RF23 - I Agree With Rangel, Just A Little...

RF23 - I Agree With Rangel, Just A Little.....
J. Lewis


It's been now two weeks that I agreed with Al Sharpton in regard to the socio-economics of folks being able to afford to go to the Super Bowl, let alone be able to watch a regular season game. Sharpton pointed out that the NFL has grown into this money grabbing organization that now most of its game are on cable networks, just like the NBA. With rising cable costs and the growing necessity to get a good signal on televisions these days. Cable networks pretty much have the average Joe by the sack and mix that with yearly cable rates. Cable and satelite is pretty much out of reach of some Americans.

I agreed with Sharpton.


Now prepare yourself to be floored once again. Congressman Charles Rangel has been hootin' and hollerin' about re-starting the draft. At first, I dismissed his arguement, due to the fact that Rangel was going around saying, it's the soooo poor and sooooo black young men and women dying for this country. And of course, when hit with the statistics of who is serving in our military. Rangel dismissed it saying, that the individuals who support the war ought to have their young-in's wearing camuflage and totin' a ruck sack. Rangels feels that those who avoid fighting over seas, and alluding to the President not participating in Vietnam, while he was in the Texas National Guard, would think carefully about sending someone else's child to a hot zone.

I disagree with Rangel.

I warned you to prepare yourself to be floored, right? Now Rangel, is proposing that all young people between should serve at least two years in the military or other service. I agree. I feel that all young people should serve their country, gain a skill in those two years, gain at least an Associates Degree while in the service. I also the agree that the maximum age limit for recruits should be raised to 42. Folks I fall within that age category and since I am a veteran, under Rangel's proposal, I should be up for recall.

I have no problem with that. I definitely believe in letting my enemy die for his country or cause. My cause is to get home.

So there you have it, In two weeks time, I have agreed with Al Sharpton and now Rep. Charles Rangel....

Who says I have no depth...

Supporting Articles:


1. Agree with Rangel

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/nation/16563834.htm


2. Problems in Rangel's reasons

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandDefense/wm1263.cfm


3. Who are the recruits

http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-09.cfm

Civil Rights Issues of the 21st Century...

While checking out my daily news information sites, I came across an article in which community activist Al Sharpton was going around talking to potential presidential candidates about "his" issues. And by now we should know what his issues are, so I'm not going to get into that. And based off the article, it was not noted that security had to be called for huge amounts of money changing hands in the name of social justice. But the one thing that got my attention is a statement made "I'm still standing by my man" Hillary Clinton is that she intends to address "the civil rights issues of the 21st century," so Community Act. Al won't involve himself in the 2008 Presidential run.

"Civil Rights Issues of the 21st Century" what is that? So I googled that little saying up and it came up with a few issues, that I sincerely did not know were civil rights issues. And one of them I know for sure was not supported by the democrats or the far past china left.

Here they are, and if there are more , please add them in your replies:

1. Voting rights to ex-felons

2. Healthcare Discrimination

3. Gay Rights

4. Regional Equity

5. Hispanic Civil Rights

and


6. Education - Support of School Choice


Now lets tackle voting rights for ex-felons, individuals who are convicted and sentenced to long term prison terms, lose the right and privilege to participate in our voting processs. I think if an individual who has done his time in the big house and reported to the man every week, should not have the privilege to participate in voting...It seems to me that along with committing a crime that will always be on his record, the person should think about the consequences of going to prison for a long time, but! hey, I'm going to lose the right of being disfrenchised when the GOP wins or not properly reading the ballot correctly....

Next, healthcare discrimination, here is my experience of visiting my doctor....

Nurse: RF23? 23?
Me: here

Nurse: Come with me

follows nurse to empty room

Nurse: go ahead and take your clothes off and put on the robe and the doc will be in soon.
Me: awww right

This is usually where we wait an additional ten to fifteen minutes....

door opens and doc walks in

Doc: Mr. 23, how are you

this is where you tell the doc. what is matter with you or why you are there.

I don't recall the doctor coming in the room, recognizing that I'm black and saying, you need to git ya-self off my table and git the hell outta of my office!

Not once, and all of my doctors have been either black, white, asian or other....

Gay rights - this one I don't get, what the hell does the public need to know what you do in your own bedroom. are there straight rights?


Regional Equity - disparity of who is living in poor neighborhoods, seems that some people don't like the fact that a hardworking, law abiding family moves out of an area that is similiar to Lebanon. Apparently there is supposed to be some type of guilt of leaving other families behind to deal with it...I think...

