Columnist Arthur Chu had a primal scream of an article published in this past week's Daily Beast titled "The Mass Murderer On Your $20". In it, the leftist writer decries having the double sawbuck tainted with the image of a man whom the author views as a psychotic "mass murderer" of the American Indians, an "anti-intellectual" demagogue, & a bully whose "presidency demonstrate(d) the ugliness of an American populace that wanted to be led" by him.
But you know what? If the Reagan people want to put Ronald Reagan on the $20 bill and boot Andrew Jackson off, I'm all for it.
The problem with Chu's article is that there's no context to it. He's quick to highlight the ugly, indisputable facts that tarnish - if not damn - Jackson's tenure as our nation's seventh president but he fails to comprehend why many historians place the man among the "greats" of American history (which is material for another blog in & of itself).
Nor does Chu want to confront the fact that today's Democrat Party owes its existence to Jackson (he was a co-founder) & that the ugliness Chu thinks Jackson alone personified was actually an ugliness shared by many within the party itself.
He was a "man of the people," in that his election marked the beginning of content-free, vicious mass-media-driven personality politics. Although operatives of both sides slung copious quantities of mud, Jackson's opponent John Quincy Adams was personally one of the most educated, idealistic, decent people to serve as president, and was thus easily taken down by Jackson as being a limp-wristed, out-of-touch elitist you wouldn't want to have a beer with.
This set the tone for attacks to be used against educated, idealistic, decent people for the entire future history of American politics. Neither sushi nor lattes were commonly consumed in America in 1828, but one gets the feeling if they had been they would have figured prominently in Jackson's campaign.
As more & more young leftists like Chu discover the truth about the Democrat Party's sordid past, they'll either dismiss it, denounce it, or ignore it. But if they want to expunge one of their party's founding father's from his place on the $20 bill and replace Jackson with Reagan, who am I to disagree? So I now ask the RMG community: should Jackson's image be dropped from the $20 bill? If so, which past American president should have his image replace that of Jackson's?
Sheriff Tom Hodgson of Bristol County, Massachusetts released the following statement concerning opposition to President Barack Obama's amnesty for illegal immigrants.
President Barack Obama has been calculatingly and systematically dismantling the enforcement of our immigration laws, and in so doing, placing more and more of our citizens in the crosshairs of criminal illegal aliens.
Late last year, after he and his party were repudiated by the voters, the president announced plans to take executive action to grant amnesty and work authorization to some 5 million illegal aliens, while his Homeland Security secretary issued memo protecting virtually all other illegal aliens from deportation. When the House of Representatives acted to block these unconstitutional actions by including explicit language in the DHS funding bill prohibiting him from diverting money and manpower to carry out his political agenda the president threatened to veto the entire appropriations bill. Despite his own veto threat, the president nonetheless is attempting to blame Congress for any interruptions in DHS operations if a spending bill is not finalized.
Unlike President Obama, a majority in Congress recognize that if they allow the president to raid DHS's budget to implement his amnesty program, it will weaken our efforts to secure our homeland. Giving amnesty to people who have entered our country illegally, knowing little about their behaviors, prior or ongoing, is a formula for disaster. Even under the best of circumstances, carrying out adequate background checks on some 5 million illegal aliens would be a Herculean feat.
To the contrary, the record of this administration has been to impede the sort of due diligence that might identify potential threats. I'm sure most people would agree that if law enforcement were looking into the backgrounds of Mohamed Atta and his fellow terrorists while in flight school, the President and other pro-illegal activists would have vilified law enforcement citing that these individuals had done nothing wrong and were simply taking advantage of an opportunity to get a pilot's license and a career. Likewise, had we been investigating the younger Tsarnaev brother for not meeting his obligations of his student visa, the President would likely say that we were harassing a college student who has done nothing wrong and is simply trying to get an education.
How many of the over 5 million illegals who would benefit from amnesty are like-minded people who have been, or are planning to commit acts of violence against us. The painful lessons of 9/11 and the Boston bombing remind us that even a few who manage to slip through the nets can inflict enormous damage.
Secondarily, we have watched as the President dismantled our Secure Communities Program, which identifies deportable aliens who are arrested and charged with other offenses, and changed the criteria for detaining and deporting illegal immigrants. For example, an illegal immigrant cannot be detained on an immigration warrant unless they have been convicted of at least three misdemeanor crimes. Someone with seven traffic arrests does not qualify for an immigration detainer.
Imagine if you had a criminal who kept committing crimes in your neighborhood and the police said they could not remove and detain him until he is convicted on three separate misdemeanor crimes. Imagine me telling you that a driver in your community who has seven traffic arrests does not qualify to be detained and prevented from repeating the behavior until he/she kills someone.
If Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police were to operate their law enforcement agencies based on President Obama's criteria, we would be unable to protect our citizens from becoming repeated victims of crime. We'd also be in violation of our oath and rightfully accused of violating our Constitution.
The American Sheriffs have drawn a line in the sand and we will not allow the citizens of our communities to face greater dangers by adopting a policy that reduces accountability for criminal illegal aliens and raises the dangers of our citizens being victimized by them.
I urge the American people to stand behind those who are trying to keep you safe and oppose President Obama's attempt to grant amnesty and work authorization to millions of illegal aliens and further eviscerate meaningful immigration enforcement.
In defense of our national security and public safety I urge all Americans to insist that Congress defund the president's attempt to impose amnesty by executive decree, and to demand that our borders be secured as the first step toward legitimate and comprehensive immigration reform.
D.W. Griffith's legendary racist masterpiece just turned one hundred years old this month. THE BIRTH OF A NATION (1915) revolutionized the art of making movies (techniques that are still used in today's Hollywood) while at the same time it poisoned race relations & contributed to a brief resurgence of popularity for the Ku Klux Klan (KKK).
What always intrigues me about the movie is its unspoken subtext. Although a portion of the movie delves into politics, it doesn't talk about Democrats or Republicans. It does, however, casually quote Democrats like Woodrow Wilson:
"The white men were roused by a mere instinct of self-preservation... until at last there had sprung into existence a great Ku Klux Klan, a veritable empire of the South, to protect the Southern country." - WOODROW WILSON
The movie was based on a book written by Thomas Dixon who once declared his goal "was to revolutionize Northern sentiments by a presentation of history that would transform every [white] man in the audience into a good Democrat!"
The Birth of a Nation focused on the period of Reconstruction after the Civil War when formerly enslaved men were allowed to vote and hold office in 11 Southern states. Dixon was a young former Baptist minister in love with gallant Ku Klux Klan stories he heard as a child and decided to write a book, a play, and a movie.
Dixon described Reconstruction as a clash between white good and black evil. He briefly touched history since from 1868 to 1898 African American men under the protection of three constitutional amendments and 25,000 federal troops were elected to office in Southern states. Then his film omits a lot: With white allies, black elected officials helped rewrite the constitutions of Mississippi and South Carolina, elected 22 black congressmen, including two senators from Mississippi, a Supreme Court justice in South Carolina, and a host of state representatives, sheriffs, mayors, and other local officials in 10 states.
This coalition managed to introduce the South's first public school system, and bring economic, political, and prison reforms to their states, including laws to help the poor of both races and to end racial injustice. Nonetheless, black legislators did not challenge segregation in Southern education, business, or personal life.
After about half a dozen years, as the federal government largely sat silent, these governments were overthrown by KKK violence and systematic election fraud. In 1877 the federal government caved in, made a deal with former slaveholders and withdrew all troops. A democratic experiment was overthrown and white supremacy reigned.
The Birth of a Nation sought to erase any memories of the role of African Americans and the unity they forged with whites to bring democracy to Southern states. The film's lesson: Race relations must remain in the hands of those who once owned, "understood," and controlled black people. And white violence is justified to ensure this noble end.
Even GONE WITH THE WIND (1939) had a touch of revisionism to it. You'll note that the Northern carpetbagger (played by Victor Jory) along with his black associate are portrayed as less buffoonish as the carpetbaggers in THE BIRTH OF A NATION but they are still the "enemy" - probable members of the Radical Republicans who won the Civil War.
It's sad that the black hole of memory affects many members of today's Republican Party. Not long after its founding, the GOP declared itself to be the party opposed to the "twin relics of barbarism, polygamy, and slavery". It was a party of modernism - a party of liberalism - that wanted to build upon the foundation laid down by the nation's revolutionary Founding Fathers. It's no surprise that Ronald Reagan - a man of the Old Left who was drawn to the Republican Party - would often quote Thomas Paine, the most radical of the Founding Fathers because he shared Paine's liberal view of politics. And by "liberal" I mean the classical liberalism that was a hallmark of the Anglo-Scotch Enlightenment which, in turn, made the American Revolution a reality that even today remains imitated by few yet despised by many.
The Republican Party in the past used to be the standard-bearer of that proud American tradition of classical liberalism. Where is THAT party today? Is it as invisible as the (black) Republicans in THE BIRTH OF A NATION whose grotesque caricatures live on in the academic archives about popular culture - or has the party's liberalism extinguished itself?
Mark Fisher was alleging criminal activity. On a list to be deposed were Kirsten Hughes, Charlie Baker, and Ron Kaufman. The never to be released tally sheets from a convention that occurred a year ago were thought to expose pre-primary collusion between the Baker campaign and the state party. Not an absurd claim at all.
Baker campaign manager Jim Conroy maintained that Coleman had been working for the campaign only as a contractor before Baker became the party nominee in March. "Ryan Coleman has worked for the campaign first as a contractor and later as an employee," Conroy said. "His engagement with the campaign has been transparent and publicly reported, as is the case with all campaign expenditures."
The Baker campaign, however, shows no payments to Coleman as a contractor when he was being paid by the state party.
MassDOT just sent out a press release with an update on MBTA service.
Severe Weather Service MID-DAY Update for Tuesday, February 17, 2015
Effective this morning: Red Line service was extended from Alewife to JFK/UMass. More than 70 buses, including 40 from Peter Pan requested by the Governor, were used to shuttle customers between Braintree and JFK/UMass. Close to 50 buses, including 10 from DATTCO, four from Bloom Bus and two from Greyhound, were used to shuttle customers between Ashmont and JFK.
Also effective this morning: Orange Line service was extended from Sullivan to Forest Hills stations. Close to forty buses, including 10 from Yankee Bus, are being used to replace service between Oak Grove and Sullivan.
Green Line service is operating between Kenmore and Lechmere stations with limited trolley service operating in both directions on the D branch.
Along the B branch, Route 57 buses are making stops between Packards Corner and Kenmore stations. There will be no bus service between Packards Corner and Boston College.
Overnight and throughout the day today: snow removal crews deployed throughout the MBTA system continue to make progress with the assistance of the Governor's Office, the National Guard, Emergency Assistance Compact(EMAC) resources, MassDOT and DOC.
Efforts have been concentrated on clearing major MBTA busways, bus routes, key T parking facilities, and major terminus locations used for MBTA emergency bus shuttles.
This includes work performed at locations such as Dudley Square, Forest Hills, JFK, Braintree, Ruggles, Back Bay, South Shore parking lots as well as key bus routes like the Route #66 through Brookline and Cambridge and the Route #23 out of Ashmont.
MBTA forces and contractors have successfully cleared and/or removed snow from major bus garages and refueling stations. This includes Quincy, Fellsway, Arborway, Charlestown, Southampton, with work expected to be complete at Cabot, Albany, North Cambridge, and much of the Wellington Campus (non-track area).
Throughout the day the MBTA has further refined its snow removal strategy resulting in the following prioritized plan:
The MBTA will continue to use labor forces to hand shovel the Red Line-Braintree Branch to remove snow from the right of way. Resources are deploying to Braintree Station to work between Braintree and Quincy Adams stations and between Quincy Center and Wollaston. The MBTA will have heavy equipment on the right of way clearing snow drifts in various sections.
