A Country Divided?

We are no longer a country who can "agree to disagree"—we are now at each other’s throats. We snipe at each other on Facebook and Twitter. We try to hold our tongue at the office or seek out allies we can voice our opinions to safely. If you go back over to the Real Clear Politics map and look back through past elections you can see how we've become more and more fundamentally divided just in the past 30 years. Instead of being rational, some people make excuses for their politicians like it's their hometown football team who got caught in a foul. They ignore and excuse them like a mother screaming at the police for arresting her “innocent” child for the 50th time.

The press has largely gone from the investigation arm, to the propaganda arm. You can find more objective reporting in blogs and by independents these days—which not surprisingly, are hated by both the politicians and the so-called “real journalists.” Politicians on both sides want to keep us divided so we go after each other, instead of calling them out for the sneaky business they're up to. Journalists no longer just report the news, they openly seek to influence it. They both look down on the majority of the populace as too stupid and uneducated and who must be spoon-fed and taken care of by an overprotective Big Brother. Bills are no longer written by the elected, but by the special interests. It's no wonder politicians can't tell us what's in them until after they made into law—they're spending more time raising campaign funds and running for office instead of actually writing the thousands of pages of laws they pass every year.

The more people who get what they didn’t earn, the angrier they are when someone tries to take it away. Give a child a bunch of toys and then tell them they aren’t going to get any more and watch them throw a fit.

I blame them and I blame the press. But I also blame the lazy public who refuse to lift a finger to educate themselves about what's going on. As long as your politician throws some money you're way, you remain coddled and asleep while the country goes down. And who's fault will that be if the country implodes financially? People will point the finger to Washington. But don't blame the politicians or the press—look in the mirror. Because it's you. You who couldn’t be bothered to look at what a politician does, not just what s/he says at election time. You who’d rather sit down than stand up. You who can’t be bothered to make an informed vote. Yes, you who watch The Colbert Report and The Daily Show with John Stewart instead of searching out the truth. It’s not always easy to find, but it’s out there. You who refuse to look at the overall well-being of your country and the massive spending going on and only care that your state gets a piece of the pie.

Because we are closer to Greece than you think, my friends. We are at the tipping point. But in our case I fear we could easily turn into a second civil war. The more people who get what they didn’t earn, the angrier they are when someone tries to take it away. Give a child a bunch of toys and then tell them they aren’t going to get any more and watch them throw a fit. But allow a child to work and earn what they can and buy their own toys and you have a more responsible child who is more secure because they are dependent on themselves, not others.

The generation that came out of the Great Depression and WWII were called the Greatest Generation. Unfortunately, they did not all pass these lessons on to their children and grandchildren. Within a few short years we went from a generation of self-sufficient and independent to the Me Generation fighting over our toys and expecting them to be provided to us. We went from the people who pursued happiness to those who demand it. Nearly fifty percent of the population now pays NO federal income taxes. Eventually someone is going to have to tell a number of them that there will be no more free toys.

Thanks to White House Support, Egyptian Islamic Law to Allow Sex with Deceased Wife

We know republicans don’t support women’s rights like the White House does, right? Especially things like reproductive rights. So it’s a good thing that the White House supports governments like those in Egypt. They took out Mubarak and made sure those nice Muslim Brotherhood guys got in. So what is the women-supporting, Islamic parliament doing now?

They about to pass a law that allows a husband to have sex with their dead wife for up to six hours after death. Hey, Sandra Fluke, how about that for reproductive freedom? Well at least at that point, they don’t need to worry about their health care plan providing birth control.

But that’s not all: They are also lowering the marriage age of girls to 14 so they can combine child rape with arranged, forced marriages. They’re also getting rid of laws about guarantee of education, employment for women. Don’t want them to get any ideas in their heads.

Don’t forget it’s THIS White House that supported the overthrow of Mubarak and the establishment of an Islamic parliament. Similar to when Iran’s Shah was overthrown, Egypt, once a country friendly toward the US and Israel is now going back to Sharia laws and furthering the oppression of women.

But remember, according to this administration, it’s the republicans that are anti-women….

George Zimmerman Case: Stand-Your-Ground vs. Self-Defense

Media pundits covering the George Zimmerman shooting of Trayvon Martin usually mention Florida's stand-your-ground law and the unlikelihood (their opinion) that Zimmerman will be able to use it as an affirmative defense.

This law is puzzling: Why not just claim self-defense? IANAL, but from what I've been able to glean, in Florida's version, the stand-your-ground law expands self-defense and allows for a pretrial hearing. If a judge finds the defendant legally stood their ground, even with deadly force, they are immune, not only from criminal prosecution, but civil as well. Case closed. Whereas, even if Zimmerman is found not guilty or the jury believes he acted in self-defense, the Martin family still could come back and sue Zimmerman for the wrongful death of Trayvon. Regarding the stand-your-ground law, the statue for Florida reads (highlighting mine), in part:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

So, to my layman thoughts, even if George initially followed Martin and even if that alone could be seen as provocation, Zimmerman could claim stand-your-ground if: It can be shown that George then turned and walked back toward the car (perhaps through the 911 tape) and was attacked by Martin.

Zimmerman had a bail hearing last Friday. The media made a big deal about the bond ($150K) and Zimmerman's apology (risky, but IMHO, brilliant). What was even more significant was the apparent admissions by the prosecution that they didn’t have evidence either to answer who started the fight or that contradicts Zimmerman's claim that he was walking back to the car when attacked. Certainly their response brings into question the 2nd degree murder charge. But, at this point it, looks unlikely that Zimmerman will be released based on the statute and without a trial, simply because of the judicial fear of what would happen in the streets after such a ruling.