North Carolina In Play

As many of you know, I supported Heather Grant for many reasons, mostly for political reasons, and one very important personal reason: the fact that she is a Nurse Practitioner. As you may know, nurses generally have a special place in my heart, especially since it was a Nurse Practitioner who realized I had cancer in July, 2011.

I plan to remain friends with Heather going forward, as I feel she is a decent human being and someone I know shares many of my values and opinions on the issues of the day. Thank you, Heather, for showing us how to run a clean campaign, talking up yourself without dragging buckets of mud to throw against your opponents.

Thom Tillis was the big winner in North Carolina on Tuesday, capturing more than the 40% necessary to avoid a run-off. As I said in my commentary "The Importance of North Carolina" from May 5,  "If no candidate gets at least 40% of the vote, the runner-up has the option to request that run-off," and further stated which would work "to the detriment of the winner and would boost Senator Hagan's chances for re-election."

Well, in spite of Senator Hagan's spin and that of her aides, Mr. Tillis certainly is a viable candidate poised to defeat the Senator in November. Ultimately, as it stands now, like most Americans, North Carolinians by a wide margin dislike Obamacare, which Ms. Hagan enthusiastically supports. That will be the issue in North Carolina, followed by who could do the best job for the middle class.

Senator Rand Paul, who had backed Tea Party favorite, Greg Bannon, posted to Facebook, his support for Mr. Tillis, emphasizing it was "time for our party to unite" to defeat Hagan. In addition, Rob Engstrom, national political director of the US Chamber said, "Tillis is the candidate best positioned to defeat Sen. Hagan in November, and he provides a clear contrast on issues important to our Members." He continued, "We welcome that debate" who best could provide economic growth in North Carolina.

I wholeheartedly agree. On November 4, vote for Thom Tillis as North Carolina's next Senator.    

The Importance of North Carolina

On Tuesday, May 6, North Carolina will hold its primaries. The race, I think, of the most importance is the Republican race for US Senator. Barring a run-off, the winner's next battle will be against Senator Kay Hagan in November.

If no candidate gets at least 40% of the vote, the runner-up has the option to request that run-off, which would be held on July 15. That would work, I believe, to the detriment of the winner and would boost Senator Hagan's chances for re-election.

Presently, there are eight candidates on the ballot. The top four, based on polls, are Heather Grant, Thom Tillis, Greg Bannon and Mark Harris. Each of these individuals is truly qualified for the post, more so than the incumbent, as they all have leadership skills.

​- ​Thom Tillis is the Speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives

​- Greg Bannon is a physician and Tea Party Activist

​- ​Mark Harris is Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Charlotte and President of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina

​- ​Heather Grant is a Nurse Practitioner and retired First Lieutenant (promotable) who was  Branch Chief of Behavioral Health Care Coordination at Ft Bliss, Texas

Based on polls, Ms. Grant is trailing the three men,  but it is a funny thing about polls. As I wrote in my commentary on April 21, The Poll on Polls

"The only poll which matters is the one taken on Primary Day or Election Day. But not all polls are about candidates, right? Issues of the day probably in the long run, matter more. It is the issues which influence our feelings about a candidate, how he or she measures up to our own values."

I have looked at all four of the Republican front-runners in North Carolina and I believe, as I said above, each is qualified based on his experience and leadership skills. But based on my own set of values, if I were a resident of North Carolina, I would vote for Heather Grant.

I believe that she understands the problems we all face, living from paycheck to paycheck, maintaining a home, raising children, in an economy which is uncertain, at best. Over the last year, I have spoken with her several times and found her to be an articulate, thoughtful person who truly gets it. She is able to take on difficult problems and find solutions which make sense.

In a field clustered with so many qualified men, she is the bright spot who will be able to take on Kay Hagan on an equal footing, without being called a "bully" by the Main Stream Media, but it is up to the residents of North Carolina to make that distinction on Tuesday, as much as I have now.

For all this and more, I am looking forward to calling Heather Grant, Senator Grant in January. Let's make that a reality. 

Loyalty, the Constitution and Us

A friend of mine posted a picture on Facebook on Thursday which resulted in a spirited conversation on the subject. Please bear with me as I would like to share it with you.

She posted: Loyalty - noun: the state or quality, or an instance of being loyal. Faithfulness to commitments or obligations.

She commented: This is what most of our politicians seem not to have toward the Constitution or to the American citizens.

I replied: Being loyal to the Constitution is not same as being loyal to the leader of a government. We don't require loyalty oaths, do we? We pledge allegiance to the flag which is the physical symbol of the United States. We take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We don't do either to a man or woman. We are not Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, the PRC, Cuba or any other totalitarian state.

She responded: Is the Oath of Office a commitment or obligation?  Should they be held accountable for faithfulness to those? They are our Representatives supposedly; do they make commitments to us? Should they be faithful in those? That is what I'm referring to. By the way, the iCaucus vetting requires commitments on fiscal, limited government, and constitutional principles.

I stated: I believe the Oath of Office includes both a commitment AND an obligation.  They are obliged to us, the people they work for and they

English: Detail of Preamble to Constitution of the United States (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

must uphold the commitment to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. This current Congress, as well as those elected since 2006, have failed miserably as they put party and the man ahead of the people. As I recall that would be Nazi, Communist and other non-American forms of government. Certainly, it is not a representative democracy or republican federalist government.

She answered: Ahh! Now I see what you were referring to LOL. Thank you for clarifying for me :)

I stated: I knew you knew. But does the great unwashed? Sadly, most of us forgot our junior high and high school civics and social studies.

She replied: That is why it is incumbent on all of US to reach out beyond our comfort zones and quit speaking only to the choir. They will never know if they don't receive the education or if they have received the revised education.

I responded: I do and so do you. I agree generally with the principles of iCaucus. I think u know that about me.

She answered: Yes, I do know that about you, lol.

We went on to other topics at this point.

I share this with you so that you understand that there are many who feel as I do, and you do, too. It is really up to all of us to try to carry the message that seems to be lost in our schools and colleges.

Sadly, school boards and administrators are more concerned about state aid than about educating our children. I have talked to many teachers across this country (one of the many benefits of social media) and to a person they all indicated that their curriculum requires that in all classes, they must teach to the state test. Even in Civics, Social Studies and History.

The points that were raised in that conversation point to the lack of real knowledge how our government is SUPPOSED to work. Our kids require remedial learning of the American government. Instead, for so many years, students have learned their Civics from 30-second sound bites.

These are the leaders upcoming over the next 20 years. We need to get them up to speed on Jeffersonian Democracy, and fast! In addition, our current bevy of leaders needs to remember that their loyalties aren't to the Democrats or Republicans or to Bush or to Obama or anyone else, except "WE THE PEOPLE". 

You know, the first three words to the American scripture we call "The Constitution of the United States of America."

Bi-Partisanship and Medical Marijuana

Florida's State Senate exercised some real common sense on Monday, April 28. In a stunningly overwhelming vote by Florida's senate​, by a vote of 36-3, the State Senate voted to legalize a strain of low-THC marijuana called Charlotte's web to be used to treat epileptic seizures in children. It was reported on Tuesday by the Associated Press via MyFox Tampa Bay that this bill which will help sick children will now go to the Florida House for its consideration. 

​As you​ know, I am a firm believer in Medical Marijuana, despite what studies at Northwestern and the Journal of the American Heart Association may have revealed. There are so many other studies which have shown that marijuana which was used medicinally had so many more healing properties. As with any drug including alcohol,  if it is abused of course there will be negative outcomes. Certainly, if it is used for the intended reason, the benefits will outweigh the detriments.

As you may know, there is an initiative on the Florida ballot in November to consider a Constitutional Amendment to approve the legalization and usage of medical marijuana. In addition, a FOX 13 poll taken on Monday revealed that 88%, you read that right, EIGHTY-EIGHT PERCENT of their viewers, think medical marijuana should be legalized. That is a real indication how the vote will go in November.

Medical marijuana Acapulco gold (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The bill, as passed in the Senate, had real bi-partisan support. The House bill also has bi-partisan support with Republican Matt Gaetz and Democrat Katie Edwards as co-sponsors of the House version of the bill. With that much support, the conference to iron out differences should be an easy affair. Opponents of the bills have indicated since the FDA hasn't approved marijuana or any of its ancillary substances, they are uncomfortable to vote in favor of medical marijuana. Sounds like a cop-out to me.

It is time for all lawmakers and us to put our big boy and big girl pants on and take a stand to finally use marijuana as a medical solution to so many illnesses and side effects of their "cures". I realize that cannabidiol (CBD) and THC are at least borderline controlled substances. But then, so is the formula that makes Jack Daniels, Seagrams 7, Budweiser and Merlot.

We need to be adults about marijuana and finally recognize it for its medical benefits. As of this writing, there are 21 states and the District of Columbia which have legalized it for its medical benefits. Surely, at least five more states will do so by the end of the year. It is time to pass a comprehensive law which will legalize it nationally for medicinal purposes.

You know how I feel about this issue. How do you feel?   

Racism and Hypocrisy

Of all the comments made either written or spoken about the Sterling Affair, I believe the fairest and most honest comment made was by legendary basketball center, Kareem Abdul Jabbar. 

 In Monday's late edition of USA Today, Kareem gave his assessment of what he sees is the real evil in this sordid affair. According to him, while he sees Donald Sterling's remarks insensitive, there are other equally distressing issues at hand. Please read the article in the USA Today link. At the bottom, click on the Time link to read the commentary in its entirety.

He is right about the sin of racism being the great evil underlying this event. The problem with Sterling, of course, is two-fold: he is the owner of a team consisting of African-American players, with an African-American coach; and he apparently has not outgrown the prejudices of his youth, even as he witnessed much of the horrible racism in the last century. 

 Sadly, Donald Sterling is also a victim of hypocrisy in this way; too many other comments made by both whites and blacks about him want to ignore the fact they all tolerated his attitude, as much as say, the attitudes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. In all three cases, each man epitomizes racism and hypocrisy at its worst.

 Perhaps there is an opportunity here where we can all relearn the lessons which were taught by Dr. King. He understood that we are all human, and as humans, we will occasionally sin the sins of prejudice and racism. As a minister of God, he would forgive those who had fallen, as much as Don Sterling has. He would reach out his hand and lift the sinner out of the abyss of racism, knowing there was the possibility he would probably sin again.  

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar at a book signing. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 That really was what I believe Kareem was trying to say. I have always liked Kareem. He is a big, yet gentle giant. He is a true example of a kind, considerate and devout Muslim. So when he writes his commentary, I take it as one written by a fair and reasonable man. 

 He points out the sins of all the players in the play. He points out the hypocrisy of those who are now outraged by Sterling's behavior, when they should have been disgusted with him years before. He is equally annoyed by the girlfriend, who is black and Mexican, who knew about Sterling's racism and only now decided to expose it; dollar signs come to mind. 

 In the end, Sterling will be judged by his owner peers and hopefully, the right thing will be done. He needs to go, much like the way Marge Schott or Eddie DeBartolo left their sports. Disgraced.  That would be the biggest and greatest punishment. 

In the meantime, blacks, whites, Asians and others all need to make the concerted effort to rise above the greatest of human sins, that of racism. Otherwise, we will see this occur again and again. 

 Those who fail to learn the lessons of history or racism are doomed to repeat them, again and again and again. It is time to move on, people.

History and the Communion of Two Saints

As many of you know, I love history, no matter whether it's ancient history, world history, American history, recent history or current events. As Fox News says,"Before its history, its news."

On Sunday morning, I was actually fortunate to not be able to sleep. No matter what religion you practice, history was made at 4 AM EDT and those of us, who could not sleep in this country, were witnesses to history being made in Italy; more specifically, in Vatican City.

Over 300,000 people, including dignitaries from many countries, along with representatives from every major faith were crowded in St Peter's Square to bear witness. According to reporters on the scene, there were also over half million people crowded in the streets and piazzas outside the square, just to say they bore witness to history.

Generally, the Roman Catholic Church will canonize an individual as a saint and while it is a big deal to the Church, the population at large is not really affected by the event. Sometimes, the newly canonized saint may have been a person from a century or more in the past.

Sunday was different though. Two beatified individuals were elevated to sainthood. If you were born before June 3, 1963, you lived when they lived. Even if you were a newborn or toddler, your life, especially as a Catholic, was affected by pronouncements and decisions made by both these men. If you actually met or saw either of them, you were touched and looked upon by a saint. Incredible.

St John XIII was elected pope in 1958, most probably, due to his advanced age, as a caretaker. Most cognoscenti felt he wouldn't live long and do anything to affect the direction of the Church. Instead, in late 1961, he announced that he was calling an Ecumenical Council, called Vatican II, to "open the windows and let out the stale air." The council went from 1962 to 1965, but he died in 1963 before it was completed, two months after he published his encyclical, Pacem in Terris. Call him The Originator.

St John Paul II was elected Pope in October, 1978 following the deaths of John's successor Paul VI, the Implementer, and John Paul I, who died mysteriously 33 days after his election. John Paul II was the second longest serving pope in history and like John Paul I, took his name to honor the two popes who directed the church through the council and its early years. St John Paul carried the church through the many changes initiated by Vatican II, some popular, some not so much, until he died in 2005. Call him The Interpreter.

It is fitting that The Originator and The Interpreter would be canonized together. While some saints share a Feast Day, never before did the Church intentionally canonize two saints on the same day, with two living popes completing the service.  But there is a special affinity between these two men that many may not see. While Paul VI may have implemented the wishes of Vatican II, the changes he made were really of no consequence. Instead John Paul II truly understood the intent of what John XXIII wanted to do with the Church.

One man wanted to include others, Greek and Russian Orthodox, Coptics, Protestants (all denominations), Jews, Muslims and other faiths, in making mankind better by working more on issues all religions had in common, and downplaying the differences. The other man went to virtually every country in the world to carry the message of unity and fraternity. Along the way, his message was understood in Eastern Europe and Russia, where by 1991, the shackles of communism were removed.

emblem of the Papacy: Triple tiara and keys. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Ecumenical Council was implemented to bring Christendom together and promote a worldwide influence of Christian and other religious teachings. To a degree, while some will disagree, this mission has largely been accomplished. Pope Francis believes it is a work in progress. It certainly has influenced our thinking about our religions over the last 50 years. In essence, the Church is in a state of flux, which may not be a bad thing.

John XXIII wanted to open the windows. John Paul II did and washed them, too. The Church still has far to go, but as JFK said, "Let us begin." It has taken over 50 years to get here, but that is alright. The Church has always been slow to accept change; but more change has happened since John XXIII became pope than in the 500 years before him.

So, forevermore April 27 will always be the Feast Day of Saints John XXIII and John Paul II. We were alive to see the first one and hope to be alive for many more. The influence of these two men on our view of the 20th Century will be measured by an Encyclical about Peace on Earth and how well it was achieved.

That is the history of our newest saints, two men who by themselves did some, but together did so much.

Barry's "Putin" on a Show

The United States deployed a total of 600 troops to our Eastern European allies, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Each country will have 150 troops to countermand and offset the 20,000 Russian troops sitting on the Ukrainian border.
Please read the article from Tuesday's late edition of USA TODAY.

I wonder if Vlad is rethinking his Soviet reunification policy now.

Do Barry and his boys really think 600 pairs of "boots on the ground" in Eastern Europe will be sufficient to fight off, let's face it, the Red Army? After the Barbarossa debacle, the Soviet Union never again allowed any country to push its soldiers around.

Unofficial flag of the Soviet Red Army. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Understand that Vlad is an old world Soviet through and through. Even though he was born in 1952, his veins course Soviet blood. Yes, he is a Russian national, but his brain is Soviet-wired. His true loyalty is not to the Russian Federation, but rather to the USSR.

He was 40 when the Soviet Union fell apart. Before that, he was a Colonel in his beloved USSR and since that time, he has worked, initially behind the scenes when Boris Yeltsin was President, and since 2000 out front for the world to see.

You need to recognize that Vlad is a consummate chess player, while Barry is playing jacks, checkers or more likely “Got your Nose”. Vlad is a three or four-dimensional thinker while Barry is a one-dimensional whiz. You would think that Barry would have finally realized that Vlad is socking his clock, but because he thinks he is the "smartest man in the world", I am sure he keeps overriding his military and diplomatic advisors.

I admit that while I studied History and Political Science, I am not an expert of the Soviet or Russian mindset. But I have played chess and I do understand strategic placement of my pieces in order to at least have my opponent withdraw, even if I can't beat him outright. So does Vlad.

The placement of 600 in a "Baltic Defense" is not going to have the Eurasian Union (Russia's new model of domination) withdraw from Crimea and the Ukraine region. If Russia can reclaim Ukraine and at least force it into its sphere of influence, the "breadbasket of Europe" will resolve many agricultural issues for Putin. The Russians and others will be able to eat more affordably in the future.

Vlad controls oil and natural gas distribution to the European Union and with that he is able to pay some of Russia's bills. Unfortunately for him, he is finding it difficult to feed his people. This is part of what the Ukraine strategy is about. The rest of it is to embarrass the United States and its weakened stature due to Obama's ignorance and naïveté on the world stage.

In the end, if Vlad moves westward, 600 troops will not stop the Big Red Machine. At that point, NATO (translate USA) will be forced to mobilize its armed forces in Germany, Italy and other locations in Europe in order to defend a NATO-member country.

Kennedy had Berlin to temper his decisions in the Cold War. Will Obama have Warsaw? Or will he back down as he did in Syria, Libya and Crimea?

Putin is counting on it.