Sarah Brady fought gun-control fight valiantly

If anyone deserved the right to believe in gun control, it had to be the wife of someone wounded grievously by a madman firing a handgun at the president of the United States.

The advocate was Sarah Brady, the wife of the late White House press secretary James Brady, who was shot in the head by John Hinckley — who sought on March 31, 1981 to assassinate President Reagan. Sarah Brady died today at the age of 73.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sarah-brady-gun-control-advocate-dies-at-73/ar-AAapGeK

Hinckley ended up being acquitted by reason of insanity and he’s spent his time in a hospital ever since.

Meanwhile, Sarah and James Brady became advocates for gun control. James Brady died in August of complications relating to the terrible head wound he suffered.

The Bradys had become enemies of gun-rights advocates, such as the National Rifle Association, which occasionally took great delight in vilifying them for their sincere views on the firearm control.

They had reason to believe as they did. They insisted courageously in the face of intense criticism that the Constitution’s Second Amendment guarantee of firearm ownership did not preclude additional controls being placed on the sale and purchase of weaponry.

That didn’t matter to the NRA or to other firearm-owners-rights groups.

They saved lives. “In the history of our nation, there are few people, if any, who are directly responsible for saving as many lives as Sarah and Jim,” said Dan Gross, the president of the  Brady Campaign and Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in a statement.

Sarah Brady was a ferocious advocate for what she believed. May she now rest in peace.

Nugent has right to expose his ignorance

I’ve taken great pleasure criticizing the blathering of the Motor City Madman, one-time rocker Ted Nugent.

Nugent is a profane loudmouth. Many of his utterances border on sedition.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ted-nugent-obama-is-causing-veteran-suicides/ar-AAankZq

He’s also an American citizen who has the same rights the rest of us enjoy under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment. He has the right to make an ass of himself. He does it regularly and he does it well.

The French writer, historian and philosopher Voltaire said it better than most when he wrote: “I do not agree with what you say but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

Nugent said recently that the rash of veterans’ suicide is a result of President Obama’s policies. Yep, he blamed the president of the United States for those tragic deaths. He said “the commander in chief is the enemy.”

He’s referred to the president as a “subhuman mongrel” and added an assortment of disgraceful, disgusting statements to make whatever point he seeks to make.

I disagree with every single political statement that flies out of this guy’s mouth.

However, he’s entitled to say these things. He’s as American as anyone else, which just goes to show how diverse our national family has become.

Voltaire’s understanding of the right of free speech is unparalleled.

Even nut jobs like Ted Nugent are entitled to be heard.

Which brings up another famous quote from another notable statesman.

This, from President Abraham Lincoln: “Better to remain silent and thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

 

MLK Jr. dies; RFK gives speech for the ages

Forty-seven years ago a single rifle shot killed one of the 20th century’s greatest Americans, Martin Luther King Jr.

James Earl Ray would be captured, tried and convicted of murdering Dr. King. He would die in prison.

Not long after the rifle shot ended the life of the Nobel laureate and champion of non-violent civil disobedience, a politician stepped to the microphone in Indianapolis. Robert F. Kennedy was campaigning for the presidency on April 4, 1968 and he decided to tell the mostly African-American crowd some tragic news.

He told them that Dr. King had been murdered and then he delivered one of the greatest extemporaneous speeches in modern political history.

RFK sought to quell the rage that rose from the shock of the news. He succeeded that night. While other cities across the country erupted in violence, Indianapolis remained calm.

I remember the events of that day very well. I was a teenager struggling to find my own way. I’d discovered a path later that summer when I was inducted into the U.S. Army.

Dr. King could stir enormous passion in people. He sought justice for African-Americans but insisted on taking a peaceful path. That he would die a violent death remains to this day one of the great tragic ironies of the 20th century.

Robert Kennedy’s courage that night in Indianapolis would be almost unheard of today. He urged the crowd to reach out and to seek the goodness among each other.

That was a turbulent time. RFK’s brother — the president of the United States — was struck down by an assassin less than five years earlier.

Indeed, Robert Kennedy’s own life would end violently two months and one day after Dr. King’s assassination.

In that brief moment, standing in the night, Robert Kennedy sought to honor Martin Luther King Jr. by seeking to tap the better angels of a society torn by violence.

 

Greed, selfishness? Not with this superstar

I used to watch baseball religiously. I don’t do so much any longer.

Free agency kind of took a lot of the fun out of the game for me. Athletes are getting paid a lot of money to play a game. Many of them behave badly when they get those millions of bucks. They move around from team to team, looking to play for the outfit that offers them the most money.

