Inviting Bad Karma onto the World Stage

"…never send to know for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee." - John Donne

The U.S., in the person of President Obama, is urging nations worldwide to cease all trade with Iran, including the purchase of Iran oil, lest the U.S. punish those nations that persist.

Have we gone mad? There is a global epidemic of failing economies; everyone is at risk. (And we seek purposefully to reduce a nation of people to kindling and heap them upon that fire.)

The world of nations is one body - each member is a finger, an arm, a leg. We hope (out of self-preservation) that Greece survives. Though Greece is just a toe - a small tone, at that - an infection there could cause the entire body to become sick.

Iran, on the other hand, is bigger than a toe. Because it is a large country, and one of the top oil producers on Earth, it is more like half a foot. Yet, the U.S. would sever that part based upon this political imperative: Iran continues to enrich uranium.

It is a false imperative. The U.S. enriches uranium every day - so does Israel, China, Russia, and many others. Besides, according to the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty), Iran has a legal right to enrich uranium. It is a right Israel refuses to acknowledge, hence the falsity of the U.S. position The U.S., nonetheless, forges ahead in its twisted desire to wreck the Iranian economy. Apparently, it is reaping results.

Recently, a U.S. newspaper columnist - a Mr. Kristof - appeared on CNN's "Situation Room" with Wolf Blitzer. He had previously spent weeks traveling in Iran. With a smile, he told Blitzer, "It looks like the sanctions are working. The Iranian people are struggling; factories are closing." Wolf Blitzer, too, appeared pleased.

What is wrong with us? How does an American journalist travel to a foreign land, speak about how kind the locals treated him - taking him into their homes, feeding him, serving him tea - and then return to the U.S. and gloat about the insidious affect our sanctions are having on their lives.

Ascendant nations are built upon trade. Even the most successful nation on Earth - the U.S. - is ever seeking new trade alliances. The loss of one trading partner can spell doom to distinct sectors of a nation's economy. That is why governors - beyond anything the U.S. Commerce Department does - seek out international trade agreements on their own to address local economies within their states.

We are all affected by trade; we should all be sensitive to the impact the severing of trade agreements can have on poor families around the world. For any nation - let alone, the self-proclaimed "Leader of the Free World" - to purposefully destroy the livelihoods of innocent men and women, and with that, all chance they have of feeding their children - and then gloat - is despicable.

Folks, No-Fault, and '57 Fords

It doesn't get much more complicated than ObamaCare. So, let's make it simple:  Under ObamaCare, which is universal health care, everyone must have health insurance.

Put that way, it doesn't sound so bad. Certainly, everyone, eventually will need health insurance. Still, people are uneasy. They hear the word "mandate," as in "mandatory," and they get worried that the government will try to make them do something that they may not feel like doing just now.

Try this:  Think "mandate" and then think of a point of reference. For me, that "point of reference" is 1973. I was twenty, and in my third year at Western Michigan University. Prior to returning to school after summer break, I bought a '57 Ford for 50 bucks. It was a two-tone blue, stick-in-the-column tank - no fiber glass there, just pure cast-iron muscle. I did not need car insurance. I just told folks to "Get outa  the way."

But government told me I had to have insurance. (On a fifty-dollar car?) Yes.

That's a mandate. Still, I could not afford real insurance. So, I purchased a "no-fault" insurance package - what we jokingly called "yo-fault" - which was no insurance at all, but a penalty for not buying real insurance. Sound familiar?

Now, the Republicans, on the heels of the Roberts ruling, is calling ObamaCare a "tax." Of course, it is a tax. All government programs tax the public. You want a road built? Tax the public first. National Defense plan, food stamp program, education budget - tax, tax, tax.

So what if ObamaCare is a tax. There are 30 million Americans - most of whom are poor - who are without health insurance, including millions of small children. ObamaCare insures that they, too, will receive those services that can give them a better life.

Sounds like a vintage two-tone '57 Ford to me. Please, get out of the way.

LeBron James: Doing it "My Way" in America

At 6'8" and 260 pounds, LeBron James may be the greatest athlete on Earth. He is hardworking, articulate, and man, can he fly. And he stays out of trouble - no guns, no drugs, no domestic assaults. He has mooned no one.

Yet, those in the sports media have declared LeBron one of the "most hated" sports stars in America. Really?

