LISTEN to BLACK MAN THINKIN’


The Good Dr. Carson Had Breakfast

Categories: ... 'bout Politics
Comments: Comments Off
Published on: February 14, 2013

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFb6NU1giRA[/youtube]

The National Prayer Breakfast, held on 7 February this year, is normally not newsworthy, though that is not always the case with a Democrat president in attendance. Bill Clinton sought national sympathy, after his Lewinsky lie collapsed, by inviting 125 clergy to a prayer breakfast in September 1998. Fortunately, Barack Obama lacks some of Bill Clinton’s personal weaknesses. Perhaps that is why, instead of seeking something he might receive, he received something he did not seek at this year’s event.

The breakfast usually has two special guest speakers. One is the President of the United States; the other’s identity remains a secret until the event. Dr. Benjamin Carson was this year’s other special guest speaker, and his remarks generated so much interest that…does anyone recall what the president said? The media attention has made forgetting what Carson said a difficult task.

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) introduced Carson as a man who:

    1. Loves Jesus,
    2. Has a compelling life story, and
    3. Is a distinguished man of science and healing

and said that he hoped Carson could “help us sort some things out”.

Now, America likes “compelling life stories”; even cop-killer Christopher Dorner found social media fans with his “manifesto”. However, the country struggles with accomplished people, outside of sports and entertainment, speaking to “political” issues, and too many Americans believe no one can love Jesus and be scientific. Consequently, many consider Dr. Carson to be a leprechaun or a unicorn — a figment of someone’s imagination. So, when this man — raised by a single mother with a third grade education, who knew poverty and suffered from being a poor student, and who yet became Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, while maintaining faith in God — dragged his pot o’ gold and spiral horn to the lectern for 25 minutes, he surprised many.

Predictably, Carson’s eloquent challenge to Obama’s policies and ideology, while the president sat, noticeably displeased, several feet away drew the most attention. Yet, his remarks on deficits and debt, tax policy, and healthcare were less than a quarter of his speech, coming toward the end. The media overlooked his other, powerful points, more concerned with the “trials” of the president than they are with the trials of the republic.

Dr. Carson called political correctness a horrible and dangerous thing. His reason: instead of encouraging honest debate, it seeks to create unanimity of speech and thought, stifling honest conversation by holding people hostage to the fear of offending someone. Political correctness shuts down the true marketplace of ideas by keeping certain ideas from being widely heard. Consequently, the country does not consider the broadest range of ideas when looking to address problems, nor does it easily reverse policies that fail. Given where the nation stands today — politically, economically, socially — that is dangerous indeed.

The doctor did not mention was that those playing the “offense” card normally lean left, politically.

Carson spoke of his mother: married at 13, 1 of 24 children, and possessing a 3rd grade education. Yet Carter recalled, despite dire poverty, she “believed in me…would never allow herself to be a victim, no matter what happened…never made excuses and she never accepted an excuse from us”, forcing him to seek solutions instead. That, he said, allowed him to overcome poverty, a horrible temper, poor self-esteem, “all the things you think would preclude success”. A memorable thought expressed here was, “if you don’t accept excuses, pretty soon people stop giving ’em and they start lookin’ for solutions.”

But we now have a body politic with no shortage of victims or excuses…and no solutions. Whether the “fault” lie with the 1%, or corporations, or racism, or being born poor, or the lack of some resource or another, all who “have not” are the victims of those who have. And the “haves” are, of course morally, ethically, and financially accountable for the “have not’s” predicament. Countering that idea, Carson offered the following:

    …the person who has the most to do with you and what happens to you in life…is YOU! You make decisions…and I came to understand that I had control of my own destiny. And at that point, it didn’t hate poverty anymore, because I knew it was only temporary. I knew I could change that…”

This exposed the ideology gap between Ben Carson and Barack Obama. Dr. Carson believe people change their own lives when they decide to do so, a classic American thought. Barack Obama believes changes only comes when “everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.”

Carson’s statement is proven by millions who, like himself, leveraged their talents and efforts along with those of neighbors and countrymen to escape poverty. The president’s comments are proven nowhere, and his egalitarian utopia has never existed, yet more people have succeeded in an “unfair” United States than anywhere else. Successful people don’t need a fair shot…just the courage to take the shot they have.

Carson defended the idea that accomplished people, not simply sports and entertainment celebrities, should take part in government and the debate of important issues, reminding the audience that 5 physicians signed the Declaration of Independence.

Carson also sounded the primary reason for the Founder’s support of an effective education system, stating, “…our system of government was designed for a well-informed and educated populace and when they become less-informed, they become vulnerable…”

And many Americans are vulnerable. The have become low-information people who know more about what happens in the lives of athletes and celebrities than about what they can do to maintain their liberty, or even why liberty is important. They are more sensitive to personalities than ideas, though the former always has a shorter shelf life and is of lesser consequence.

It was a brilliant speech of powerful ideas. Some say it was rude to the president. However, I can never recall a time when truth’s timing was welcome, or when those who opposed it did not complain when it appeared. The fortunate thing is, while many Americans are not as informed as they should be, the vast majority can understand the truth in Dr. Carson’s words.

May that same majority embrace what I am confident they can understand.

Much Ado About Guns?

