Rachel Maddow

One of the most surrealistic examples of idiocy occurs five nights a week on MSNBC at 9 pm. eastern time. That is when “The Rachel Maddow” show airs. Ms. Maddow is unabashedly lesbian. She has a partner or wife or whatever they term their relationship to be, and has referenced this fact on her show… usually in passing. You can almost guarantee that a segment of her show each evening will be devoted to the struggle for “Gay Rights.” Usually it is either the first or second segment.

I get it! Rachel is a lesbian activist and the issues which impact her lifestyle are very important to her. She is a tireless campaigner for Gay equality. The right to marry, the right to adopt children, up until President Obama did away with DADT – Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – the right to serve openly in the military. These were issues that we’d hear night after night after night. All of it was under the aegis of the recognition of Rights and equal protection under the law.

The problem becomes apparent when the subject of firearms comes up. Rachel is as virulently anti-gun as she is pro-Gay rights. Although she is a Rhodes Scholar and has attended Oxford University on a full scholarship and holds the equivalent of at least one doctorate degree, possibly more, Rachel seems oblivious to the fact that if gun Rights are open for review and removal, so are Gay Rights. Rachel, if you cannot respect and support my Rights, why should I support and respect your Rights? The Second Amendment is not in the Bill of Privileges. It is in the Bill of Rights. Have Progressives lost their damn minds?

When Faking Ignorance Becomes Stupidity.

Lawrence O’Donnell

Lawrence O’Donnell is another blight on the ass of common sense. Although Mr. O’Donnell frequently gives the impression of being a lawyer – he references writing legislation for the Senate Finance Committee – it turns out he never actually went to Law School. Perhaps that might explain some of the cockamamie nonsense he spews when it comes to gun Rights and other legal matters.

On this evening’s show he was bawling yet again about guns. He recounted the story of a woman going through a divorce who was threatened by her husband. In particular, the husband told her that the did not want her new boyfriend anywhere near his young son. She ignored his advice. He subsequently showed up with one of his firearms and threatened her life. The police were called. He was arrested.

I sat in stunned amazement while Lawrence carped about the Police not removing this man’s firearms while he was under the protective order filed by his soon to be ex-wife. You do not have to be a lawyer to know, this isn’t the movie “Minority Report” we’re living in. We do not punish people for what they might do. Anyone can get a protective order. Here in Indiana, a protective order is filed as a matter of course whenever a divorce is filed for. Whether it is needed or not. As a matter of fact, in the right court, I could get a protective order against Lawrence O’Donnell. Chances are, he wouldn’t have to be present and may never even know I’d filed for one.

His guest attempted to allude to this fact, to wit: you cannot punish someone for something they haven’t done, but Lawrence soldiered on by pointing out that people have their passports taken even though they have not been convicted of a crime. Evidently Lawrence equates a criminal indictment with a request for an order of protection. It just occurred to me, perhaps Lawrence isn’t faking? Have Progressives lost their damn minds?

Snatching Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory

The Republican party is in disarray. They have no real leader. The crazy wing has taken over the Republican party. Now is not the time to join them. Now is the time to press our advantage. The NRA is not the problem. Most people who have owned firearms for any length of time consider the NRA to be a toothless lion. We own firearms for various reasons. The protection of ourselves and our families being primary.

The dirty little secret is, citizens of these United States really take the whole “land of the free, home of the brave” thing seriously. It is not a Republican thing nor a Democrat thing, it’s an American thing. As Democrats we realize that Government does and should play a vital role in advancing the quality of life. However, when Government begins to flex it’s muscle and tell us what we can eat and drink – Michael Bloomberg – we begin to find this as repugnant as Republicans wanting to insert government into a woman’s womb. There is not a lot of difference.

Each piece you run on gun violence doesn’t say we need to be disarmed. If anything it proves how dangerous society has become and why we need to be armed! After eight years of the “Bungling Brothers Circus” there is a lot that needs fixing. We have a competent and capable President in the White House that needs our support on the things that matter. This faux issue ginned up by the Progressives – not the Republicans – over Drones, is a waste of time, a distraction and only serves to weaken our position. Instead of attempting to tell our President how to do his job, how about we get behind him and help him? Or have Progressives really lost their damn minds?

Christianity And Modern Black Enslavement III

Posted on March 8, 2013 by Benjamin Moore

by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr

The Information Vacuum

Indoctrination begins at an early age

In an information vacuum, the injection of any piece of data or information is seized on and subsequently becomes the basis or foundation upon which all subsequent data is judged. Those raised in Christian homes are introduced to the Bible and it’s concepts at an early age. At a time when one is not only too young to ask questions, but doesn’t even know which questions to ask, these concepts are imposed on the blank slate of a defenseless mind.

It is often easier for a parent to apply God as a cause than actually give a comprehensive explanation to the questions of a child. For example, I have a grandson whom when he was very young wanted to know the secrets of the universe. He wanted to know the answer to everything and he would ask me questions incessantly. In an effort to gain some peace and quiet I would often have to impose a moratorium on his questions. Usually 10 minutes or so. He would watch the clock until the moment his 10 minutes were up and begin again.

I don’t know if I did myself any good because he probably used his time to think of even more questions to ask. When dealing with children I always try to be mindful that my interaction with them will be a part of the foundation they use to build on for the rest of their lives. Thus, I do not talk down to them. I do not lie to them. If they ask me a question, I will give them the most accurate and comprehensive answer I am capable of. I tend to treat them as though they are miniature adults.

