Monday, December 22, 2014

Sony Caved - Obama Led the Way

Sony Caved – Obama Led the Way
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
December 22, 2014

I don’t particularly care about Sony. I had and still have even less interest in this film “The Interview.” And I think former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton said it best when he said of the North Korean hackers, “They picked a trivial industry to go after.”

That said, the bigger picture is not how it affects Sony, but how it depicts the nation as a whole – weak and spineless, and for that I place blame on the narrow shoulders of both Barack Obama and Sony Entertainment CEO Michael Lynton who can argue all day long that Sony did not cave, has not given in, did not capitulate, when in fact they did all of the above. Lynton can make all the excuses he wants, but the bottom line is Sony pulled the film on the heels of a cyber-terror threat. Yes, Lynton is correct that he/Sony doesn’t own the theaters, but there are plenty of theaters who believe in the First Amendment to the Constitution and would have shown the film.

Therein lies the bigger issue – censorship. If Sony can be intimidated by such a cyber-threat, what will be next? A television network? How about a newspaper or magazine? This is the entertainment industry, and while I agree with Bolton that it is a trivial industry, news and information are more important industries and the people in the United States rely upon a free and open press, again, one of the guarantees of the First Amendment.

As for Obama’s culpability in this crisis, he has set the bar at its lowest with his “leading from behind,” mantra, his disastrous deal making from a position of weakness when he is able, yet unwilling, to lead from a position of strength. This is evident in at the very least, the Bergdahl and Cuba cases. Obama’s leadership style, if it can be called as such, is weak and feckless. He injects himself into incidents where he should not, does not do so when he should, and is more often than not, wrong on his stances on the issues where he does inject himself.

Obama and his poor leadership aside, as he will be out of the White House in 25 months; a greater concern is the ability of hackers, regardless of from where they come, to infiltrate the banking industry. If that is hacked with the ease with which Sony was hacked, the entire nation could be brought to its knees. Electronic records destroyed would eradicate trillions and trillions of dollars of wealth, earnings, and retirement accounts thus affecting the housing industry as well as commercial real estate. This would send the United States into a financial tailspin that would make the Great Depression feel like a party with the Gatsbys. The devastation would be global and catastrophic.

So while Sony is a minor player on this stage of hacking and censorship, it is vital for all of corporate America to shore up its defenses, create more firewalls, and have as many paper trails as possible. Sometimes the Luddites are better prepared for the financial Dark Ages that may be beset upon the world.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Cuba Libre? No Way Jose

Cuba Libre? No Way, Jose
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
December 21, 2014

American contractor/aid worker Alan Gross became a free man on Wednesday, December 17 – released from a Cuban prison after five years incarcerated as an enemy of the Communist state. Mazal tov, happy Chanukah, and welcome home. But what of the 11 million Cubanos who are not free to leave their island penitentiary?

In yet another sterling example of Barack Obama doing his impersonation of the New York Mets ownership when on December 10, 1971 they traded future Hall of Famer Nolan Ryan to the California Angels for Jim Fregosi, Obama made the egregious error of swapping three convicted Cubans in American jails for spying on the United States for Gross. (Antonio Guerrero, 56, Gerardo Hernandez, 49, Ramon Labanino, 51)

Gross “shouldn’t have been in prison to begin with,” said former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, adding this is “another failed attempt to appease rogue regimes.

“This president is the worst negotiator,” said Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), whose family fled Cuba in 1956. “This is a murderous, tyrannical regime,” added Rubio, noting the United States got nothing in this lopsided deal.

Obama noted the Cubans also released Cuban-born spy for America Rolando Sarraff Trujillo. However, this trade is as deleterious to American safety and security as the one executed on May 31, 2014 bringing home US Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, having been held in Afghanistan for five years in exchange for releasing five Taliban terrorists from Guantanamo Bay prison. Largely suspected of desertion, Bergdahl serves little purpose other than to his family.

Gross, taken hostage in December 2009 while working as a subcontractor for the US Agency for International Development, worked to endorse democracy in Cuba. This was his fifth trip to Cuba where he was working with the tiny Jewish community to establish internet access that would override Cuban censorship when he was nabbed.

These trades demonstrate a feebleness of the United States and sends a message to recalcitrant dictatorships that this nation will deal for hostages and will do so from a position of weakness. With an ever weakening Cuba, currently getting little relief from Russia and Venezuela who are engrossed with their own crises and difficulties, the United States is in a position to negotiate from strength.

Instead, the United States received nothing in return from Cuba in terms of human rights for the Cuban people, in terms of free elections for the Cuban people, in terms of free speech, religion, and press for the Cuban people, in terms of garnering bona fide internet and information access for the Cuban people.

“Cuba is a dictatorship with a disastrous human rights record, and now President Obama has rewarded those dictators,” said Bush.

Obama immediately announced his desire to normalize relations with the island nation that sits 90 miles from Florida. He wants to build and open an embassy there as well as end the 54-year embargo – something with which Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) agrees.

However, both the building of an embassy and the cessation of economic sanctions will only strengthen the communist regime run by the despotic Fidel Castro since the revolution in 1959 that ousted Fulgencio Batista. Castro’s brother Raul has been running the show since Fidel’s abdication in 2006 with the same iron fist that has kept Cuba in the information Dark Ages and the financial doldrums for more than a half century. For example, the average Cuban earns roughly $20 per month, and the average doctor on the island brings home about $67 per month ( and

Responding to the one-sided deal favoring Cuba, Raul Castro commented that “Obama deserves recognition and respect.” This coming from a state sponsor of terror – on the list since 1982, just three years after Syria made the list.

US Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), a Cuban native, opposes Obama’s desires to normalize relations with his country of origin. He was asked if sanctions for national security reasons have worked, Diaz-Balart said “you better believe it,” then calling Obama the “appeaser in chief,” for making such a misguided deal. The Congressman then called for the immediate release of all political prisoners, free elections, the provision of human rights, and open internet access – something Gross was working to provide prior to his capture.

And while Paul supports Obama demonstrating some bi-partisan support, Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) added his voice across the aisle in opposition to his party’s leader. “It’s a fallacy to believe Cuba will reform because a president opens his hand,” said Menendez. “Just because Obama opens his hands doesn’t mean the Castros will unclench their fists,” he added.

But Obama, in his feckless and obtuse manner, said “it’s time to begin a new chapter with Cuba,” when the current chapter has yet to be finished being written. As long as the Castro brothers are at the helm, Obama is simply making more concessions to tyranny, while attempts to end 54-years of isolation gets the United States nothing, and more importantly, firms up the Castros stranglehold on their own citizens.

Obama continued to demonstrate his lack of historical knowledge by saying the United States is a former colonizer of Cuba following the Spanish-American War (1898-1901). While the United States did establish a military government after the war, they were not a colonizing force and lived up to the Teller Amendment in 1902 by relinquishing control of the island to the Cuban people with one caveat – the Platt Amendment (1901). In an effort to thwart any designs by another powerful nation to take control of Cuba after just gaining freedom from Spain, the Platt Amendment gave the United States a Cuban base – which did not create a colonizing effect. Not only was Obama not accurate, he offered an apology to Cuba. “We can never erase the history between us,” said Obama.

“Obama betrayed the Cubans fighting for the freedom and liberty of the island,” said Rubio, noting that Cuba is not an open society and still a repressive society. “If they [the Obama administration] think this will bring democracy to Cuba, they’re out of their minds.”

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) also expressed his displeasure with Obama’s plan, calling Cuba a state sponsor of terror with close allies Venezuela, North Korea, and Iran. “Friends don’t trust us, enemies don’t fear us,” said Cruz.

There should be no embassy built by the United States in Cuba nor should the embargo be lifted as long as the corrupt, communist, despotic “government” is still in power. Congress must thwart all efforts to normalize relations with Cuba, and they can do that by performing its job of controlling the purse strings, until the Castro brothers are either ousted or dead. Raul is 83 and Fidel is 88, but don’t count them out yet, as they have outlasted 11 American presidents. Additionally, it is incumbent upon Cuba to institute the reforms mentioned above before the United States even considers amending its relationship with the island nation.

It’s crazy to think real Cubans – the rank and file of the population would benefit from any deal made between Obama and the Castros. This is a most untrustworthy regime. Money from business ventures will only end up in the hands and pockets of the dictatorship, thus strengthening the despotic regime and military rule.

There is an enormous amount of money to be made in a largely untapped Cuba. It is important for Americans to understand a weak Cuba is not worth doing business with, while a democratic, burgeoning Cuba benefits all who invest. After all, a rising tide lifts all boats.

Remember, Alan Gross was not required to go to Cuba, yet those are still there may not leave.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Saturday, December 13, 2014

No Apologies Necessary - CIA Doing its Job

No Apologies Necessary – CIA Doing its Job
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
December 12, 2014

America’s enemies have long memories and are patient people. Radical Islam did not introduce itself to the United States on September 11, 2001. While that may be the date by which all else is measured and thus galvanizing the American people, with damn good reason, if history has taught us anything, it is that a strong defense is the best offense. Ronald Reagan said it best when he said “peace through strength.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee’s recently released report on CIA enhanced interrogation tactics is an abysmal disgrace. Not because of the contents therein, but that it was issued at all. The sanctimonious Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) used the waning days of the Democrat’s time as the Senate majority to unleash this ultra-partisan report giving the United States a wallop of a black eye and worse yet, endangering the brave men and women wearing the uniform of their country.

"This is the most dangerous report to ever come out of Congress," declared Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney.

Since the days of the wars against the Barbary pirates, during the administration of Thomas Jefferson (1801-05) and again under the presidency of James Madison in 1815, radical Islam has been a thorn in the side of the United States. Jefferson declined to pay tribute money to the pirates setting in motion a course that could be traced to today. Jefferson was correct then, and the CIA is correct now.

Covert operations are covert for a reason. This is how the men and women entrusted to run and win our wars are able to do so successfully. Wars should be won, and won decisively, not played out to a draw where thousands of lives are wasted; where the blood and treasure of the United States are lost for some indefinable, indiscernible reason. The American people do not need to know everything.

CIA Director John Brennan did the right thing be defending the men and women working for The Agency. Were mistakes made, to be sure there were, as people are fallible. Should that preclude the intelligence resources of the United States from making their best efforts to combat foreign and domestic terrorism? Absolutely not.

Former Senator and Governor of Nebraska Bob Kerrey (D), and more importantly a Vietnam veteran, condemned the Senate Intelligence report as being too partisan and a danger to the men and women in uniform and handling the day to day field operations of the CIA. The one-sided report by the Senate Intelligence investigators did not include a single word from CIA leadership as none were consulted or interviewed, according to a December 10 Wall Street Journal editorial “CIA Interrogations Saved Lives,” written by former CIA directors George Tenet, Porter Goss, Michael Hayden, and three other non-directors.

One cannot fight evil without getting dirty. The nature of the continuing war on terror being fought by the United States includes enemy combatants who have no moral code, fight for no country, under no particular flag, and do not abide by the Geneva Convention. The United States won the Revolutionary War by fighting as guerilla warriors against a more superior, better trained military machine – the British red coats. The American rebels fought an unconventional war leading to victory and freedom from the British Empire of King George III.

By the time of the war in Vietnam, the United States was the better trained military machine fighting against guerilla warriors and the end result was less than satisfactory. But those wars and the wars during the interim period were fought nations versus nations with rules of combat – Hitler’s methodical slaughter of six million Jews the glaring exception. And anyone who has opened a history book knows of the vicious cruelty the Japanese and Vietnamese inflicted upon their POWs. Any apologies from them? Hearing crickets.

The United States does live by a higher code and moral standard.

Yet, that did not prevent this country from interning 127,000 Japanese Issei (those born in Japan and immigrated to the US) and Nisei (those born in the US and were citizens) – mostly Nisei, in 10 camps in seven states: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming. President Franklin Roosevelt (D) issued Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942 on the heels of the Japanese Empire’s attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, “a date which will live in infamy,” said Roosevelt. On that horrific date 2,403 innocents were murdered. In 1998, the United States, via Congress, attempted to apologize for the internment of American citizens.

However, September 11, 2001 as well as preceding and subsequent terror attempts and attacks by radical Muslims on American soil both at home and overseas at embassies are an entirely different story.

Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-CA) simply has no concept of history. When asked if the United States and specifically the CIA should apologize for using enhanced methods of interrogation against the enemies of this country, her response – “absolutely!”

What would Speier prefer the interrogators do? Whisper sweet nothings into the ears of the terrorists? Say “pretty please,” or threaten to take away their dessert? Let’s not forget the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, the 1998 attacks on US embassies, as well as the attack on the USS Cole in 2000. This is not an enemy destined to go quietly into that good night. If enhanced interrogation techniques are what will get the job done and enable our troops to move more swiftly and survive their tours of duty, so be it. And if that includes waterboarding while thousands of our countrymen were murdered on September 11, 2001, well then, cry me a river.

“These people are evil,” said Congressman-elect Ryan Zinke (R-MT), a Navy Seal. This report “puts military lives at risk,” he said, condemning it and its supporters, adding, they “have no concept of 9/11.”