In 2003, fresh out of high school, LeBron James signed a seven-year contract with the NBA's Cleveland Cavaliers. By the time he had fulfilled that contract, he had taken a last place team to first place in the standings, and then to the NBA finals in the playoffs. He single-handedly doubled the value of that Cleveland franchise. During that same time, he won the NBA's Rookie-of-the-year, two MVP awards, and an Olympic Gold Medal.

Then, as a free agent, during a made-for-television special, LeBron announced, "I'm taking my talents to South Beach (Miami)."  That did it. Apparently, no fouler words had ever been spoken. For the next three years, the sports media and its sycophants went after LeBron with a vengeance. It has been a vile attempt to villianize a fine, young African-American for being himself.

They are Hatfields and McCoys - these types of people - ignorant and cruel. they make something our of nothing, magnify it to illogical proportions, and then draw as many idiots as they can muster down into their vortex. In that mosh pit of inanity, they find affirmation.

These most-imperfect people demand perfection of LeBron (as though they would recognize "perfection" if they saw it.) They not only want to tweak LeBron's game (because being the best isn't good enough), but they want to tweak his personality to fit their image of what he should be.

All the while, LeBron has continued to perform at a level unmatched at both ends of the court despite their damnedest efforts to drain the joy from him and his game. It appears they do this for not other reason than that LeBron has decided to do things his way.

I guess doing it "my way" is okay for Ol' Blue Eyes, but not for a young "brother" in America.

…And Justice For All

Last month, they sent back his remains - letters of an American soldier missing in Vietnam. In one letter, he wrote: "This is a dirty and cruel war."

That is all the Vietnam War was - dirty and cruel. It was senseless violence on an epic scale waged against an agrarian society who had done the U.S. absolutely no harm. We contrived grievances against those people, and then bombed them mercilessly. We killed well over a million men, women, and children, and then, on the Washington mall, built a monument to our suffering.

For a nation known for making its own citizens pay dearly for their crimes, America has never paid for the crimes it committed against the Vietnamese people.

They Don't Like You

A year ago, the Pakistani government was charging the U. S. $250 per supply truck passing through Pakistan to U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Now they want $5,000 per. Sound familiar?

Remember "Godfather II", when Nevada's Senator Geary decides to charge Michael Corleone $25,000 for a gaming license? Corleone asks, "Why should I pay $25,000 when the fee for a license is only $1,000?"  Geary responds: "Because I don't like you, and I intend to squeeze you."

That, Mr. Obama, is your relationship with the Pakistanis in a nutshell.

The NAACP: A Search for Relevance in the 21st Century

The question of "relevance" ever haunts the NAACP these days, and for good reason. As it is presently constituted, it is irrelevant.

Start with the name, NAACP, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. It was in 1994, fully 18 years ago, when I wrote to the NAACP leadership, after attending one of their membership banquets at the Hilton in downtown Kalamazoo. I implored them to change their name to NAAPC - National Association for the Advancement of People of Color. Sounded like a no-brainer as we approached the 21st century. This particular membership drive was geared toward young people. I suggested: "What young people would join an organization whose very name - "Colored People" - insults them? The leadership rejected my idea.

Why does the NAACP persist in denigrating itself and the people it supposedly represents? Because the NAACP is a dancing bear - it dances for its supper.

Deep down, the NAACP knows it has not accomplished anything in years. Perhaps the leadership - Ben Jealous, et al - imagines there would be no donations to the NAACP at all, except those donations have come because of that iconic name. Unfortuantely, the very name - NAACP - has become synonymous with self-congratulatory fetes, and subsequent lethargy.

Recently, the NAACP passed a resolution in support of same sex marriage as a civil right. Many wonder why the NAACP would take up this issure considering the majority in the African-American community rejects gay marriage. All seem to agree, however, that is was an attempt to "remain relevant," (and cash in on what political pundits are calling an abundance of "gay money.")

There are bigger issues in America, like the resolution put forth by this citizen declaring the institution of slavery in America a Crime Against Humanity. Such a resolution in the hands of a once-august entity such as the NAACP, could help bring this nation to the brink of racial healing for which it so deeply longs.

Then there is Major League baseball and its system of apartheid (better known as "Jim Crow baseball") that has persisted since baseball's inception in 1839. And though this forced segregation ended in 1947 with Jackie Robinson's entrance into the Major Leagues, the achievements of those Negro League stars who toiled in that separate (but equal) league are whitewashed from baseball history as though they never happened. This, too, is a post in the structure that helps sustain the racial divide in America. We cannot change baseball's sordid past, but with the NAACP's help, we can correct it.

And what of this criminal justice system which consistently preys upon poor families in America? There is little pretense at "justice" there anymore - it is just "criminal" the way they squeeze monies from these poor families even as they drain them of their hope.

America's prison system has become a den of human rights abuses - none more egregious than its penchant for keeping men and women imprisoned who, anywhere else, would be free. Even China and Iran compare favorably.

Now they seek to privatize their prison industry - prison for profit.

Where prisons' goal becomes profit, it conflicts with the liberation interests of humans everywhere. The very trajectory is contrary to the course of justice set forth in the U.S. Constitution. And America's prisons beome plantations - people, once more, are made chattel. Who will speak up for these dispossessed?

Want relevance, NAACP? Change your name. Then, declare a moratorium on feasts and fashion shows. Get back to earning your celebrations.

Justice has been known to skip a generation - no fault of its own. It happens most often when those charged with protecting the rights of others go to sleep at the switch. Fortunately for us all, justice marches on.

Wake up, NAACP. You've been asleep too long. Justice is up ahead. If you try, you may intercept her at that next great moment in history. If you do not, you will go down as the biggest mat-head since Rip van Winkle.

Is Gay Sex Simply True Love Gone Awry?

At the risk of sound rude (and ignorant), may I take this moment to speak on behalf of the so-called "straight people" everywhere? We have questions:

How do we tell which of you is the man, and which is the woman?

And what is your story…anyway? Shakespeare wrote, "Some men are born great, some achieve greatness, others have greatness thrust upon them." Does that notion apply here? Certainly, some people are born gay, (I suppose), while others purposely seek a gay lifestyle, (I suppose). Still, there must be those who have homosexuality thrust upon them - by force, or circumstance. Simply put, we do not know who you are. And, if you come out of the closet, that can be scary too.

We can pretend that gay people are like the rest of us, but they are not, (unless we all are gay). I doubt that 1% of the world's people are gay. If they are, that would amount to roughly 70 million homosexuals on Earth, which is fine. (It is not like they can reproduce).

No one doubts that a man can love a man, and a woman can love a woman. We only wonder whether it is prudent to "do something about it."

When a gay man says, "I love him," we say, "Okay, but must you have sex with him?" A man can love a child, but he cannot have sex with that child. He can show his love for that child by taking the child to a ballgame, buying him ice cream, or taking him fishing. All the while, he must control himself. If he loses control and indulges himself in his love for that child, then that love becomes sick; it becomes a crime.

A man can love his sister, and she can love him back. But he cannot have sex with her - that is taboo. They certainly cannot marry and have children - that would be an abomination. Yet, both are grown. She may be a doctor, and he a lawyer. Intelligent, successful, and in love - yet, we are repulsed at the thought of them consummating their union. As a society, we would deny them the chance to lawfully spend their lives together as man and wife based on our revulsion at the thought of them coupling.

Fifty percent of the American people seem to want a constitutional amendment giving a man the right to couple with another man. Just this past week, the NAACP passed a resolution endorsing same sex marriage as a civil right. Yet, I doubt that one percent of the American people would consent to bestowing the same rights upon a man who wants to spend the rest of his life with his sister. Why deny a brother-sister couple the same civil rights, when given the choice, most men on Earth would marry their sister before they would marry another man.

The survival of any species is dependent upon its ability to produce offspring. That is the basic function of sex on this Earth - to insure the continuation of life. A man and a child can do that; a brother and a sister can do that. Two men cannot; neither can two women.

Why then this rush to wed one man with another? Who has convinced us that this is good, or necessary, or just?

If adult brothers and sisters want to have sex, no one can stop them. But, just because we cannot stop them, that is no reason to cheer them on. It is the same with grown men. If they want to have sex with each other, that is their business. But why do we, as a society, feel compelled to encourage this willful indulgence? It is as though we have conceded that since we cannot stop them, we should join them. Is that supposed to make us feel good about ourselves? Does our approval make it right? Or does it simply make us complicit in love gone awry?

Historically, incest and homosexuality have been condemned throughout all major societies. Today, both continue to be prohibited by custom or law in most societies around the world. More and more, however, Western societies - including the U.S. - while continuing to condemn incest, increasingly embrace homosexuality as a viable lifestyle.

Are we to believe a split has occurred, much like the split millions of years ago that sent apes in one direction and man in another - a split that insures one branch of this modern-day tandem makes it out of the trees, while the other does not?

Or, could it be that both incest and homosexuality are what they are, what they have always been, and what they always will be - not books to be read, but bookends - the extremes of our lusts, beyond which, sickness and deformity await mankind?