Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Which Black Lives Matter?

Which Black Lives Matter?
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
August 25, 2015

Why are Michael Brown and Freddie Gray household names, yet when the name Jamyla Bolden is mentioned, the response is, who?

Sadly, the answer is because to the Black Lives Matter folks, apparently not all black lives matter. Apparently because there is no political or financial capital to be earned, the drive-by shooting of this nine-year-old girl from Ferguson, MO is widely ignored by the main stream media which has recently kow-towed to the BLM movement.

Where are such provocateurs as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson? Why aren’t they leading the parade fomenting the angst and demanding answers as to why this little girl was murdered while doing her homework sitting on her mother’s bed?

These prevaricators of racial divide were nowhere to be found following the August 18 slaying of fourth grader Jamyla Bolden. This crime was not perpetrated by police, nor did not involve questionable suspects where it would be important to shift blame to the police. Instead this was yet another black on black slaughter; another taking of yet another innocent life – a life barely started. No witnesses have come forward to identify a yet to be identified murderer.

The murder of Jamyla Bolden comes about 13 months after the death of Brown that left Ferguson still reeling from the aftermath and uprising of a crescendo of violence that provided for the impetus of the Black Lives Movement. This is a movement that has operated under the false pretense that blacks are constantly the victims of white police officers simply for possessing black skin. Yet, the BLM has remained virtually silent regarding the epidemic of black on black crime, often murder.

If black lives matter, and they do, then all black lives should matter from birth. Black lives should matter when liberals and Democrats under the Lyndon Johnson so-called Great Society made it acceptable for a welfare check to replace a father in the home and to date more than 70 percent of all black children are born to single mothers. (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_01.pdf) (Page 40; Table 15)

Black lives should matter when more and more liberals and Democrats oppose charter schools and school choice as black graduation rates continue to plummet and fall further behind the graduation rates of white, Hispanic, and Asian students. (http://www.governing.com/gov-data/education-data/state-high-school-graduation-rates-by-race-ethnicity.html)

Black lives should matter when more and more liberals and Democrats support providing a path to citizenship for the between 12 and 20 million illegal aliens. Illegals are typically working illegally in the United States underselling their labor for cash under the table and creating an underclass with which poorly educated blacks are unable to compete.

For those who question whether there is hope in the black community, read the Dr. Benjamin Carson story.

And while touching briefly on the political realm, former Maryland Governor Martin O’ Malley (D) embarrassed himself when he apologized for saying “white lives matter and all lives matter” to a chorus of boos at the Netroots Nation conference in July. O’ Malley said he meant no disrespect for including white and all lives following black lives matter. Doing so was unnecessary and made him look feckless and sheepish.

That we as a nation have lowered ourselves to the place where a presidential candidate would apologize for saying all lives matter is disgraceful, discordant, and disrespectful of life itself. But between violence seen on television, movies, music, video games, as well as abortion on demand, including the dissemination of baby body parts to the highest bidder, it is no wonder life has lost value in more than just the black community.

Yes, black lives matter, white lives matter, all lives matter, and Jamyla Bolden’s life mattered.

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

Thursday, August 20, 2015

Schumer Must Whip Up the Minyan on Iran Deal

Schumer Must Whip Up the Minyan on Iran Deal
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
August 20, 2015

Senator Charles “Chuck” Schumer (D-NY) wants to be Minority Leader in the next Congress. (Actually he really wants to be Majority Leader, but is at least smart enough to know that won’t happen.) Point being, Schumer, for all his desire to lead, passed on a golden opportunity to do just that – demonstrate his leadership chops on this disgraceful Iran deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

There have been numerous articles and columns written ad nauseum opposing Barack Obama’s capitulation to Iran while doing his best impression of the second coming of former British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (1869-1940). These two feckless so-called leaders gave away their respective stores in an attempt to bring “peace to our time.” It failed miserably under Chamberlain, who did not live long enough to see his successor Winston Churchill (1874-1965) become a British hero, himself rising out of the political ashes like a Phoenix.

Obama, not learning from history, presented two options to both the American people and the world – his tepid, borderline traitorous deal with Iran or the inevitability of war, most probably a nuclear war at that. For once Iran procures the bomb its first strike will be toward Israel, the nation Iran perpetually promises to wipe from the map and globe, followed by attempts to destroy Western Civilization as a whole.

Obama, as GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee (R-AR) has advised, should take Iran seriously. Huckabee came under a degree of criticism for not just calling the Iran deal “idiotic,” but that “Obama ultimately will take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven,” a reference to the Holocaust without using that word. Huckabee said neither anything wrong or hyperbolic in the strength of his words, and in fact it was Iran, long a Holocaust denier, said having so many Jews in Israel makes it easier to wipe them off the face of the map, calling for a holocaust. Huckabee also opined that when Iran makes such incendiary proposals it is better to take them at their word. And while Obama chided Huckabee’s remarks as “ridiculous and sad,” Huckabee responded by saying, “what’s ridiculous and sad is that President Obama does not take the Iran threats seriously.”

Apparently neither does Secretary of State John Kerry. Iran’s repeated virulent calls for Israel’s destruction makes Kerry’s recent remarks even more myopic than one could have originally imagined. In an interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic, Kerry said “this deal is as pro-Israel… as it gets.”

Kerry further demonstrated how obtuse he truly is when asked if he believes “Iranian leaders sincerely seek the elimination of the Jewish state?”

“I think they have a fundamental ideological confrontation with Israel at this particular moment. Whether or not that translates into active steps, quote, ‘wipe it,’ you know…

“Wipe it off the map,” Goldberg said, finishing Kerry’s moronic thought.

“I don’t know the answer to that,” Kerry continued, adding he saw nothing to indicate the destruction of Israel was a goal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Kerry also said, “There isn’t a better deal to be gotten.” That statement alone is demonstrative of the utter submission to Iran and its future quest to achieve nuclear weaponry.

“The deal leaves Tehran on the cusp of a bomb while sanctions vanish,” wrote The Wall Street Journal in its July 15 editorial condemning this atrocious deal that will almost certainly lead to the destruction of Israel.

Certainly Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who can run mental circles around both Obama and Kerry with half his brain tied behind his back, understands the riskiness of this deal.

“The world is a much more dangerous place today than it way yesterday,” calling this deal a “stunning historic mistake,” and a “death sentence for Israel,” said Netanyahu in July. He also said it is a gamble that 10 years from now Iran will no longer be a state sponsor of terror seeking to destroy Israel and the United States.

Netanyahu observed and asked, that with all their oil, why do they need a nuclear power plant, as Iran claims it is seeking. Clearly Iran is undergoing a quest to build a nuclear bomb, or numerous bombs, as they continue pursuing nuclear bomb grade uranium. And with the relaxed sanctions and the return of $150 billion to Iran, their quest just became easier.

“Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran because Iran continues to seek our destruction,” said Netanyahu in July.

Because of the stress on Israel and its future, it becomes incumbent of the United States Congress to eviscerate this deal when it reaches their chambers in September. This is where Senator Schumer needs to step up and be the leader he was elected to be. To be the leader that will promote him to the Leader post he so desires, as well as be the statesman by leading his people to the right side of history.

There are 10 Jewish United States senators. From a religious standpoint, this is significant, as 10 people having surpassed the age of bar/bat mitzvah (13), comprise a minyan, the daily service required in the Jewish faith. Jews are required to pray thrice daily, and in a minyan, as certain prayers are required to be recited as a community.

Schumer has already announced his rejection of the Iran deal and plans to vote against it. Sadly, he also announced he would not “whip up” his fellow Democrats to follow suit. This is a huge mistake on Schumer’s part. He must remain true to his position that “to me, the very real risk that Iran will not moderate and will, instead, use the agreement to pursue its nefarious goals is too great…. Therefore I will vote to disapprove the agreement… because I believe Iran will not change… Better to keep U.S. sanctions in place, strengthen them, [and] enforce secondary sanctions on other nations,” wrote Schumer in an August 6 editorial in The Wall Street Journal.

How weak a deal did Obama cobble together? As previously mentioned, millions of dollars returned, which only strengthen Iran’s financial place in the world, when in reality, Iran should be shunned and isolated until brought to its knees. Leading from behind, as is an Obama trait, is akin to America on her knees before the Ayatollah. The United States couldn’t even extract the four hostages still held in Iran. This country is still rewarding bad behavior.

And now, the latest shocking news as reported by the Associated Press on Wednesday, August 19, “that Iran can conduct inspections on its own Parchin nuclear site under a top-secret agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) amounted to a new target for critics of the deal ahead of next month’s vote on the nuclear deal in Congress.”

Such an absurd allowance is worse than the proverbial fox guarding the henhouse.

This is why Schumer must whip up the minyan, and although the Jewish vote is not a monolithic vote (OK, not as much as it used to be) he must get the other nine Jewish senators on board. They must abandon their ultra-liberal roots in favor of common sense to preserve and protect both Israel as well as the United States. Make no mistake, if Iran can, it will strike the United States. It is up to all Americans, from all faiths to call these senators as well as the two from each of our home states.

Need more evidence this deal with Iran is wrong and dangerous? Israel and Saudi Arabia are on the same side opposing this treacherous pact, and the United Nations approves the deal. Iran’s long-standing desires to exenterate Israel must be stopped before the mushroom cloud of World War III forces World War IV to be fought with nothing more than sticks and stones.

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

To reach the Senate operator who will connect you to your senator, call 202-224-3121.

Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO) – 202-224-5852
Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) – 202-224-2823
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) – 202-224-3553
Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) – 202-224-4524
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) – 202-224-3841
Senator Al Franken (D-MN) – 202-224-5641
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) – 202-224-5141
Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) – 202-224-3934
Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) – 202-224-6542

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) – 202-224-5244

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Slavery Should Be So Good

Slavery Should Be So Good
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
August 12, 2015

From a historic perspective, as an educator I am quite familiar with the annals of black slavery in the United States. The singer Prince Rogers Nelson, more famously known just as Prince, apparently missed that year’s history course as he compared signing a record contract to the vileness of forced servitude dominating the American south from 1619 through 1865.

“Record contracts are just like – I’m gonna say the word – slavery. I would tell any young artist… don’t sign,” said Prince during a media event at his Paisley Park Studios in Minneapolis, according to NPR.

Born in 1958, and at age 57, Prince knows nothing about real slavery, yet his words, hyperbolic or not, have not been condemned by the so-called leaders of the black community. Were a white entertainer to have uttered such insulting verbiage he or she would be excoriated right out of the business; same for an athlete, educator, or politician. Yet for a black man of such popular acclaim as Prince there is an expected double standard.

Was Prince not one of the highest paid performers since the late 1970s? Worth $300 million, plus or minus, as of 2014, Prince released his first album, For You in 1978, with an additional 30 albums throughout an illustrious career that is still active. His accolades include seven Grammy Awards, one Golden Globe, and one Academy Award.

Does $300 million sound like “slave wages?” I use quotes around the words slave wages as slaves were not paid for their forced labor, and that is also what Denzel Washington called his pay in the excellent film Glory, where black soldiers were paid less than white soldiers.

Was Prince tortured? Was Prince raped? Was Prince deprived of basic human rights? Was Prince deprived of food and water? Was Prince taken against his will from his parents? Was Prince’s freedom of speech denied or restricted? I imagine Prince was denied none of the above.

Is Prince literate? I imagine so. Does or did Prince have access to legal counsel? I imagine so. If Prince was not provided with competent, sound advice, he should sue his attorney. In order to make a living in the music business Prince signed a contract with a record producer – a producer who took a chance that signing Prince would be a wise investment with a positive return. Producers gave Prince a damned good living and he no doubt had more creative control than the myriad artists who preceded him.

If Prince wishes to opine about his dreary life of “slavery,” let him walk a mile in the shoes of those in genuine slavery – in third world countries where children are enslaved making the crap we buy in schlock stores; let him walk a mile in the heels of those young girls and women cast off as sex slaves – whose bodies and minds are destroyed by drugs and degenerates peddling them in bars and on street corners to be used, discarded, and forgotten. No, no, Prince, you have lived the life of royalty and you owe an apology to those souls whose lives are not much worth living because of the genuine slavery into which they have been subjected. Open your wallet and kick in some of your millions to rescue, educate, and hire some of these genuinely unfortunate people who know real slavery.

Prince no doubt has earned more money from royalties, from play on more radio stations, and from more concert dates that those artistes who toiled, often in segregated obscurity. Prince owes an apology for such cavalier use of the word slavery for all his “slavery” has rewarded him.

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