Hispanic Civil Rights - Let me get this straight, hispanics who have long been catergorized as white, weren't segregated in the military...is now looking for civil rights...I think it's illegal hispanics who are looking to get over for their crimes.....

Education: Let me get this straight, they now want a "choice" of schools and supports vouchers...strange...

Article: http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070126-122635-4418r.htm

Crime Doesn't Pay

Crime Doesn't Pay
RF23/J. Lewis
www.keepingitright.blogspot.com

"Whatcha doing down here, n@#!er?" "Boy, I'll teach you not to be no damn trouble maker," are probably some of the words that hundreds of innocent black men and women heard right before the cowardly act of a few ignorant, hiding behind the badge or sheets white men murdered them. Nothing can be more cowardly than the bombing of a church with four girls in it or the shooting of a NAACP civil rights leader and WWII veteran in the back as he is walking to his front door of his home. How about the thousands of lynching of innocent blacks right after the civil war, just because of their skin color and new status as Americans.


Did those cowardly men, and I'm calling them cowardly because thats what they are and were if they're burning in hell for the terrorism they caused Black Americans. But for those who are still alive and read that the party responsible for the brutal beating and then killing of Emmitt Till have been arrested or the coward that shot Medgar Evers was found guilty of a murder that happened decades ago for them, but just like yesterday to Mr. Evers' family and the black community as a whole.


And now one of those cowards, is going to pay the piper for his crimes and I don't give a damn if he's cripple, drooling at the mouth, and poo pooing on himself...I want him behind bars, and if he dies the next day, prop his azz in a defense chair and try the case. And when he's found guilty, I want a noose in place of a tie around his neck and a gravestone that says, "Here lies a guilty murderer of two young black men and may he burn in hell."

I know it's justice too late, but dammit the message is out....

Crime doesn't pay....Cowards.

News Story on the latest Coward: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16792385/?GT1=8921

Greenburg: Why The Left Hates Clarence Thomas

RF23 Comments: What I don't get is why this man is ostrasized the way he is, my God he is a Supereme Court Justice, who happens to be black and yet there is nothing to show our young black men and women that we could strive to sit on the bench like Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas. Look at the contrast of both gentlemen, doesn't it show our diversity to where we came from in which Justice Marshall fought for and where we are with Justice Thomas?

Why the left hates Clarence Thomas: he's conservative and he's black
The Truth About Clarence Thomas
By JAN CRAWFORD GREENBURG
January 22, 2007;

Page A14 Clarence Thomas has borne some of the most vitriolic personal attacks in Supreme Court history. But the persistent stereotypes about his views on the law and subordinate role on the court are equally offensive -- and demonstrably false. An extensive documentary record shows that Justice Thomas has been a significant force in shaping the direction and decisions of the court for the past 15 years. That's not the standard storyline. Immediately upon his arrival at the court, Justice Thomas was savaged by court-watchers as Antonin Scalia's dutiful apprentice, blindly following his mentor's lead. It's a grossly inaccurate portrayal, imbued with politically incorrect innuendo, as documents and notes from Justice Thomas's very first days on the court conclusively show. Far from being a Scalia lackey, the rookie jurist made clear to the other justices that he was willing to be the solo dissenter, sending a strong signal that he would not moderate his opinions for the sake of comity. By his second week on the bench, he was staking out bold positions in the private conferences where justices vote on cases. If either justice changed his mind to side with the other that year, it was Justice Scalia joining Justice Thomas, not the other way around. Much of the documentary evidence for this comes from the papers of Justice Harry Blackmun, who recorded the justices' votes and took detailed notes explaining their views. I came across vivid proof while reading the papers as part of my research for a book about how the Rehnquist Court -- a court with seven justices appointed by Republican presidents -- evolved into an ideological and legal disappointment for conservatives. Justice Thomas's first term was especially interesting. He replaced legendary liberal icon Thurgood Marshall, and joined the court just a year after David Souter took William Brennan's seat. There appeared to be a solid conservative majority, with the court poised to finally dismember the liberal legacy of the Warren Court. But that year it instead lurched inexplicably to the left -- even putting Roe v. Wade on more solid ground. Justice Thomas's first year on the job brought to life the adage that a new justice makes a new court. His entry didn't merely change the vote of the liberal justice he replaced. It turned the chessboard around entirely, rearranging ideological alliances. Justice Thomas acted as a catalyst in different ways, shoring up conservative positions in some cases and spurring others -- the moderate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, in particular -- to realign themselves into new voting blocs. Consider a criminal case argued during Justice Thomas's first week. It concerned a thief's effort to get out of a Louisiana mental institution and the state's desire to keep him there. Eight justices voted to side with the thief. Justice Thomas dissented, arguing that although it "may make eminent sense as a policy matter" to let the criminal out of the mental institution, nothing in the Constitution required "the states to conform to the policy preferences of federal judges." After he sent his dissenting opinion to the other justices, as is custom, Justices Rehnquist, Scalia and Kennedy changed their votes. The case ended up 5-4. Justice Thomas's dissents persuaded Justice Scalia to change his mind several times that year. Even in Hudson v. McMillan, the case that prompted the New York Times to infamously label Justice Thomas the "youngest, cruelest justice," he was again, initially, the lone dissenter. Justice Scalia changed his vote after he read Justice Thomas's dissent, which said a prison inmate beaten by guards had several options for redress -- but not under the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment." * * * From the beginning, Justice Thomas was an independent voice. His brutal confirmation hearings only enforced his autonomy, making him impervious to criticism from the media and liberal law professors. He'd told his story, and no one listened. From then on, he did not care what they said about him. Clarence Thomas, for example, is the only justice who rarely asks questions at oral arguments. One reason is that he thinks his colleagues talk too much from the bench, and he prefers to let the lawyers explain their case with fewer interruptions. But his silence is sometimes interpreted as a lack of interest, and friends have begged him to ask a few questions to dispel those suggestions. He refuses to do it. "They have no credibility," he says of critics. "I am free to live up to my oath." But the forcefulness and clarity of Justice Thomas's views, coupled with wrongheaded depictions of him doing Justice Scalia's bidding, created an internal dynamic that caused the court to make an unexpected turn in his first year. Justice O'Connor -- who sought ideological balance -- moved to the left. With the addition of Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito, the court now is poised to finally fulfill the hopes of the conservative movement. As George W. Bush told his legal advisers early in his presidency, he wanted justices in "the mold of Thomas and Scalia." Interestingly, on President Bush's marquee, Justice Thomas got top billing.