They’re ba-ack! Anti-gun activists, axes in hand, looking to fell the Second Amendment tree, spurred on by the recent spate of mass shootings, including:

    • Newtown, CT school shooting (14 Dec 2012): 26 dead, 2 wounded,
    • Aurora, CO theater shooting (20 Jul 2012): 12 dead, 58 wounded,
    • Tucson, AZ shooting (8 Jan 2011): 6 dead, 13 wounded, and
    • Ft. Hood, TX Massacre (5 November 2009): 13 dead, 30 wounded.

Mother Jones compiled a list of US mass shootings, going back to 1982. They found 62 occurrences, which killed 513 and injured 494, 1,007 victims total…in 30 years.

However, gun control supporters could argue the “problem” has worsened…since Obama became president. Since 2009, 15 shootings killed 139 and wounded another 129; more than one-quarter of the deaths of the last 3 decades have occurred in just the last four years.

Still, the “problem,” for which some want new federal legislation, kills 35 people….per year…in a nation of more than 310 million. While the low numbers comfort no one who lost a loved one, they do call into question the true urgency of the matter.

Interestingly, 513, the number of US mass shooting fatalities in the last 3 decades matches the number of Chicago homicides in 2012; guns killed 441 of the victims. This carnage occurred, despite Illinois gun laws which forbid concealed or open carry, and prohibit the transport of loaded firearms. No one seeks to explain how gun laws which allowed Chicago to kill, in one year, as many people as died nationally from mass shootings in 30 years, would reduce deaths nationwide. However, this is liberal politics; logic is not a prerequisite.

Using the time-honored “compassion” chant of “we must do something,” liberals have bum-rushed the national legislature, trotting out a sympathetic mass shooting victim (conveniently, a gun-owner) to testify before the Senate, saying “we must do something”, without saying what “something” should be. Chicago Mayor (and former Obama chief of staff) Rahm Emanuel wants banks to boycott gun manufacturers, as though that removes any of the more than 300 million guns already made from anyone’s hands.

Obama dutifully made his proposals, announcing them with elementary-school-aged gun control advisers present, and an expanded “we must do something” mantra: “…if there’s even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation to try…”

The president then signed 23 Executive Orders that, had they been in place on 14 December 2012, would have spared no one in Newtown, Connecticut….or Aurora, Colorado before that….or Tucson, Arizona before that.

Perhaps gun control advocates are unaware that they want as law has been the law since the Gun Control Act of 1968. The act made it illegal, more than 4 decades ago, to sell weapons or ammunition to anyone the seller knows or has reason to believe:

    1 – is indicted for, or convicted of, a crime punishable by a prison term exceeding one year,
    2 – is a fugitive from justice,
    3 – is a substance abuser or addict
    4 – is ruled a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution,
    5 – is an illegal immigrant,
    6 – is dishonorably discharged from the military,
    7 – is an American that renounced his citizenship,
    8 – is subject to a restraining order, or
    9 – is convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence.

Despite the law, Newtown, Aurora, and Tucson occurred. If that could not prevent the tragedies, then what would, aside from dismantling the 2nd Amendment itself? Despite all assurances to the contrary, logic dictates that to be the aim of gun control advocates. In the meantime, more workable issues receive short shrift:

    Adam Lanza’s mother sought to commit him to a mental facility, but the ACLU has fought hard to make sure that committing a person against their will is a long and difficult process.

    The man who shot Gabby Giffords was a known loon, but it is not “politically correct” to remove a nut job from among us, so 6 people are dead and a U.S. Congressperson nearly became a vegetable.

    James Holmes had 3 folks shrinking his head before he opened fire in Colorado, but they apparently told no one, and Mr. Holmes may have used federal grant money from the National Institutes of Health to buy his weapons and ammo.

I’ve heard no call to ease the process of institutionalizing the mentally unstable; to look at how mental health professionals evaluate warning signs, and decide which ones to report and which ones to ignore; to keep federal grants from financing weapons purchases.

All emphasis is upon reducing the rights of those who do no wrong, and have nothing wrong with them, from exercising a constitutional right, and a right put in place precisely to protect people from a government that would seek to infringe upon that right. Consequently, the government wants to change the subject when it comes to the 2nd Amendment’s purpose.

When Andrew Cuomo screams, “No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer”, and Obama says gun control advocates should be sensitive to hunting traditions, they restate and mis-state the entire debate.

The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting or firing at targets. It is about resisting government tyranny. Heck, even Ice-T knows that.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPMfWqLhFGU[/youtube]

How can a rapper have clarity on the issue, yet the smartest man ever to be president seems confused?

Obama’s not confused. He has an agenda – to increase government power at the expense of individual liberty. He knows an armed citizenry will not bow to government, even if outgunned by law enforcement or the military (has the Arab Spring taught us nothing?). And Americans do not back down from “unwinnable” conflicts. However, a people unable to defend themselves are much more pliable.

This is not about guns, never has been. It is about whether we remain a government of, by, and for the people, or become a people of, by, and for the government. And, while Obama deflects with gun control and immigration, the economy that escaped recession before any of his policies took hold is contracting under Obamanomics.

Obama’s attack on the economy will last much longer than any mass shooting and is poised to make victims of us all.

page 1 of 1

The World of Black Man Thinkin’
ARTICLE ARCHIVES
WDFP Radio Show Archives

Welcome , today is Thursday, March 28, 2024