Currently viewing the category: "Opinion"

Donald Trump Apologetics 7 20 15

I have nothing whatsoever against people who do not support Trump, who think he’s not a real conservative, who thinks he’s bad for the GOP, who thinks a Trump nomination will guarantee a loss in 2016.

I myself am absolutely not a Trump supporter.  I believe that Donald Trump will not deliver on the promises he is making, that he is actually making unrealistic promises.  I believe that he, at least for me, doesn’t go nearly far enough in challenging the power of the Federal government, that a Trump presidency might very well see an increase in Federal power, not a decrease, and I am concerned that his foreign policy might be extremely nationalistic and get us involved in wars which could directly threaten the lives of my family and friends at fighting age.

I do not, however, believe the supporters of Trump are idiots, are undesirables, are part of a conservative coalition that everyone in that coalition would be better off not having in the coalition.  These folks are not crazy, they are not uninformed, they are not un-serious.

I take them very seriously and I recognize that if conservatives wish to win in 2016, they will need ALL HANDS ON DECK to have a chance to stop a candidate that, in my opinion, is far more dangerous than Trump, than even Bush.  Perhaps only Lindsey Graham might fairly give Hillary a run for her money in the dangerous department.

Mind you, for military folks and for the nations of the world, Trump might actually be more dangerous than Hillary, but he’s far more interested in the world’s stuff than he is in our stuff.

Do you recall the way many conservatives embraced Vladimir Putin when he began to butt heads with Obama, especially in the Syria chemical weapons debacle?  Facebook was filled with Putin is awesome memes, contrasting Obama, the girls’ bicycle rider, with Putin, the T-rex ridin’, no shirt wearin’ tough guy.

Putin is not afraid of the PC crowd, not afraid of Obama, not afraid of zombies even.  Putin is unapologetically pro-Russia.  On the world stage, he cares little for niceties, he fights for Mother Russia.  He will crush states for the sake of Mother Russia.

Think of the GOP Presidents we have had since Bush I.  Tepid, apologetic, UN-approval seeking, refusing to even battle the progressives squarely, ruthlessly, without mercy.  The progressives have in Obama a strongman, a leader who will do whatever it takes, who will lie, cheat, steal, crush ANYONE who stands between him and his Mother Russia, the progressive party.  On the world stage, even, he serves Mother Progressive over Mother America, and decisively so.

Of all the GOP contenders, who among them is willing to look a progressive in the eye and say, “You’re a murderer, you’re an evil person who should have no place in the public square.”  Now, I’m not saying they SHOULD say that, but I will tell you there is a significant portion of folks in the conservative coalition who are desperate for someone to say such things.

Do they want this because they are stupid or bad people?  No, they want this because, like many of us, they feel beaten, worn down, always defeated, betrayed by their own leaders.  They want their own Obama, or, more accurately, their own Putin.  Donald Trump is the GOP’s Putin.

They don’t care about the test for conservative purity.  They don’t give two plug nickels for what Trump did or said in the past. They don’t even care if he insulted McCain and POWs.  Those days are done for them.  There have been far too many equivocators, soft negotiators telling them they need to get along to go along to get along, only to watch progressives win battle after battle with the HELP of their own party leaders.

They only care that here and now he is actually doing something NO GOP LEADER has done since Reagan, defiantly and unapolgetically standing up against the enemy. This is not to suggest that Trump is Reagan.  No, unlike Trump, Reagan could essentially call you a thief and an adulterer and have you walk away still liking him.  Trump does not have the gifts of Reagan, but he does have Reagan’s passion and unflinching resoluteness.

Like many of you, I too hope to see Donald Trump go the way of the Dodo bird, metaphorically, but I believe that there is a much smarter way to bring about that reality, and it’s not by using Alinksy-like tactics against Trump or by constantly eviscerating his supporters, or by seizing on his every gaff, or by digging up all the dirt you can about his ‘draft dodging’ past (I think that’s the latest Alinsky tactic being deployed by conservatives against Trump).

If I am right, none of these tactics will do anything but solidify his hard-core supporters and ensure that, come the summer of 2016, those Trump supporters, if their guy is not in it, won’t be knocking on doors, sending in money, and, in November, might not even show up to vote.