Ms. Crawford Greenburg, legal correspondent for ABC News, is the author of "Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story for Control of the United States Supreme Court," published tomorrow by Penguin Press.

Malkin: Immortal Words

The immortal words of 2LT Mark Daily
By Michelle Malkin · January 19, 2007 01:37 AM
Army 2nd Lt. Mark J. Daily, 23
A reader e-mails that 2LT Mark Daily was killed in an IED attack in Mosul along with three other soldiers. He was named the ROTC's outstanding cadet for 2005 and also a Distinguished Military Graduate, the highest ROTC award. The OC Register profiles him here.
This was his MySpace post explaining his decision to enter the military. I'm reprinting it in full because it deserves to be read and remembered--and because it will probably only get briefly mentioned or excerpted in most MSM coverage of his death. Read the whole thing:
Sunday, October 29, 2006

WHY I JOINED
Current mood: optimistic
Why I Joined:
This question has been asked of me so many times in so many different contexts that I thought it would be best if I wrote my reasons for joining the Army on my page for all to see. First, the more accurate question is why I volunteered to go to Iraq. After all, I joined the Army a week after we declared war on Saddam's government with the intention of going to Iraq. Now, after years of training and preparation, I am finally here.
Much has changed in the last three years. The criminal Ba'ath regime has been replaced by an insurgency fueled by Iraq's neighbors who hope to partition Iraq for their own ends. This is coupled with the ever present transnational militant Islamist movement which has seized upon Iraq as the greatest way to kill Americans, along with anyone else they happen to be standing near. What was once a paralyzed state of fear is now the staging ground for one of the largest transformations of power and ideology the Middle East has experienced since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Thanks to Iran, Syria, and other enlightened local actors, this transformation will be plagued by interregional hatred and genocide. And I am now in the center of this.
Is this why I joined?
Yes. Much has been said about America's intentions in overthrowing Saddam Hussein and seeking to establish a new state based upon political representation and individual rights. Many have framed the paradigm through which they view the conflict around one-word explanations such as "oil" or "terrorism," favoring the one which best serves their political persuasion. I did the same thing, and anyone who knew me before I joined knows that I am quite aware and at times sympathetic to the arguments against the war in Iraq. If you think the only way a person could bring themselves to volunteer for this war is through sheer desperation or blind obedience then consider me the exception (though there are countless like me).
I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many modern day "humanists" who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow "global citizens" to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions. Their excuses used to be my excuses. When asked why we shouldn't confront the Ba'ath party, the Taliban or the various other tyrannies throughout this world, my answers would allude to vague notions of cultural tolerance (forcing women to wear a veil and stay indoors is such a quaint cultural tradition), the sanctity of national sovereignty (how eager we internationalists are to throw up borders to defend dictatorships!) or even a creeping suspicion of America's intentions. When all else failed, I would retreat to my fragile moral ecosystem that years of living in peace and liberty had provided me. I would write off war because civilian casualties were guaranteed, or temporary alliances with illiberal forces would be made, or tank fuel was toxic for the environment. My fellow "humanists" and I would relish contently in our self righteous declaration of opposition against all military campaigns against dictatorships, congratulating one another for refusing to taint that aforementioned fragile moral ecosystem that many still cradle with all the revolutionary tenacity of the members of Rage Against the Machine and Greenday. Others would point to America's historical support of Saddam Hussein, sighting it as hypocritical that we would now vilify him as a thug and a tyrant. Upon explaining that we did so to ward off the fiercely Islamist Iran, which was correctly identified as the greater threat at the time, eyes are rolled and hypocrisy is declared. Forgetting that America sided with Stalin to defeat Hitler, who was promptly confronted once the Nazis were destroyed, America's initial engagement with Saddam and other regional actors is identified as the ultimate argument against America's moral crusade.