Many others of them keep it all in perspective.

One player I do enjoy watching is a future Hall of Famer, Albert Pujols. Yes, Pujols looked for a fat contract after playing many years in St. Louis. He’s now a first baseman for the Los Angeles Angels. His best years likely are behind him.

He also has maintained his reputation as a thoroughly decent human being.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/albert-pujols–touching-gesture-for-brother-of-dodgers-outfielder-joc-pederson-033106483.html

This link is about Pujols meeting a young man with Down syndrome, something about which Pujols has intimate knowledge: His eldest daughter, Isabella, also has the disease.

This story is heartwarming in the extreme and it illustrates that goodness does reside even inside ballplayers who often are tempted to look the other way when given a chance to demonstrate an act of kindness toward those who follow their athletic exploits.

Well done, Albert.

 

Right-wing media find a 'war on Easter'

The right-wing mainstream media cannot get enough of these trumped-up “wars.”

Fox News annually declares there to be a secular “war on Christmas.” The only people waging war on Christmas are the retailers who keep pushing out the notion that it’s all right to camp out overnight waiting for the stores to open on Black Friday. Get in ahead of the rush … but please don’t punch out the shopper who cuts in ahead of you to get the toy you had targeted.

Now it’s a “war on Easter.”

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/29/foxs-week-long-war-on-easter/193352

Please. Stop.

There is no war on Christians’ holiest holiday. It’s a figment of the right-wing mainstream media marketing geniuses who look for ways to boost their ratings, allowing their on-air personalities to brag about how they’re kicking the stuffing out of the rest of the “mainstream media.”

Churches are still informing congregants about what Scripture says about Easter, about how Jesus rose from the dead after being crucified. Believers all over the world celebrate this holiday with all due reverence. My family and I do.

“War on Easter”? It ain’t happening.

Let’s knock it off, shall we?

 

Yep, Sen. Menendez ought to quit

The curious world of politics at times deprives politicians of the presumption of innocence granted to “ordinary citizens.”

Such is the case with U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., who’s been indicted on a host of corruption charges.

He ought to quit the Senate and pursue his defense as a private citizen.

A federal grand jury indicted Menendez on felony counts relating to his close relationship with an eye doctor, Soloman Melgen, who flew Menendez to the Dominican Republic on his private jet — trips that Menendez failed to disclose to congressional ethics officials.

There’s a lot of other allegations involving favors exchanged between the men. The amazing detail of the indictment suggests there’s considerable fire under all that smoke.

Is the senator guilty? I have no clue.

This much is clear: His service in the U.S. Senate will be clouded forever by this indictment. How in the world can this man conduct the public’s business when he is defending himself against a federal indictment?

Why does this matter to anyone outside of his home state? Well, he’s a federal official himself and he votes on laws that affect all Americans, even those of us out here in Flyover Country.

As the New York Time editorialized in calling for his resignation: “Mr. Menendez is evidently not in a hurry to get to the stage of contrition, having warned on Wednesday that he’s ‘not going anywhere.’ He would be doing a disservice to New Jersey by clinging to power as a disgraced politician. His colleagues in the Senate should demand that he step aside.”

Politics can be a dirty business. It doesn’t allow for the normal presumptions of innocence granted to non-politicians. That’s the way it is.

 

Death Row to freedom … how does one cope?

Of all the stories I read each day, the one type of story that stretches my comprehension deals with Death Row inmates who suddenly find themselves free to pick up the pieces of their lives.

I never can quite grasp how these individuals cope with such profound circumstances.

Anthony Ray Hinton sat on Alabama’s Death Row for nearly 30 years. He’s now a free man. He gets to go to the grocery store, watch the movie of his choice, visit with friends and family members … you know, do the things you and I get to do.

http://news.yahoo.com/alabama-death-row-inmate-freed-nearly-30-years-174433714.html

The court had convicted him of a 1985 murder, sentenced him to death and then let him sit there for three decades. The U.S. Supreme Court, though, ruled that Hinton didn’t receive a competent defense, to which he is entitled under the U.S. Constitution. “He was a poor person who was convicted because he didn’t have the money to prove his innocence at trial. He was unable to get the legal help he needed for years. He was convicted based on bad science,” according to Bryan Stevenson, head of Equal Justice Initiative, based in Alabama.

Now the court has determined it doesn’t have enough evidence to kill him, so Hinton has been set free.

