MO STATE SENATOR NASHEED RANTS AGAINST RACIAL BIAS IN FERGUSON

Today on MSNBC's "Now with Alex Wagner", African-American State Senator Jamilah Nasheed (D) St. Louis unleashed a tirade against the local government in Ferguson, MO. During her vehement interview, she indicated that she expected a movement will be initiated to recall Ferguson's Mayor.

Now, we strive to be fair and reasonable here, but State Senator Nasheed's reason for a recall seems to be, shall we say, not well thought out. But, she didn't stop with a unreasonable basis for recall. She also tore into local employers who, in her opinion, were not hiring young, local African-American's simply because of their undeserved/unjust criminal background.

According to State Senator Nasheed, a major reason for both the potential recall and the unwarranted/large number of local criminal convictions was due to the local government's representatives, including the police department who, in her opinion, don't reflect the ethnic make-up of the community.

This is an absolute fact, but these governmental officials were elected by eligible voters in Ferguson. If African-Americans do not run for office or if African-American candidates do not carry the majority of votes they won't be elected - period. So, who's really to blame for those elected to local offices in Ferguson? As State Senator Nasheed forcefully noted, Ferguson has a very high percentage of African-Americans compared to other ethnicities. Therefore, it's obviously the vast majority of eligible African-American voters who must be responsible for electing the current local government officials.

And, the State Senator's reason for wanting to recall the Ferguson Mayor is equally confusing. If she really means what she said, she's simply a racist and that label does not do her constituents any favors. I know she would bristle at being characterized as a racist since that's her main criticism for Ferguson's problems. But, when your main reason for recalling the duly-elected Mayor is because "not only is he not African-American, you have a Republican", well what would you honestly call her justification for recall?

Nasheed also railed against local hiring practices. Eligibility for a particular position/job must be considered lest we go down the very sad road depicted in the movie "Idiocracy". If eligible African-American workers do not apply for a job/position what are local employers supposed to do? They can either lower their standards or hire from those who do qualify. The residents must take responsibility for both those they elect and for those they locally educate in order to obtain the result Nasheed is demanding. The State Senator's demands cannot be justified simply based on an ethic majority.

Qualified, law-abiding African-American job candidates must have an equal opportunity for employment, to do otherwise is obviously racist. The employer, unless bound by racial quota considerations, should be free to employ the best candidate for the job/position regardless of race. However, the hiring decision can be subjective. For example, the job may require a high degree of security and hiring a repeatedly-convicted felon might not only be a very bad decision, it could be considered negligence.

State Senator Nasheed also proudly announced her intention to introduce legislation called "Ban the Box". This legislation would prohibit employers from asking on an application if the job seeker has misdemeanor or felony convictions. Apparently State Senator Nasheed is intending to also infringe on an employer's right to obtain an independent background report on a potential employee. I'm sure many local employers would absolutely obtain a background check if they were prohibited by law from asking for this information on an application.

This may be a situation where "unintended consequences" should have been considered by the lawmaker and/or her staff. It is very possible that a formal background check could highlight other negative information for an applicant, which might not have been revealed if only a job application was considered.

We would suggest that State Senator Nasheed tone down her rhetoric and absolutely think through future pronouncements or be seen as simply a "shoot from the hip radical" who's incapable of seeing the Big Picture. Obtaining the changes that the citizens of Ferguson are demanding will depend on initially adhering to our Election Laws and to nominate/elect candidates who they feel are most qualified to represent them. Attempting to force changes, which may or may not reflect the desires of the entire city's electorate, will only lead to anarchy.

If anarchy is the intention of the State Senator, we would again suggest that she think though the potential outcome and resulting consequences of such an approach. Solutions to the perceived injustice(s) are much more likely to be supported by the community if accomplished by a democratically-decided election rather than a "brute force" approach advocated by only a few radicals.

Tony Stewart Pre-Crash Pictures - Zoomed Perspective

Below are a few pictures from the incident that preceded the unfortunate accident that took the life of Kevin Ward, Jr.  These pictures are focused on the angle of Tony Stewart's left front wheel in an effort to identify whether he had his wheels turned into Ward's path.

 

The following photos are provided for your scrutiny. We are not passing judgment, just hoping to clarify things for NASCAR fans  

 

Brooking Institute Rep Says World Safer Now Than '40's, 50's or 60's

A Brookings Institute Senior Fellow stated on FOX News today that the world is safer today than in the 1940s, '50s or '60s. While we can't argue about the 1940s, it's difficult to get to the same opinion for the '50s or '60s.  Certainly we didn't have the long security lines at our airports, tourists could travel throughout the middle East and Africa without fear for their safety stemming from terrorist attacks.

In reference to the major uprisings in Iraq, Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Gaza and the current border crisis on the Southern U.S. border, not to mention the Ebola outbreak threatening West Africa, it's difficult to remember a more serious period of widespread threats to World peace.

Now, we don't pretend to be "experts" on these events and the Brookings Institute should have a much better handle on these situations than we do, but it sure doesn't feel like a "safer" period than we experienced in the 1950s for example.

We would suggest that a reference like that made on FOX today by the Brookings Sr. Fellow, needs a little more "flesh on the bone" to justify that statement. To state this evaluation without facts to back it up, smells a little like cozying up to and attempting to justify the Administration's current stance on engaging our enemies. It's pretty obvious that after 6 years of "feeling out" the current Administration's strengths weaknesses, our enemies have decided it is time to test their evaluation of our weakness and reluctance to engage.

This could be a very well calculated multi-front attack to test the U.S.'s response. If our enemies can obtain a successful outcome, it will only strengthen their radical beliefs and subsequent attacks will be even more extensive and brazen.

We fear that things will only continue to deteriorate if the Administration fails to respond in a decisive manner. Drone and air attacks could seriously reduce the threat from ISIS in Iraq. Hamas must be eliminated from the Palestine government. Russia needs to know we will repel any further incursion into the Ukraine. And finally, we need to slam the borders shut. Illegals should not be given amnesty and they all need to be sent packing.

Let's get our priorities straight. The U.S. is OUR country and we must protect it - period. We fought for our independence and for the system we've enjoyed for over 200 years. Those who feel "guilty" for our successes and feel we must bow to others need to individually handle these feelings. Become a missionary, donate your "undeserved" dollars to whoever, but don't think for a minute that the U.S. majority will rollover and embrace your guilt.

BUK MISSILE SYSTEMS HAD "FAILSAFE" OPTION DISABLED

A FOX NEWS correspondent today reported that the Russian-made BUK Missile systems (SA 11 and/or Gadfly) have a "failsafe" option that, when activated, would identify the target based on signals transmitted from the targeted aircraft. The inference here is that commercial airliners "squawk" a unique signal that would notify the BUK system that they have targeted a non-hostile aircraft and the firing would automatically be aborted. Therefore, it is apparent that someone disabled this option to allow manual firing on any target acquired.

Disabling the "failsafe" option takes the operation of this missile system to an even higher level of sophistication and makes it more likely that the attack was controlled by an experienced operator(s) and far less likely that a "rebel separatist" simply pressed a button and erroneously brought a commercial Malaysia Airlines 777 out of the sky.

To our knowledge, this feature of the BUK system has gone largely unreported by the mainstream and, other than one mention on FOX Cable News, even the cable news networks have not picked-up on this additional bit of evidence to help identify who was ultimately responsible for this tragedy.