And maybe it is. Maybe the reality of politics makes all political action inherently crude and immoral. Or maybe it is these adventures in philosophical masturbation that prevent people from ever taking any kind of effective action against men like Saddam Hussein. One thing is for certain, as disagreeable or as confusing as my decision to enter the fray may be, consider what peace vigils against genocide have accomplished lately. Consider that there are 19 year old soldiers from the Midwest who have never touched a college campus or a protest who have done more to uphold the universal legitimacy of representative government and individual rights by placing themselves between Iraqi voting lines and homicidal religious fanatics. Often times it is less about how clean your actions are and more about how pure your intentions are.
So that is why I joined. In the time it took for you to read this explanation, innocent people your age have suffered under the crushing misery of tyranny. Every tool of philosophical advancement and communication that we use to develop our opinions about this war are denied to countless human beings on this planet, many of whom live under the regimes that have, in my opinion, been legitimately targeted for destruction. Some have allowed their resentment of the President to stir silent applause for setbacks in Iraq. Others have ironically decried the war because it has tied up our forces and prevented them from confronting criminal regimes in Sudan, Uganda, and elsewhere.
I simply decided that the time for candid discussions of the oppressed was over, and I joined.
In digesting this posting, please remember that America's commitment to overthrow Saddam Hussein and his sons existed before the current administration and would exist into our future children's lives had we not acted. Please remember that the problems that plague Iraq today were set in motion centuries ago and were up until now held back by the most cruel of cages. Don't forget that human beings have a responsibility to one another and that Americans will always have a responsibility to the oppressed. Don't overlook the obvious reasons to disagree with the war but don't cheapen the moral aspects either. Assisting a formerly oppressed population in converting their torn society into a plural, democratic one is dangerous and difficult business, especially when being attacked and sabotaged from literally every direction. So if you have anything to say to me at the end of this reading, let it at least include "Good Luck"
Mark Daily


On his MySpace front page, he featured this quote:
"Patience demolishes mountains" -Arab proverb
He wanted to be a journalist.
These are the kind and caliber of men who fight for us. Twenty-three years young. God rest his soul. And never, never forget.

Jason Whitlock: History

With the wins from both the Colts and Da Bears to advance to the Super Bowl. The game will showcase something that in forty super bowls have not seen. Two Black Head Coaches.

Jason Whitlock: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/16518214.htm#recent_comm

A Little Reprieve For LT...Just A little..

A Little Reprieve For Tomlinson...Just A Little..
www.keepingitright.blogspot.com
RF23/J. Lewis

Last week after a loss to the New England Patriots, NFL MVP and Charger's running back LaDainian Tomlinson said that the Patriots were classless and attributed some of that classlessness to the Patriot's coach. And no sooner than he said it, it was criticized and dismissed as LT being emotional after a loss, that his team should not have suffered. Nonetheless, after a mere twenty four hours, Tomlinson stuck with his original statement and continued to call the Patriots classless and this was after some Patriots expressed their disappointment with Charger fans and the fact that they felt that the Chargers overlooked them and was preparing for Colts. With that notion, I agreed with the Patriots and believed that LT was wrong for being upset that a couple of Patriots performed the "Lights Out" dance. Hell they saw Merriman perform it on two ocassions, usually three yards from where their quarterback was either on his kness or back. LT overlooked the fact that a dance after a sack is showing up the offensive line and the quarterback...So why not a little jabbing from the Patriots? Especially if they did the unthinkable? They came in pillaged the village and punked your team, after a serie of crucial mistakes.