Good for him. I will pray for him as he seeks to acclimate himself to a life he hasn’t known for 30 years.

How he accomplishes that is the great mystery.

***

This story also brings to the forefront the great debate about capital punishment.

Anthony Hinton sat in an Alabama prison cell for more than half of the life he’s lived already. What if the state had executed him for a crime it couldn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt? In Hinton’s case, he reportedly had an alibi and couldn’t have been present when two men were shot to death.

It is fair to ask whether Hinton symbolizes other individuals whose guilt remain in question.

The ultimate punishment for crimes requires utterly incontrovertible proof that the person awaiting execution is guilty of the crime. Innocent people have been put to death; of that there can be no doubt.

A single wrongly executed individual is one too many.

Anthony Hinton has been spared.

Now the hard part commences. This man has to figure out how to live like a human being.

Godspeed, Anthony Ray Hinton.

 

Iran nuke deal: good or bad for the world?

I’m going to withhold final judgment on the Iran nuclear deal for a little while as I try to wrap my arms around what President Obama calls “historic” and what his critics — to no one’s surprise — call an “appeasement.”

I remain hopeful that the framework, as I understand it, is going to cut off “pathways” for Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, as the president said today.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/237747-obama-hails-historic-iran-nuke-deal

If I had one misgiving about the impending deal it is the end of the economic sanctions. The European Union is going to end the sanctions on Iran almost immediately, while the United States will lift them in accordance with verification that Iran is remaining faithful to the terms of the agreement.

The U.S. portion of the sanctions removal sounds reasonable and verifiable, to my understanding of what was hammered out over the course of several months.

There are lots of nuts and bolts to this deal. The Iranians are going to stop enriching uranium at some locations, will transfer capabilities from one nuclear plant to another and juggle all kinds of contingencies in accordance with what the bargaining nations agreed on.

The result, though, must ensure that Iran does not build a nuclear weapon.

The Israelis, of course, oppose the deal. They’ve said all along that no deal is better than virtually anything that was discussed publicly with regard to the negotiation.

Congressional Republicans are blasting the framework. One GOP lawmaker used the “appeasement” language, conjuring up memories of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s declaration that Europe had found “peace in our time” in negotiating with Adolf Hitler just before all hell broke loose in September 1939.

Let’s not go there.

Instead, the principals have until June to hammer the details out. Congress will get to weigh in.

Iran’s nuclear program appears headed in another direction — away from its construction of a nuclear bomb.

I’m left to wonder initially: What can be so wrong with that?

 

Boycotts hurt more than they help

Let me be clear.

I detest boycotts in response to bad public policy. The Indiana legislature enacted a bad bill, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which Gov. Mike Pence signed into law.

The reaction across the country has been to boycott Indiana. Business leaders are encouraging Americans to stay away, don’t do business in the Hoosier State.

What precisely do boycotts accomplish? To my mind, they inflict significant collateral damage on business owners who well might oppose the public policy that’s been enacted in their name.

RFRA is intended to protect business owners from being sued for refusing service to individuals based on “religious beliefs.” The law has been interpreted as giving license to discriminate against gay people.

Thus, the calls for boycotts have been launched.

I detest this tactic as a political response.

To my way of thinking, a more reasonable response is to send letters to the offending politicians. Leave the business owners out of this fight. They’ve been used as pawns by politicians. They shouldn’t be used as pawns by those who the politicians have offended.

If there was the textbook definition of “political football,” the business owners victimized by angry boycotts fit the bill.

 

How did Lubitz get a commercial license?

I’ve posed the question already, but a report today prompts me to ask it again … in stronger terms.

How on God’s Earth did Andreas Lubitz ever obtain a commercial pilot’s license and what in the name of all that is holy was he doing on the Germanwings plane that he crashed into the French Alps?

http://news.yahoo.com/second-black-box-found-french-alps-plane-crash-134958557.html

Lubitz, the co-pilot who locked the captain out of the flight deck before crashing the plane and killing all 150 passengers and crew members, had reportedly researched cockpit security and suicide before committing this horrifying airborne atrocity.

The world already has learned that he had been diagnosed with “suicidal tendencies” some years ago. Then someone cleared him to fly apparently after determining he no longer exhibited those tendencies.

How does a medical pro make such a determination?

They’ve located the second black box in the wreckage of the aircraft. More details will come forth about the horrifying final moments of the flight.

Meanwhile, the families and other loved ones of those who died will continue to live in intense anguish as the world keeps asking questions about how Andreas Lubitz was allowed at the controls of a commercial jetliner.

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience