LIFEIN THE REARVIEW MIRROR

My philosophy of life is, “You are born, you die and in between you do something.” While doing that something, you learn something. My posts on this Blog are not attempting to change anybody’s mind. I know I can’t do that, but maybe after my seven decades plus of life experience, I can shed some experiential light on another way to think. Life gives us something to do and I believe a big chunk of my life’s something is giving others something to think about. Think about that.







Friday, August 29, 2014

IT'S NOT ALL BLACK AND WHITE

October 3, 1995. Los Angles, CA. O.J. Simpson was acquitted of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Coleman outside of the Simpson's Brentwood, CA. condominium. The residents of Brentwood, to show their disagreement with the verdict, looted and burned down all the businesses on Brentwood's main street shrieking, "No justice, no peace."

Actually, I just made that story up. The OJ case didn't have the right "ingredients." for a riot. Ferguson MO did.

Ferguson MO is just the latest in a string of occurrences where poor blacks feel they are being preyed upon by "the man," and have no resource but to burn down what little they have. Why? Poverty is why the media will tell us that the blacks over react consistently, and negatively, as no other race has in similar situations. This would make a certain amount of twisted sense if it weren't for the fact that blacks make up about 14 % of the US population, and according to government statistics 48% of the US population is considered low income or in poverty. That means there are 34% of the rest of the population's non black, low income or in poverty and don't find it necessary to crap in their own cup and set their neighborhood back a couple of years at every seeming injustice.

I have been trying to figure out why the Ferguson fiasco, and others like it, have occurred. It was obviously not the killing of Michael Brown. Homicide is the leading cause of death among black youths 15-34 years of age. It could not have been a complete surprise to those who knew Michael, a choir boy he was not, and if he weren't killed chances are better than even he would spend a good portion of his life making license plates. I guess it's possible, even with his alleged marijuana use, he could have changed, straightened out his life and even become President, but that wouldn't be the way to bet. No, the riots couldn't be just about the killing of Michael Brown.

The riots couldn’t really be about a black person being killed by a white person because only 9% of the homicide deaths of black youth are committed by other than non blacks. It doesn’t seem to be worth burning down your neck of the woods to stop something that only happens 9 % of the time. Though the white person was a policeman, statistics show 99.9% of arrests do not end in fatalities. Why spend valuable time the rioter could have used looking for a job, to protest such an unlikely occurrence. No, the riots couldn't be a black and white thing.

So, again why the riots?

I have never met a black person I did not like. It's not the individuals; it is what the African-American race has let its leaders do to them that saddens and frustrates me. When you are a victim, your only power rests in your victimhood ("What can I do, I am a victim you know?"). The black "leaders" fully recognize that, and those leaers have made their livelihoods on insuring those who have thinking as a secondary skill believe there is very little blacks can do as long as the white establishment continues to be the "Masters of the Plantation."

I believe that riots occur in places like Ferguson not because of what actually happen, nor the skin colors of the participants, but because the blacks, as a race, feel they have lost control of their lives. They have no power. Their overlords can just come in and can even kill them with impunity. This is enough reason to lash back.

Which is just what the race-baiting "leaders" want. Unfortunately they are not the only ones who want this outcome. The "victims" are also wallowing in their victim status. If a person were to be able to examine the motives of those non Fergustonion blacks who came to Ferguson to loot and riot, you would find folks who recognize the power of victimhood and have made a life-style out of practicing "poor me."

An example of what I mean about the black leaders: Jessie Jackson was on TV with Chris Wallace and Jackson referred to the shooting as an "execution." (If the Rev. wanted to see an execution, he should have watched ISIS cutting off the head of James Foley.) Jackson then, in the face of known statistics, said white police killing black youths was a "pattern." Pattern? 91% of black homicide victims are killed by other blacks and .1% of all police encounters end in a fatality, and not all of those fatalities are a black fatality. The word "pattern" helps the reverend solidify the victim mentality and his own livelihood.


I just finished reading a column by black liberal columnist Eugene Robinson in which he was bemoaning the life of young black men and how policemen always pick on them and not white youth in the same situation. If blacks keep reading that BS day in and day out written by people who are supposed to have their readers' best interest at heart, like brain washed prisoners of war the blacks are going to believe it. Then when one of their fellow victims is killed by the "oppressor," their response, through fear alone, is bound to be excessive.

Blacks are constantly being jacked around. Their leaders are telling them every bad thing that happens to them is somebody else's fault, and the government is saying, "Don't you worry, you have obstacles to overcome, so we will take care of you." Where do blacks go and who do they go to to get back their self-esteem?


If only Ferguson could act as a catalyst for the many blacks not under the spell of this race rotting social system to rise up and find a leader that will give back African-Americas their pride and dignity by emphasizing, among other things, education and family. Blacks have a high school graduation rate of 69% vs. 86% for whites, which creates their unemployment rate of 11.4 % vs. 5.3% for whites. The family is where young men and women get their values and morals, and 55% percent of black children are raised in one-parent households vs. 21 % for whites. If the African -American community does not pull itself up buy its own boot straps, I fear we will forever lose the significant potential of much of our African-American population.


Events like those in Ferguson and other like it seem to me to be so bizarre. I mean destroying your own neighborhood even before you have the facts isn't logical, but it happens often, why? In an attempt to peel the skin from this complicated onion, this is my conclusion. Riots after police shootings do not occur because of the death; riots do not occur because of the color of the folks involved; they do not occur solely because those involved are poor. Riots occur because the people involved feel disrespected. When you are adults and treated as children by your leaders and by your government you tend to react like children and throw your toys all around your room.


The Liberal approach of giving to the poor while requiring nothing in return has insured this segment of our society will be forever takers, not givers. This social philosophy has robbed the poor in the US of their dignity. The folks in Brentwood didn't have to riot, not because they have money, but because they have pride and dignity. They have been given and have taken the opportunity to be in control of their own lives, to be adults. Hopefully in the years to come all of our citizens will have that opportunity.



Friday, August 15, 2014

HEADS OR HEARTS?


Liberals are emotional. Conservatives are logical.

Now, that I have your attention, and before the Liberals hit "delete," let me explain what I mean.

This is not meant to be bad or good for either side, but every time I say that to Liberals, I am met with Herculean resistance. I'm not really sure why.

What I mean is this. Every person is made up of logic and emotion, and it's usually not a 50/50 division. If people are made up of logic and emotion then it would only stand to reason that the society they comprise would also have an emotional and logical makeup. When the society leans emotional we have Democrats elected. When rational, Republicans get the nod.

The emotional side of Liberals see the world the way they would like it to be, and they work to make it that way. Very laudable! When Liberals get frustrated, it's because the world will never be the way they want it to be. The rational side of Conservatives see the world the way it is, and always was, and they try to work within that unfortunate reality. When Conservatives get frustrated, it's because the world will always remain the way it is.

In my quest to understand why people don't believe what I believe, I come up against this difference between emotional and rational world view on a daily basis. Today it's the Ferguson, MO. shooting.

As soon as I heard that a white policeman shot a black teenager, I immediately knew the Liberals would come out against the police and the Conservatives against the looters/rioters/protesters without either side having the slightest idea of what actually happened.

The emotional members among us see this young boy, Michael, (like the Archangel), walking home with his good buddies, Richie and the Beaver, sharing a bag of Skittles talking about the latest cat YouTube video when a lily white policeman roared up next to him, tried to pull him into the police car for no obvious reason. Michael is very scared, he jumps back, throws his hands in the air and begs for mercy from "the man." The policeman empties his weapon into Michael’s young body.

The rational side sees a policeman getting a call about some untoward activity going on. He sees a group of young black males closely matching the description he was given, or maybe they were just "out of context" in the neighborhood. He attempted to detain Michael in the way he was taught in the police academy. Logic says that something happened in those few minutes that put the policeman in fear for his safety. Not knowing that this 6'4" 250 pound plus person was "only 18," and if Michael gave any indication he was going for the officer's gun, the officer fired. He fired not to "shoot the gun out of his hands" or to wound him in the leg but to do as he was taught, to kill someone who he believed wanted to kill him. The policeman reacted so he could go home to his family that evening.

Somewhere in there is the truth. There are only two people who really know the truth, and one of them is dead. So, without the truth we go to our basic fall back positions. Liberals line up behind the looters/rioters/protesters, and the Conservatives behind the police.


You may still not believe my characterizing left and right as emotional and rational, but for kicks, try it out on what is going on around in the US today. Immigration--poor children from poor countries, they deserve happiness and safety. Yes, but they cost money and we're on our way to $20T debt, and we have no infrastructure to care for them. Minimum wage --people deserve to make a living wage off of their work. Yes, but the money, over and above what they are worth to the business, has to come from somewhere. It is not logical to take money from people who have earned it and give it to those who have not because it "feels right."

We have to find a way to open our minds to both the emotional and rational sides of our nature, and it's the government's job to meld the two for society as a whole. During past administrations I’ve heard stories of the President getting a jug of Jack Daniels, a box of Cubans, and in a smokey backroom confabulating with leaders of Congress to get things done, but logic tell this Conservative that ain't going to happen for at least the next couple of years.



Sunday, August 3, 2014

THE BUSINESS OF A BUSINESS


I think I talked about this before, but it hit me again at how surprised I am that not all people think as I do. After all, my conclusions are derived by careful thought, intense research, and good old common sense.

What got me thinking this time was the Tony Dungy statement made a couple of weeks ago regarding the drafting of Michael Sam, who would be the first openly gay player in the NFL. To paraphrase what Dungy, a former  Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Indianapolis Colts and   coach, said: he said he would be concerned about drafting Sam only because of the distraction to the team that media coverage of Sam's attempt to make the roster would create.

Coach Dungy had no problem with Michael Sam being drafted or playing in the NFL. He merely said he would not want the distraction. That sounded perfectly logical to me. A coach is trying to manage a team to the championship, which is the job coaches are hired to do, and the job his customers (fans) expect him to do. Dungy simply felt the distraction caused by Sam, a 7th round draft pick whose chance of making the team was slim at best, would only interfere with a coach successfully doing his job.

Again, sounded logical to me and sounded like a good business decision, but the Left attacked him like he called for the beheading of every gay over 12 years old.

What was the difference between my Conservative view of the situation and the view of many Liberals? Am I a homophobe because I didn't jump on the "String up Dungy" bandwagon? I know I'm not, but why do I think the way I think?

It's all in the definition....

Conservative definition of a business: "The activity of making, buying, or selling goods or providing services in exchange for money." A person or group gets an idea of a product or a service they can provide that will be needed or wanted by another who will pay money for that good or service. The owner will design his or her business and all of its parts (equipment, employees, finances) in a way that will cost the least to produce the good or service so that he /she can sell more than the competitor.

Liberal definition of a business: " A person or group gets an idea of a product or a service they can provide that will be needed or wanted by another, who will pay money for that good or service. The owner will design his or her business and all of its parts (equipment, employees, finances) in a way that will provide the employees with a wage that will allow the employee to live a middle class life regardless of the employee's skill level or his/her contribution to the business. In other words, Liberals tend to think of a business as an incubator for social justice.

This is why, I believe, Conservatives and Liberals disagree on a government-mandated minimum wage. Should a business pay workers what the workers want from the business, or pay the workers what they are worth to the business?

It is also why the "Dungy disagreement" occurred. A coach is running a business. The introduction of an employee (Sam) that would undoubtedly interject a distraction thus impeding the coach's ability to provide his "customers" with the best product for the cost, is to be considered very carefully. Should a coach concentrate on winning more games or making a social statement?

This, I guess, is why all people don't think the way I do. We often times have a different core definition of the subject. If I believe the main objective of a business is to make a profit through concentration on the customer, and a Liberal friend sees the business as a way to implement social justice through concentration on the employee, we may have to agree to disagree.


There is a lot of that going around.........at least the disagreeing part.