One well-respected conservative writer (whose name will be withheld) even stated he wanted to destroy Trump AND his supporters.  That’s right, conservatives out there want to hack off a significant part of the coalition because they hate Trump and they can’t imagine how everyone else doesn’t hate him as well.

For this next part, I will be borrowing heavily from Felecia Cravens’ excellent article that appeared on Liberty Juice.

Felecia really captures what I have been saying for some time now, as this Trump feud has gotten nastier and nastier:
“The real question then is how to make that an easier decision for those supporters of the losing candidates when the time comes.  That actually means planning far in advance of the primary result, strategically preparing the ground for the unity and cooperation you want to see.  That means fostering the conditions that will make it more than possible; that will make it INEVITABLE.”

If Trump does, in fact, actually lose (and I am inclined still to believe he will), you should be prepared, well in advance, for how you welcome back those family members you may have been in disagreement with earlier.  If the fights get to be too nasty (I’ve seen conservatives block each other on Facebook over Trump), you may not have a family member at all when the dust settles.

Felecia goes on to outline some clear steps we should take when advocating for our candidate and challenging supporters of another candidate.

1.)  Pitch Your Guy – We don’t respond well to the people who try to build themselves up by tearing others down in our personal lives, and any candidate making that a primary tactic will ultimately turn people off. Sure, the other candidates have failings – some too numerous to mention – but your first job as a supporter of your candidate is to SELL THAT CANDIDATE…..

2.)  Target the Real Enemy – The GOP primary is a horserace, sure. But it’s actually just Phase I in a two-part job interview. Phase II is all about winning the general election; convincing the apolitical, the independents, the casual voters that both your team (GOP) and your candidate (who just won the primary, of course) are better for the country than the person the Democrats field…..

Keep an eye open for opportunities to attack Democrat policies that are hurting the country. Draw strong contrasts between those policies and the ones your candidate will be running on. Connect the dots for people so that they see your candidate has better policies and actual solutions for problems we face…..

3.)  Be Gracious – …..Sure, there’s going to be some blood drawn in the coming months, but at the same time, conservative values and issues are going to be front and center in a way they haven’t in a long time. The more we focus on articulating those issues and promoting them, the less opportunity the media will have to make the conversation about infighting, personalities, and candidate conflicts…..

4.)  Think ‘Family’ – Andy Peth of The Party of Choice draws a great contrast between the Left and our coalition on the right. “Collectives control people; we free them. Collectives thrive on conformity; we thrive on challenge. Thus, while control rallies the Left, it only splinters the Right. To defeat the Collective, we must unify as something empowering to individuals: We must be a family.”

I highly recommend you read this whole article by going here.

I want to end my article, adding to what Felecia said above, by calling on some basic biblical standards.  You don’t have to be a Christian to use these standards, so, if you are not a Christian, bear with me while I quote bible verses.

First, this is from 1st Corinthians 13-
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

The people who support Trump ARE part of your conservative family.  You will desperately need them.  You need to practice these standards of love when you approach them.  Yes, love rejoices with the truth, but it is also PATIENT, kind.  As Felicia said, you don’t need to invalidate people to make the case for your candidate, or (and I’ll add this) AGAINST their candidate.

Lastly, I want to share 1st peter 3-
15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

The key phrase in this passage is this, “do this with gentleness and respect.”  This is a basic tenet of good apologetics.  If your words are invalidating, if they are being used to demean your opponent, then your effectiveness at actually sharing truth ends.  You will drive them further away and closer to what you think is not the truth.

Author George MacDonald once said, “To give truth to him who loves it not is only to give him more plentiful reasons for misinterpretation.”

Theodore Roosevelt said, “‘People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care’   If you want to have standing to speak to people about why you think Trump is not the right choice, why your candidate of choice is a better one, you better not start off the conversation by saying, “Trump is an idiot and anyone who follows him is nuts.”  More often than not, all you’ve done is permanently shut a door and created an even more committed Trump supporter.

Whether you stick with Trump or not, I will continue to welcome you and accept you as a member of the coalition to stop the progressive party from controlling the White House and the Executive branch for another four years, of stopping a progressive, a hard-core progressive, from having the chance to replace moderate and/or conservative Judges on the Supreme Court.