There is a sad irony to Speier’s desire to apologize to the enemies of the United States. This Senate Intelligence Committee report was issued just days prior to the slaughter of children. ISIS reported that it beheaded four Iraqi children each under the age of 15 for refusing to reject Jesus and Christianity and convert to Islam. And the US/CIA should apologize for what? Speier, Feinstein, and their ilk should be the ones apologizing for endangering the lives of not just American men and women in uniform, but the total of the American population.

The United States should never apologize for doing its level best to win any conflict, destroy any enemy, and continue to protect the borders and citizens of the United States. For without safe and secure borders, the people living within those borders are no longer safe and the Constitution along with all it entails and represents is meaningless when under the thumb of a narcissistic dictator.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Illegal Still Means Breaking the Law

Illegal Still Means Breaking the Law
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
December 10, 2014

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, here we go again, regarding this most divisive issue of illegal immigration. What part of illegal do people not understand?

Within a three day span, from December 7-9, one column and several letters to the editor of such myopic shortsightedness appeared in The Indianapolis Star it has become painfully obvious people do not understand the concept of the rule of law.

One does not need a law degree to understand that when a person who is not legally entitled to take up residency in the United States of America crosses the border without permission, that person has committed a crime – period. Whether such people are called illegal immigrants, undocumented aliens, illegal aliens, what they cannot be called is American.

It is completely disingenuous to read Matthew Tully’s December 7 column “Immigration has made Indy a more vibrant city,” for the reader could assume the text will be about those upstanding folks who legally became residents and citizens of Indianapolis. But we all know what happens when one assumes.

Legal immigration, yes; illegal immigration, no way Jose. Why are lawbreakers rewarded, when those still standing in line to do the right thing are falling farther and farther behind?

Tully quoted Terri Morris Downs, head of the nonprofit Immigrant Welcome Center, as saying, “Let’s pretend there’s an imaginary line… Would you as a parent be willing to cross that line to make sure your kids were being fed and that your family was being cared for? Would you break that law and cross that line, that imaginary line, to make sure your kids would be safe and have a chance at a decent life? I think most people would.”

While Downs naturally is tugging at the heartstrings to make her point, she forgets that borders are not imaginary lines. Granted they are lines that may not be terribly visible, but geo-political lines are legitimately organized. Then, she admits the crossing of that line is an illegal act – “would you break that law…”

Tully then correctly observes that the “current immigration system is a politically charged mess…,” but fails to note this is because of the unwillingness to differentiate between legal and illegal, as well as both major political parties using this broken system to its own advantage.  Liberals and Democrats support amnesty and a path to citizenship in an effort to induce support of Hispanic voters, yet not realizing that Hispanics are not a monolithic community. Republicans and conservatives turn a blind eye to this crisis because they seek support of businesses who hire illegals for cheap labor.

As for amnesty itself, one Indy Star letter writer, Robert W. Hammerle of Indianapolis, opined that “illegal immigrants deserve amnesty.” No, they don’t – they have broken the law. Not only do they not deserve amnesty, they do not deserve any of the trappings that come with actual citizenship or even legal residency. Hammerle went so far as to compare today’s illegals with the “Southern rebels and their leaders like Gen. Robert E. Lee and James Longstreet [who] were given amnesty by the U.S. government. Even though they tried to destroy the U.S. Constitution while killing hundreds of thousands of fellow American citizens, they were forgiven and allowed to move on with their lives.”

Not so fast, Mr. Hammerle. Certain amnesties were offered but with stipulations attached, and those amnesties were presented in stages.

The Confiscation Act of 1862 authorized the president of the United States to pardon anyone involved in the rebellion. The Amnesty Proclamation of December 8, 1863, offered pardons to those who had not held a Confederate civil office, had not mistreated Union prisoners, and would sign an oath of allegiance.

On May 29, 1865, President Andrew Johnson provided for amnesty and the return of property to those who would take an oath of allegiance. However, former Confederate government officials, officers with the rank of colonel and above from the Confederate army or lieutenant and above from the Confederate navy, and people owning more than $20,000 worth of property had to apply for individual pardons.

On Christmas Day 1868, Johnson granted an unconditional pardon to all Civil War participants except high-ranking military and civil officials.”

Finally, “in May 1872 the Congressional Amnesty Act gave the right to hold office again to almost all Southern leaders who had been excluded from public office by the 14th Amendment.” (

But Section 3 of the 14th Amendment did take seriously the acts committed by the rebel confederates. “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as a executive or judicial office of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or give aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House remove such disability.”

Clearly the behavior of the southerners was looked upon with a dim view by the federal government of the Union and amnesty was not awarded lightly or with a cavalier attitude – requiring an oath of allegiance – something not expected of the illegal aliens in the US today. In fact illegals in this country are not legally required to learn or speak English, let alone take any kind of oath of allegiance. And quite frankly, Mr. Hammerle, two wrongs do not a right make.

It is this paucity of expectations that remands this issue back to Tully’s column where he suggests bringing the illegals out of the shadows will move them to become “more civically engaged.” Being civically engaged starts with being law-abiding, something that has eluded the illegals from their first step on to American soil. Tully also recommends treating illegals not “as unwanted outsiders,” but with compassion. That begs the question: Would a rational person have compassion for someone breaking into their home? Should that miscreant be given food stamps, medical attention, public schooling for the children, and in-state tuition rates at the local state school at the cost to the homeowner? No, because breaking the law is still breaking the law.

Even Barack Obama should understand the above concept, yet he announced an executive order to protect nearly five million illegal aliens from potential deportation. As a result of that misguided and illegal decision, 14 states, including Indiana have enjoined in a lawsuit against the federal government fighting the Obama edict.

Geoffrey Heeren, the director of the Immigration Clinic with Valparaiso University Law School checked in on December 9 with his Indy Star letter noting the state of Indiana was wrong to participate in this lawsuit. Heeren said the suit was “misguided” to suggest Obama “usurped Congress’ power to write immigration law.” That is exactly what Obama did and it is wrong, as writing legislation is in fact the job of the Congress, as per the US Constitution.

Heeren suggested that Obama has not violated his constitutional duty as chief executive to enforce the laws pertaining to immigration simply because the amount of money provided by Congress has been exhausted. Obama has a responsibility to enforce the laws passed by Congress and enacted by the president. If the there is a dearth of funding, he must prioritize, which Heeren claims Obama is doing by not deporting certain illegals, yet he is still complicit in violating the law by allowing for an extension of their illegal acts simply by allowing them to remain in the United States.

Such funding priorities must commence at the borders – both southern and northern – stop people from crossing into the United States illegally before they become a fiscal and legal problem. This should be a nondiscriminatory policy instead of the one unofficially adopted by so-called lawmakers and Obama to allow for “more sympathetic” groups – families, people who heretofore have committed no crimes until invading the United States, and those seeking honest work instead of the thugs, drug dealers, killers, rapists, and other miscreants whose presence in this country would have a deleterious effect on society. The easy answer is, to use a Western-themed movie concept, to “head them off at the pass.”

But Heeren also seems to miss the point when he supports Obama’s executive order calling the beneficiaries “law-abiding,” when the first act they committed in this country was to break the law simply by crossing the border.

And it would seem to run contrary to the United States Constitution for Obama to make law and to attempt to supersede the 10th Amendment. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Nowhere does it say such rights can be obfuscated and absconded with by Obama or any other occupant of the White House.

Those who are in the United States illegally are still breaking the law and they continue to have an adverse effect on the economy, as well as on the potential prosperity in their own lives living under the radar or in the shadows. The United States is a proud nation of immigrants – legal immigrants. It is important to discern legal from illegal, act in a less emotional tenor, and save this nation from itself before there is no nation left to save.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Thursday, December 4, 2014

Hands Down, Rams & US Reps - Dead Wrong

Hands Down, Rams & US Reps – Dead Wrong
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
December 4, 2014

Hands down, five St. Louis Rams football players and four members of the United States House of Representatives are dead wrong for their “hands up – don’t shoot” gesture of support of the protesters, miscreants, thugs, and criminals who took the law into their owns hands following a disappointing grand jury decision.

It was bad enough to see people flouting the law in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, MO – pillaging, plundering, looting, committing arson, overturning police cars – all in the supposed name of justice, but the Rams players and the Congressmen simply added insult to injury. Insulting to the men and women in the law enforcement community against whom the illicit behavior was directed.

Let’s remember, Michael Brown, Jr. robbed a convenience store and struck the store clerk before fleeing the scene. Had Brown not committed those crimes, he might still be alive today. Had Brown not resisted arrest, he might still be alive today. Had Brown not lurched toward Officer Darren Wilson, Brown might still be alive today. It was Brown who chose wrong in each case, start to finish and the grand jury – a composite of black and white panelists – that determined Wilson did his job without an excessive use of force in defending himself as well.