The MBTA deployed labor forces to the Orange Line from Oak Grove to Wellington to remove snow from the right of way. Effort will be concentrated on the segments of track between Oak Grove and Malden, and Malden to Wellington.
Resources are also being deployed to Wellington Yard to clear the south end of the facility to allow for additional access points and greater mobility for MBTA operations.
Forces are also being deployed to the Mattapan High Speed Line to hand shovel and clear the Ashmont and Mattapan loops, as well as segments of track along the right of way.
Resources are also assisting with clearing Silver Line locations on Temple and Washington streets; the Mattapan Busway, and the Cabot Yard area, the Green Line rights of way on the B, C, and E lines; Riverside Yard and Busway; Silver Line, Bus Route #66; and parking lots along the Red Line and Commuter Rail.
The Boston Globe has written a very lengthy piece explaining the root causes of the MBTA freeze up (can't call it a melt down can we?). They rightfully put the majority of blame at over expansion, supported by governors of both parties, but started by Dukakis and the Conservation Law Foundation.
The story could begin in many places. But start in 1990.
Governor Michael Dukakis was at the tail end of his third and final term. The Big Dig, an idea two decades in the making, was moving closer to reality. And the governor was determined to push the project forward and cement his legacy.
The Conservation Law Foundation, an influential environmental advocacy group, sensed an opportunity.
A project of this size - burying the Central Artery beneath downtown Boston and transforming an important American city - had to pass muster with federal clean air regulators. And one way to do that was to attach a bunch of public transit improvements.
Take a look it is a sobering look at government gone wrong. The roots of this problem are simple, and mismanagement has made it worse.
According to Boston Herald reporter Hillary Chabot, GOP Chairwoman Kirsten Hughesjust got a raise:
But the Massachusetts Republican Party needs more than a strong governor. Thanks to a recent $240,000 settlement payout to former gubernatorial candidate Mark Fisher, the party is scrambling for money. Add the fact that the executive committee voted on Feb. 4 to start paying Hughes a $90,000 salary - the first time she's taken a salary since she started chairing two years ago.
"It was a unanimous vote," said Hughes. "It's not taken from the operating budget in terms of candidates."
(Charlie) Baker and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito have plans to help boost the state's GOP coffers at a March fundraiser, said Hughes.
I've long argued that the party needed its position of chair to be a paid gig if the party ever hoped to attract talented individuals to apply for the job. So I've no problem with the compensation part of the news.
Now does Hughes herself deserve the salary? I'd venture to guess a lot of activists would say no based on how the last GOP convention was mismanaged & how said mismanagement contributed to the party's payoff of Fisher.
I wasn't at the State Committee meeting when the decision was "unanimously" supported by its members in attendance. I hope said decision was reached after due deliberations had been made springing from the pros & cons of the issue itself. I'd be VERY disappointed if powerful people rather than an impartial process had determined the outcome of Hughes getting a raise in spite of a performance that one could charitably describe as "underwhelming".
(She showed that she's a fraud on these issues the moment she ran to uncle sub-prime banker Deval for help in 2012. - promoted by Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno)
"Let's just be real clear - the game is rigged and it's rigged in favor of those who have money and who have power"
Elizabeth Warren is a champion of the middle class. She has devoted her political career to defending the powerless against the Wall Street elites who have rigged the economy in their favor. Elizabeth Warren is leading the charge to level the playing field.
Okay, let's be serious here.
Regardless of what the media says, Elizabeth Warren could care less about the middle class. She is not Wall Street's worst nightmare; often times she's their best friend. When railing against Wall Street achieves her goal of dramatically increasing the size of government, she'll jump on that bandwagon. The other 99.9% of the time - when Wall Street benefits from big government - there is no bigger corporatist than Liz Warren.
That's why it's interesting to hear that Liz thinks that Sen. Rand Paul's Audit the Fed bill is a "dangerous" idea. You might think that a populist warrior would want the activities of the Fed - the bank of all banks - to be made public and given greater transparency. Wouldn't it make sense for the "champion of the people" to be upset about the Fed eating away at the savings of middle-class America?
Nope. Because middle-class America doesn't really factor into her ideology. It's just a helpful disguise for her much larger political goals.
Be sure to sign the Audit the Fed petition and tell Congress to bring sunlight to this shadowy institution:
A recent Boston Globe article posits that a few conservatives within the Massachusetts Republican Party have expressed serious concerns over some of the cabinet appointments being made by Governor Charlie Baker.
"We are bracing ourselves,'' said Mark Fisher, the GOP's Tea Party gubernatorial candidate who was crushed in his primary challenge against Baker.
"Charlie said he wasn't going to raise taxes and fees. Now he's got some Democrats in the Cabinet," said Fisher, the former gubernatorial candidate. "The question I hear from conservative Republicans, is he going to raise taxes?"
The Globe also cited this blog as proof that Bay State conservatives are upset with some of Baker's choices:
"Baker AGAIN forsakes his party" was the headline on the conservative RedMass group website on Jan. 16, the day after Baker appointed a Democrat to fill the seat vacated by Bristol District Attorney Sam Sutter.
"Shame, Charlie, Shame,'' said the anonymous blog that was posted by Rob Eno, publisher of the website that promotes the GOP.
Count me as unimpressed. Baker repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he would have an array of ideological voices to guide his administration & he's kept his word. Given the paucity of GOP talent, Baker's appointment of experienced moderate or left-of-center individuals to manage certain departments makes sense.
The man prides himself on his non-ideological management skills & that's how I'll judge him (with the MBTA management crisis being his first test). I suspect most voters in Massachusetts will judge him in the same way.
Conservatives should continue to respectfully press their issues with Baker while being mindful that, since he isn't going to change things (he accepts the Democrat paradigm but not the status quo left behind by former Governor Deval Patrick), they must mentor candidates for future offices who will be the true change agents of the GOP.
For the last eight years, Deval Patrick has mismanaged state government. That is a fact that is becoming increasingly clear. The $700 million+ budget deficit Baker was left with, a malfunctioning Health Connector, among many other scandals. Patrick's most egregious and cruelest legacy may be Beverly Scott as head of the MBTA, which millions of people rely on every day to get to and from work.
Image Source: Public Domain via MBTA.com
Why? Because Deval Patrick's MassDOT board hired someone who had already run another mass transit system into the ground. Here's a Boston.com article from November of 2012 that explains it all.
The newly selected director of the MBTA was required to undergo counseling with a business psychology consulting firm while she was running the mass transit system in Atlanta, a fact that state officials say they were not aware of when they hired her.
Beverly Scott's relationship with her board of directors in Atlanta had grown so strained that the board in 2010 paid $144,000 to a business psychologist to help Scott and her leadership team improve their management styles.
How bad was MARTA being run by Scott? Here's the results of an independent KPMG audit, as reported by Boston.com.
The KPMG audit found MARTA to be in deep trouble, with a operating budget deficit of as much as $33 million a year, a shortfall that is being made up by dipping into reserves. The audit projects complete depletion of the system's reserves in 2018. The "current economic model is unsustainable," the audit said.
KPMG itemized tens of millions of dollars in potential savings that could be realized if MARTA privatized certain functions, restructured excessive compensation to employees, and curbed high absenteeism among its 4,500 workers.
In Tuesday's edition of the Boston Herald an article appeared stating that members of Boston 2024 and Go Boston 2030 have been meeting "behind closed doors" with some state legislators and transportation officials to discuss long-term transportation plans for the Boston. Many of those duly elected and charged with helping to shape the Commonwealth's transportation policy are being left out.
That is why I have asked for public hearings. On Wednesday I sent the attached letter to Senator McGee, the Chairman of the Joint Committee on Transportation, to request hearings before our committee on this important matter. I am very concerned that the public and their elected members of the legislature are being circumvented. These are decisions that will affect Massachusetts residents and taxpayers for many years to come.
I encourage my colleagues and citizens on both sides of the aisle to insist upon transparency in this process, especially fiscal conservatives who should be concerned about this costly endeavor. The public deserves a say on these matters, and I look forward to seeing an open and healthy discussion on the Transportation Committee and in the legislature about the long-term transportation plans for the Commonwealth.
Fox News & Glenn Beck have made an editorial decision in their respective businesses to show to the public an uncensored exhibition of Jordanian pilot Lt. Muath Al-Kaseasbeh who was burned to death by ISIS.
Don't watch the video if you don't have the stomach to view political snuff porn. But DO take a peak if you want to understand the nature of our enemy. The technical aspects of the video are on par with the type of professionalism one sees in Hollywood movies. One must force to remind oneself during the viewing that an actual human being is burning to death as the cameraman gets a closeup shot of his face falling off his skull while the music soundtrack tries to seduce the viewer into swaying to its hypnotic rhythms as if undulating in sync to the poor victim's death throes.
Thus is the "glamour" of evil as presented by ISIS. It's a great piece of psychological warfare that "brands" this Islamofascist organization as THE "bad-ass" group to join. Judging from the thousands of people from all over the world who are enlisting with ISIS, the propaganda from these snuff videos has been effective. Damn effective.
That the video is also effective in striking fear into the hearts of Muslim people everywhere needs to be addressed too.
A lot of non-Muslim people are quick to equate Islamofascism with Islam itself. However, to equate Islamofascism with Islam would be to equate, for example, Nazism with German nationalism. Not only are the analogies wrong but - in the case of Islamofascism - said analogy plays into the skillful hands of the Islamofascists who exploit for political purposes the problematic aspects of Islam's theology (notably the nature of "reason" & Allah as "pure will"). While the defects of Islam's theology have been the prime reason for its centuries-long civil war waged between its Sunni & Shiite adherents, what the world is now confronting is a political movement masquerading as a religion in BOTH camps.
Given President Barack Obama's decision to imitate Neville Chamberlain while the death cult that is Islamofascism has grown more powerful under his watch, what can we as Americans do at this point? For starters, we should follow the lead of Fox News & Beck in no longer avoiding the grisly reality of Islamofascism. Secondly while America can't & shouldn't impose itself on Islam's civil war, all Americans should try to protect & help those moderate Muslims who are fighting to provide a much needed dose of the kind of "enlightenment" that was ultimately embraced by Jews & Christians. It's in our long-term interest to do so. While America has no problem having Muslims in our country who respect our Constitution (especially the First Amendment) & who love our nation as it is, we should have no tolerance for any group purporting to be Islamic that tries to institute sharia law. Anyone who tries to circumvent our Constitution should be dealt with harshly (up to & including deportation). Lastly, our foreign policy needs to have a carrot/stick approach that respects non-American cultures in our war against Islamofascism. Eradicate Islamofascism, yes, but do it in such a way that America isn't regarded as a bull in the proverbial (Muslim) china shop who should be avoided.
The last time America faced the death cults of Nazism & Japanese Imperialism, we had to resort to firebombing the cities of one adversary & nuking not one but two cities of the other. If we don't get serious about confronting & defeating Islamofascism while we still have the time to do it within the parameters of conventional & asymmetrical warfare, then we'll be forced to do unthinkable things - including using nuclear weapons once again - in order to ensure our survival against our latest existential threat. With Iran close to having a nuclear bomb, we must act NOW.
MIT Professor calls global warming believers a cult.
"As with any cult, once the mythology of the cult begins falling apart, instead of saying, oh, we were wrong, they get more and more fanatical. I think that's what's happening here. Think about it," he said. "You've led an unpleasant life, you haven't led a very virtuous life, but now you're told, you get absolution if you watch your carbon footprint. It's salvation!"
When asked about 2014 being the hottest year ever he adds this:
"Seventy percent of the earth is oceans, we can't measure those temperatures very well. They can be off a half a degree, a quarter of a degree. Even two-10ths of a degree of change would be tiny but two-100ths is ludicrous. Anyone who starts crowing about those numbers shows that they're putting spin on nothing.
And his intellectual opposition added this:
Last week, after scoffing at Vermont socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders' call for a Senate vote on global warming, Lindzen was subjected to another barrage of diatribes. At his listed MIT phone number, Prof. Lindzen received a typical anonymous call:
"I think people like you should actually be in jail," the male caller told him, "because you must know where this is all leading now... the people you support and take your money from to make these outrageously anti-human comments (also 'know')... In other words, you're a sociopath!"
Lindzen chuckled when the voicemail was replayed.
What will it actually take to convince people that global warming is silliness? They falsify every report and misquote every study to try and support their failing theory of 'earth fever'.
Antibiotics like penicillin are wonderful advancements in modern medicine. They have saved countless lives and improved the lives of countless others. They are wonderful. Unless, of course, you are allergic. For those individuals allergic to penicillin, they should not take it.
The same is true for vaccines. Unfortunately not every vaccine is right for every person in every situation. If you are too young, too old, have an auto-immune condition, specific genetic conditions, or on specific medications there are vaccines you should avoid.
I will use an example in my own life. I have psoriasis and am treated for it through a variety of ways including doctors appointments twice a week. Following the advice of my doctors, I am not currently on prescription medication such as "Embrel." Others with my condition are. At some point in the future I may need to be.
Avoid being near people who are sick or have infections. Call your doctor for preventive treatment if you are exposed to chicken pox.
Huh.
Unfortunately for us, big government mandatory vaccination laws seldom have protections written in for individuals who should not be taking certain vaccines. Just a lot of force.
Here is the official statement of the Islamic Society of Boston on the murders in Paris. BTW, they have not yet made any comment on the most recent beheading of a Japanese journalist.
All of us at ISBCC and ISB here in Boston are deeply grieving the loss of life by fanatics in Paris and Nigeria. These extremists disgrace Islam, and Muslims worldwide have denounced their senseless violence, as Imam Suhaib and other scholars have made abundantly clear.
I also know that many of us are simultaneously deeply frustrated that the acts of this tiny handful of extremists once again have raised doubts about the Mercy of God and this central tenant at the core of our faith. I feel this frustration myself.
Yet, as opposed to remaining frustrated, it appears to me the Prophetic response to such tragedies is to channel that frustration into re-committing ourselves to being a Mercy to mankind. "The default of our Prophet's character (Peace be upon him) was Mercy". At an individual level, let us re-commit ourselves to doing those little acts of kindness that make a big difference in the lives of people: feed the homeless, help a stranger cross the street, or help your neighbor shovel the snow (snow is expected tonight in Boston.) At an institutional and community level, let us re-commit to becoming a benefit to our communities. In Boston, the ISBCC and other mosque's need to address the homeless crisis, need to help improve our public schools, and work with the city to provide more affordable housing. If you're interested in getting involved in these initiatives contact Rasha Azoni-Hannigan at rasha.azoni@masboston.org.
May God help us move in this direction and keep us on the straight path.
Yusufi Vali
Your Executive Director - ISBCC
Let me ask a few questions on the statement:
1. Where exactly are these 'Muslims worldwide' that have condemned the violence? A Google search would leave you empty. I have not yet seen any long winding marches through the streets of Boston, NYC or Washington on the subject. They were quick to march when Charlie Hebdo issued a cartoon, but not to protest any murders. One man in Paris who took part in the recent march had this to say:
"Our religion is the religion of love. ... Our religion loves Jews ... loves Christians. We are not terrorists," one Muslim man said, his voice rising.
He lifted his arm and gestured to many people around him who came to denounce violence: "We are all Muslim!"
The Massachusetts House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly Thursday to abolish term limits for Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, extending indefinitely the reign of one of the most powerful politicians on Beacon Hill.
The vote came six years after DeLeo put the limits in place, trumpeting them as a blow for more ethical government.
On Thursday, the speaker said that his position had "evolved" and that it would be good for the House to have an experienced leader with a strong track record.
Continuing the tradition of 4 corrupt Speakers in a row, Robert DeLeo proudly accepted the praise of creating term limits for his office only to waive them away after his stranglehold on power was completed. The move was correctly panned by good government groups and the Massachusetts Republican Caucus voted against the change in unanimous dissent.
But what of our own party?
The Minority Leader has the power to appoint the rest of party leadership, unlike the national Republican caucus where they are elected separately.
The Minority Leader controls committee appointments and uses the power of these appointment to control the actions of the caucus both inside and outside of their roles as legislators.
The Minority Leader controls the salaries of the caucus member by controlling the "bonus" money that comes with leadership roles.
The Minority Leader is not term limited and the Republican House Caucus has the ability to term limit the position without the approval of the Democrats. It can be done by simply changing their own internal rules or through voluntary term limits.
It's time for our Minority Leader to stop viewing corrupt Democratic Speakers as a model to copy and start viewing them as a tragedy to avoid.
Secret audio recordings recovered from Tripoli raise even more questions about America's involvement in Libya and suggest that the chaos now consuming the North African nation could have been avoided at the very outset.
Top Pentagon officials and a senior Democrat in Congress so distrusted Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2011 march to war in Libya that they opened their own diplomatic channels with the Gadhafi regime in an effort to halt the escalating crisis, according to secret audio recordings recovered from Tripoli.
The tapes, reviewed by The Washington Times and authenticated by the participants, chronicle U.S. officials' unfiltered conversations with Col. Moammar Gadhafi's son and a top Libyan leader, including criticisms that Mrs. Clinton had developed tunnel vision and led the U.S. into an unnecessary war without adequately weighing the intelligence community's concerns.
"You should see these internal State Department reports that are produced in the State Department that go out to the Congress. They're just full of stupid, stupid facts," an American intermediary specifically dispatched by the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the Gadhafi regime in July 2011, saying the State Department was controlling what intelligence would be reported to U.S. officials.
The audio recordings raise serious questions about Clinton & Barack Obama's Libya gambit:
Brad Jones, the House Minority Leader, issued the following statement after the vote to grant Bob DeLeo and unlimited amount of time as speaker:
"During today's rules debate, an amendment was filed to reinstate term limits for the office of Speaker, which had previously been set at eight consecutive years. Although the proposal failed when put to a vote, the fact of the matter is that, even if the term limits rule had been retained, Speaker DeLeo would still continue to lead the House over the next two years. The members have spoken, and although not everyone may be pleased with the results, it is my hope that we can move beyond this vote and not allow this one issue to distract us from the important legislative agenda and budgetary challenges that lie ahead."
Really, when everyone in Massachusetts politics, even liberals like Scot Lehigh in the Boston Globe are deriding the legislature for this vote, the leader of the opposition is saying, hey it's no big deal.
Paul LePage thinks big and bold in the mantle of tax reform. The Wall Street Journal reports.
A sweeping proposal to cut taxes for Maine families and businesses could upend one of the most widely accepted practices in the country: the property-tax exemption for nonprofit organizations.
A recent budget plan by Republican Gov. Paul LePage calling for an overhaul of individual, corporate and sales taxes also would make Maine the first state in the nation to require colleges, hospitals and other large charities to go on the property-tax rolls in their municipalities.
“It would be a stunning development,” said Daphne Kenyon, a fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy in Cambridge, Mass. “I think there would be all kinds of reaction, from litigation to nonprofits’ possibly moving.”
An interesting chart here:
Channeling every Boston mayor in history, should Charlie Baker follow this line of thinking? Maine does not have a history of "payments in lieu of taxes" made by nonprofits as does Boston and other jurisidictions.