So having said all that, maybe LT has a little point. After the Colts-Patriots game, New England QB Tom Brady was seen making a B-line towards the visitor's locker room after his team gave up 18 unanswered points in their loss to the Colts. What happened to sportsmanship and being a good loser. Dungy and Manning had to swallow disappointing loses to these Patriots and meet Belichick and Brady in the middle of field and shake their hands. So why the slip from Brady and the abruptness from Belichick? Isn't that classless and bad sportmanship?

Maybe LT is right and deserves a little reprieve....

Just a little.

RF23 - Next To Nobody

Next To Nobody
RF23/J. Lewis
www.keepingitright.blogspot.com


Well yesterday was a day that we as Black Americans and all of America take the time to reflect on the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the sacrifice of his life to the enpowerment of blacks in the 60's. Lets get this straight, the man, along with others lost his life so we as blacks would not have to endure the same travesties of justice he did and his parents did. He died to gain the same basic civil liberties that whites enjoyed. And he along with others didn't beg and plead for it, they simply demanded to be heard and seen. You see the opportunity to show someone who thinks you are inferior to them and beneath them, that you are the most talented that doesn't involve putting a ball in a hoop, running for touchdowns or tap dancing, but the most intelligent, the most innovative and like your white counter-parts, the most loyal to your country by fighting for it's beliefs. It's exactly what MLK and other black activists were doing. And unlike those in the past, they weren't just jocking for camera time or listing "black activist" as an occupation. They were real community men and women who wanted a change of social thinking, not because it was politically correct, but it was to show the hypocrisy of a country that said, "All Men Are Created Equal." For these brave community soldiers, who lost their lives for the struggle to remove "All Men Are Created Equal....But" It was the "but" part that needed to be removed.

You know when it comes to reflecting on the legacy of Dr. King, I can't help but think about Medgar Evers or Malcom X and other men who wanted a chance, man! And it's a shame that we have squandered all of those sacrifices. Yesterday, while some of us were probably reflecting on Dr. King. A few of us still fired weapons at someone who looked like us, A few of us still have our pants on the back of our thigh and A few of us are still locked up for selling poison to people who look like us.

I'm not writing this to be negative or continue to berade our people. WE HAVE COME A LONG ASS WAY IN COMPARISON TO CHAINS, LYNCHING, SEGREGATION AND GANGS. A long way folks and for that, I'm able to see to take advantage of all the opportunities that come my way, even after making mistakes in my life. Can't remember or can recall a discriminatory moment, haven't experienced it and I owe that to men like Dr. King. Am I discounting that racism doesn't exist, hell no. There are always a few a-holes who refuse to accept things the way they are. But I realize the sword cuts two ways and we are just as prejudice.

So on a day, when I got up and prayed thanked the lord for allowing me yet another day to experience the cool air and repeat the same go to bed and get up routine. I thought about Martin, Medger, Booker, Frederick, WEB and Malcom. And as I shook my head to a AOL Black Voices Poll that said next to nobody, that Jesse Jackson and Condeleza Rice were number three and four respectively as the most influential black leader. I shook my head....

And agreed with thirty percent of my peoples.


That.

Today there are no influential black leaders.



None.

Another Ya Know Me Moment....

You know it seems like everytime an athlete says, "Ya'll know me," after a controversial statement or mis-deed off the field. We find out, we don't know the person. First, Kobe Bryant tells the media and fans that we knew him after allegations of rape of a woman in Colorado. Turns out that Kobe indeed did in fact have sexual relations with that girl and became a locker room rat by telling detectives that his former team-mate Shaquille O'Neal pays off women after he's had sex with them.

And now we can add LaDainian Tomlinson to the list. After a heartbreaking loss to the New England Patriots, Tomlinson obviously upset made a charge against some Patriot players who were celebrating on the Charger logo and doing the "lights out" dance that is usually performed by Charger linebacker Shawn Merriman. After being restrained by his coaches and team-mates, Tomlinson then went on to slam the Patriots as classless and pinned the classlessness of the Patriots on Bill Belichick. And of course those famous words came out, "Ya'll know me, I'm usually not this emotional, but to see those guys doing the dance that Shawn does, it really got me, they showed no class and they probably got it from their coach."

You see, he said, ya'll know me, which means that we should give him a pass for his comments and after the game, maybe so and we as fans would give him a break. It was emotion right after a game and players should be able to vent their frustrations. But a full 24 hours after the game and Tomlinson is still standing by his comments and calling the Patriots classless.

Cmon! LT, it's over and your team lost. And regardless of the class or lack thereof, it wasn't class that beat your team on Sunday. It was the lack of discipline on your team's part by getting stupid penalties. It was the lack of discipline of your coaching staff by not giving you, the MVP, the rock more in the second half. It was also your coaches that challenged an obvious fumble that cost your team a time out and eventually the game. Don't you think that your kicker would have appreciated a little bit more yardage to do the one job he's paid to do...And I'm not going to put this on the kicker. Ya'll were up by eight with six minutes left and by virtue of an interception by your defense and eventually a fumble on the same play. Cost you. If your guy would have just remembered he's a cornerback, and we all know where cornerbacks come from, but just in case you forgot, cornerbacks are rejected receivers who somehow forgot that they should "catch" the ball, instead of knocking it down. But if he knocks the ball down, it's fourth down and the Patriots kick the ball and you have a chance to run, wait! naw, you guys would have tried to pass the ball and forgot to give you a chance to put the icing on the Patriot cake. Sorry L.T., on the field the Patriots played a simple game of "Survivor." They outplayed and outsmarted you all, while you were busy thinking of the Colts and making plans to go to South Beach.

Let's call it like the Patriots called it, you guys overlooked them and they came back and bit you in the ass.

Lovin' My People

I found this article to be interesting and yet was insulted by a small passage in it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/05/AR2007010501936.html

"That's Why I Love My People" - Garry Taylor

To bad my people don't love me....

just because.

Can I Get Some Freedom

Can I Get Some Freedom?
J.Lewis/RF23
www.keepingitright.blogspot.com


A fellow internet boardmember recently started a thread in regard to the mindset of conservatives. Personally, he hit the nail on the head in his assessment of conservatives, but I got the feeling that he was depicting "conservatives" as selfish, non-compassionate people who don't care about anything accept guns and less government. Which is probably not the case, maybe I'm skeptical, but then again, as sure as the sun is bright and hot, someone is going to say that republicans are a bunch of kool aid drinking boobs, who hate black people and would rather eat a "Big Mac with fries and shake" in front of a starving black kid. And oh, we are blood thirsty people who would rather drop bombs on innocent women and children because they happen to be standing on a black gold mine, underneath the sands of a Middle Eastern desert.

And since I happened to hit on the subject of oil and the war. My fellow internet boardmember quoted me in regard to my "now" belief that the Iraqis and muslims everywhere else in the Middle East Region want to be free. They want democracy and they want to be able to express themselves without being lashed or executed for rabble rousing against their oppresive governments. To me it makes sense, it reminds me of Black-Americans of old. Blacks were bounded in slavery, freed and remained oppressed until the yok was broken in the sixties. And it wasn't easy, it took the lives of many, it took the sacrifices of a few, it took the faith of a whole people "to be" whatever their minds took them. Today, blacks can attain the highest office of the land, blacks can run and lead huge corporations, blacks can be millionaires and billionaires, blacks can attain anything, hard work and dedication can get them without fail.

Now I know some people won't agree with that. They will say that racism is still the root cause for all failures in the black community. They'll prevace that with "tolling in plantations" as slaves, that they never tolled in nor were made to be slaves. They'll blame White Americans for their social ills and have ready and cocked the racial bullet of calling someone a racist if they disagree or take a different position. It's ironic that the same "tolerance" that some blacks or other social groups clamor for, is the same intolerance that is not given if someone happens to disagree with Affirmative Action, Abortion, The Environment, Gay - Lesbian Rights, Crime and so on...Don't we have the right to "express" ourselves without the moral police of the Main Stream Media prosecuting us for saying, "hey, affirmative action is no longer needed and it's reverse racism." Or, "abortion is wrong or it's a woman's right to choose," "I'm against same sex marriages," "I'm against illegal immigration."

Does that make some conservatives the devil or warped in their thinking....And when you think about it, who really gives a damn? Why would I give two flucks about what some democratic supporter feels. I really shouldn't. But what I care about is that I respect his position and in turn he respects mine. That's the one thing that this country is missing, our ideology might not be the same, but in the end we damn sure would strike like a rattle snake if someone told us that since we are against homosexuality, that we should tarred and feathered and made to wear a sign that said homophobe or that all able bodied Americans should get off their azzes and "do something" to feed their familes, instead of taking the "entitlement" route that the government is responsible for all their needs and wants, that we should be stockcaded with a sign that said "selfish."

I would like to think that our freedom of expression is what make some muslim countries crazy. They can't stand that an ordinary peon can say, "I hate George Bush and he' an idiot," and nothing happens to them. They can't stand the fact that a woman can be free to express herself and be seen and heard! They can't stand that many religions can be practiced in this country, including Islam! And they can't stand the fact that some of their own people have stopped, as if they were window shopping, to see this democracy, to see this individual rights and freedoms.

They can't believe that a people who were slaves, made free, were oppressed for over one hundred years, have the biggest GNP than their own countries, are supreme ct. justices, are secretaries of state, governors, senators, inventors and so on! are free!!

And they're saying, "Mr. Salesman, I want that, where can I get the seeds to begin my democracy. My freedom for me and my children. I want to end oppression, I'm tired of the blood shed of many innocents for expressing themselves. I want better things for my country and me leaving it to douse myself with just a little taste of what the Americans are getting in their own country, won't do me any good, knowing that my mother, father, brother and sisters are still going through hell with radical regimes.


And having said all that. In 2005, millions of Iraqis voted and expressed themselves. In 1999 and now, thousands of Iranians are starting to hiss about their own freedoms. They want to attain it by themselves, but freedom is the main prize and sweeter if they do it....on their own.



This one says it all:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2294509.stm

Do these Iranians Want Democracy?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2996604.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2946982.stm


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2563413.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/2383267.stm

Do you think this Professor and his students want some type of "Freedom" of Speech?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2773989.stm

Elder: Dems to tackle "Income Inequality"

Dems to tackle "income inequality"By Larry ElderThursday, January 11, 2007

You make too much money! And you make too little!

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., put it somewhat differently. But the new chairman of the House Financial Services Committee vowed to tackle the growing, festering problem of "income inequality." "Government doesn't have to interfere with the free enterprise system," says Frank, "but we can work along with it to reduce inequality."

Railing against Home Depot's $210 million severance package for its fired CEO, Frank called it "further confirmation of the need to deal with the pattern of CEO pay that appears to be out of control."

What does Frank propose to do about the "income inequality" in, say, baseball? New York Yankee Alex Rodriguez several years ago signed a contract for a quarter-billion dollars. That's "b" as in "bodacious." Pity the teammate who toils at the league minimum of $380,000 a year. Will Smith reportedly gets $20 million per picture. Most members of the Screen Actors Guild work at other non-acting jobs just to make ends meet.

What exactly is the appropriate gap? How wide should it be? Presumably Mr. Frank possesses the divine wisdom to know when the gap is jus-s-s-st right.

Understanding Frank requires understanding the deep recesses of the Democrats' psyche about wealth and its creation. Recall former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt of Missouri, who once said people of wealth in America are "the people who have won the lottery of life." Obviously, Messrs. Frank and Gephardt consider the old hard-work formula dated and dysfunctional.


A friend told me a story of an executive, "Bob," who works with her at an insurance company. During a golf outing, Bob told her his life story. His dad abandoned him shortly after his mom gave birth. When he was 3, his mother, in a fit of anger, broke his arm. Social services investigated, but found no wrongdoing. Shortly after he turned 8, his ever-angry mother broke his jaw. This time, social services removed him from her custody, and he lived in a series of foster homes and group houses. In school he constantly caused trouble, made poor grades, and grew angrier and angrier as he found himself shuttled from one temporary custodial place to another.

One day, a priest visited the house where Bob, now a teenager, was staying with other "unwanted" kids. The priest gave a motivational speech, telling them about God's love, and that despite their circumstances, they should value their lives. The priest said that each of you possesses a special gift, a gift you must find and use. Bob's eyes rolled toward the ceiling as the priest spoke -- after all, he'd heard this before. "If I'm so special," he thought, "who values me? Please, what 'gift' do I have?"

The priest noticed Bob's indifference, and after his talk, approached Bob quietly and asked him why he appeared to pay no attention. Bob asked the priest the very questions he'd been thinking, including, "Where's my gift?" He told the priest about his absent father, and the abuse he suffered at the hands of his mother. The priest said, "Your gift is that you survived. What you endured requires strength, a strength that a lot of people do not have. That is your gift."
For whatever reason, the priest's words sunk in. Bob began to work harder, and his grades improved. He went to college, got a degree in business and joined a large corporation, where he began to work his way up. He is married and has two children. He now earns a high six-figure salary and loves his life.

To Messrs. Gephardt and Frank, Bob is merely a winner in "the lottery of life." To them, Bob occupies the wrong end of the "income inequality" scale. Never mind that America remains the most upwardly mobile country in history. Or, that most rich did not start out that way. Or that, of all the qualities that go into income success, hard work remains the most important.

A great man from humble circumstances once said,

"[T]here is not, of necessity, any such thing as the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition for life. . . . The prudent, penniless beginner in the world labors for wages awhile, saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself; then labors on his own account for awhile, and at length hires another new beginner to help him. This is . . . the just, and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way for all -- gives hope to all, and . . . improvement of conditions to all. If any continue through life in the condition of the hired laborer, it is not the fault of the system, but because of either a dependent nature which prefers it, or improvidence, folly, or singular misfortune."

Barney Frank, meet Abraham Lincoln.


Larry Elder is host of the Larry Elder Show on talk radio and author of Showdown : Confronting Bias, Lies, and the Special Interests That Divide America .

National Review Article: What's Going Right In Iraq

I know some of my liberal anti-war friends are going to outright reject this article, but what the hell....

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTQwM2ExODNhMjRmMTczODM1OTc0MmVmNDRiNTM5MzE=

Ooops Sorry.

Ooops Sorry.
J. Lewis/RF23
www.keepingitright.blogspot.com


Today, the Baseball Hall of Fame announced two inductees to its hallow halls, Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripkin, Jr. But that's not really groundbreaking news. Those two were shoo in's from the get go and rightfully first time nominees to get the nod. Both were instrumental in the record books, both were good ambassadors of the game and there isn't a time when a fan of both of the men won't think about those two with a smile and stories of their feats.

However, with the joy of those men who will be gracing the hall in few months, there will be candidates denied entry. These players were instrumental to their respective teams, they were threats for opposing pitchers and fans often thought of them around all star games. Some were great, some were just good enough to be great, but for the next fourteen years or so, they will bite their fingernails and hope that their name is called. But there's a problem and maybe an injustice that is going to happen for the second time this year. Last year, baseball ambassador and the first black to hold a coaching position was denied entry into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Buck O'Neill was turned away from joining the greats that denied him into the majors and was denied to join the men he called friends that played in the Negro Leagues. And being Buck O'Neill, he decided to join them spiritually and left us last year, without ever receiving that phone call telling him that he will join the immortals.

But this isn't about Buck, it's about these "moral" police press that has carte blanche to deem an individual guilty without due process. Mark McGwire was denied entry into the Hall of Fame and wasn't because of his numbers, well maybe it was, because but for his numbers and the moral police of the press, McGwire has been deemed guilty as charged for steroid use. McGwire up to his retirement has not come up hot on drug tests, OH!! wait a minute, there was no drug testing going on for steroid use when McGwire played. So what is he guilty of?

For taking the fifth at congress, by refusing to answer questions if whether he used steroids or performance enhancing drugs.

And for that over 75% of the "moral" press said that McGwire is a steroid user and the "Ivory" of what is wrong with baseball (Bonds is "Ebony").

Now this man sits 8th on the home run list and along with Sammy Sosa single handedly put baseball back on the map, after a world series had been cancelled because of a strike. The game was on life support if not for those two and other players playing out of their backside!! But 1998 and 99 will foreever be remembered as the "Mark McGwire Show", co-starring Sammy Sosa.

And for that he is being denied his rightful place in the hall because of some "purist" wants to know that the home runs he has never hit, and probably never in a game of "kick ball," is real and on the up and up. That's crazy and these people should be ostrasized for being so gulliable.

This isn't your grandfather's game anymore, hell it ain't even America's past time. For that matter it ain't even American, with the hugh influx of foreign ball players. I guess the game can be happy that history is repeating itself in regard to the paucity of black players in the game. In that case, the majors won't have to worry about another negro leagues coming out and out selling them.

Anyway congratulations to Gwynn and Ripken for your inductions to the Hall. As for you, McGwire, please take the seat next to Pete Rose, squeeze in tight, cause Bonds will be joining you both in 6 years.

Yeah, Shrug, So What...It Happens

Last night I caught my boy Stephen A. Smith's show last night and one of the subjects was about the useless, cowardice shooting of Denver Bronco corner back Darrent Williams on New Year's Day. One of the panalist on the show is a columnist for one of the Philly fish wraps named John Smallwood who opined about the blaise reporting of a young athlete who was violently gunned downed, oh wait a minute, a young black athlete, who had no reports of trouble or beefs with anyone is gunned down and the media, the league in which he played for downplayed it like it was just an usual story.....sort of like "Yeah (shrug) So What...It Happens."

John Smallwoods Column: http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/columnists/john_smallwood/16371808.htm