Although I believe Rolling Stone has the inherent right to publish what it deems acceptable, I do question their wisdom in perhaps glorifying this suspected murderer. I mean, we all know people rarely read lengthy articles and instead, seek shortcuts while reviewing print media. So, does Rolling Stone have any idea how many "readers" will actually read the related article or scan it? How many people that are not Rolling Stone subscribers will only look at the cover in their grocery aisle and see a vibrant photo of a young man, without connecting the dots that he represents nothing but pure evil? I know, "Innocent until proven guilty" but haven't we seen enough of this with the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin matter? Nice transition Rubin, I see it!
Now that the Zimmerman criminal trial has concluded, "sofa lawyers" can argue the merits of the case and the acquittal to their heart's content. Only, is anyone really satisfied with the results of this trial? Anyone? Is anyone satisfied with how the case was handled by the Sanford Police from the "get-go?" Why did it take a family's outrage leading to press coverage for Zimmerman to actually be formally charged? With the acquittal of Zimmerman, can anyone tell me what "Stand Your Ground Laws" really mean? Anyone? In conversation with local folks, one asked me how Obama could have come out and stated "he hoped if he had a son, he'd be like Martin." Except that is NOT what Obama actually said. Obama instead said "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." (Dark skinned and male, yep, he got that right!). But where do folks get such erroneous impressions about Obama? Who has fed this crap to them? Does it help sustain American criminal justice when television cameras sensationalize actual tragedies and include self-adulating legal pundits opining 24/7 on said pending cases? "I know this is speculation, but...." Then why is it even being offered on the air? should anyone listen to what the "experts" say? Infotainment on current media "news" broadcasts has polluted our collective minds (or has done a great job attempting to do so)! I know, "Inquiring minds want to know!" The National Inquirer used to be a national joke. How did its style of infotainment become the mainstream of broadcast journalism we have today?
Now influential Americans believe that a fetus at the age of 20 weeks feels pain and cannot be aborted, no matter what the medical circumstances may be. Where did they get this "scientific" information? Reverend, er, Governor Rick Perry signed into law a Texas Bill that claims to protect human life before it is born. As he signed the Bill into law, Perry proclaimed, "Today, we celebrate the further cementing of the foundation on which the culture of life in Texas is built upon. It is our responsibility to give voice to the unborn individuals." Nice sentiment, huh? Except where in the Constitution does any Governor have the authority to impose personal religious beliefs into the area of governmental "responsibility?" Texas has executed over 500 human beings for conviction of crimes. What efforts is Texas undertaking to preserve the quality of life for the unborn after they are born? "Culture of Life" in Texas? From the days of the Alamo, I have a difficult time believing those fighting for Texas independence did so to protect 20 week old fetuses. Were the Mexicans sadistic in-vitro baby killers? I know, what an absurd correlation. But what is really absurd is the continued efforts by like minded states to curtail the Constitutional right of a women to choose when it comes to pregnancy. Every other state enacting the very same law have been enjoined by Federal Courts. So why bother? Because it matters to their political base. Now that Perry has announced he will not seek another term as Texas governor, has he laid down a marker to run for president...or most likely Vice-President? He certainly seems a perfect fit with the Dan Quayle model for the job.
I also know many are curious why I have not weighed in on the Snowden affair. What more is there to say? If you read my book, you would know I called Congress and the President out on the unreasonable extension of surveillance into our private lives under the guise of national security. Been there, done that. Perhaps it is best not to play the "I told you so card" (see how I just did)? As far as the dysfunction of Congress, that certainly remains the norm today! Still waiting for the "Grand Bargain?" The other shoe to drop on the Debt Ceiling debate? Still watching Fox's argument about Benghazi? Still wanting to reform the tax code? Still expecting consensus on the IRS? Ah the IRS. Seems we now learn they were not exclusively picking on Tea Party groups, but on liberal groups too. You mean they may have actually been doing their jobs? Criminal! Still waiting for productive action from Congress on Sequestration? How about the House attempting to repeal or maim Obamacare for the 39th time instead? Again, isn't it time for politicians to stop worrying about keeping their jobs and instead start doing their jobs?
We have a lot going on in America, and a lot of it is not healthy. We can argue the merits of every matter, but we can only do so if Americans have informed opinions and not those that simply mirror any particular political party, interest group or Media outlet. Americans expect more from their government, not less. We expect decisions that reflect all of our beliefs and interests, not the privileged few or their supporting interest groups. It's called "Pluralism" and it was desired and expected by the Framers of the Constitution. Isn't it time we assert our power again? Isn't it time we call "a spade a spade?" Isn't it time to make wholesale changes in Washington? Consider 2014 already here. By the actions of our politicians, they certainly do! As President George Washington once wrote, "Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire, called conscience." Hard work, indeed!