It is time to act like officers in an army and not high school kids in the cafeteria.  It is time to think, right now, about November 2016.

Read More
Showdown Over Amnesty Versus DHS Funding Highlights American Divide

Paul Gordon Collier- There are 17 days left before the Department of Homeland Security will lose some of its funding.  The House passed a bill funding the DHS, but selectively de-funded parts of the DHS that would be needed to implement the order given by DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson to stop all deportations of certain classes of illegal, or undocumented immigrants.  The order followed a recommendation by President Obama, but is more commonly referred to as the President’s Executive Action granting amnesty to illegal, or undocumented workers.

The bill is now stalled in the Senate, not because it lacks a majority to pass it, but because the democrats have been filibustering the Bill. The Senate requires 60 votes to bring legislation up for a vote.  So far, the GOP has only mustered 54 of the needed 60 votes.  The tactic of stopping legislation by not voting for it to come to the floor is called a filibuster.

The GOP ran in the 2014 election with a specific promise to stop President Obama’s Amnesty Executive Order.  Much of the GOP views the landslide victory from that election, where they flipped the Senate, took a super-majority in the House and scored major victories in State Legislatures not seen in almost 100 years, as a mandate for them to do whatever needs to be done to stop the President’s Executive Order (or, to be precise, DHS Secretary Johnson’s order).

A Rasmussen report from August of 2014, when the President announced his intention to implement executive action to create amnesty for illegal, or undocumented immigrants, found that 62 percent of Americans opposed the action.

From the democrat perspective, playing politics with the DHS is a demonstration of bad governance.  If the GOP wants to oppose Obama’s executive action, there are many other ways to do this without risking national security.  A Wall Street editorial even excoriated the GOP for its strategy, calling GOP members like Cruz and Sessions ‘restrictionists.’

The perspective from the DHS Secretary, Jeh Johnson echoes the perspective from the left.  Remember, Johnson is the one who actually issued the order, following the President’s recommendation.  Jeh Johnson had this to say in an interview on CNN:

“If people in Congress want to have the debate about immigration reform, let’s have that debate. But don’t tie that to funding public safety and Homeland Security for the American people.  This is not a situation to make light of. In these challenging times, we need a fully-funded Department of Homeland Security.”

Johnson went to warn that furloughs could result for a minimum of 30,000 employees.  He further elaborated that he had concerns the agency would not be able to meet the growing security threats on our borders and from within.

<!– Generic Leaderboard Image 728 x 90 –>

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Ted Cruz has been attributed as the architect behind the DHS funding strategy of the Republicans.  However, he denied that role:”It’s now up to leadership to lay out their strategy, I told them this was not a winning strategy and they went down this road.”

On the Filibuster effort of the Democrats in the Senate, Cruz had this to say, “What we saw last week was stunning irresponsibility from the Senate Democrats, the Senate Democrats three times filibustered funding.”

Through all the smoke and mirrors, what emerges are really two clear narratives, one from the perspective of the left and one from the right.

The narrative from the left is this:
For partisan political reasons, stopping the President’s Executive Action granting Amnesty, the GOP is willing to put the country’s security at risk.  The GOP would rather break up families and deport children than fund the security of America.

The narrative from the right is this:
For the sake of awarding an unconstitutional act granting amnesty to illegal aliens, who will now be rewarded with taxpayer monies through welfare, the earned income tax credit, college grants, etc, the democrats are willing to put this country’s security at risk.  They are protecting the President and choosing illegal aliens over Americans.

The question forthcoming will be this; which side is able to better articulate their narrative and which narrative are the American people more pre-disposed to digest?  The question for you is this; which narrative makes more sense to you?

Read More

Why Boehner and McConnell Should Step Aside

By Bill Collier Jr- The conservative base of the GOP wants Boehner and McConnell, the respective GOP heads of the House and Senate, to go. They want them to go because the base believe these men, indeed the entire leadership of the GOP, are quislings at the helm selling their soul to special interests on a number of issues, including the Affordable Care Act (so-called Obamacare) and “Immigration Reform”. The conservative base feel un-represented in DC and they are, as Democratic pollster Pat Cadell has claimed, “ready to bolt the party.”

Average Americans do not closely follow the minutae and nuances of the political scene and do not have an in-depth working knowledge of the American political process. This does not mean they lack the acumen to understand these things, it’s only a matter of how much time they have: and understanding these things to the granular level takes time.

The truth is, as I see it anyway, that “realpolitik”, the art of the possible in the political process set before you, is not very simple or straightfoward. One might argue convincingly that in many ways Boehner and McConnell are masters of the art of realpolitik. Their ceaseless manuevering cannot be discounted as a factor in their party’s stunning successes in the last election cycle, though they’d be mistaken to assume they take the sole credit for those successes. They are indeed playing chess while it seems the President is still playing checkers, or at least that is the argument.

Some would counter that Americans are fed up with “realpolitik”, that they are becoming incresingly anti-establishment, regardless of their political persuasion. They want politics to be up front and simple, and people-powered instead of being driven by elites and special interests who buy access and influence. All this is grist for the populist mill on both sides of the political spectrum, but it is not entirely true that this sentiment drives dissatisfaction with leaders.

Far from populist sentiment driving dissatisfaction with leaders who master realpolitik, I would argue that dissatisfaction with leaders drives populist sentiment. And I say this as someone who, on principle, embraces a more populist politics driven by consensus of the People, especially at the local level.

<!– Generic Leaderboard Image 728 x 90 –>

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The real problem is not whether or not Boehner and McConnell understand realpolitik, the real problem is whether they can be both masters of that art and dynamic leaders of their own potential supporters. We should, I propose, take it as a given that if 60% or more of members of the Republican Party, this according to Pat Caddell’s polling, reject their own leaders then there is a leadership problem. When leaders must take to sniping their own allies and friends who demonstrate a lack of confidence in their leadership, then those leaders should step aside. When your own support base canot stand you then you cannot blame them and call them names in a petulant act of whining.

Already, Boehner is retaliating against those 25 House members of his own party who voted against him. And it is remarkable to see the number of House members who voted for him trying to excuse their vote to angry constituents who have been raising royal hell on the phone lines for the past few days. It would seem to the average American conservative that the GOP are far more afraid of harsh editorials by the New York Times than they are of angry constituents who have lost confidence in their ability to lead.

I am not arguing that Boehner and McConnell are in fact liberals in disguise plotting with the Democrats to move American down the road to socialism, as many angry conservatives are. I actually believe they are playing realpolitik in a skilled manner that will ultimately unravel the plans of their opponents on the left. I do not believe these men are not conservatives. But the reality is that these two men are focused on the traditional roles of leading a caucus of elected Republicans, a role that, arguably, is what their positions have normally entailed, and not on also being the leaders of PEOPLE on the street level who are looking for a symbol of their values and their opposition to their political opponents on the left.

The traditional role of merely being the leader of a Party Caucus is just not sufficient in the 21st century. In times past, people barely knew who these party leaders were, but not so today. Everything they do and say is published and broadcast to the Party base without any party filter- it is transmitted by bloggers and conservative news sites who are constantly looking for re-assurance that their leaders are towing their line. That those leaders have tended to just assume that if you tell your own base about the nuances required in realpolitik while assuring them of your shared goals that the base won’t get it is unfortunate.

The conservative base, up to 60% of the Republican party, no longer believes party leadership have the same vision or represent the same values they hold dear. This is not the fault of the followers, it is the fault of the leaders. And for this reason alone Boehner and McConnell should step aside from leadership and help find leaders who know how to both master realpolitik AND rally and inspire their Party’s core of supporters- and they should do this before that base just up and walks away.

Read More

No Heroes In Ferguson

On August 14, 2014 By
No Heroes In Ferguson

The Ferguson Riots- An American Turning Point?

While politicians and activists from both sides of the political spectrum scramble to benefit from Ferguson, we wonder if Ferguson might be a turning point in American history, when people reject the limousine leadership of the left and the right and start leading themselves.

OPINION- William Collier- There is rioting, police brutality, and racial hate menacing the town of Ferguson, MO as a result of the fatal police shooting of 18 year old Michael Brown.

Michael Brown (Social Media screen grab)

Events in Ferguson, Missouri, which is in St. Louis County, have taken a course which alarms many citizens across the political spectrum.