Why is the sky blue Papa?

On one fine day, my grandson was in rare form and I was on auto-pilot answering his questions while I cleaned the kitchen. My oldest son was sitting at the table working on some college level homework and evidently was monitoring our exchange. My grandson asked, “Papa, why is the sky blue?” Without giving it a second thought, I launched into an explanation covering the chemical composition of our atmosphere and how certain gases absorbed various frequencies of light. This of course necessitated an explanation of the electromagnetic spectrum. I finished, drawing everything together by saying that the red frequencies of light were absorbed by the various gases, nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide and the blue frequencies were allowed through thus giving us the impression that the sky is blue.

I continued cleaning the kitchen until I noticed the deafening silence. I turned to look at my grandson – he was about 6 at the time – he was staring at me with his mouth open and a totally confused look on his face. My oldest son was doubled over with his shoulders shaking trying valiantly to conceal the fact that the was cracking up with laughter. It was then I realized my mistake. At which point I told my grandson, “the sky is blue because that’s the way God made it.”

A smile of understanding broke across his face and all was good. It was a simple answer that he could understand and it satisfied him on that question. This happens all the time. God is used at the ultimate explanation for everything and in particular anything we do not understand. In an information vacuum, the first piece of information we are given becomes the basis or foundation for which all other data is judged.

Racism In The Media

When it comes to our society, segregation of the races has been practiced from the beginning and although there are cracks beginning to appear in the bulwarks, we still tend to enclave based on our ethnicity. Thus, white people don’t know a lot about black people, don’t know a lot about Hispanic or Asian people.

Racist indoctrination through the use of sterotypes

The media through movies, radio and television programming floods this information vacuum with often stereotypical portrayals of the various races. Some of these stereotypes are delivered in cartoons when children are extremely impressionable. Consider the Character of “Charlie” in the old “Mr. Magoo” cartoons. You have a totally stereotypical depiction of a Chinese man.

Antonio Fargas as Huggy Bear

Sitcoms are another source of stereotyping. When you have no reality to base things on, what you see depicted on television becomes your reality. While you’re laughing at Jimmy Walker’s portrayal of “J.J.” what are you being taught about Black people and the Black lifestyle? Remember the old Starsky and Hutch serial dramas from the 70’s and 80’s? What was the only Black character with a recurring role? He was a pimp. Now if you went to school with Black people, worked around Black people or even attended Church with Black people, you would have had some actual experiences to balance these depictions. However, in our society, this is often not the case.

All Black people cannot dance. I’m one! All Black people are not good at playing basketball. I’m going to have to admit to being in this group as well. I competed in Track and Field and was a member of the Chess Club in school. Although I cannot dance, I’m a fairly accomplished Jazz musician; Saxophone. The point is, there is as much variation between individuals in the Black race as there are in any other race. Images and depictions do matter.

Christianity And Modern Black Enslavement

Even in Church, the white man is watching your every move.

When we apply this imagery and iconography to the religion of Christianity, the effects can be profoundly detrimental. No matter how we couch the theology, the subliminal subtext remains that:

The white man is your God.
You are hopelessly lost without the white man.
You must look to the white man for your salvation.

Until the iconography is corrected and the imagery restored to what it was in the beginning, so long as Black people continue to embrace Christianity, it will be difficult if not impossible for them to achieve self-determination. Yes, there may be a Black preacher in the pulpit, but there’s a larger than life white Jesus looking over his shoulder.

Part I and Part II

Homosexuality In Nature

Misunderstanding The Sodom and Gomorrah Story

Where Does The Hatred Of Homosexuality Come From?

Homosexuality In The Church

It’s Time For The Church To Come Out Of Its Closet

Share this:

Like this:

Understanding The Second Amendment

Why The Second Amendment Came To Be

The Difference Between The Militia And The Army

Dispelling Some Oft Recited Myths

Is The Second Amendment Still Relevant?

We’ve Evolved Beyond The Need For The Second Amendment

Share this:

Like this:

The Simple Answer Is Not Always Correct

Brady Law Provisions

What Is The “Gun Show Loophole?”

Should Personal Firearms Sells Be Subject To Background Checks?

Why Senate Background Check Bill Failed

Share this:

Like this:

The Early Days – Air America Radio

MSNBC Gives Rachel A Home

Rachel Maddow’s Problem

Rights Are Rights!

Share this:

Like this:

Have You Ever Noticed?

The Attacks On 9/11

Rule By Fear

Sandy Hook And The Boston Marathon Bombing

Naivety Is Not A Virtue

Share this:

Like this:

A Crusader Is Born

Trading In Fear

Black In America – Mark Kelly Finds His Blackness

Reality Check

Share this:

Like this:

Problems With The Crucifixion Story

Holy Shroud – Holy Fake?

Science Weighs In

Notice Anything Odd About The Image?

Miraculous Deception

Share this:

Like this:

Golden Fleecing

Thinking The Unthinkable

Gold Scams And The Precious Metals Market

Gold Scams – Ugly Truths About Gold Investing

Share this:

Like this:

Obstruct

Racism Exposes Stupidity

Have Progressives Lost Their Damn Minds?

The Subtle Bigotry Of Back Seat Driving

Moaning About Drones

My Rights Are Better Than Your Rights

When Faking Ignorance Becomes Stupidity.

Snatching Defeat From The Jaws Of Victory

Share this:

Like this:

The Information Vacuum

Racism In The Media

Christianity And Modern Black Enslavement

Share this:

Like this: