Is the new X-47B unmanned drone an accident waiting to happen?

LA Times reporter J.W. Hennigan had an article that was featured in the Friday January 27, 2012, Tacoma News Tribune entitled, “Drone may drop bombs without human control.” There is little doubt that the deployment of unmanned, pilotless drones turned the tide in favor of the United States in its “war on terror” by killing almost all the top al-Qaeda leaders as well as crippling the Taliban in Afghanistan. Although this high-tech killing machine is not without its drawbacks because some innocent civilians have mistakenly been targeted as hostile insurgents and lost their lives after the drone unleashed death-dealing missiles and rockets upon their location. Now the Navy is about to test its newest aerial war toy, The X-47B. What makes this drone so remarkable is that it just might have the ability to indiscriminately initiate its own attack protocols without direct human involvement. A human operator would program it with a flight plan and could override its decisions or abort its mission; at least that is the plan in theory. Although this could certainly alter the face of warfare in the modern era but it should also be of great concern to everyone if something goes wrong and a malfunction of the world’s most sophisticated offensive, aerial war machine could prove a grave danger to those along its flight path. In case of such an incident, how soon could the military get control of or destroy a rogue mini-plane roaming the skies, probably flying at Mach speed and out of control, lacking the human capacity to distinguish between friend or foe?

This brings to mind several Sci-fi precedents: The movie, “The Day the World Stood Still” where the space traveler Klatuu mentioned that the United Federation of Planets have given all police duties over to robots like ‘GORT,’ which includes the ability to detect any form of aggressive behavior or hostility [through internal programming and sensors] and act automatically [by artificial intelligence] to completely neutralize any threat [unleashing a disintegration beam or ray through its visor. In the Sci-fi television series, “Star Trek,” Captain Kirk of the USS Enterprise was in danger of losing his command to the super computer M-5, which had human-like sentiments (“ingrams”) incorporated into its AI (artificial intelligence) circuitry and it functioned in place of Kirk by making bridge decisions during Starfleet battle simulations. It later malfunctioned by destroying an empty space freighter, which could have contained human occupants, and then it took over the Enterprise. The movie, “2001: A Space Odyssey” where the super-computer ‘HAL’ developed self-awareness [sentience] and took control of the ship. The “Terminator” movies and television’s “Sarah Connor Chronicles” where advancements in computer technology leads to the creation of ‘SKYNET,’ which becomes the harbinger of doom and MAN vs. MACHINE Armageddon by manufacturing and unleashing the prototype cyborg-series terminator robots. The 2010 movie “Stealth” was about an AI (artificial intelligence) super-advanced, pilot-less Stealth fighter plane that went rogue after being struck by lightning.

So, many could argue that such comparisons are unwarranted and concerns to the contrary are mere paranoia because safeguards will be built into this super plane to prevent even the slightest loss of total human control. It is one thing to watch a movie or a television series but all comparisons stop there because fantasy is one thing but reality is quite a different thing altogether.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 27, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

The controversy over WA State's impending Gay Marriage Law may be overblown

There are two sides on this contentious issue: those who are for it and those who are against it. But before getting into some of the particulars, one question needs to be asked, namely, “Is marriage a duty established as by social custom, history and tradition or is it instead, divinely ordained and ONLY approved or accepted before God as between a man and woman”? If the Judeo-Christian Scripture is the authority for this institution which some contend supercedes any civil legislation, how can this be reconciled if we live in a Representative Democracy separated between Church and State?” The Bible does not seek to change, incorporate or regulate the civil laws but rather is the rule or standard for those who belong to the community of faith and are citizens of the Kingdom of God [Heaven].

It is indeed puzzling why there is such outrage and furor among believers over this single issue because no church can be forced through passage of legislation to abandon their faith practice to accommodate adoption of this law, nor to do anything in violation of their conscience. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the Right to the free exercise of Religion and no Law enacted by a state legislature, or mandated by an act of Congress as well as the Supreme Court, can legally force any religious denomination to accept Gay Marriage as a lifestyle. Practically speaking, this means Christian clergy cannot be sued for refusing to perform a marriage ceremony for a same-sex couple as well as for not hosting a reception for the couple if they were married at a courthouse or somewhere else.

On the other side of the issue, which is a valid legal concern, is the discrimination and unequal treatment in denying a marriage contract to same sex couples as well as the State’s interest in the matter. There was a same-sex couple in 2004 who sued in Superior Court, which challenged Washington State’s Civil Marriage Law, amended in 1998, as discriminatory because the statute ONLY recognizes marriage as “valid” between a man and a woman. The Plaintiffs contended that the law unfairly makes a distinction arbitrarily based ‘solely’ upon gender by denying privileges under the law that are not being made equally available to all citizens, whch is in violation of the Washington State Constitution (Art. 1, sects. 3 & 12) and Washington's Equal Rights Amendment, denying them the right of due process to liberty and privacy.

The first issue under review is if denyng marrage to same-sex partners burdens a ‘fundamental’ right of a suspect class, and secondly, [whether the goal or purpose being sought is deemed a "compelling state interest]." Since marriage is a contract with the state [civil authority], subject to the conditions and requirements of such a governing body imposes on its citizens, it would seem reasonable that the state would want to ensure that all citizens under its jurisdiction are treated the same. Even former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor stated that, "the moral views of the majority [in a pluralistic society] can never provide the “sole” basis for legislation and that moral disapproval, without any other asserted state interest, is insufficient rationale . . . to justify a law that discriminates among groups of persons. Also, a Massachusetts Supreme Court noted, "It is circular reasoning, not analysis, to maintain that marriage must remain a heterosexual institution because that is what it has been historically. Be that as it may, Article IV Section 2 and Amendment XIV (part b) of The U.S. Constitution guarantees that all citizens of the United States and in each state respectively are to enjoy all the privileges and immunities as well as equal protection under the law.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 23, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Shaken and Stirred: Romney loses South Carolina Primary

This is not about how British super spy, James Bond, Agent 007, likes to have his martini served but rather a description of the two leading GOP Presidential nominees. Mitt Romney has been shaken by the recent reversal of fortune regarding his frontrunner status when he was almost guaranteed to be eventual presidential nominee over the other Republican rivals. Instead of winning the Iowa caucus as previously announced, when the last votes were counted, it was Rick Santorum who was announced the winner, instead of Romney. Add to that, following the New Hampshire primary, polls showed that Romney was enjoying a double digit lead among the electorate, however, because of negative campaign ads, especially from the Gingrich camp in particular, not only did his commanding lead rapidly began to erode but much of that support migrated to the Gingrich camp instead, and helped propel him to victory.

For Romney this has to be quite a devastating blow, irregardless of the statements he makes in public. For Gingrich, it as if new life has been breathed into his campaign and like a man on a mission, he is fired [stirred] up even more and will continue to launch a barrage of attack ads against his arch-rival and political nemesis Mitt Romney. Strange as it seems, Newt Gingrich used to be the "Angry White Man" but now it is itt Romney who is out for blood while Newt seems as innocent-looking as the Pillsbury dough boy. As a final thought, the Florida Primary should be a critical test, do-or-die for Romney as well as Gingrich because it is an "open primary" (voters can belong to any political party, or none at all), and will serve as a measure of support throughout the political spectrum; much like in a General Election. Since Florida has mail in ballots we may get a preview of voter preference before the January 31st deadline.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 23, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Some reflections about The U.S. Constitution

The U.S. Constitution is a remarkable document and as the cornerstone of our grand experiment as a Democratic Republic, it has survived rather well for the past two-hundred and thirty-six years. It is unfortunate that the average citizen, and not some lawyer-turned-politician, does not take the time to become more familiar with its contents. There used to be a time when a Civics class was taught in school and students had to become quite familiar with The Declaration of Independence, The Preamble to the Constitution as well as The Amendments, and recite verbatim, President Lincoln’s “Gettysburg Address.” Looking at the way things are happening in America, this seems to confirm the worries expressed by some of the Founding Fathers, namely, the growing power of the Executive Branch of Government. Adding to this problem is the fact that the supposedly neutral and impartial U.S. Supreme Court is very politically partisan because each Justice is appointed by the President, who belongs to a political party and is later confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee; which is politically partisan and dominated by whoever is in the majority. Also, the Supreme Court may be exceeding the powers for which it has been granted. Here are excerpts from the U.S. Constitution as cited below in the following:

Article IV Section 2. The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of citizens in the several states.

Amendment X. The powers [explicit or implicit] not delegated to the United States [Federal government] by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it [Federal government], are reserved to [for] the States respectively, or to the People.

Amendment XIV. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State where they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge [lessen or take away] the Privileges and Immunities of citizens of the United States [or the State where they reside]; nor shall any State deprive any person of Life, Liberty, or Property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction, the equal protection of the laws.

The Constitution guarantees the minimal protections and privileges to the people and “NO” state can legally deny its citizens anything less than these. It is interesting that in the most often quoted Fourteenth Amendment, there is no precise definition of what “due process of law” is or even a hint at its intended meaning. The only thing that has language comparable to this is found in The Sixth Amendment, which pertains to persons involved in a criminal prosecution, and what the Rights of the accused [Defendant] are. Be that as it may, the one thing that gets lost in all of the anger towards government at the Federal level and in each State Legislature is the power of “WE THE PEOPLE.” Yes, it is a scary thing to think that we are not slaves to the powers that be [“Brutus to Cassius”], and the Tea Party and Occupy WALL STREET are prime examples. The problem with the former was that is became a platform for Sarah Palin to use it as a CASH COW to become rich, and when she could no longer milk KA-CHING from those political teats, she said, “Adios;” You betcha! As for the latter, without any real leader or guidance, it morphed into separate entities in each state, a headless body that attracted the homeless, anarchists [Eco-Terrorists] or just plain criminals who assaulted and raped people. There was no real referendum or strategy but only criticizing the wealthy and it became nothing more than a one-sided shouting match, a US vs. THEM [The 99% vs. The 1%].

In addition to all of that, The U.S. Supreme Court gets involved in way too many legal issues that could be decided in The Federal Appellate Courts or The Supreme Court in each State capitol. Even among those judges, some of their cases could be arbitrated in the lower Superior courts under judicial review, and in some cases, decisions reversed if an error in the initial trial court ruling was proven to exist. Of course, as it is with any statute, it is not so much what it says but rather what it means, and how should it be applied to a particular situation; and not only that, but no two set of circumstances are exactly alike, and therefore the court is governed by ‘PRECEDENT’ (prior ruling) to guide it in the present. As a final thought, the field of Republican candidates for President have mentioned on more than one occasion about some issue that should be left up to each State, an no one is more vocal in this sentiment than Texas Congressman Ron Paul. It is time to seriously consider curbing the over-reaching power of the Federal Government into our private lives and mettling in the affairs of private corporations, as well as Judges who legislate from the bench; but it may already be too late. Once the genie is out of the bottle it is hard to get him to go back in.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 18, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Does the requirement of a photo ID violate the Voting Rights Act?

On the 83rd anniversary of MLK’s birthday, Associated Press reporter Jeffrey Collins had an article in The Tacoma News Tribune on Tuesday, January 17, 2012, mentioning about a throng of African-Americans who surrounded the South Carolina capitol to voice opposition to the state’s voter ID laws, which was rejected by the U.S. Justice Department last month. What is at issue, critics say, is that the new law is “discriminatory” towards African-Americans and poor Whites; and is especially meant to suppress the turnout and participation of Blacks in the voting process, undermining the Voting Rights Act of 1964 and 1966. In order to better determine if requiring a photo identification is “unequal” treatment and a violation of the U.S. Constitution, therefore it is necessary to get a historical perspective about the evolution of the voting experience in America.

When the Constitution was written, only white male property owners (about 10 to 16 percent of the nation's population) had the vote. Over the past two centuries, though, the term "government by the people" has become a reality. During the early 1800s, states gradually dropped property requirements for voting. Later, groups that had been excluded previously gained the right to vote. Other reforms made the process fairer and easier. Poll taxes enacted in Southern states between 1889 and 1910 had the effect of disenfranchising many blacks as well as poor whites, because payment of the tax was a prerequisite for voting. By the 1940s some of these taxes had been abolished, and in 1964 the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution disallowed the poll tax as a prerequisite for voting in federal elections. In 1966 this prohibition was extended to all elections by the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that such a tax violated the “equal protection” clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

1790 Only white male adult property-owners have the right to vote.
1810 Last religious prerequisite for voting is eliminated.
1850 Property ownership and tax requirements eliminated by 1850. Almost all adult white males could vote.
1855 Connecticut adopts the nation's first literacy test for voting. Massachusetts follows suit in 1857. The tests were implemented to discriminate against Irish-Catholic immigrants.
1870 The 15th Amendment is passed. It gives former slaves the right to vote and protects the voting rights of adult male citizens of any race.
1889 Florida adopts a poll tax. Ten other southern states will implement poll taxes.
1890 Mississippi adopts a literacy test to keep African Americans from voting. Numerous other states—not just in the south—also establish literacy tests. However, the tests also exclude many whites from voting. To get around this, states add grandfather clauses that allow those who could vote before 1870, or their descendants, to vote regardless of literacy or tax qualifications.
1957 The first law to implement the 15th amendment, the Civil Rights Act, is passed. The Act set up the Civil Rights Commission—among its duties is to investigate voter discrimination.
1964 The 24th Amendment bans the poll tax as a requirement for voting in federal elections.
1965 The Voting Rights Act protects the rights of minority voters and eliminates voting barriers such as the literacy test. The Act is expanded and renewed in 1970, 1975, and 1982.
1966 The Supreme Court, in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, eliminates the poll tax as a qualification for voting in any election. A poll tax was still in use in Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, and Virginia.
1966 The Court upholds the Voting Rights Act in South Carolina v. Katzenbach.
1970 Literacy requirements are banned for five years by the 1970 renewal of the Voting Rights Act. At the time, eighteen states still have a literacy requirement in place. In Oregon v. Mitchell, the Court upholds the ban on literacy tests, which is made permanent in 1975. Judge Hugo Black, writing the court's opinion, cited the "long history of the discriminatory use of literacy tests to disenfranchise voters on account of their race" as the reason for their decision.
2003 Federal Voting Standards and Procedures Act require states to streamline registration, voting, and other election procedures.

REFERENCES:
Read more: poll tax — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/poll+tax#ixzz1jluxV0rD
Read more: U.S. Voting Rights http://www.infoplease.com/timelines/voting.html#ixzz1jm6rkwX1
Read more: U.S. Voting Rights http://www.infoplease.com/timelines/voting.html#ixzz1jm6RbQJ1

The recurring word in The Fifteenth Amendment as well as Twenty-fourth Amendment is “abridged,” which has the meaning of to weaken or take away and it is yet to be proven that such a requirement is in any way to be construed as an attempt to disenfranchise any ethnic, religious or social class/group of their rights under the Constitution. In fact, it could be argued that this procedure is in streamlining the voting process by discouraging fraud and proving the person’s citizenship and eligibility to vote; which would seem to be the intended objective of the 2003 Federal Voting Standards and Procedures Act. It seems reasonable to conclude that every legal and naturalized citizen of the United States, regardless of income, social status, level of education or any other consideration, ought to have on their person at all times [if possible] some kind of photo identification. To wit: any allegation to the contrary, no matter how passionate the argument, is without merit and should be rejected. As of this writing, Kansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Wisconsin passed voter ID legislation in 2011. Texas has pending legislation before the Justice Department and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley vowed to fight the Justice department in Federal Court over rejection of their voter identification laws.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 17, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

How should the legacy of MLK be honored?

One of the things about revering a saint is that oftentimes such a person, as well as his words and deeds remains frozen in time, and are not able to save those who need help and guidance in moments of crisis or impending danger. Such is the case with slain Civil Rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., who would be eighty-three years old this month. The birthday of this great African-American is a national holiday, there is a museum and national monument built in his honor, and his writings, as well as speeches, are taught in the most dilapidated and rundown classrooms in America as well as among the recommended curriculum in some of the most prestigious institutes of higher learning throughout the world, but the question remains that needs to be asked is whether or not he is still relevant? Of course, this is not to suggest that he is not an important historical figure and cultural icon, because he is, but on another level, is it heresy to suggest the MLK brand, especially the “I have a Dream” speech to be nothing more than a one-size-fits-all social template that is no longer useful or practical as it needs to be, especially in the complex world that we live in today? It’s like the what would Jesus do mantra that is just way too simplistic because things are not ‘just’ Black and White in the rainbow social universe of today.

To determine if such a statement is seen as disrespectful to the memory of Martin Luther King Jr., consider and think for a moment: What would MLK say about “Gitmo?” or the Iraq/Afghanistan War, the mortgage crisis, occupy WALL STREET, rap music and use of the "N" word, Oprah Winfrey, gay marriage and GLTB rights, 9/11, North Korea, Iran, water-boarding, the national debt crisis, political gridlock in Washington D.C., President Barack Obama, the recession, bullying, legalizing marijuana, the Arab Spring, the European debt crisis, Hurricane Katrina and New Orleans, capitol punishment and the disproportionate number of minorities on death row, Herman Cain, Israel, Palestinian statehood, Lady Gaga, the Republican and Democratic political parties, pedophile clergy, Mormonism, Islam and the holy Koran, immigration, outsourcing jobs, The Bush Administration, Global Warming and the KYOTO Treaty, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, video games with violent and sexual content, suicide bombers, Ron Paul, the Tea Party, Mega-Churches, the economic power of China and India, NRA and gun control, reparations for descendants of slaves, reverse discrimination, Roe vs. Wade, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, birth control/contraceptive use, racial profiling and a host of other issues or people?

Since nobody is able to channel the spirit of MLK through some kind of clairvoyant trance, and even if someone could, it still doesn’t mean he would have the answers to the problems we face today. The legacy of MLK, it seems, is not for us to look backwards in time and become stuck in reminiscing about the past, but rather to look toward the future and use his example to become the MLK in each succeeding generation. One of the most poignant statements ever made by Dr. King is “If a man is not willing to give his life for what he believes then he is not fit [doesn’t deserve] to live.” Now, that is what having a mission in life is all about and if each person would take to heart these powerful words then the “Dream” will continue to live on in us. It is much more deeper than a mere festive annual holiday celebration, awash with drama and ceremony, but rather it is a life-affirming commitment to making the world a better place in which to live; it’s sacrifice without expecting recognition nor reward in return, absent of even the smallest trace of praise, glory or honor.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 16, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

The 2012 Republican Presidential nomination still up for grabs

It is still way too early to crown Republican Mitt Romney as the party favorite to challenge Barack Obama for the 2012 Presidential nomination; as some of the political pundits are doing, while this long and grueling race is just getting started. Yes, Mitt Romney is doing better this time around than he did in 2008, but a brief historical recap from 2008 is in order. Romney lost the Iowa Caucus in Iowa with 25% of the vote and came in second to former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Again, he placed second to John McCain in the New Hampshire Primary but came in fourth in the South Carolina Primary with only 15% of the vote. Also, Romney came in second to John McCain in the Florida Primary. Romney did however; win the Wyoming, Nevada and Maine caucuses, and in The Super Tuesday contest: won the Alaska, Michigan, Colorado, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and Utah caucuses and primaries; but John McCain won Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, and Oklahoma. After the outcome on The Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses which were held on February 7, 2008, Romney suspended his campaign and decided, according to him, “to step aside for the good of the party and for the country.”

Romney is untested in a marathon political contest and it is uncertain what a protracted and bitter campaign filled with negative ads will have upon him because he just might want to quit again before reaching the finish line, and this time around it will cost a lot more than twenty million dollars of his nearly quarter billion dollar net worth to get his message out to prospective voters. Another problem that Romney faces is whether or not he can convince those true believers in “The Bible Belt” or red meat states (Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, New Mexico and The Carolina’s) that he is a “true” born-again political Conservative instead of just masquerading as one. Aside from not being able to shake off the dogged question of ‘authenticity’ is Romney being able to relate to the average person struggling to keep a job when he is a son of privilege whose father was the CEO of General Motors. No, Mitt Romney doesn’t have anything in common with Joe Six-pack but rather with the aspirations of someone like Gordon Gekko [the movie “WALL STREET”].


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 12, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

The Doctrine of Ron Paul

The Republican field of presidential candidates has been whittled down to the gang of six, with the possibility of one or more dropping out of campaigning in the coming weeks. Ron Paul has been largely ignored, almost unnoticed and under the radar for the most part and now he has been receiving more and more attention, so it just might be the time to take a closer look and see what kind of America Ron Paul believes in and what is his view on some of the more pressing issues of the day.

On the National Debt, Congressman Paul wants to slash nearly half its spending and shut down five Cabinet-level agencies and end spending on existing conflicts as well as no longer allocating any resources and money toward foreign aid. This seems rather shortsighted and ignorant of the value and impact of this assistance on a global basis. As far as The Economy is concerned, Paul wants a return to the “GOLD STANDARD” and total elimination of The Federal Reserve as well as abolishing most federal regulations. Of course, he hasn’t said which regulations need to be axed and which ones are to be kept. The implication of replacing the dollar with gold as the currency standard and eliminating the “Fed” is so radical as to not even merit further comment because the impact on world economies, including in this country is too serious to imagine. On Education, he wants to eliminate the Department of Education and sees no role for the federal government in education; so that presupposes refusal to accept any assistance in the form of Pell Grants and low-cost Stafford Loans for college tuition.

Although, like most Americans, the idea of paying taxes is a hard pill to swallow but Congressman takes it to another level when is comes to Taxes by completely eliminating the Department of the Internal Revenue Service [IRS] and paying all federal income taxes. He is an avid proponent of ‘States Rights’ and believes that Abortion, The Environment and Gay Marriage/Rights are matters that should be settled by the states and not federal legislation or The U.S. Supreme Court. Congressman Paul has an Immigration policy that is non-apologetic and forceful as he believes, “Do whatever it takes [BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY]" to secure the border and end right to citizenship of U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants as well as deny social services for illegal immigrants. He also wants aggressive deportation of undocumented citizens no matter how long they have lived here and raised families, or worked and paid taxes or served in the military. As far as positions on Terrorism or The War/Foreign Policy, Ron Paul believes that America’s military presence overseas [Pacific Rim or Middle East] is what provokes or incites terrorists to attack America or our troops in these regions and pulling our military from remote places should be the highest priority. He wants to slash the Pentagon budget and opposed the intervention in Libya but it would be interesting to know how he views the outcome now.

There is an article by syndicated Columnist Michael Gerson, which was featured Tuesday, January 3, 2012, edition of the Tacoma News Tribune, Section A9, listed some of the more interesting comments by Texas Congressman Ron Paul:
He accused President Lincoln of “causing a senseless war” and regarded the presidency of Ronald Reagan as a “dramatic failure.” He once proposed the legalization of prostitution and heroin and promised to abolish the CIA, depart NATO and withdraw military protection in South Korea. He believes that 9/11 was a government “cover-up” and published in a newspaper that the 1993 WTC [World Trade Center] attack was a set-up orchestrated between the U.S. government and the Israeli Mossad.

He would not have sent American troops to Europe to end the “Holocaust” and freeing over six-million Jewish men, women, boys and girls from the horrors and atrocities of Hitler and the Nazis. Congressman Paul believes that forced [government-mandated] “integration” is evil. He obviously doesn’t agree with the outcome of Brown vs. the Board of Education in which the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed segregation as unconstitutional. He sees no problem with former slaveholders treating human beings a “property” and can treat them in any way as they please, and he believes that the federal government has no “legitimate“ authority to infringe upon the sovereign rights of the states and their citizens. Congressman Paul has disparaged Martin Luther King Jr., former Texas Congresswoman Barbara Jordan and has referred to the MLK holiday as “Hate the White Man Day.”

Finally, since this nearly octogenarian [76 year-old] is vying for nomination to represent this country on the international stage as well as occupy the most powerful elected office on planet earth, and sit at the head of government of world’s only true military “SUPER POWER” it is imperative that a window into what he really believes in is important, and after getting a glimpse into his inner psyche [past and present], there are a few things that should concern all of us but each person has to make up in their own mind about which of his personal perspectives that concern them the most.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 3, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Which Republican presidential candidate would you vote for?

Several weeks ago, Associated Press writers Brian Bakst and Chris Tomlinson listed the political positions of the contenders for the GOP nomination for president of the United States. They are Republicans: Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Utah Gov. John Huntsman, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. Since the Iowa Caucus is Tuesday, January 3, 2012, it is important to review what stand the candidates have taken on some of the more important issues and the nation’s first early voting process will serve as a bell-weather indication on the effectiveness of each candidate to get their message across to the electorate and how it has been received; now that the debates are over.

Although the results of this event may be overstated as such but for those who do not finish in the top three positions it, especially Bachmann, who is in the single digits, it may very well be the death knell of their long journey and their campaigns may come to and end by Wednesday, or not too long afterward. Although there aren’t any real specifics in these points that are listed, still, there is enough information to get a glimpse of perhaps the moral leanings or character of a few of them and one can make a determination as to whether or not if this is the person who merits any further support and of whose values you can identify with.

ABORTION:
Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry, Santorum and Romney are for a constitutional ban on abortion.

Gingrich is against federal subsidies to fund abortions while agreeing, along with Paul, Romney and Perry that the states should decided their own abortion laws.

FEDERAL DEBT:
Bachmann and Santorum opposed the federal bailout of the financial industry (TARP) which averted a default on the U.S. debt and raising the debt ceiling by Congress, While Huntsman supported it.

Romney supported the financial bailout but criticized GM and Chrysler receiving government assistance. Romney wants to cap federal spending at 20% GDP while Perry favors 18% of GDP.

Paul would eliminate five Cabinet-level agencies [which ones??], end spending on existing conflicts [post-war Iraq and Afghanistan] and end foreign aid.

Perry wants to cut the pay of the members of Congress [like that’s really going to make a big difference].

Gingrich, as well as Romney, is for a balanced budget but didn’t mention specifics.

ECONOMY: Bachmann feels the best way to create jobs is to eliminate all the excessive overregulation by the federal government [the same as Santorum, Huntsman, Perry and Romney.

Paul wants to eliminate most federal regulations] which limits capital investments and proposes, along with Gingrich, Perry and Romney, the repeal of financial-industry regulations enacted in response to the sub-prime housing crisis.

Gingrich feels that the Federal Reserve’s power to set interest rates artificially low is what is stifling the economy, and Paul wants to eliminate the Federal Reserve altogether.

Huntsman, along with Santorum, believes in eliminating corporate subsidies, lower corporate taxes [same as Romney], and spur jobs through energy development [the same as Santorum], seek repeal of President Barack Obama's health care law [the same as all candidates], break up big banks [financial institutions and insurance companies] as hedge against future bailouts. He also wants to break up big banks as a hedge against another financial bailout.

Paul wants a return to the gold standard instead of using the dollar.

Romney more trade deals to spur growth. Replace jobless benefits with unemployment savings accounts.

EDUCATION: Bachmann, along with Paul [and Romney, who later changed his mind in bowing to the interest and demands of teachers’ unions], believes in abolishing the Department of Education while Gingrich and Santorum favors shrinking it. She says the federal government doesn't [shouldn’t] have a role in education; jurisdiction is with state and local governments.

Huntsman says, “No Child Left Behind hasn't worked for this country. It ought to be done away with." He favors more school choice [charter and private schools??].

Perry opposed No Child Left Behind law, whereas Romney and Santorum support No Child Left Behind law.

ENERGY: Bachmann, Perry, Santorum, Gingrich, Huntsman and Paul advocate reducing regulatory restrictions to drilling.

Gingrich wants oil and natural gas industries to drill offshore for reserves now blocked from development by federal regulation, and end restrictions on Western oil shale development.

Huntsman wants to phase out (eliminate) energy subsidies and subject fuel distribution network to federal review to "break Big oil's monopoly" and expand opportunities for natural gas development and production.

Paul wants development of coal and nuclear power, eliminate gasoline tax, and provide tax credits for alternative fuel technology [wind, solar, geothermal, etc.].

Perry proposes more development on restricted federal lands to spur drilling.