Meanwhile, leaders in Ferguson are calling for people like Al Sharpton to remove themselves from a local problem.  They accuse Al Sharpton of inciting a near-riot when he proclaimed that the incident in Ferguson involving a young black man being shot to death by police is ‘bearing witnesses for all of America’, specifically America’s race relations.

According to Sharpton, the Band-Aid has been ripped off, and all of America is seeing that racial hatred is alive and well. The accusations are seen as doing more harm than good, inciting militant activists to violent actions, such as can be seen in Ferguson right now.

PHOTO- Facebook MEME circulating allegedly shows another side of Michael Brown. We have not confirmed that this IS Michael Brown FACEBOOK SCREEN GRAB

Regardless of the act that led up to the unstable situation in Ferguson, the reaction by the local police has been dramatic and militaristic.  The police deployed were wearing military-style clothing.  They were armed with heavy weapons and drove armored vehicles.  They were not facing insurgents, but unarmed protesters.

This overt display of military power on American streets by a local police department has come under scrutiny not just from the protesters, but even from the members of the community who do not support the protesters.

An armored vehicle with a fully automatic weapon manned and ready…against unarmed protesters. PHOTO Provided by ANONYMOUS Twitter user

The incident that triggered the riots and unrest was the shooting of an 18 year old unarmed man, Michael Brown. Michael Brown had a long criminal background before the incident, so the police might well have been aware of who he was.  According to the police version of the incident, Brown was assaulting an officer.  There was a struggle for the officer’s gun which led to the 7 shots that killed Brown.

A friend of Brown, who is also accused of participating in the assault, claims Brown was attacked for no reason by the police.  The friend claims Brown was shot while trying to raise his hands and surrender.

Police supporters claim this is a cut and dry case.  They note that the officer was injured in the altercation and that both Brown and his friend have a criminal background (as I noted earlier), including assault (this has been confirmed in the case of Brown, but not in the case of his friend).

Michael Brown supporters say this is a case of police brutality and, now, as charged by Sharpton, racism. In fact, President Obama called Michael Brown’s family to offer condolences before any facts had emerged about the actual nature of the shooting.   Obama’s overture to the family is seen by the police supporters to reinforce the narrative that this is about racial hate, not an altercation that went wrong.

Scereen Grab- Fox News covered Al Sharpton’s inflammatory remarks which many local leaders wish he would not have uttered.

But both sides in that debate have problems to contend with.

For the police supporters, there are real and proven incidents of police brutality against members of the community of Ferguson during this unrest.  There have even been reporters that have been roughed up, arrested and let go without any paperwork filed, and a number of other documented ‘irregularities’ by this police department.  These incidents cannot be brushed aside, and they only serve to offer evidence of a police department gone rogue, one that could possibly have done what Brown’s friend alleges they have done.

Two reporters were arrested, one roughed up, at a local McDonald’s when they were clearly not breaking any laws and, though they were released, no paperwork was filed. Another reporter was shot point blank with a rubber bullet. Additionally, I myself watched a live feed as police, in military gear, with armored vehicles, pushed a crowd of protesters INTO an otherwise quiet and peaceful neighborhood.

The crowd being pressed by the police fled into the neighborhood, running between homes, often being chased by police, bringing chaos to a neighborhood that was not involved in the rioting. The police then proceeded to turn their tear gas and rubber bullets on the people in this neighborhood who had stepped outside to see what was causing all the disturbances on their front lawns and back yards.

The notion that this same police force, the local police force in Ferguson and the St Louis County Sheriff’s Department, never uses excessive force cannot be easily discounted after what has transpired.

For the supporters of Michael Brown, the problem is that the only witness to claim this was police brutality may himself have been involved in the alleged attack on the police officer and, if reports are true (which we have not confirmed), he is himself a criminal.

<!– Generic Leaderboard Image 728 x 90 –>

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

He certainly has the tattoos that are associated with gangs, say those who disbelieve his story, which we have not confirmed.  It had been alleged that the deceased man, 18 year old Michael Brown, had a criminal record already, including burglary and assault. Man posts with links to court records went viral. What is disconcerting about these allegation was that his juvenile record is closed and he is only 18- this means his list of crimes SINCE he turned 18 would be fairly lengthy. His rap sheet is cited as reason to believe the police officer’s version of the events.  We have learned that possibly 4 other witnesses have also come forward with similar stories. We have SINCE CONFIRMED- Michael Brown had NO CRIMINAL RECORD and no charges were pending against him.

The shooting took place on August 9, a Saturday, at around noon. After the shooting, efforts to organize protests and reprisals went viral on social media, and by Monday the riots had become severe, resulting in businesses being looted,  One local convenience store was not only looted, it was also burned down.

The rioters were further inflamed by the vitriolic and black supremacist rhetoric of the New Black Panther Party, as well as by Al Sharpton, both of whom flew in from out of state to ‘lead’ the protesters’.

The violence-inciting rhetoric was legitimized, police supporters argue, when US Attorney General Eric Holder promised to get involved, as well as by President Obama’s rush to call to offer condolences to Michael Brown’s family before getting the facts of what actually occurred.

But many local citizens and leaders, even those who believe this was police brutality, have accused the politicians and the national figures from outside of making things worse.

I saw one woman on live video, a black woman who had come out of her home. She was outraged at how the violence was encouraged by people from outside the community. She noted that while her taxes were up and schools were failing, these local politicians continue to ask for the “black vote” but do nothing for the black community.  The only time political leaders, local or national, show up in a black community is during times like this, in their helicopters and Lear jets, making matter worse for all concerned. She kept saying “they win, they win”.  When asked who “they” were, she replied, “them politicians!”

She did not appear to sympathize with police, who she saw come through her quiet neighborhood bullying anyone who was seen outside, even homeowners who were concerned about the ruckus.  But she did not endorse the rioting, which she blamed on “people from outside the community coming to stir things up and get their 15 minutes of fame!”

Whatever the truth is now may only matter in the legal sense of the word.  The question from the outside looking in is this, who benefits?

There seem to be two opposing views on this:

The first view is from the leadership on the right.  They believe that whether the killing was justified or not, leftist agitators saw an opportunity to reinforce the demonizing narrative of the white man attacking the black man.  It is the same tactic used by the mullahs of Iran who wish to deflect blame for their own failures away from themselves by attacking the great Satan, America.

In the case of the trusted leftist voting bloc of African Americans, the deflection is away from the failures of democratically controlled governments to deliver prosperity and security to the ghettos of America.  If the black community focuses on hating white people, they won’t pay attention to the failure of government, run by Democrats, to give them a good education, offer them a safe place to live and a path to prosperity.

The countervailing view from the leadership of the left is that the police are attempting to agitate the black community in order to create a similar bogeyman, for different voting bloc, this one for republicans, white America.  The narrative goes something like this; The black mob is being whipped up to a frenzy by republican-leaning agitators to reinforce the notion that white America should fear violent black America and come back to the republican party to check the growing power of the black-supported left.

As outlandish as these theories sound, they have more than a few adherents, and this is the cause of no small amount of division between Americans. But the police reaction may have a rather interesting effect not foreseen by anyone- people from the left and right, people who are of all races, and people who disagree about the original incident, all seem to agree that what the police in Ferguson are doing to protesters and what outside leaders are doing to stir the pot are equally awful and illegitimate in a free and democratic society of equals.

One sees leftwing and rightwing blogs, as well as social media commentary all saying the same thing- the spectacle of a military-styled police force is detestable on the streets of ANY American neighborhood.  It could be that if there are true agitators on the left and the right, neither side will get what they want, greater control over the voting power of a bloc of people.   It could be, at the end of the day, when the dust has settled on Ferguson, that the real winners might be the Americans, of all ethnicities and beliefs, who decide to no longer be led by the helicopter-swooping, Lear-jet parking leaders.  Rather, they will choose to lead themselves where they are, neighborhood by neighborhood, block by block, town by town, to build pathways to prosperity, security, and liberty.

In Ferguson, it appears, there are no heroes.  One can only hope that from such flames, a new resolve is forged in America, to build, where you are, with those who will build with you, what most of us really want, across all divides, the freedom to prosper and pass along to our children a better world than the one we were given.

Let us hope at the end of the day, be they Republicans or Democrats, that we do not say the only winners from Ferguson were ‘them politicians’’.

The Obama Bush- Perfect symbol of the reality today?

Read More