From this came the now ubiquitous “hands up – don’t shoot” mantra, which is illogical as Brown did not raise his hands in surrender. Those who peacefully protested were well within their rights. Those who behaved in an illegal manner as opportunists should be sought out, arrested, and charged with all due severity. The video footage from stores should be used to identify, capture, and charge the guilty. Restitution must be made, but government should not foot the bill for the rebuilding of the community destroyed by those who live within it.

One videotape showed a criminal stealing rolls of what appeared to be instant, scratch off lottery tickets. Those tickets can be identified by number. First all those tickets should be invalidated, and anyone attempting to cash them in should be arrested and charged to the fullest extent of the law.

As for the Rams football players, tight end Jared Cook, and wide receivers Tavon Austin, Stedman Bailey, Kenny Britt, and Chris Givens should have been punished by both the team and the National Football League for entering the field prior to the Sunday, November 30 game versus the Oakland Raiders with their hands up. Neither organization plans to discipline the players. This is wrong. For a league that penalizes a player for what it considers excessive celebration, wearing the wrong attire, the use of a cell phone, and the exuberant chastisement of officials, the NFL certainly is within its purview to excoriate the five Rams for a poor representation of members of the league and likewise the team for the same reason.

What these players did, and they are role models whether they want to be or not, is demonstrate their fervent support of the lawbreakers and stick thumbs in the eyes of law enforcement. By doing so, the message the players send to their fans is that it is okay to break the law if they think the cause is just – even when it is not. That it is okay to express disappointment when things don’t go their way by committing crimes.

Britt had the name of Michael Brown written on his arm during the game. When asked about it, Britt said he wasn’t taking sides, but instead supporting Ferguson. Instead, he demonstrated the exact opposite.

Four members of the United States House of Representatives added their own fuel to the fire by bringing this same nonsense to the House floor. Democrats all, Yvette Clarke (NY), Al Green (TX), Sheila Jackson Lee (TX), and Hakeem Jeffries (NY), disgraced the historical tenor of the institution with their antics, strode to the well of the House floor with hands up then repeated the “hands up – don’t shoot” mantra, to once again perpetuate the falseness of what Michael Brown, Jr. represents. This is the antithesis of support for the people of Ferguson, and, once again, demonstrates support for law breaking by those entrusted with making the laws of this land.

For the Rams players and the members of Congress who support incendiary behavior, they are doing their professions a disservice as well as those they represent. Col. Allen West (R-FL) a former member of the House said the evidence demonstrates it was not “hands up – don’t shoot,” from Michael Brown and that his former colleagues are merely politicizing the issue.

Proving West correct, Green announced he will raise a flag above the Capitol Building in honor of the five Rams players.

These players should be fined the equivalent of four games’ salary to be donated to help rebuild the looted and destroyed businesses of Ferguson and then physically help rebuild during the off-season. That is how they can show their support for Ferguson. In fact, any player could contribute a game’s salary to the effort to demonstrate support for rebuilding Ferguson – it won’t affect the players’ bottom line too much.

The Congressmen should, at the very least, be censured. They too can kick in to the effort by holding a fundraiser in their district with all proceeds going to the rebuilding effort, matched by the members themselves.

Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson said “Brown died because of Brown.”

Even famed liberal attorney Alan Dershowitz said there are no grounds for civil rights action to be taken against Wilson.

Ironically, NBA Hall of Famer Charles Barkley, never at a loss to be outspoken, but also claiming he never wanted to be a role model, made perhaps two of the strongest statements regarding Ferguson and its aftermath.

“Those [people] who are looting, those aren’t real black people, those are scumbags. Real black people, they’re not out there looting… There’s a perception amongst some black people that if you’re not a thug or a hood rat, you don’t wear your pants down by your ass you’re not black enough. And they’re always holding us back, plain and simple.

If it wasn’t for the cops, we’d be living in the wild wild west in our neighborhoods. We can’t pick out certain incidents that don’t go our way and act like the cops are all bad. I hate when we do that. Think about it. Do you know how bad some of these neighborhoods would be if it wasn’t for the cops?

For those St. Louis Rams fans objecting to the behavior of the five players, contact the Rams at 314-982-7267. Let them know, politely, that you take issue with the inappropriateness of the five players’ behavior. If you are a season ticket holder, consider cancelling your tickets – hit them where it seems to count – the wallet. Football fan or not, anyone should feel free to contact the Rams regarding the inappropriateness of the players’ behavior. The NFL already has a big enough black eye for ignoring bad behavior. Remaining silent when players disrespect law enforcement and support lawlessness continues to sink the reputation of the league.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.