Romney supports drilling in the Gulf, the outer continental shelves, Western lands, offshore Alaska; and exploitation of shale oil deposits.

Santorum, Perry and Romney favor drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

NOTE: These proposals would provide many thousands of jobs and stimulate the economy but at what cost to the environment?

ENVIRONMENT: Bachmann wants to repeal "radical environmental laws that kill access to natural resources." She voted to bar EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. She, along with Romney, opposes cap and trade.

Gingrich, along with Perry, wants to convert the EPA into "environmental solutions agency" with no enforcement powers, devoted to research and "more energy, more jobs and a better environment; although he once backed tougher environmental regulation.

Huntsman wants to end the EPA's "regulatory reign of terror." Yet, he acknowledges the scientific evidence that humans contribute to global warming.

Paul says emission standards should be set by states or regions. He, along with Huntsman and Romney, believed human activity "probably does" contribute to global warming; now later, he, along with Perry and Romney, says that there isn’t conclusive evidence [it hasn’t been proven] that human activity contributes to global warming and calls such science a "hoax."

Santorum also believes the science establishing human activity as a likely contributor to global warming is "patently absurd" and "junk science."

GAY MARRIAGE: Bachmann, Romney, Santorum and Perry [who earlier was against it before he was for it] support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Gingrich says, “If the Defense of Marriage Act fails, you have no choice except a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.”

Huntsman supports same-sex civil unions, with many of the rights of marriage, and says states should decide their own marriage laws and not the federal government [the same as Paul and Perry].

HEALTH CARE:
Bachmann favors limits on medical malpractice lawsuits as a way to control health care costs, and she voted against expanding Children's Health Insurance Program.

Gingrich wants to prohibit insurers from canceling or charging hefty increases to insurance holders who get sick [or have a preexisting health condition??]. He wants a "generous" tax credit to help buy private insurance, although he previously supported mandatory coverage [like ObamaCare].

Huntsman says,"Let the states experiment," and he is open to restricting or limiting Medicare benefits for the wealthy [like Perry].

Paul opposes compulsory insurance and all federal subsidies for coverage.

Perry wants to raise eligibility age [to what??] for Medicare benefits, offer federal aid (“subsidies”) to help elderly buy private insurance instead of getting Medicare benefits.

Romney opposes federal mandate to obtain coverage [ObamaCare]; introduced health insurance mandate in Massachusetts [RomneyCare or is it ObomneyCare??]. He also proposes "generous" subsidies [like Perry] to help future retirees buy private insurance instead of going on Medicare.

Santorum wants Congress to defund Obama’s Health Care Law if passed, and supported Bush administration's prescription drug program for the elderly.

NOTE: All the candidates would seek repeal of Obama's health care law.

IMMIGRATION: Bachman favors a fence all along the 1,900-mile U.S.-Mexico border, not just the 650 miles built, and she opposes government benefits for illegal immigrants and their children [no matter how long they have lived in the U.S. and are law-abiding and pay taxes].

Gingrich supports option of giving legal status to illegal immigrants who have sunk roots in the U.S. and lived otherwise lawfully, and supports path to citizenship for illegal immigrants' children who perform U.S. military service. He also wants to make English the official language. He wants to divert more Homeland Security assets to the Mexican border.

Huntsman thinks it is unrealistic to deport all illegal immigrants out of the country. In Utah, he threatened to veto a bill to repeal cheaper in-state college tuition rates for children of illegal immigrants [so that means he is in favor of cheaper in-state college tuition rates for children of illegal immigrants].

Paul says, “Do whatever it takes to secure the border and end the right to citizenship of U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants [even if they served honorably and with distinction in the Armed Forces]"; and he wants no social services for illegal immigrants and aggressive deportation [like Bachmann].

Perry opposes a complete 1,900 mile U.S.-Mexico border fence [what about the 650 mile one that’s already built??], but instead wants more border agents [like Gingrich]. He supports continued U.S. citizenship for U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants [like Gingrich].

Romney favors complete U.S.-Mexico border fence [like Bachmann and Santorum], opposes education and social service] benefits to illegal immigrants [like Paul, Bachmann, Romney and Santorum].

Santorum supports complete border fence [like Bachmann and Romney], opposes education and social service benefits to illegal immigrants [like Paul, Bachmann, and Romney].

SOCIAL SECURITY: Bachmann wants to keep Social Security for older workers [what age??] and wean everybody else off. The age for retirement benefits will have to go up for new workers [like Huntsman and Perry].

Gingrich wants to give younger workers the "option" of diverting Social Security taxes to private retirement accounts [privatizing social security benefits in risky equity investments??].

Huntsman and Perry want to restrict benefits for the wealthy.

Paul, like Gingrich, says younger workers should be able to "opt out" [diverting Social Security taxes to risky private retirement accounts or other savings] of Social Security taxes and retirement benefits.

Perry previously branded Social Security a "disease," now says it should be saved. He supports private accounts [like Paul, Santorum and Gingrich].

Romney says that reducing inflation adjustments for rich retirees are among options that should be considered [Huntsman and Perry differ on that matter].

TAXES: Bachmann wants a tax holiday [no one is taxed on their personal income??] followed by 5% corporate tax rate for U.S. companies operating overseas that invest their profits back in the U.S. economy.

Gingrich wants to offer the American taxpayer a “choice" of filing under the current system or paying a 15% tax rate, preserving mortgage interest rates [prevent them from rising] and allow charitable deductions. He also wants to cut corporate tax to 12.5%.

Huntsman favors lower income tax rates coupled with the elimination of deductions [including charitable in opposition to Gingrich] and cut corporate tax to 25%.

Paul wants to eliminate the entire federal income tax system and the IRS, and defund half the government.

Perry, like Gingrich, wants to offer the American taxpayer a "choice" between the current system and 20 % tax on income, preserving mortgage interest rates and charitable deductions. Also, for each individual or dependent, he wants to exempt them from paying taxes on the first $12,500 in income.

Romney wants no one with an adjusted gross income under $200,000 to be taxed on interest, dividends or capital gains and to cut corporate tax rate to 25% [like Huntsman].

Santorum proposes zero corporate tax. "If you manufacture in America, you aren't going to pay any taxes." He opposes any national sales tax.

NOTE: All candidates support eliminating the estate tax and keeping Bush-era tax cuts.

TERRORISM: Bachmann wants to expand Guantanamo [like Gingrich], and no Miranda or constitutional rights for foreign terrorist suspects [enemy combatants]. She approves the use of “waterboarding” [torture or extreme interrogation techniques] and probably ‘rendition’ as an option in prisoner interrogations.

Gingrich supports extending and strengthening investigative powers of Patriot Act and creation of the Homeland Security apparatus. In 2009, he said of waterboarding: "It's not something we should do."

Huntsman said Homeland Security Department has been heavy-handed, conveying a "fortress security mentality that is not American [unlike Gingrich]," and opposes waterboarding [unlike Bachmann and the 2009 Gingrich].

Paul opposes Patriot Act as an infringement on liberty [like Huntsman and unlike Gingrich], and says: "Waterboarding is torture, it's illegal under International Law and under our law, and it's also immoral [unlike Bachmann,Perry and Santorum and like Huntsman and Gingrich 2009]."

Perry said it was "unprincipled" for Republicans to vote for creation of the Homeland Security Department [like Huntsman and unlike Gingrich and Santorum]. Supports continued use of Guantanamo Bay detention for suspected terrorists [like Bachmann], and that U.S. interrogators should "use any technique" short of torture, which he did not define [Is "waterboarding" torture according to Perry??].

Romney wants no constitutional rights for foreign terrorism suspects [like Bachmann]. His campaign says he does not consider waterboarding to be torture [like Bachmann, Santorum, Romney and Perry and unlike 2009 Gingrich and Paul].

Santorum defends creation of the Homeland Security Department [like Gingrich and unlike Huntsman and Paul]. He voted to reauthorize Patriot Act [unlike Paul]. And says airport screeners should employ racial or ethnic profiling; "Muslims would be someone you'd look at, absolutely." Supports continued use of Guantanamo Bay detention for suspected terrorists [like Bachmann and Perry]. He says waterboarding has proved effective [and is not "torture"??].

WAR: Bachmann opposed intervention in Libya and said that might help terrorists there, and called Afghanistan a war "we must and can win" with sufficient troops and money [now that Osama bin-laden is dead, is it worth staying there just to fight the Taliban and pump billions of dollars into a corrupt Karzai government??].

Gingrich supported the Iraq war and opposed early U.S. troop withdrawal and said U.S. forces should not have been used in the Libya campaign, after he had called for such an intervention at the onset [he was "for" it before he was "against" it]. He opposes "precipitous" [all at once??] pullout from Afghanistan.

Huntsman proposes reducing U.S. involvement in conflicts around the globe and, unlike most rivals, says Pentagon budget should be cut. He opposes any U.S. military assistance of new Libyan government and says no more than 15,000 U.S. troops should be left in Afghanistan [for how long; indefinitely??].

Paul wants to bring most or all troops home from foreign posts "as quick as the ships could get there [like Huntsman]." He opposed U.S. intervention in Libya [like Bachmann and Gingrich at first] and wants to cut the Pentagon budget [like Huntsman].

Perry criticized planned withdrawal of troops from Iraq this year and Afghanistan next year but has not said how many troops should stay or for how long.

Romney has not specified the troop numbers behind his pledge to ensure the "force level necessary to secure our gains and complete our mission successfully" [whatever the mission is] in Afghanistan.

Santorum said in September that 20,000 to 30,000 U.S. troops should remain in Iraq and that troops should withdraw from Afghanistan "a little slower" [Gingrich's 'precipitous' pullout??] than the timetable Obama is planning.

NOTE: Some of Texas Congressman Ron Paul's political solutions seem to be a bit too 'Draconian' or just plain crazy.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
January 2, 2012
robertrandle51@yahoo.com














.

Is Mitt Romney really the best the GOP has to offer?

President Barack Obama and the political gods of the Democrats must be secretly smiling, quite amused as the GOP struggles to find its soul because right now they look like the blind leading the blind, stumbling all over each other. First there was Romney, then Bachmann, Perry, Cain and even Gingrich seems more like Humpty Dumpty falling off the wall, and all the king’s horses and all the king’s men won’t be able to put him back together again. So, it seems that all of this invariably leads back to Mitt Romney, who is probably the biggest vacillator or flip-flopper since Senator John Kerry. This is apparently the best that the Republican Party can produce from within their ranks to run for this country’s highest elected office; which is a sad tragedy in and of itself. Romney is not the unOBAMA or noBAMA but rather he is nothing but ObamaLITE. The most noticeable distinction between the two is that Barack start singing a different tune after he got elected and Mitt is telegraphing all his political “rope-a-dope” moves to the electorate and somehow thinks he is going to fake us out, trying dazzle us with his fancy footwork, float like a butterfly and sucker punch us into voting him into the Oval Office; but we can see all this coming a mile away and it’s the same old song.

Mitt has had to reinvent himself several times on the campaign trail, even contradicting earlier positions as well as in some instances excerpts from his book, “No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.” Romney spent 25 million dollars of his own money and lost to John McCain for the Republican nomination for president in 2008, so why would Republicans want him to lead the party into the 2012 Presidential campaign, now; what has changed to make them want to? Mitt Romney likes to try and relate to the average American but he co-founded Bain Capital, a venture capitalist firm, which is just what those people in OCCUPY WALL STREET are demonstrating about. Sure, Romney can boast about the businesses and jobs he helped create but talks very little about the hundred of millions that he is worth or what he does with all his wealth-outside giving a tenth to the Mormon Church. No, Mitt, like John Kerry, was in favor of it before he was against it-or rather before he decided to run for President and as the old saying goes, “Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.”


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 26, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

X Factor’s first season grand finale was xcellent

X Factor got it right because Melanie Amaro was better than Josh Krajcik, but just barely. Josh reminded me of a cross between Joe Cocker and Otis Redding and perhaps if he were younger or looked a little different he may very well have been the winner. Chris Rene certainly had mad skills (rapper/singer, songwriter, dancer and musician) like Justin Timberlake and Ne-Yo, and his commitment to kick his drug habit certainly made him the emotional favorite. Nevertheless, fans voted for who they thought was the best and I think the telephone voting wasn't rigged like on “American Idol” season 1, when Tamyra Gray was a better singer than Kelly Clarkson and all the judges, including Simon Cowell, were surprised that she was eliminated so early in the final competition.

Ironically, Melanie was booted off the show earlier by the very Simon Cowell, who later felt in his heart that he had made the wrong decision and asked her to come back, and it seems that he made the right choice after-all; considering that he had put himself on the spot by the prediction that she would win the competition at the finale on Thursday, December 22nd before the votes were cast. The only thing that perhaps changed the tone of the evening was the booty-shaking and gyrating dancers on stage during the montage by Fifty-Cent and other rappers which almost made X Factor seem like XXX-rated factor, instead.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 23, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Peace on Earth and goodwill toward men?

Col. Robert Thieme of Barachah Church in Houston, TX penned this unforgettable quote decades ago in one of his many books, which was: “Ritual without reality is meaningless,” and considering the state of things, especially in America, this statement could not be truer. If those hopeful words in the gospel of Luke are to have any real meaning then what it requires of us is to look at the world in which we live through radically different lenses. The intervention of transcendent God into humanity as a fleshly being called Jesus Christ was so much more than teaching superior moral values or starting a new religion, but rather to inaugurate or herald the coming Kingdom [government] of God to the earth.

This divine theocracy will supplant all human political, social and economic institutions which are now under the power or dominion of Satan and sin, however, under the new celestial administration with the eternal Father and Jesus [Yeshua] at His right hand on the throne of power, the earth will be a place where righteousness dwells and God will wipe away all our tears, and there will be no more pain or sorrow and no more death because the former things will have all passed away. All the bickering and controversy over displaying overly religious and for that matter, non-religious holiday symbols in public buildings or private homes misses the point entirely because all these things will be destroyed anyway. The thing that will endure is what we have done with our lives in the time God has allotted to us, and what we have done by emulating Jesus in love to unselfishly or unconditionally make a stranger’s life better and as a result of our good deeds and works our name will be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 22, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Navy’s “First Kiss” tradition a non-event?

The article by Associated Press reporter Brock Vergakis which appeared in the Thursday edition, December 22, 2011, of the Tacoma News Tribune about the Navy allowing a sailor to share a ‘kiss’ on the pier with a significant other after returning from 80 days active duty at sea. Ordinarily this would be a true non-event but with a repeal of former President Clinton’s “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy regarding gays/lesbians serving in the military, this practice may be reevaluated. Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta of the USS Oak Hill amphibious landing ship hugged and kissed her partner, also a Navy sailor, Petty Officer 3rd Class Citlalic Snell upon disembarking from the craft. According to the commanding officer David Bauer, said the crew’s reaction to who was selected for the coveted privilege was ‘positive’ but that could be just putting on a particular game face just to cover up the surprise or embarrassment. Was Commander Bauer and his crew unaware of Officer Gaeta’s sexual orientation as well as other sailors who might be GLBT, too? And secondly, if all of this was known, were there any attempts to discourage or disqualify any and all non-straight sailors or officers from participating in this lottery/selection process? These particular women are probably attractive but what if it were two men kissing, or maybe a couple who are the stereotypical “dike-looking” or short-haired, masculine-looking female (“Butch”) who was participating in this storied kiss?


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 22, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Was the Iraq War worth the cost?

President George W. Bush declared “The War in Iraq is over” aboard an aircraft carrier six weeks after his pre-emptive invasion of the country when superior U.S. airpower decimated Saddam Hussein’s Army and Republican Guard and American troops entered Baghdad unopposed by insurgent fighting forces and were greeted with cheers by Iraqi citizens. That was nine years ago so this declaration by President Barack Obama must be the “official” end of America’s combat role as military forces leave the country. Of course, there is still a large diplomatic corps of 16,000 personnel and 4,000 security contractors; not to mention the largest embassy in the world that is operational and located right in Baghdad. The thing is, there is no closure in the deaths of 4,500 soldiers and 33,000 injured troops who have suffered traumatic injuries both physical and mental. One cannot help but reflect on the nonsense of it all because there were no WMD’S that posed a “CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER” to America’s national security, no ties existed between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, no hijacker was linked to Iraq, and come to think of it, how far is Iraq from the United States; I mean, its not like Cuba 90 miles off the coast of Florida?

One cannot forget about Bush administration officials who dragged us into this ‘quagmire’ (un-winnable war) like George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and George Tenet. Osama bin-Laden was cornered in the mountains of Tora-Bora in Pakistan but instead of American forces going in to get him the Pakistani military was given that responsibility and somehow he was able to get away. Ironically, this is the same country where Osama bin-Laden was eventually killed by U.S. Special Forces nine years later, so Iraq wasn’t even necessary and the blood of thousands of our soldiers didn’t need to happen. Not only that, but a weaker Iraq divided among Sunni, Shiite and Kurds means a stronger Iran only emboldens the regime toward the development of an atomic bomb; which will not only be destabilizing to the Middle East but the uncertainty or unpredictability will also rattle financial markets worldwide.

So, what was or is the price of victory- Saddam Hussein and his sons are dead, Iraqi political elections (Democracy Middle East style/“Nation building”), access to Iraqi oil? America may have won the battle but the thing is when a War is over normally there is a formal declaration of surrender, so either one of two things must be true: The enemy is still continuing to fight or there was never any ‘real’ war in the first place. It is a painful thing to say, but it appears that those brave and patriotic soldiers who gave the fullest measure of devotion were just “cannon fodder” and incidental pieces or pawns on a chess board to fulfill the agenda of those ‘special interests’ who are powerful, influential and wealthy and who manipulate world economies and governments, and unfortunately the deaths of other people is just the cost of doing business.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 16, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Send members of Congress into the unemployment lines

What a radical concept, that is, people can have a “voice” in the way that they are treated by their ruling authorities. Because the history of America is rooted in civilian government, this rules out Martial Law through the military or a police-state implemented through local jurisdictions. Barney Frank, House of Representatives member from Massachusetts made an interesting comment recently on McNeil-Lehrer News Hour on PBS that, “If Americans are dissatisfied with the performance of Congress, then we are the ones to blame because we are the ones who elect them.” His statement should be taken seriously because it is ‘right-on-the-money’ and instead of the benign and unfocused energy as well as the non-platform of OCCUPY WALLSTREET or even the Tea Party’s initial momentum, the answer to our grievances is right before our very eyes. All the 535 members of Congress will be up for reelection in 2012 and according to the latest Gallup and other opinion polls, members of Congress have a favorable rating in the single digits (9% or so). There should be slogans on tee-shirts with the caption of a broom, symbolizing making a clean sweep in Washington D.C. There could even be the picture of a mop, which depicts cleaning up all the mess in the nation’s capitol.

Americans have been held hostage far too long amid all the legislative gridlock and partisan politics and “enough is enough!” In reading the inspirational reasoning preserved in the words contained in THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, several key phrases seem to leap from the page, namely: “We hold these truths to be self-evident . . all men [they] are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness- to that end Governments [branches of government] are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed [people]; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive [ineffectual] of these ends, it is the “right” of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government [or political representation], laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them [which] shall seem most likely to effect [secure] their safety and happiness.” Although this treatise sounded the clarion call to rebel against the abuses of power by King George of England and Parliament as well as the military superiority of British Royal Navy on the high seas, nonetheless, the principal is that when the legitimate needs and expectations of a free people are unfilled or ignored by their government, The PEOPLE have the right, due to legal precedent, cultural experience, social values and history, to effect “CHANGE” in the way they [the majority] deem that suits their needs to insure domestic tranquility; which at this stage is anything but that with all the protests and high unemployment.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 2, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Mother of fifteen children is now homeless

Just when you think things couldn’t get any weirder in America, another event happens to come along, unexpectedly, from somewhere out-of-the-blue. Although this is an old story that reporter Keith Morelli, The Tampa Tribune, broke way back in April 21, 2010, still, it has reignited the contentious debate regarding family planning and the responsibility of social services agencies. The woman is an African-American, 37 years old, unemployed mother of fifteen children, and a longtime Florida resident. Her fiancé is currently serving a prison term on unspecified charges and he is the father of ten of the children. Three of the children are emancipated adults, or “aged out,” meaning they are past eighteen years old and living on their own. Angel Adams did have an $800-a-month, two-bedroom apartment that was paid for by Hillsborough Kids, but she was evicted last week. Ms. Adams, who doesn’t work, believes that her “work” is to have babies, which she says are ‘gifts’ from God. While no one can hold that sentiment against her, it doesn’t seem rational to think an All-Wise God and Creator would place the sole responsibility upon one woman to have more children than she can reasonably and adequately provide for their needs. But as she boasts, “I can have as many as I want to” what is even more outrageous is when she also asserts that somebody owes her. She goes on to say, “Somebody needs to pay for All My Children, somebody needs to be held accountable. . .” The only “ALL MY Children” that comes to mind is a soap opera that is almost as old as she is, and Angel and her family failed to make the casting director’s cut.

It is believed that Ms. Adams has at least three baby daddies out there who have fathered these children and it appears from her living situation that Child Support is not received at all or very little; and who knows, these men may be incarcerated also? The youngest is a 6 month old baby and the family now stays at the Economy Inn on East Busch Boulevard, in Tampa, FL. There is a microwave and mini refrigerator. No stove. One sink, one toilet, one shower. Everyone's barefoot, walking on a dirty, stained green carpet. The living quarters also consist of two beds where the girls sleep on one bed and the boys sleep on the other; and Angel sleeps on the floor. A relative paid for the hotel room for a week, but beyond that point, who knows what will happen. Hillsborough Kids, which manages child welfare in the county, through spokesman Elaine Olszewski, said they are working with Metropolitan Ministries to arrange a place to stay for Adams and should have one ready by next week. The children were taken away by sheriff's deputies two years ago, but were reunited with Adams six months ago, when she was set up in an apartment off North Boulevard near of Columbus Drive. A home-study report was completed to the satisfaction of everyone involved, she says.

Olszewiski goes on to say, “All the children of school age are enrolled and going to school, although Adams says they have not gone to school since she took up residence in the hotel. She says she can't get them to school. Typically, single moms in similar situations have frequent visits by case workers, who work with charities in the community and coordinate grant money to pay for services. "It's on a case-by-case basis," she says. "It's not that we would financially support them, but we are connected to community partners that provide assistance." The goal when children are removed from the home is to get them back with biological parents, she said, and caseworkers try to work to that end, she says.

"Children always are better with their biological parents," she says. If, according to Ms. Olszewiski, social workers and the make sure all the requirements of a safe and wholesome environment exist for the children, then this present situation is untenable and the court will have to intervene and a judge may have to sign an order to remove the children temporarily until a more suitable arrangement can be made. There is another issue that needs to be addressed, namely, what to do about the mother? Should Angel Adams be allowed to continue having children just because she in biologically fertile and able to do so, even when she cannot financially provide for them and sees herself on a mission from God to replenish the Earth? In China, “one” child is the limit and any woman having more than that number is forcibly sterilized by officials of the government. Of course in China’s case, they have a population of nearly 2 billion people, too.

So, what should be the role of the local social service agencies, federal government, community outreach sources, churches and the taxpayers in providing assistance and public resources without any strings attached? The country was shocked a couple of years ago when Nadya “Octomom” Suleiman had all those multiple births from fertility treatments but in her case she became sort of a celebrity and was the flavor-of-the-week; at least for awhile. Now that Nadya has almost faded from memory Angel has risen to take her place in the talk around the water cooler. It is doubtful that Ms. Adams will or has received the attention that Nadya has because with her it was more surprise and fascination and a slight resemblance to actress Angela Jolie, of whom she was a fan, only helped feed the mystique. In Ms. Adams case it just may well be the old racial stereotype of a promiscuous or sexually-active, Black welfare mom having all these babies with different men and the tab is being paid on the taxpayer’s [mainly White] dime.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 2, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

An Economic Recovery may still be years away

Despite the recent Department of Labor statistics regarding an increase in output from factories and the manufacturing as well as the latest drop in the unemployment rate from 9.0% to 8.6%, one shouldn’t start celebrating just yet. President Obama is touting the latest news that his economic agenda is working and for Americans not to give up but keep persevering and making personal sacrifices. Of course, president Obama will take credit for any good news about the economy, even if it is just a slight bump in the positive column. Now, he and former President Bill Clinton are encouraging the creation of well over a hundred thousand “Green” Construction jobs that involve painting roofs white on all residential houses and public buildings to make them more energy efficient. What bolsters this ambitious plan are perhaps those surprisingly lower unemployment statistics as well as better-than-expected “Black Friday” sales figures, but numbers can be misleading. For one thing, the “real” unemployment rate is much closer to between 12% and 15% because individuals who have been fired, quit their jobs or their UI claim is in dispute are not included in the data; as well as the people who have already exhausted their benefits and the many who have just simply given up looking for work altogether. Also, it is believed that the 315,000 reduction in the workforce is probably due to retirement; as opposed to any other significant factor.

Now, as far as the early holiday gift on “Black Friday” to the nation’s retailers from consumers who spent more money in 2011 than in the past two years, merchants shouldn’t uncork the bottles of champagne just yet. Lackluster or slumping sales has forced many merchants and stores to offer deep discounts by slashing prices 50% or more, resulting in lower margins, usually below their cost, on average, just to make a sale. When all the accounting is done it will show that a few of the more well known stores actually made a profit because they lowered their target for the year-end quarter, but the majority of others will do poorly and lose a substantial amount of money. President Obama wants Congress to not let the Bush tax cuts expire because, once again, the ‘detached-from-reality’ political thinking is that this is the same thing as a rebate, of sorts, and people will spend this extra money on big ticket items to stimulate the economy. The thing is though, the Congressional Budget Office or some other governmental agency should conduct a study in conjunction with the IRS and issue a report on how much the average American taxpayer or family will save because in an economic downturn because most individuals who are struggling to keep a job and hang on to their homes will use any and all discretionary income to pay for necessities like utility bills, groceries and medicine and not on other non-essential goods or services. And to wrap this up with a final point, it is like the old adage, “A recession is when everybody else is out of work, and a depression is when you are out of work.”


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
December 2, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Sears stores past the point of no return?

In a recent Wall Street Journal article by reporter Miguel Bastille, the former Sears-Roebuck catalog store is slowly becoming the equivalent of a retailing ghost-town, as more and more customers decide to spend their money elsewhere. There have been very few improvements and modernization in its aging fleet of 2,200 full-line stores, and it has already closed 171 since merging with K-Mart under the new name of the flagship Sears Holdings Company in 2005. Interestingly enough though, K-Mart stores entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings before joining Sears but the same management team runs the operational activities of both companies. Unlike some of their competitors, Sears has been quite skimpy on spending money for renovation and capital expenditures whereas most of the larger retail chains spend $6-$8 per square footage but Sears spends less than $2 per square footage.

It is believed that hedge-fund billionaire Edward S. Lambert, who is majority stockholder, will eventually sell all the Sears stores for the real estate value. Sears has been steadily losing ground to competitors like Macy’s, Target, JC Penny’s and Wal-Mart and the Hoffman Estates IL company incurred losses exceeding 300 million dollars for the first half of 2011. The latest strategy for the struggling retail giant is to sell some of its most recognizable brands at the locations of its rivals. The thing is though; this is just speeding up the eventual demise of Sears because if consumers can buy these products at another store then why should they continue shopping at Sears? Ironically, K-Mart is known for offering the “Blue Light Special” on merchandise for Sale but as it pertains to Sears, “Will the last employee to leave please turn out the light?”


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 22, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Letter of Apology to Hillary R. Clinton

Dear Hillary:
We are sorry for choosing Barack over you but don't make us eat crow for this grievous political blunder as 17 million women, mostly White have been proven to have not been wrong after-all; and they weren't. The way things are going, your country need you, despite the fact that you mentioned about not seeking political office. Perhaps you want to be head of the World Bank but right now you can still become the first female President of the United States, which you deserve. Barack, along with our own duplicity, stole it from you so let us make it up to you by electing you as President of the United States. During the 2008 Democratic presidential debates you pointed out that Barack Obama was good at making speeches and we turned a deaf ear to your warnings because we were so caught up in the moment; being on the threshold of history in electing a person of color to the presidency that we could not be dissuaded from our course. Barack's exceptional oratory left us mesmerized and blinded by the light which gradually dispelled the darkness of the Bush era with the "hope" for CHANGE; but alas, it was only an illusion. One thing that has been so obvious that even Stevie Wonder can see it, is that "EXPERIENCE MATTERS."

I have read several online comments about a potential presidential run and quite a few Republicans mentioned that even they would vote for you. This is a critical time in America's history and a real leader needs to step up to the plate because sometimes in the course of human affairs you don't seem to have a choice because circumstances choose you, not the other way around. If after reading this impassioned plea from one of the many contrite and repentant voters, then let it be upon your conscience when this great country called America spirals down into an economic, social, political, moral, cultural and even spiritual abyss with no rescue, when you could have helped save this nation. So, if this is your final answer, then thank you very much for being such a hater and a coward!


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 22, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Occupy Wall St. demonstrators ignore the real villains

Those protestors who exercise their First Amendment Right of Free Speech to seek a redress of grievances need to rent a copy of the movie, “Distinguished Gentleman” starring Eddie Murphy. While it is true that there are abuses of wealth and power at the financial center of the world and leader of a Free Market Economy and Capitalism, still, the blame should not rest solely on the shoulders of the titans of industry. According to the latest figures from “The Center for Responsive Politics” by Staff Reporter Rob Hotakainen of the Tacoma News Tribune, November 16, 2011, of the 535 members of Congress [100 Senators/435 House of Representatives], 249 of them are millionaires; roughly 47% while only about 1% of American citizens are millionaires. Can someone who is a wealthy Congressman really understand the needs and concerns of struggling, low-income wage earners who have to juggle family responsibilities, work two or more jobs, pay for childcare and have very little or no medical/dental insurance, and on top of that, to decide on whether to pay for medicine or groceries with the little money left over from paying bills? Sure, we can vent our rage against the CEO’s of Fortune 100 and 500 Companies, AIG, Chase Bank, The Big 3 Automakers, and so on, but ignore the fact that it is the members of Congress that need to be chastised, who enact laws that allow for favorable corporate tax loopholes in exchange for generous contributions to their PAC’s and other perks.

Even some members of Congress are board members of large companies or become a Lobbyist for some industry after retiring from the Senate or House of Representatives. Reform on Wall St. won’t take place as long as the status-quo runs things the same old way as they always have in the nation’s capital. I mean, even to run for elected office today requires big money and if you don’t have access to it your message will never get heard. So, all these disillusioned demonstrators are just making news headlines for the moment and getting arrested, but as a social protest juggernaut and grassroots movement that will sweep across the country and bring down the citadels of greed, corruption, capitalism and excessive executive compensation; I think not! Instead of using all that unfocused or misdirected energy without a central or core message beyond the obvious, why don’t the organizers, whoever they are, go to their Legislators in Washington D.C., to the very place where they should have in the first place, and ask Congress to repeal the tax code which benefit the rich and make it “OCCUPY CAPITOL HILL” instead?


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 16, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Political fodder for the week ending November 12, 2011

President Barack Obama is hosting a dinner party for world leaders at the Asian Pacific Economic Summit [“APES”]; there is a joke in this somewhere.

Three reasons why Sarah Palin didn’t run for president-#1 is Katie Couric; #2 is Tina Fey; and heck, I forget the third reason just like Texas Governor Rick Perry. Representative Ron Paul has five reasons.

Herman Cain plagiarizes again. The first time it was using Clarence Thomas’ “electronic lynching in the media” and now it is George ‘Dubya’ Bush’s, “I talk to My Heavenly Father and He told me to run for President.”

Texas Governor Rick Perry appears on “Late Night with David Letterman” to make fun of his ‘brain fart’ at the recent GOP presidential debate in Iowa.

Herman Cain appears on the “Jimmie Kimmel Show” to let the public know that he is just a regular guy like them and that all his White female accusers are lying; just trying to keep the Black Man down [Oops, will he decide to use this statement next, too?].

Mitt Romney appears in front of a bathroom mirror, taking his hand and slicking back his perfectly cropped hair, listening to ‘I’m too sexy for my shirt’ while asking, “Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the most handsome, richest and ‘flyest’ top GOP presidential frontrunner of them all?”

Michelle Bachmann appears in front of any camera, even one mounted in a cell phone and says, “I still love and obey my husband-or would you rather have Gloria Allred running for president?”

Newt Gingrich appears in front of the camera and says, “Hurry up and ‘nuke’ Iran before my campaign goes nuclear again in another meltdown.”

John Huntsman appears in front of a camera and says, “I’m really a fun-loving, rugged and daredevil type of individual at heart, like a young Steve McQueen, Marlon Brando or James Dean; although I may look as macho as Michael Dukakis.

The ‘Birthers’ and Donald Trump are half-right about President Barack Obama. It seems although he was born in Hawaii he is really a citizen of an American colony on Mars; according to Dr. Andrew D. Basiago of ‘DARPA’ and Project Pegasus [The U.S. time-space study]. Barry or “Klatuu” as he is affectionately known back home on Mars, forgot to file his alien registration papers before running for President.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 12, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Christmas just doesn’t seem so special anymore

Houses will be decorated with Christmas lights, wreaths, mistletoe, yuletide characters and winter motifs that places a strain on some local utility companies from the over consumption of electrical power, but it seems the “real’ meaning of the holiday just seems to get lost in all the commercialization, advertising and marketing strategies from America’s largest retailers. There may not be the scene from a Charles Dickens’s classic in most cities with, “chestnuts roasting on an open fire, Jack Frost nipping at your nose, tiny tots with their hearts all aglow will find it hard to sleep tonight. . .” as embodied in the lyrics sung by the legendary and incomparable Nat King Cole. No, the anticipation which used to accompany this most celebrated of holidays is just an empty shadow of itself despite all the ornaments and Hallmark cards.

In fact, thanks to the internet you can go to a number of websites and browse through a preselected category of holiday scenes or create your own and email the card of your choice to a family member or friend for free, anytime. Funny, stores almost stat pulling out Christmas goods right after Halloween and one of the biggest shopping days of the year is the day after Thanksgiving Day, called interestingly, “Black Friday.” Perhaps this is ironically what the Retail Merchants Association hope that the ‘day’ will represent, the beginning of a reversal in the direction that their members have been going in where they will show a growth in their margins and return to a level of profitability by being in the ‘black’. It is estimated that the commercialization of Christmas accounts for over 40% of the biggest retailers annual revenue by generating around $40 billion into the national economy; more than the GNP of many countries on the entire planet.

This is seeing the Nativity of a young Jewish couple superimposed with Anglo-European features with a young holy babe, the Christ-child and Son of God whose birth into this world was heralded in song by a choir of angels from the very Heaven of God and the Annunciation was “Peace on Earth and good will toward man.” The stargazers who traveled eastward following a ‘special’ light in the sky that seemed to be guiding them to a small, insignificant village in Galilee named Bethlehem where they, beheld Him who is King of the Jews [and Savior of the world] was wrapped in raggedy cloths and laying in a feeding trough for animals, came bearing gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. Today’s celebration is traveling to the early 5AM sales and camping out all night and waiting in long lines to honor the Prince of Peace by offering to the merchant cashier in the checkout line- cash, check or credit card [mostly the latter]. People will even trample over each other and fight among themselves just to get that bargain item to wrap as a present, only for the recipient to forget all about it a week after the holiday ends. Yes, this is how we celebrate Christmas, and it is about as empty as store shelves a few days before December 25th.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 12, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Joe Paterno: scapegoat or scoundrel?

In the biggest and most recent scandal in collegiate sports, Penn State legendary football coach was fired over allegations that he failed to alert the police after assistant coach Mike McQueary said that he saw former Defensive Coordinator Jerry Sandusky having sex with a ten year old boy in the shower at Penn State’s football facility. This incident regarding Sandusky happened in 2002, the Attorney General indicted two university officials and Penn State Board fired school president Graham Spanier as well as Paterno. Jerry Sandusky has already been arrested on sexual abuse charges which he perpetrated against at least 8 boys over a 15 year period, according to McClatchy News Services. Be that as it may, an anonymous reporter has mentioned that he thinks this is just part of a larger, more sordid practice where young boys were pimped out to rich Penn State benefactors. If true, this is more unsettling than anyone could possibly imagine for a college that has a billion dollar endowment and those who are involved in this conspiracy of silence will very likely face criminal prosecution.

While not wanting to completely exonerate coach Paterno, he did at least notify the Athletic Director and doubtless expected appropriate action to be taken. Paterno once epitomized the idea of a man with moral integrity, family values, and was a father-figure to his players and elder statesman of the campus, who, when you hear the name Penn State, you automatically think, “Joe Paterno.” Now, that image is forever tarnished and one could question whether Joe Paterno is involved in a broader cover-up and for the sake of the college and to protect the identities of its pedophile and sodomizing, deep-pocket contributors. Although coach Paterno has hired an attorney but is this an attempt to protect him from possible criminal charges and prosecution, or instead, is he willing to fall on his sword to save Penn State further embarrassment and further legal action by the State Attorney General as well as additional indictments by the Grand Jury.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 11, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Message from a Black Democrat

As an American who typically votes for Democratic candidates, although I have voted for Republicans on occasion because I thought their message was better than their political opponents, it is way past the time to seriously challenge and question the unfailing loyalty of Blacks toward the Democratic Party. How can any person with a brain not be offended by the comment of radio host Tom Joyner a few weeks ago who encourages his listening audience to reelect President Barack Obama, keeping a Democrat in the White House and worry about the issues later? Now, he is not the first person to ever encourage a particular constituency, demographic and ethnic group to vote strictly along party lines but the problem lies in the fact that political loyalty, not substantive, critical examination and rigorous debate on pertinent issues, is the most important thing. I mean, to coin a phrase from Janet Jackson, “Democrats, what have you done for us lately?” Are African-Americans really “Uncle Tom’s” or “Aunt Jemima’s” if they march to another drumbeat and choose to think for themselves; or must we only listen to the voices of Black America’s self-appointed political, religious and social Messiahs where some receive unreported financial donations or contributions from White men with fat wallets?

Maybe such devotion is based upon the collective memories from the past, like the exploits of heroes JFK (John Kennedy) and RFK (Bobby Kennedy) who stood so firmly against racial injustice in the 1960’s, but that was more about political expediency [Black votes] and if they could have avoided involvement in this social time-bomb at the time, they would have. Originally, the majority of White Southern Democrats vehemently opposed the Civil Rights Movement. What about LBJ (Lyndon Johnson) who signed into Law the Civil Rights Bill, while at the same time repudiated MLK by calling him a “Nigger preacher” when he criticized America’s involvement in the Vietnam War? On another note, maybe our love should extend all the way back to Abraham Lincoln, who after all, signed the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing the slaves [who were considered 3/5 of a person, by the way]; although his driving motive was more about “preserving the union” than any other reason. Oh, by the way, Lincoln was a Republican and as the old saying goes, “Lincoln freed the slaves but he didn’t give us jobs.”

Herman Cain, the GOP presidential contender who is African-American, and despite the troublesome controversy surrounding allegations of improper sexual conduct, has received surprising support from a political party that hasn’t been known to be as welcoming to minorities in the past, especially one who has such a high profile candidacy. Talk Radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity as well as other prominent figures within the GOP, including FOX News Bill O’Reilly or Ann Coulter circling the wagons around their ‘Man of the Hour’ must mean that Armageddon is near.
Michael Steele, former head of the RNC, was the last African-American who held any significant position of power within the party a few years ago, yet there were numerous complaints about him not being competent and effective in his position. The thing is, though, now is the time for the Republican Party and the Tea Party to nurture relationships outside the so-called enemy’s camp and honestly reach out to those whom in the past they would ignore because the Democrats had a ‘lock’ on our hearts and votes; but that is simply not true.

The real problem is that the Republicans have not made their case convincingly enough. It must go beyond just opposing President and the Democrats [because some of us don’t agree with his policies and have noticed a failure to fulfill campaign promises] or use labels but lay out concrete steps in clear and concise language how your plan is better for All Americans; hopefully what you propose can be verified by non-partisan Fact Checker and the CBO (Congressional Budget Office). Blacks also need to realize that historically, we are a ‘conservative’ people in our moral values, social experience, family relationships, religion, work ethic, pursuit of higher education, upward mobility [social class] when it pertains to the attainment of wealth and power, etc. Even some of our oldest and most revered social institutions would be deemed conservative, such as the Black Church, Black Colleges, NAACP, Urban League, Johnson Publishing [Ebony, Jet, Essence, and Black Enterprise magazines], etc. Let’s not ignore the voice of Francis Rice, president of NBR [National Black Republicans], Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and other Black Republicans; famous and not so famous.

The Republican Party should not be stereotyped and characterized by those segregationists and racists from the ‘Old Days’ like KKK Grand Wizard David Duke, Jessie Helms or Strom Thurmond and we should look upon the “Neo-Republicans” like the ‘Arab Spring’ that is happening in the Middle East where a younger, more tech-savvy and open generation is rising up and breaking the shackles of ignorance, intolerance, bigotry, suppression and control of their thoughts and right to choose their own path. Perhaps this is more like “political Darwinism” where either you change and adapt to the new environment or you cease to exist or become irrelevant, redundant and ineffective. We, as African-Americans have to be willing to listen, to meet the other side half way and we just might find out that that we have a whole lot more in common than at first thought. We can’t do this through political proxies and “talking heads” but we have to meet each other face-to-face, sit down together and have dialogue where we respect each other and accept the fact that we can still disagree without being disagreeable. This is America at her best that allows for the free flowing of ideas guaranteed by our First Amendment Rights under the Constitution and where each person is valued and has the opportunity to enjoy Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 9, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Herman Cain needs to throw in the towel

Well, the handwriting is on the wall and the handlers in Hermann Cain's corner need to throw in the towel because he has just been blindsided with a TKO in the form of Sharon Bialek, a White woman from Chicago, who became the fourth woman to allege sexual harassment by the GOP presidential contender. She provides details that are disturbing and it goes a lot further than just inappropriate language, a leering or lustful glance, or even patting someone on the butt. What Sharon describes is a man who has an insatiable sexual appetite who used his position of power to force himself upon women when his advances were not solicited or welcomed. This is even more shocking than the previous complaints against a man who is married with two children and serves as an associate minister at Antioch Baptist Church North in Atlanta, GA.

It is interesting that wife Gloria has not come to his defense as some other spouses have done when their husbands have been involved in lewd behavior or extra-marital affairs. The Democrats should not laugh too loudly because Mr. Cain's moral turpitude and attempted ascendancy to the Oval Office could bring back memories of former President Bill Clinton who had some baggage that he brought along to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.; namely Jennifer Flowers and Paula Jones. And as president, "Slick Willie" had a tryst with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. So, For Hermann Cain, his "999" Plan probably looks more like "666" and for most of us, that's not something that we want to be associated with; religious or not.


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St.
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 7, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

America is just as "race-sensitive" as ever

Herman Cain played the “race” card recently to deflect some of the ever-increasing scrutiny about allegations of sexual harassment from at least three different women; which happened over twelve years ago. He was quoted earlier as saying, “I don’t believe racism in this country holds anybody back in a big way.” Now Herman Cain has used the line made famous by Supreme Court Clarence Justice at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judicial Committee, “This is nothing more than high-tech ‘lynching’. . .” And there you have it, using “White Guilt” for political points and using the liberal media as slave master to put in check another ‘uppity’ Negro who has forgotten or doesn’t know his place in the society. President Obama used the ‘race’ card continually throughout his campaign through playing up the part about his white mother from Kansas as well as her parents [his grandparents]. He even made the comparison to not looking like one of the faces [White] on the dollar bill. Heck, it wasn’t until he was practically elected President that he introduced his Indonesian step-sister. There have been other elected offices throughout the country where one of the candidates, namely a white person, had injected the issue of “race” time and time again to gain victory. Even the redistricting and gentrification of certain neighborhoods and regions in various cities or urban areas across America have more to do with race than social class or creating economic empowerment zones. To be sure, Herman Cain’s problems are those of his own making but it will be interesting to gauge the fallout when one of the victims to whom he has alleged to have engaged in “conduct unbecoming” happens to be a White female? If such turns out to be true, his supporters will disappear faster than rats fleeing out of a burning barn.

Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 5, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com

Herman Cain’s sexual harassment dilemma

Just when the public opinion polls were indicating Hermann Cain might just be the next leading candidate and frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination, he runs into a media firestorm regarding investigations into complaints filed by two former female employees concerning allegations of sexual misconduct over twelve years ago. The pizza mogul’s explanation recently at the National Press Club is not entirely plausible because his answer to this question is inconsistent at best and vacillating in the least. Of course, TALK Radio has circled the wagons around their “Man of the Hour” by the support of on-air commentators Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. The thing is, though, why would the General Counsel of the National Restaurant Association, while Hermann Cain was CEO of Godfathers Pizza have the one Plaintiff, who was also a Lobbyist, through advice from her attorney sign a ‘Confidentiality Agreement’ to make all of this go away, in exchange for some unspecified financial settlement or agreement if the allegation was totally without merit?

Also, Hermann Cain maintains that he did not sexually harass the two women, or at least, that’s the way he sees it; so accordingly, ‘Sexual Harassment’ is like the description of beauty: “It’s all in the eye of the beholder.” The thing is, though, since the Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill spectacle, the laws regarding inappropriate workplace behavior have been very clear, enforceable and not subject to ambiguity; as he would like to make people think. The legal definition of sexual harassment is [any] “Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that tends to create a hostile or offensive work environment.” Sexual harassment may be physical, such as kissing, hugging, pinching, patting, grabbing, blocking the victim's path, leering or staring, or standing very close to the victim. It may also be verbal, which may be oral or written.

A ‘hostile’ workplace is when a female employee is sexually “objectified” in the workplace, especially from a superior, by an unwelcome or unsolicited statement about her appearance, clothing, perfume, shape (even if it is a compliment), etc, that suggests some kind of favoritism, special treatment, bias or attention that is distinctly made known or expressed separate and apart from others, and which tends to undermine the work environment. It could also be extended to a wanton or lustful look or non-verbal gesture that is degrading, disrespectful, devalues a person or their sexual orientation and gender. So, it may very well be that the only way Hermann Cain can get out the “stain” of this political embarrassment is if he buys a very large box of TIDE [the stain remover].


Robert Randle
776 Commerce St. #B-11
Tacoma, WA 98402
November 1, 2011
robertrandle51@yahoo.com