State Representative from Dona Ana County in the Headlights

New Mexico State Representative Bill McCamley, District 33 (Dona Ana County)

New Mexico State Representative Bill McCamley, District 33 (Dona Ana County)

There has been a lot of anger from some people in Las Cruces over an initiative to collect signatures to recall three city council members from their positions; Olga Pedroza, Gil Sorg and Nathan Small. All three identify as liberals and have responded in typical fashion to charges of improper and unethical behavior in their elected positions; they’ve responded with defensiveness and smug self-righteousness. In the case of Nathan Small, fear of losing his position that has led him to flip-flop more desperately than a fish in the sand. There are plenty who are coming to their defense the only way that liberals seem to know how to…by attacking others. In this case, the attacks have been leveled at the people involved in the recall initiative. Many are trying to diminish the leadership of those spearheading the recall initiative by pointing out that some are not native New Mexicans and therefore, in their eyes, don’t have a legitimate right to get involved. They do this while ignoring that two of these three council members aren’t New Mexico natives, either. They’re accusing those who are collecting petition signatures of lying in order to get those signatures, misrepresenting either the wrongdoings of the council members or claiming that the petition is about an entirely different issue than the recall. Of course, none of those making those accusations have so far produced a single scrap of supporting evidence while many people, myself included, have witnessed nothing other than honest representation from these signature collectors. While this sort of behavior from the left had come to be pretty much expected, one individual has crossed the line so blatantly that it’s caught nearly everyone off guard.

As reported on the local Las Cruces radio show, The Kelly O’Connell Show on January 19, NM State Representative for District 33 (Doña Ana County) Bill McCamley engaged in what amounts to an aggressive assault against a young lady here in Las Cruces.
Earlier this month, the 19-year-old girl, who was working to collect signatures for the recall of Olga Pedroza, knocked on a door that appears now to be the address that Bill McCamley claims as his residence. A woman answered the door and, when presented with the petition, asked some questions which the girl answered. The woman then signed the petition. At that point, the girl then asked if there was anyone else at home who might be willing to sign. The woman pointed to a car that was pulling up at the house and said that the man driving might sign. She went over to talk to the man, who turned out to be Bill McCamley, although she did not recognize him. When he realized what her petition was for, he began yelling at her and then began yelling at the woman at the front door for signing the petition. In order to avoid confrontation and make matters worse, the girl began walking away from the house. At that point, McCamley started running after the girl, yelling at her again. Fearful for her own safety at this point, she called her supervisor, who was only about a block away. By this point, McCamley was right up on the girl, yelling right in her face. The supervisor arrived and witnessed this and actually stated that, as being trained and licensed for concealed carry of a firearm in New Mexico, if she had been carrying her handgun that night, McCamley’s behavior was so aggressive that she would’ve considered drawing her weapon for defense.
The signature collector was quoted on the Kelley O’Connell Show as saying after the incident, “In this job, I anticipate getting chased by a dog, but I never imagined it would be the state representative. I was pretty scared.”
A police report was filed that night, but nothing has come of this story so far. The local newspaper, The Las Cruces Sun News, hasn’t even mentioned it. Afterwards, though, McCamley did make a statement on his Facebook account that he said was an apology, but was severely lacking in the language or appearance of remorse one might expect from a sincere apology of any substance. He wrote:
“OK, so I owe an apology. A canvasser for Close the Cafe came by my house looking for signatures to remove Olga Pedroza from the City Council. I asked why, and there was no answer given. I then went and spoke to her supervisor, and asked the same thing. When no answer was given, I raised my voice and took a frustrated and intense tone of voice in the conversation.
I didn’t touch anyone, or threaten anyone. I want to make that perfectly clear. However, raising my voice isn’t right. Though I disagree passionately with that movement (as it sets a horrible precedent for elected officials), discourse should be held in a civilized and polite manner. And that young, paid canvasser who came by my house certainly isn’t responsible for this issue. You all deserve better from your public officials, especially me.
And you have my word that sort of thing will never, ever happen again.”
Apparently, McCamley thinks that because he didn’t touch her or “threaten” her, what he did wasn’t so bad. While it’s true that, had he touched the girl, he would’ve been guilty of assault and battery, if it can be proven in court that he behaved as is being reported, then he still committed a crime: assault. Typical for someone like Bill McCamley, he is trying to diminish the seriousness of his behavior and blow it off as not being a big deal, saying it will never happen again. As a rule, that defense tends to stop being at all effective once a person is more than about eight years old.
The only defense that’s come close to being even slightly substantive has come from people like local radio host Keith Whelpley, who simply says that he doesn’t believe that he’s capable of that kind of behavior. Thank God that our system doesn’t simply weight guilt or innocence on the level of belief that those that know them have regarding the charges. If that we’re the case, we’d never convict serial killers due to the testimony of others as to their character (ie. “He was always quiet and kept to himself,” and “He was a good, thoughtful neighbor.”)
So, let me make two quick points, the second one carrying no more weight than anyone else’s thoughts about ‘belief’ of guilt or innocence: 1) Anyone is capable of just about anything. Failure to acknowledge that is simply ignorant and will regularly lead to disappointment at best. 2) From the online dealings I’ve had with Bill McCamley, the way I’ve seen him treat others and what I’ve heard from other people about his behavior, I have absolutely no problem believing him capable of going after someone he perceived as weaker than him and easily intimidated by him. He has struck me as an intellectual bully from the first time I was ever exposed to him and it’s a short road from that kind of bullying to other, more hands-on types.
Should the evidence prove that Bill McCamley did indeed attack this girl, there are three things I really hope happen. First, I want to see McCamley publicly humiliated as his actions are exposed for all to see and therefore lose any chance at serving in public office again. Second, that maybe he’ll even finally realize what it feels like to be honestly regretful of his behavior instead of just playing not so subtle lip service. Finally, and most importantly, I hope this girl finds the strength inside herself and realizes that, while fear is a perfectly natural reaction to a situation like she, it was McCamley who was reacting to her and what she was representing with fear and irrationality. I hope she comes to accept that, when you shine light into dark places, those that thrive in the dark may desperately try to extinguish the light, but they only strength they can ultimately bring against you is a false strength. True strength always comes from the light, not the shadows.

Dona Ana County Treasurer May Yet Lose His Job

Dona Ana County Treasurer David Gutierrez

Dona Ana County Treasurer David Gutierrez

While there is currently a petition drive in the city of Las Cruces to recall three city councillors, there may be another initiative shortly to recall the Treasurer for Dona Ana County, David Gutierrez. Unlike the city recall efforts, in this case, Gutierrez has actually admitted to committing the acts he’s been accused of.

On August 18, Gutierrez had gone to the post office with a female employee on Treasurer’s Office business, then to a bank. Afterward, Gutierrez offered her $1,000 to “spend a couple of hours with him at a hotel.” The employee said no and then told a supervisor what had happened on August 20. The two then reported to Deputy County Treasurer Rene Barba. Gutierrez walked in on the meeting and, when he asked what was going on, the employee told him she was reporting him. He then asked the employee to leave the room and asked Barba and the supervisor not to report the incident to county management to give him time to “resolve the matter with the employee,” a request that was immediately denied as it would’ve been a gross violation of proper procedure. In the course of the investigation, Gutierrez admitted to propositioning the employee and even clarified that the reason for going to the hotel would have been for sex.
Gutierrez didn’t attend the county commission meeting where the incident was to be discussed, but instead had county attorney John Caldwell read a statement that said, “I apologize to the commission for not being here today. Please do not take my absence as a sign of disrespect to you. I will respect the decision that the board makes today.” However, when the commission called for Gutierrez’s resignation, he refused and, since the commission doesn’t have the authority to force his resignation, they instead censured him, which simply amounts to a public reprimand with no actual punishment.
Prior to voting for censure, County Commissioner David Garcia said “I’m very sad today these kinds of things have to happen, but when they do happen, we have to move on it. I’m glad the procedures we have in place work.”
While the procedures may have worked, they also had absolutely no impact. Gutierrez committed two violations; soliciting an employee for sex and attempting to delay the investigation. Another thing that no one seems to be talking about right now is that David Gutierrez committed an actual crime as well by soliciting for prostitution. Yet, in the face of all of this, he has continued in his position as if nothing had happened. The lack of consequences for his behavior has not gone unnoticed, however.
Friday on both local Las Cruces AM radio shows, The Kelly O’Connell Show and Speak Up Las Cruces, Dolores Connor and Francis Williams came on to talk about the course of action they’ve decided to take on this issue.  Connor, a former Las Cruces City Council member and previous candidate for Mayor, and Williams, who has had a career investigating sexual harassment claims and is currently an appointee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights New Mexico State Advisory Committee, are very unhappy that, even after admitting to his behavior, Gutierrez remains in his position and is still collecting his $65,500 annual salary.
After waiting four months to give Gutierrez a chance to take appropriate action on his own, Dolores Conner went to the county commission on Tuesday to inform them that she has found a state statute providing for the removal of an elected official under these kinds of conditions. NMSA 10-4-2 lists a cause, among several others, for removal from office as:
” [6] G.  any other act [or acts which] that in the opinion of the court or jury [amount] amounts to corruption in office or gross immorality rendering the incumbent unfit to fill the office.”
They argue that offering a female employee $1,000 for sex is a perfect example of “gross immorality.” Connor and Williams say they are currently looking into taking action through the courts and a possible abbreviated petition drive to have Gutierrez removed from office. They will be meeting with Gerald Byer, an attorney at the Third Judicial District Attorney’s Office in Las Cruces, NM to look at the law to explore those options in the coming week.
Connor also wants to propose a change to the NMSA at the upcoming legislative session to add sexual harassment to the allowed reasons for removal from office. At this point, the only actions that have been taken against David Gonzalez has been a censure that didn’t actually affect him outside of a little bad publicity and action taken by the Democrat Party Central Committee to remove him from his position with them but it is possible that, ultimately, his actions could result in not only his removal from office, but also an important and fundamental change to state law and the level of behavior required of our elected officials.

Thoughts On The Movie, Selma

Martin-Luther-King-JrThis weekend, I watched the new movie, Selma. Oprah Winfrey, a notoriously close-minded liberal with a willingness to throw the race card almost as much as the likes of Al Sharpton, was heavily involved in making this movie, so I was a little concerned about what I was going to see.
Surprisingly though, Selma is much more accurate than I ever expected. The historical inaccuracies are relatively minor and most are easily overlooked. I was disappointed that there was no mention of A.D. King, Dr. King’s younger brother (and father of Dr. Alveda King), who was also present in Selma. I was a little disappointed, but not terribly surprised. After all, I’d be willing to bet good money that there wasn’t a single conservative involved in the creation of this movie. Just the subject matter alone is enough to raise some very uncomfortable issues for Democrats when dealing with racial issues in America in a factual way. After all. It’s pretty hard to avoid the fact that the racist politicians and lawmen who obstructed, intimidated, brutalized and even murdered those who were demanding the liberties we are all endowed with, were all, without a single exception, Democrats: Bull Conner, Wilson Baker, George Wallace and even J. Edgar Hoover. Including the father of one of today’s influential and passionate black women, a Christian minister, pro-life activist and, yes, conservative Republican, probably hit a little too close to home for them. There were only actually two things about this movie I wanted to address.

LYNDON JOHNSON AS A RACIST
Speaking of shortcomings in our education system, one of the first things I heard about Selma that piqued my interest, was from some very offended liberals. Beside the fact that liberals have a default setting of being offended most of the time, this caught my attention because they were upset at how ‘historically inaccurate’ the movie is because it portrays President Lyndon Johnson as a…gasp…racist! To be clear, Johnson was absolutely a racist. Yes, he did support and sign the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (the bill he referred to as “the n*gg*r bill”), but only after dragging his feet and opposing it. In 1948, then Senator Johnson said, regarding the civil rights efforts during the Truman administration that it, “is a farce and a sham–an effort to set up a police state in the guise of liberty. I am opposed to that program. I have voted against the so-called poll tax repeal bill … I have voted against the so-called anti-lynching bill.” I assume that, for a man like Johnson, it was very important to protect the practices of poll taxes and lynchings. He fought against Eisenhower’s 1957 civil rights bill, ultimately using his position and power in the Senate to gut the bill of all its enforcement powers. He also fought against the 1960 Civil Rights Act. Johnson kept company with many like-minded racists in the Democrat Party but, unlike most of them, he came to understand the potential political power of a voting black populace and decided to attempt to rewrite his own history to make it look like he was the type of man who embraced what he’d actually been fighting against his whole life. A line from the PBS special, LBJ, says, “But the real measure of a leader is what he gets done, the size of the problems he faces. Before Lyndon Johnson, we were essentially a segregated society.” The thing is, if Johnson had his way, we would still be segregated today. It’s true that you measure a leader by what he gets done, but make no mistake. Johnson was not the leader to ‘get done’ anything to further the cause of Civil Rights in America; he was simply dragged along against his will in the wake of the real leaders of the time; people like Martin Luther King, Jr., A.D. King, John Lewis, Hosea Williams, James Orange, Roy Innis, A. Phillip Randolph, and Bayard Rustin, among so many others. These were the people who effected positive change in spite of the opposition of men like Lyndon Johnson. It’s sad that so many have since been conned into mistaking Johnson’s political expediency for any sort of change of heart or, even worse, have just blindly bought into the narrative of the man as some kind of Civil Rights hero because the media and other voices on the left say it’s so.

ATTEMPTS AT POLITICAL REPOSITIONING
The second thing that struck me came straight from the movie itself. While I wasn’t particularly surprised, it was disturbing to hear the words ‘progressive’ (used once) and ‘liberal’ (used twice) to describe the people who were inclined to support the Civil Rights Movement and the efforts of Dr. King. While it is true that the progressive movement wasn’t terribly advanced or high profile yet and the term ‘liberal’ was only beginning to be taken and twisted by the left, it’s clear what the subtle message that the movie makers are trying to get across is: that it was those evil Republicans who wanted to keep the black man down and the ones who could be rallied to stand against that racism were the Democrats. Of course, they had to make this message subtle for the simple reason that it’s an outright lie. Every single name mentioned in Selma as an enemy of equality was a devoted Democrat. It was the religious leaders that Dr. King called on for support, the majority of whom, at least those who were affiliated, were Republicans and definitely conservative, much like Dr. King himself. It was Republicans, both black and white, who were standing beside these activists across the nation, often losing their lives in the process, too. It was the NRA that was created specifically in order to arm and train black Americans so that they had a chance of defending themselves against those who immersed themselves in racial hatred, especially in the form of the Democrat sponsored, funded and manned Ku Klux Klan.
And, yes, I’m already hearing this nonsense starting to resurface about how there was this great party switch and the Republicans of then are now the Democrats of today. That’s always been a lie and always will be. To this day, the only example anyone can point to of a Democrat of that time becoming a Republican is Strom Thurmond. The thing is, Thurmond had a major change of heart and deed and turned his back on his racist practices and words. Of course he had to leave the Democrat Party. To do otherwise would’ve been like someone turning vegan but staying a member of the steak of the month club. (I assume something like that exists because, if it doesn’t, then it really, really should!) Here’s just a handful of Democrats (this article would be HUGE if I put all of them in) who were opposed to civil rights and equality for blacks who never made a single move to leave the Democrat Party: Orval Fabus, Bull Conner, Benjamin Travis Laney, John Stennis, James Eastland, Allen Ellender, Russell Long, John Sparkman, John McClellan, Richard Russell, Herman Talmadge, George Wallace, Lester Maddox, John Rarick, Robert Byrd (Bill Clinton’s good friend) and Al Gore, Sr. (his son invented the Internet).
The truth is, the place where those who wallow in racism or victimization or a desire to imprison people, be it in chains of iron or the more deceptive chains of entitlement and dependency, feel the most comfortable is the Democrat Party. That has never changed from Day One. The only things that have changed are the words they subvert to describe themselves and the increasing sophistication of the shell game they play to fool so many people.

BACK TO THE MOVIE
Believe it or not, in spite of the time I took addressing these two factors, they’re actually pretty minimal problems in regard to this movie. Selma is a movie I’d really encourage people to see. I really like the way it portrays Martin Luther King Jr.; as a man who is, like the rest of us, flawed and at times unsure, but who follows his conscience and commits himself to promoting what is right and standing against what is wrong. He sets a standard in those ways that is worthy of emulation and it is an example that so many members of the modern Republican Party would do well to take to heart before we completely lose our way. I found myself crying at the sight of people’s capacity for cruelty towards others and my heart swelled with pride at those who answered the call to oppose such overwhelming hatred and violence. While I’m used to the sort of biased tripe that Oprah Winfrey and other Hollywood liberals put out, like that train wreck of a movie (but not the book), The Butler, I do have to give credit where credit is due. Other than a couple of minor attempts to alter the political reality of our history, this movie is very well done and worth the time to watch.
Next time, I’ll be talking about how the new Dumb and Dumber movie is a direct parallel to the Democrat National Convention. Well, probably not, but you never know!

Stand up and reject the entitlement mentality

There are plenty of fundamental problems in our society that desperately need to be fixed. One of the major issues facing us is this pervasive entitlement mentality that has been eating away at our character as a people, constantly making us weaker and weaker…and less American. The most recent and local example of this is the minimum wage initiative by NMCAFe here in southern New Mexico.

In spite of the Las Cruces City Council putting forth a reasonable compromise of an increased minimum wage of $8.50/hour (something that made no one really happy, but something everyone could live with), NMCAFe plugged their ears and shut their eyes and pushed forward to get the $10.10/hour increase they wanted, no matter what the concerns of others might be or who might get hurt in the process (including those they claim to want to help). It’s this attitude of “I deserve” and “I’m owed” that’s allowed that kind of behavior to be tolerated and even embraced. So many people on both sides have failed to do what used to be the norm in America: telling those like NMCAFe Director, Sara Nolan, to grow up and learn how to work with others for something beyond their personal wants.

It’s not just a left-wing thing, either. We had a Republican running for Senate this past year, Allen Weh, who was just as guilty of wallowing in an entitlement mentality. He decided that, because of who he was, what he’d done in his past and the station in society he now holds, that he simply deserved to be elected and everyone who considered themselves conservative should just fall in line and support him blindly. Unfortunately for him, there are way too many people on the right who are fed up with being treated that way. Add to that the fact that he blatantly alienated large numbers of grass roots-oriented conservatives while making absolutely no effort to connect with conservative Democrats (Yes, there are a lot of those in New Mexico.). His run was a spectacular failure as large numbers of voters simply stayed away from the polls altogether and a huge block who did vote, withheld their votes from him. Yet, we have so many who demand the allegiance of voters simply because of the letter beside their names and the candidates names. Like expecting workers who want higher pay to be willing to put out the effort to earn it, we need to start demanding that our candidates and officials do something to actually earn our votes and our support, too.

Our nation is founded on the principle that we’re all created equal, not that equality needs to be imposed upon us throughout our lives and definitely not that those who earn more need to be forcibly brought down to a lower level out of some twisted sense of fairness and not that we need to be told to shut up and show ‘gratitude’ or ‘loyalty’ to those who claim to know so much more than we do and who claim to be looking out for our wellbeing. We need to stop acting like victims and giving our power away and embrace individual responsibility again…in ourselves and those around us.

After all, equality doesn’t need to be imposed, only defended against those who would directly attack it or twist, diminish and pervert it under the guise of empowerment and doing away with perceived inequalities (like the false narrative about the so-called income inequality). We need to return to the idea that, if we want something, then we should put out the effort to get it. If we’re not willing to do what it takes, then it’s obviously not important enough to us. Handing people what they haven’t earned is like rewarding a child who has behaved badly. In that kind of an environment, there should be no surprise when that child continues to behave badly, just as there should be no surprise when those being given higher wages or benefits or even votes under the guise of ‘equality’ or ‘loyalty’ or ‘a lesser of two evils’, regardless of effort, show no desire to excel or put out extra effort to earn what they want.

In small increments, kind of like putting a frog into cold water and then slowly heating it up, we’ve accepted so much of this sort of entitlement thinking as a part of modern life and it becomes more vitally important every day that we wake up and jump out of that pot while we’re still capable as a society of embracing personal responsibility and excelling in the process.

New Voter ID Law Passes in Hobbs, New Mexico

voter id ballot hobbsVoters in Hobbs New Mexico today voted to approve a measure that would require identification  to be presented in order to vote in municipal elections. The vote was decisive with 78% of voters in favor of the measure in spite of efforts by opposition, including the NAACP. B.J. Choice Sr., a member of the NAACP and Hobbs resident, said, “It’s an effort, in my opinion, to suppress people coming to the polls.” He said the legislation is like “the poll tax and the literacy test that minorities and poor whites had to go through.” Opponents, including Choice, have also compared it to the Jim Crow laws and say that groups like African Americans, Latinos and the elderly will have a harder time obtaining photo IDs in order to vote.
Just for the record, poll taxes were instituted by Democrats to require that voters pay in order to register to vote…unless their father or grandfather had been registered previously. This specifically targeted blacks, whose fathers and grandfathers had generally been slaves with no right to vote, while whites were much more likely to qualify to have the poll tax waived. The same thing with the literacy tests; they were designed to exclude blacks, who had a much higher rate of illiteracy than whites and could be disqualified even if they were literate. As an example, in Alabama, blacks were asked to answer questions such as: name all 67 county judges in the state, name the date when Oklahoma was admitted to the Union, and how many bubbles are in a bar of soap. Jim Crow laws, also passed by southern Democrats, established the concept of “separate but equal” and severely disenfranchised and limited the civil liberties of blacks.
By contrast, this voter ID law requires every voter to present an ID, proving that they are who they say they are. That’s all. Among other things, you must have a valid photo ID to:
  • buy cigarettes, alcohol or an “M” rated video game
  • open a bank account
  • apply for a mortgage, Medicaid, Social Security, unemployment or government assistance including public health insurance (ie. Obamacare)
  • drive, buy or rent a car
  • get on an airplane
  • get married
  • adopt a pet
  • rent a hotel room
  • apply for a hunting or fishing license
  • pick up prescriptions
  • donate blood
  • get a job
  • cash a check
  • or even get a library card.
While they haven’t been vocal about these requirements for ID, Civil rights groups like the NAACP argue that voter ID laws target blacks, latinos, senior citizens and the poor by unduly restricting voting and imposing unnecessary costs. However, anyone who can prove who they are and that they are legally authorized to vote, gets to vote. The new legislation also ads that, if voters don’t have identification, the city will provide it for no charge. So, apparently, the NAACP believes that blacks, latinos, seniors and the poor are either too stupid to go down and ask for an ID, pose for a picture, or follow the same rules as everyone else or they believe that they’re too poor to afford a free ID. Or it could just be that the they’re using this issue to further promote class warfare and racial division and score political points on an issue that has nothing to do with race or class. It’s not like they have a reputation for pulling those kinds of stunts, right?
Even at the state level right now, any citizen can acquire an ID by providing 1) a document of their identity (birth certificate, U.S. passport, military ID, etc.), 2) a document proving their identification number (Social Security card), 3) two documents proving New Mexico residency (rental or mortgage agreement, utility bills, bank statement, etc.) and 4) a thumbprint and signature. It then costs $10 for four years or $18 for eight years. Citizens who are 75 or older get the ID free. That’s not what I’d call restrictive requirements. It is nothing more than establishing the identity of those the state is providing proof of and I pay more for my gym membership than either $10 or $18 a year (not to mention what I pay for my drivers license).
Secretary of State Dianna Duran has called the Hobbs special election encouraging and said that she will again push state lawmakers to consider a voter ID law. If that were to happen, such legislation would very likely include making those state IDs available at no charge, as well.
Hobbs is also not the first city in New Mexico to pass a voter ID law. Albuquerque and Rio Rancho also require photo ID for local elections. We currently have 34 states with laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls. The Hobbs vote is not an isolated incident and these laws are not designed to keep anyone from the polls…other than those who are attempting to perpetrate fraud on our election process. The voting rights of those who actually have the right to vote will be protected through these laws. The ones who are not registered to vote, who have had their right to vote revoked through Due Process, who try to vote under someone else’s name or who are simply not residents or even citizens? They have no right to vote anyway, nor should they, so there are no rights there to protect.
Congratulations to Hobbs, New Mexico on passing a voter ID law and may the rest of us come to our senses and follow your example soon.

Riots In Ferguson: Disheartening, But Not Unexpected

I don’t know what happened! I stopped at the gas station on the way into work this morning and bought a soda. On the drive to work, I shook the bottle as hard as I could the whole way. When I got to work, I opened the bottle and…it exploded all over me! I just don’t understand why it would do something like that!

So, tell me. How dumb did I sound just then? Is there anyone reading this who doesn’t understand why the bottle exploded? Yet I’ve been reading and listening to all sorts of people talking about the riots in Ferguson. So many of them are expressing surprise or an inability to comprehend why these people are behaving like this. If you want to play a drinking game that’ll leave you passed out in the floor in no time, just take a drink every time you hear someone say something like, “How could they cause this kind of damage to their own homes and neighborhoods?”

The answer is simple as to why they’re destroying their own neighborhoods: An explosion damages everything around it.

What’s amazing to me is the surprise and shock over it all and the pleas for peace, at least from those who have helped shake the bottle of racial unrest that’s been continuously shaken for decades. For the sake of brevity, let’s take a look at just three who’ve most recently had their hands on the bottle.

President Obama said last night, “I join Michael’s parents in asking anyone who protests this decision to do so peacefully.” He also said, “Michael Brown’s parents have lost more than anyone. We should honor their decision.”

I’m sorry, Mr. President; is that why we should be peaceful? Not because violence is wrong, counterproductive and ultimately self-destructive, but because it’s what the Browns want? Well, thank God they’re not crying for blood, then. Obama’s calls for peace come across as weak, in large part, because of his own contributions to racial tensions and division in America. Typical of most liberals, he’s constantly playing the race card, from claiming that conservatives oppose him because of the color of his skin (as opposed to the deficiency in the content of his character) to taking stands in racially charged cases with no regards to the facts (ie. Henry Lewis Gates and Trayvon Martin) to opening the floodgates to illegal immigrants at our southern border while ignoring the hardships of Americans and the huge number of legal immigrants who have found themselves trapped in a quagmire of red tape that stalls their efforts to gain citizenship the proper way. Add to that, just for fun, his close ties with other race baiters like Derrick Bell, Jeremiah Wright, Dorothy Tillman, and Al Sharpton (We’ll get to him in a minute). Obama’s entire career has been built upon the liberal Democrat practice of using race as a bludgeon to clear the path of any opposition and of building narratives of class and racial division in order to keep the people who fall for those tactics looking to them for some sort of salvation from this supposed cesspool of racial injustice and hatred we call America.

Next up is Eric Holder, the U.S. Attorney General who, no matter what his color, should’ve been fired, if not brought up on criminal charges, a long time ago. He’s engaged in the practice of racial division with the fervency of a true believer. He’s propagated the narrative that blacks are victims at the hands of evil racist conservatives and corporations…and probably anyone wanting to launch an investigation into his actions as Attorney General. He opposes voter ID law as racist and disenfranchising because, apparently in his mind, only whites are smart enough and rich enough to get cheap and, in many cases, free state-issued IDs. He feels perfectly comfortable inserting the federal government into local criminal investigations like the Trayvon Martin case and now the Michael Brown case, only succeeding in furthering the idea of America being a racist place where minorities have no power, except what is given to them by the government. At the same time, he has refused to do his actual job when it comes to things like investigating the New Black Panther Party for blatant acts of voter intimidation; a crime that is actually in the jurisdiction of the Attorney General. He has worked so hard to drive a wedge and set back race relations in America as much as he possibly can. In contrast to his actions over the last several years, now he’s calling for peace in Ferguson…a request that is obviously falling on mainly deaf ears. Eric Holder has become the equivalent of a man who pulls the pin on a grenade and then begs it not to explode…and he’s proving to be just about as successful.

Then there’s the man who Barack Obama has called “a voice for the voiceless and … dispossessed,” Al Sharpton. Sharpton’s entire career has been immersed in hatred, bigotry, division and even bloodshed. From the Tawana Brawley case, where Sharpton didn’t even believe that Brawley had been raped but went ahead anyway, accusing an innocent man who ended up committing suicide, to his campaign against Jewish storeowner Fred Harari that led to seven murders by one of Sharpton’s followers, right up to the Michael Brown shooting, the aftermath of which will turn out poorly as well, if Sharpton has anything to do about it anyway. Remember how these other agents for left-wing race baiting and division at least make it look like they’re genuinely calling for peace? Sharpton can’t even be bothered with anything more than the most cursory of that kind of posing. He was waiting for the grand jury decision like a kid on Christmas, with major protest demonstrations organized and ready to start in 28 cities across America. After the decision was released, he went on to call for a continued federal investigation into a case that has now been properly and legally laid to rest in the courts. Apparently, for Reverend Al, the courts only have validity if they do what he wants them to. Otherwise, he’ll just try to kick it up to other levels of government and openly abuse our legal system for his own personal gain. Sharpton called the verdict, “an absolute blow to those of us that wanted to see a fair and open trial.” Of course, how can you have a fair and open trial that starts with the abuse of the legal system to get the trial that you want, but is not supported by the established process of law? It reminds me of a western I saw once (the name escapes me) where a lawman told another man, “Don’t worry. You’ll get a fair trial, followed by a first class hangin’.” Other than the fact that Sharpton doesn’t have a Texas drawl, those are the kinds of words I imagine could come flowing quite comfortably from his lips. Sharpton has also announced that he will continue to “rally around the country” regarding the verdict. Obviously, he believes he can still milk more money and media attention from this death and the misery and devastation of this town, which is partly due to Sharpton stirring up unrest.

The bottom line here is, when these people who have built and protected their careers by promoting narratives that encourage people to feel like victims, to feel powerless and set upon by enemies who they have no chance to fight against, to feel cornered and pinned down with nowhere to go, no way to improve their lives by their own actions; do not believe them when they start acting surprised or shocked when all of this pressure they’ve been applying blows up. Don’t believe that they’re sincere when they call for peace; for calm and rational behavior. It’s the fear and the frustration that that they can manipulate into dependency that keeps their bank accounts full and their positions secure.

At the same time, the next time you say or think something about how you can’t believe people would destroy their homes and neighborhoods, stop and think about those who’ve been pressurizing these communities, as well as the communities and individuals who have bought into this horrible narrative about their own un-acceptionalism. Remember that this is what those who cash in on convincing others that America is an evil place filled with racists and self-serving, victimizing fat cats want. Realize that there really is nothing shocking when communities explode like this. The only really surprising thing is that we aren’t seeing this kind of ugliness more often, considering the decades of seeds that have been planted, especially in the soil of minority communities by self-serving liberals who are more focussed on their own selfish ends than the means. And, much like opening a bottle of shaken up soda, riots in places like Ferguson, Missouri are very easy to see and understand, both in terms of the causes and the inevitable effect. Unlike the bottle of soda, the clean-up is a lot more difficult and heartbreaking.

The Michael Brown Autopsy: The Truth Can Shine Through The Manipulation

     The official autopsy on Michael Brown, the subject of the shooting incident with police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, MO, is pretty well guaranteed not to make those who have been accusing Officer Wilson of murder very happy.
     The report shows that Brown was shot in the hand at very close range, supporting Wilson’s claim that Brown physically attacked him and try to wrestle his gun from him. A supplemental microscopic exam showed foreign matter “consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm,” in a wound on Brown’s thumb. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch quoted Dr. Michael Graham, the St. Louis medical examiner as saying that this “does support that there was a significant altercation at the car.” This conclusion is also being confirmed by Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco. She said that the autopsy “supports the fact that this guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound.” She said, “If he has his hand near the gun when it goes off, he’s going for the officer’s gun.” It’s been reported as well that Brown’s blood was also found on Wilson’s gun, further backing up the claims of a close quarter struggle and that Brown’s tissue was found of the outside of the driver’s side of the police vehicle, as well as his blood inside the vehicle.
     Melinek also says that the autopsy doesn’t support claims that Brown was shot while running away from Wilson. She says that Brown was facing Wilson every time he was shot and that, when he was shot in the forehead, he was either falling forward or lunging forward. The report also shows that Brown’s hands were not raised over his head in a surrender position, contrary to claims from witnesses.
     So what does this mean beyond the not so shocking thought that witnesses sometimes get it wrong or even outright lie? How about this: Maybe we should wait until at least some of the evidence is in before we start jumping to conclusions. I’m talking about both extremes in this case. There were those walking the streets, protesting and some even engaging the police who were pushing the narrative that Wilson was a murdering monster and Brown was simply a faultless, innocent victim whose only crime was the color of his skin, despite the evidence of his prior violent and thug-like behavior. On the other side were those who vehemently defended Wilson and the shooting as righteous despite having no evidence available yet one way or the other and as if there has never been cases of cops crossing those kinds of lines before. The fact is that, until the evidence started coming in, the claims of either side amounted to nothing more than throwing a pair of proverbial dice with no idea of what numbers were going to come up. It was irresponsible, a waste of time and, quite frankly, it only benefitted those who profit from racial division in America.
     Some of those who engaged in this race baiting included, of course, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. They both regularly cash in on instigating and encouraging racial division and, in this case, Sharpton has been especially prolific in Ferguson with his multiple trips to the city (another one planned for October 31) and his two-faced demands for justice and fairness in the case while, at the same time, denouncing and ridiculing Officer Wilson’s accounting of events with no other reasoning than, apparently, the Rev. Sharpton just knows better than anyone what happened there. Missouri governor, Jay Nixon, released a statement calling for the vigorous prosecution of Officer Wilson before any investigation was even started. Even Barack Obama had to chime in, speaking before the United Nations saying, “In a summer marked by instability in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, I know the world also took notice of the small American city of Ferguson, Missouri – where a young man was killed, and a community was divided. So yes, we have our own racial and ethnic tensions.” Where no evidence has shown any kind if racial element here, our president had no trouble pulling the trusty race card out of his deck once again. At least we haven’t had to be exposed to Obama waxing poetic about how Michael Brown could’ve been his son. Maybe he was too spooked at the thought of trying to ground that particular ‘son’ just to end up shoved into a magazine rack himself…just a thought.
     One of the worst parts of these kinds of situations is the fact that it illustrates how easily the majority of us can be manipulated and influenced by such a small number of political and social opportunists. I’m not talking about every single one of us when I say ‘we’, rather I’m referring to us in a more general reference. The truth is that most, if not all of us, have or will fall into this trap at some point. The important thing is not to make a habit of it. With that said, we buy into this narrative that’s been shoved down our throats for decades that America is an evil, racist place and there are bigots in power everywhere (with the exception, of course, of those in power who are telling you this…they’re different) just waiting to pounce and victimize other people; the darker their skin, the better. So many of us give in to that and start building up this huge resentment to “The Man”, even if we’ve never experienced or witnessed that bigotry ourselves. But don’t worry about that inconsistency. Liberals have that covered by creating this idea that, if we don’t get everything we think we should, then that’s discrimination. They’ve even found a target to blame all that bigotry on: Republicans. (Never mind that the source of all the organized and much of the unorganized racism and master/slave mentality comes from the party on the other side of the aisle, both in the past and today.) Then, there are those of us who jump every time someone brings up racism or vilifies a white person or even a “white Hispanic”…whatever that means…and we come to that person’s defense 100 percent, whether we have any reason to believe they’re innocent or not. Then, of course, when the first group of “us” sees this second group of “us” acting like that, then the first group of “us” feels more justified in the original principle that America is an evil, racist place. Is that last sentence a little confusing?
     Feel free to take a minute and re-read it again. I use “us” in both cases because that’s what we should be…one people…Americans, but that’s not how it’s been for a long time now. The real “them” in America is those who manipulate and lie and create false narratives designed to vilify some of us in the eyes of others of us. Are you a black man who feels victimized? Whose fault is it? White Republicans. Are you a veteran who feels pushed around and ignored? Whose fault is it? White, rich Republicans.  Are you a woman who feels abused and devalued? Whose fault is it? White, rich Republican men. Our communities and families are crumbling both socially and economically. Whose fault is it? Old, white, rich Republican men.
     If we want to know who’s really responsible for the negatives in our society, maybe we need to look at who’s doing the accusing and re-evaluate those they accuse. It’s an old and effective tactic to manipulate and control people through accusations. It’s been working ever since a certain serpent got what he wanted from Eve in the Garden of Eden by putting forth…an accusation. She was blinded by the accusation and didn’t bother to consider the accuser. Over the next several thousands of years, nothing’s really changed that much. So much of the time, no matter which side we stand on it, we still tend to focus on the accusations and not on the accusers. We need to learn to slow down, look beyond the superficial to see what’s really going on and what the real agenda is. We’ll have plenty of opportunities, too. I guarantee that these accusers aren’t about to admit they might  have been wrong or try to re-evaluate their positions. They’re just going to double down and continue spreading the same poison as always.
     Those of us who are feeling vindicated today because the evidence is pointing toward our assertions that Darren Wilson did nothing wrong, remember that: 1) All the evidence is still not in, so we really don’t know if he was blameless or not. 2) It could have just as easily gone the other way. We had no more assurance that we were right than those who claimed Brown’s innocence and victimization. As for those who pushed and continue to push the race baiting and the narrative of cops vs. minorities? They’re going to come out ahead, no matter how this case actually plays out. After all, people like Al Sharpton don’t really care about the specifics of a death in a community. They only care about how they can turn it to their personal advantage; how they can translate their involvement into ratings, money and power. Black, white, brown or any other shades in that spectrum? They don’t really care about any of that. The only color they really care about is green and they’ll step on any of us, no matter what our ethnicity, to get what they want. We really need to wake up and see through the con; start seeing the real enemies to our nation and our unity for who they are and quit aiding and abetting them in driving our Union further and further from the greatness we once all shared.