Current Event – Page 95 – intramuralist ™

11/09/201411/09/2014

getting in the way

So in the midst of persons attempting to neatly tie up all the loose end explanations of last week’s elections (and find creative ways to either absolve self, gloat, or legitimize the dismissing of reality), I found a story that resonated a little closer to my heart (… thank you, beat reporters, those of you who send newsworthy items my respectful, editorial way). As told by a CNN affiliate this week in Fort Lauderdale…

It did not take long for officials to make good on the promise to criminally charge those who violate a new ordinance that effectively outlaws groups from feeding the homeless in public. On Sunday, the city charged three people, including two ministers and a 90-year-old homeless advocate. They could face up to 60 days in jail for the violation.

“I fully believe that I am my brother’s keeper. Love they neighbor as thy self,” Arnold Abbott said. Abbott, 90, prepares hundreds of meals each week for the homeless in the kitchen of the Sanctuary Church.

“We serve two entrees at every feeding,” he said.

He faces possible jail time and a $500 fine for feeding the homeless after he was charged with violating the ordinance.

“One of police officers came over and said, ‘Drop that plate right now,’ as if I was carrying a weapon,” Abbott said.

Authorities also charged a minister from Coral Springs and Sanctuary Church’s pastor, Wayne Black.

“We believe very strongly that Jesus taught us that we are to feed his sheep,” Black said.

Mayor Jack Seiler had warned arrests were coming, but it was not the first time Abbott has fought city hall. In 1999, Abbott sued the city for banning him from feeding homeless on beach — a lawsuit he won.

Abbott said he plans to be fire up the stoves again Wednesday, when he has another food sharing plan for the beach. He said he does not want to be arrested, but he is prepared for the possibility.

“I’m going to have to go to court again to sue the city of Fort Lauderdale, the beautiful city,” he said. “These are the poorest of the poor. They have nothing. Don’t have a roof over their head, and who could turn them away?”

So let the Intramuralist acknowledge a few, brief perspectives. First, there’s most likely a valid reason the Lauderdale law was created. They are obviously attempting to limit the number of homeless persons on the street. No one wants the homeless to be homeless.

Also, in the Intramuralist’s opinion, no less — and potentially consistent with the message Tuesday’s voters sent Washington — I believe sometimes government goes too far. Recognizing a solid message or motive, government often attempts to control us via law. They justify too many rules and regulations to control our behavior. More often than not, as long as our behavior is not detrimental to the health of another, government should stay out of the way. Let the divine spirit be the convictor of our hearts — not the federal government.

Here’s a 90-year-old man who feels called to feed the hungry. Isn’t there a better way to handle all angles of this issue than the government getting in the way?

Respectfully…

11/06/201411/06/2014

midterm notes

This week I found a few extra sticky notes stuck around the edges of my computer desk. Seems they were prompted by Tuesday’s election…

I’ve heard rumblings of bipartisanship. Where were those calls before the election?

CNN, FOX, MSNBC… interesting watching them all.

Wasserman Schultz calls Obama Democrats’ “best asset.” If he was their best asset he would have been seen campaigning with vulnerable candidates. Please don’t lie for rhetorical sakes. Please don’t think we’re ignorant.

Obama calls election the “worst possible group of states for Democrats since Dwight Eisenhower.” Noticing a trend… the “worst”… “worst economy.” Wonder if he’ll ask how he’s contributed to the public’s discontent.

Wish this would finish soon. I’m getting sleepy. Need to go to bed.

Crist/Scott or Scott/Crist… geepers… can they decide which party they actually wish to be from? Charlie Crist has officially represented 3 different parties now. Geeesh.

Scott Brown is challenging the New Hampshire results. Ok, I get it. Close election. Congratulations. But accept the outcome.

Ed Gillespie… where’d you come from? No one seemed to think your race would even be close. And now… what… a recount in Virginia?

All these graphics. Much improved. Could use one of those big interactive computer screens in my family room.

How do they call these races with only 7% of the vote in? Oh, my. Doesn’t always make a lot of sense.

Obama calling leaders from both parties to the White House on Friday. Could this be a little more regular and all be more considerate?

Still need sleep by the way.

Pelosi calls the potential results a “catastrophe.” Get some perspective, please. Go to Africa; see spread of Ebola. Then let’s talk catastrophe.

How to win and lose graciously. Seems like we could all learn something there.

Facebook. Twitter. (See winning and losing graciously again.)

Too much money. Yep. No doubt they could all be better stewards. Why don’t we use all that to pay down the debt?

Anti-incumbent? No. More anti-Washington.

This election is over. Well sort of. Still a run-off. Sorry, Louisiana.

Alaska… where are you?

No more commercials or robo-calls. Thanks, God.

Hope and change. Again.

Elections have consequences.

Now quit campaigning, quit the disrespect, and get to work. P.S. Some of us also still need sleep now, too.

Respectfully…

11/04/201411/04/2014

sundays & tuesdays

For 17 Sundays most of the nation joins with the likeminded, typically sitting on the family room sofa, sometimes in our favored garb, cheering on our favorite team. Like this past weekend… some rooted for Denver instead of New England, Pittsburgh instead of Baltimore, and St. Louis instead of San Francisco. We enthusiastically and loyally cheer for our team. “Who dey” and “Go Bengals,” for example, were heard multiple times, echoing loudly amid our household (… yes, some days it’s hard to be a Bengals’ fan). But let’s face it: not only are we zealously rooting for our team, we are also actively rooting against the other.

Today, however, is Tuesday; it’s not Sunday. Yet with today’s midterm elections, it seems many have the two days confused.

Many highly intelligent people are rooting zealously for their team — and — actively rooting against the other. Many of the elect are encouraging us to do exactly that. From Pres. Barack Obama to congress to our local municipalities, many are encouraging us to choose sides — to choose a single side — choosing only one team. It’s as if only one team can win.

[Sigh.]

It’s not that I don’t believe certain candidates are better. It’s not that I don’t believe certain policies are wiser. Wisdom and foolishness exists across all parties.

I will add that no party’s candidates have cornered the market on integrity, and the Intramuralist will always support a man or woman of integrity before a candidate who shares a preferred party (note: I don’t have a preferred gender or ethnicity). That’s one of the most significant, gaping, moral loopholes that seemingly intelligent people seem to miss. They fight for their party. They don the favored garb. But they forget that not all people of all parties are good — they aren’t all men and women of integrity; they also forget that both Pittsburgh and Baltimore have good people on their team; hence, it’s understandable that some would favor the plays of the Steelers to the Ravens or the Ravens to the Steelers. It’s not so understandable to rhetorically vilify an entire team in order to propel oneself or one’s party; such seems a silly exercise for the otherwise intelligent to embrace.

This past weekend Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) joined in a conference call with progressive activists, attempting to help a Democrat keep hold of Iowa’s currently open Senate seat. He said of his desired candidate, “Bruce Braley is a fine man. He has a good record of public service.” Of his opponent, Joni Ernst, Reid said, “She’s so out of line with mainstream Iowans… she has spent the entire campaign talking about what she did as a young girl, castrating animals.”

Friends, please vote for the person of your choice, but don’t be influenced by Reid’s words; they aren’t accurate. They are part of an inflated rhetoric designed to prompt us to put on our partisan garb and root actively against the other team. Democrats and Republicans alike join in this exercise; it’s as if they are attempting to get us to hate the other team — to turn a blind eye to the fact that there may exist candidates of integrity on both sides of the ballot.

This past Sunday the Jacksonville Jaguars visited Cincinnati’s “Jungle” on week 9 of the NFL’s regular season. We were (obviously) rooting for the Bengals, but we no longer cheered actively against the team from North Florida. We were changed by this past summer, when my family had the opportunity to visit extensively with several of the Jaguar players, including blossoming rookie, star quarterback, Blake Bortles. Blake was very intentional with my sons; he was especially good with my child with special needs. While the Jaguars lost the game Sunday, thanks to Blake, we had no doubt there were people of integrity on both sides.

Maybe all those talking about today’s ballots should recognize that, too.

Respectfully…

10/30/2014

black enough

“Scout,” said Atticus, “nigger-lover is just one of those terms that don’t mean anything—like snot-nose. It’s hard to explain—ignorant, trashy people use it when they think somebody’s favoring Negroes over and above themselves. It’s slipped into usage with some people like ourselves, when they want a common, ugly term to label somebody.”

“You aren’t really a nigger-lover, then, are you?”

“I certainly am. I do my best to love everybody… I’m hard put, sometimes—baby, it’s never an insult to be called what somebody thinks is a bad name. It just shows you how poor that person is, it doesn’t hurt you.”

So much truth so often overflows from fiction’s pages, as noted above in the poignant dialogue between To Kill a Mockingbird’s “Scout” Finch, the tomboy teen that perceives the goodness in others while not negating societal evils, and her father, Atticus Finch, a widowed lawyer with an undeniable, solid moral compass. Racist persons used the phrase “nigger-lover” to damage or demean; Atticus wisely shares that the term tells us more about the user than about the one the user attempts to describe, showing us “how poor” the user actually is.

Let’s face it. Racism is unfortunately alive and well on planet Earth. Sometimes it’s real; sometimes it’s more a repeated accusation. The Intramuralist wishes it weren’t real. I wish no man, woman, child, etc. were measured by the color of their skin. All men were created equal, regardless of color or creed, yet too many of us still justify judging by the color of one’s skin.

Too many people voted against Barack Obama because he is black. Too many people voted for Barack Obama because he is black. Too many people oppose or support him now for potentially the same reason (… see his approval ratings broken down by race). The point is that both positions are motivated by skin color. A judgment based on skin color fits the definition of racism.

It seems, however, racism accusations are more quickly prevalent when it’s one color posed against another. But what happens when it’s one color against itself, so-to-speak?

For example… in the 2014 Super Bowl, the Seattle Seahawks dominated the opposition; they won handily. In fact, they were so exceptional, many spoke of a potential dynasty for years to come. How could they not repeat?

Yet this year the Seahawks are not dominant; they have already lost three times — still winning but not consistently; each week their status has seemed shaky. Hence, with expectations different than reality, the questions and finger pointing have begun, as the dynasty potential has dissipated. Last week there were even reports from the Seattle locker room that their quarterback, Russell Wilson, the man who led them to Super Bowl victory was not “black enough.” You heard me correctly.

As first shared by the Bleacher Report’s Mike Freeman and then on ESPN, “There is also an element of race that needs to be discussed… it’s backed up by several interviews with Seahawks players — is that some of the black players think Wilson isn’t black enough.” Let me be clear… black players think a black quarterback may not be black enough. What exactly is “black enough”? … and is that not a judgment based on the color of one’s skin?

Racism is alive and well on planet Earth… and it’s not always one race juxtaposed against another. It’s also not always handled as wisely as in fiction by Atticus Finch.

Respectfully…

10/28/201410/28/2014

geeeesh

Can we talk? Can we put all red and blue hats aside and partisan paraphernalia? Can we talk about the elections, one week from today, and objectively acknowledge what is wise and what is not? Can we talk? Can we ignore our emotional entrenchment that too often gets in the way, prompting us to justify the partisan blinders — blinders often of wisdom?

Hence, all blinders and party recognition aside, I question the wisdom in the following circumstances surrounding next Tuesday’s midterm elections…

Can someone tell me why Mitch McConnell feels like he needs another six years in the Senate? McConnell has been in office for 30 years. While I appreciate his service and his commitment to Kentucky, why is it that he feels he must represent Kentuckians? Isn’t it time for someone else? … some fresh ideas? … some new, creative articulation of ideas? One of the primary reasons the Intramuralist repeatedly advocates for term limits is because too many candidates refuse to limit themselves. Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont has actually been in office since 1975. Geeeesh… (note: #1).

Speaking of Kentucky, there’s also McConnell’s opponent, Alison Lundergan Grimes. Sharing a political likemindedness with the President — yet noting that Pres. Obama is rather unpopular in the Bluegrass State — Grimes has repeatedly refused to say whether she voted for the current Commander-in-Chief. After stumbling with her response, she claimed she was motivated by privacy, expecting the not-so-intelligent voter to miss the warped sense of politics involved.

Ms. Grimes, it’s ok if you voted for Obama… lots of people did; a majority of us did! But not to answer the question makes me wonder where else you are being deceptive. Where else is politics your primary motivator?…

Grimes’s misstep prompted a plethora of similar questions, with multiple other candidates joining in the rhetorical fumbling, such as Georgia Senate candidate Michelle Nunn, West Virginia’s Natalie Tennant, and now gubernatorial candidates (see Tom Wolf, Pennsylvania). There’s too much politicking involved. Hence… geeeesh #2.

Too much politicking, too many impure motivations, and too much money… way too much money! It’s both parties, friends. The Center for Responsive Politics projects nearly $4 billion will be spent on the elections by the time the dust settles after Nov. 4th (… uh, geeeesh #3 comes pretty easily).

Somewhere within the process, no less, is the current, seemingly awkward role of Pres. Obama. With stagnant at best approval numbers, few candidates desire photo ops with the current President, but fewer still will admit their lack of desire. Obviously, there exists an intentional strategy for Obama to not campaign with candidates who hail from bellwether or non-blue states; no prudent candidate wants to be seen with anyone or anything which might negatively affect their candidacy; also, Obama is by no means the first president to possess such a perceived, unfortunate albatross effect. My “geeeesh” thus arises again, primarily by those who attempt to deny the strategy — again, believing the average voter to be rather ignorant. As said by incumbent candidate, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the other night in New Hampshire, “The fact is, he’s busy in Washington.” Geeeeesh, indeed.

Unfortunately, when elections are near, so often is a lack of wisdom.

Geeeesh.

Respectfully…

10/26/2014

where are they now?

In one of the more tragic summer scenarios, we remember the fretful days in Ferguson, Missouri. Remember this brief timeline, extracted from USA Today…

On Saturday, Aug. 9th, a police officer encounters 18 year old Michael Brown and a friend as they walk down a street. Brown is shot to death as a result of the encounter.

The next day in a St. Louis County Police press conference, the police chief says Brown — who was unarmed — physically assaulted the officer, and during a struggle between the two, Brown reached for the officer’s gun. One shot was fired in the car followed by other gunshots outside of the car.

That evening, a candlelight vigil to honor Brown later turns violent. More than a dozen businesses are vandalized and looted. More than 30 people are arrested and two police officers suffered injuries.

As the days continue, the situation intensifies… Looting and violence continue. Local school is cancelled. Death threats are made to the police. Reports surface that Brown had been involved in a minor robbery the day of his death. Hundreds gather outside police headquarters to demand justice for Brown’s death. Over the next two weeks, the demands for justice escalate, as does the violence. Remember Brown was unarmed. Also, Brown is black; the officer is white. Injustice is assumed.

The FBI gets involved. The NAACP gets involved. The reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton make appearances. Witnesses claim Brown had turned his back and was walking away — maybe even having his hands up, in some sort of surrendered posture. For weeks the protests and demands for justice loudly continue… in Ferguson’s streets, the media’s lead stories, and in social media’s passionate rants.

This past week the St. Louis Post-Dispatch posted a copy of Michael Brown’s autopsy. While some were notably frustrated by the leaked report, the confirmed autopsy shows Brown was impaired by THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. It also shows that Brown was shot at close-range, not walking away, and his arms were not raised. Brown’s blood was found on the officer’s uniform and inside the police car. While the autopsy does not give a complete account of the total truth, it also calls into question the claim that the killing was unjust. This report — solely a single piece of the investigation, although a significant piece indeed — does not substantiate claims that the shooting was racially motivated.

Please note that the Intramuralist is not suggesting what actual motives were in play. I do not claim to know. But just as I do not know the totality of the motives, neither do the Sharptons, Jacksons, any potentially opportunist activists, nor the citizens of Ferguson. Hence, I have more questions…

As we await the grand jury’s proceedings, what happens if the grand jury fails to indict the police officer?

And if the claims of injustice are proven to be either wrong or inconclusive, where will the Sharptons and Jacksons of the world be then? Will they continue to cling to what they want to be true?

One of the Intramuralist’s observations is that persons are often quick to assess and react with certainty, prompting emotion to permeate truth. This then does not allow for the wisdom that comes from patience and prudence, as there is minimal tolerance for the time necessary for all the facts to unfold. I get that; it’s easier to assume and react than it is to be quiet and wait. It’s harder still to admit we may be wrong.

My prayers remain with Brown’s family, for comfort in their ongoing grief… and for wisdom…for each of us.

Respectfully…

10/23/201410/23/2014

more wisdom

I was struck by conversations in multiple arenas this week when the Intramuralist humbly submitted the opinion that Pres. Obama has misused his presidential platform rhetorically. The basis for the opinion was that Obama’s “ ‘yes’ hasn’t always meant ‘yes’ and his ‘no’ hasn’t always meant ‘no’ “. He often says things that seem exaggerated, untrue, or designed to control the public narrative and impression. Note that the yes/no adage is a prioritized practice in my household. I have since wondered what additional practices we might appreciate seeing prioritized in our public servants, as after all, they are one of us, elected by us, supposed to be representing us, and thus serving us. What if they consistently practiced the following… adopting the wisdom of both scripture and Twain? 🙂

Tell the truth (… “then you don’t have to remember anything”).

Say what you mean and mean what you say.

Think before you speak.

Always do right.

If a person offend you, and you are in doubt as to whether it was intentional or not, do not resort to extreme measures (… “simply watch your chance and hit him with a brick”… oh, wait… they’re already good at that).

Ladies first.

Look after the orphans and widows.

Love your neighbor as yourself.

Clothe yourself with humility.

Confess your wrongs (… “acknowledge it like a man and say you didn’t mean to”).

Turn the other cheek.

Let no debt remain outstanding.

Never handle firearms carelessly.

Obey your parents (… “this is the best policy in the long run, because if you don’t, they will make you”).

Pray for your enemies.

Forgive and be forgiven.

Get your facts first.

Be very careful about lying (… otherwise you are nearly sure to get caught. Once caught, you can never again be in the eyes to the good and the pure, what you were before).

Remove the log in your own eye before focusing on the speck in another.

Value mercy over judgment.

Seek God first.

Just wondering… winking somewhat, too.

Respectfully…

10/18/201410/19/2014

ebola Q’s

So Ebola seems the hottest topic of conversation… what it is… what it’s not… what are the imminent dangers. As one might expect, the Intramuralist has multiple questions…

How did this begin?

Where will it end?

How many will be infected?

Are we prepared?

Are we overhyping it?

How has the federal government failed the American people?

How concerned should we be?

When Pres. Obama seemed so unconcerned — saying the spread to American shores was unlikely — what did he actually know?

Was he once again just telling us what he thinks we want to hear?

How has the White House politicized the process?

How has the press politicized the process?

How effective would a travel ban be?

Is there any lobbyist influence involved both advocating or opposing a travel ban?

How much did prayer play a role in the healing of Ebola-infected, Samaritan Purse worker, Dr. Kent Brantly?

Why appoint an Ebola “czar”? And better yet, why appoint a czar who has zero healthcare experience?

With elections looming and confidence in Obama waning, is Ebola the so-called October surprise?

Has anyone embraced initial Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s mantra that “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste”?

And what does it say about our country that anyone would desire to take advantage of a crisis?

And one more Q: is the government completely capable of dealing with all things?

Maybe, that, too, should influence both our questions and our vote…

Respectfully…

10/16/201410/16/2014

climate omission

It’s election season, so you know what that means.

That equates to typically seemingly intelligent people screaming over one another, each attempting to make their point most emphatically, hoping they are able to somehow at least appear to respectfully drain out the point and attention paid to the other. That’s part of America’s biggest pollution problem — not emissions nor exhaust — sadly, rather, elections. While still clinging to our threads of democracy, we pierce the purity of the process by not only the amounts of lobbyist money infused (as some will be quick to claim) but also by all the dirty and dishonest tactics (as still more will claim). Claim both. Call it out in both parties. Wise leadership cannot turn a hypocritical eye by calling out a lack of integrity in an opponent while justifying it in the politically likeminded.

One of the more contemporary arguments, no less, where each tends to drown out the point of another is climate change. Yes, here we go again…

Democrats say “the debate is over” (thank you, Pres. Obama) and Republicans say “I’m not a scientist.” Ok, ok… I get it… both of you will net lobbyist monies by emphatically stating your point. P.S. We know you like money.

I am thus sensing it’s again time for the Intramuralist to put forth the most significant point in the climate change/global warming/whatever’s-most-convenient-to-call-it-now debate. It’s a point that all those in leadership — Democrats and Republicans, Republicans and Democrats — even those who like to claim it’s over — always omit. The glaring omission fascinates me.

Climate change adherents say the Earth is warming and man is responsible. Earth’s warming is responsible for everything from hurricanes to snowfall to tornadoes and typhoons; throw in, too, maybe Ebola and my mama’s kitchen sink (ok, maybe not the sink). The point is that the politically likeminded and talking point repeaters seemingly blame all they can’t explain on climate change.

Climate change deniers simply say it’s not true. There’s no proof. No conclusive change. “I am not a scientist,” was Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) most recent claim. Note: skeptics can’t explain all they believe either.

Here’s my point: no one can prove with certainty that climate change exists or not; no one can definitively prove man’s role or responsibility — regardless of the intensity of their emphatic expression. Despite the wanting attempts of a clearly declining-in-influence President wishing to appear in charge, a wanting attempt cannot be equated with scientific proof. So acknowledging that point, let me then add the number one problem that no candidate wishes to acknowledge this close to election day…

The problem with the climate change argument is that it omits any acknowledgement of God. No Creator of the universe is considered in most stereotypical, scientific arguments. God is left out. That’s a problem.

It’s not a problem simply because acknowledgement is a preferred practice of religious people; it’s a problem because of what the historical scriptures actually say. The authenticated scriptures speak of a world that will one day end… a world marked by war and famine (as happening now), earthquakes and turmoil (also happening now), and a time in which persons become incredibly self-important, ungrateful, and arrogant in their own thinking (again — yikes — happening now). The scriptures say there will be a time the Earth will end.

The end of the Earth, however, is not correlated to plastic bag usage nor any influx of aerosol cans. There’s nothing about light bulbs, coal, or gas-guzzling vehicles. While God certainly calls us to be good stewards of our planet’s vast resources, the world’s end — according to those historical passages — comes as a direct result of man’s unwillingness to acknowledge and thank God. I would think it’d thus be wise to at least include him in the debate… even this close to the election.

Respectfully…

10/14/201410/14/2014

retreating

This past weekend I had the humble privilege of leading a retreat for some seventy-five plus women who are committed to expressing gratitude despite the circumstances… persons who regardless of the depth of the irritants or piercing of the pain are intentionally choosing to trust God regardless, recognizing that they will grow — even from the ugly.

Let me be clear; it’s not that we’re thanking God for the actual irritants; but we trust him with what happens; we seek him within the tough times. And that change in focus girds us with peace and gives us joy. That peace and joy sustains all else.

We also addressed the fact that after the empowering, shared experience of the weekend, we would return home and quickly be challenged to forget what we learned — that we would undoubtedly soon be tempted to gripe and grumble more as opposed to being intentional in our expressions of gratitude.

The grumbling opportunities came quickly. All one has to do is take a brief a glance at a cross section of selective stories missed while away…

The elections… less than a month away; candidates are scrambling — doing whatever it takes to win… sometimes all ethics, all respect for one another, and all adherence to the Constitution gets thrown aside…

Gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis (D-TX) runs an attack ad against her opponent, Attorney General Greg Abbott (R-TX), that begins with a stark picture of an empty wheelchair. Note that Abbott is disabled and in a wheelchair. Pundits and politicians across the ideological spectrum find the controversial “wheelchair ad” in the Texas governor race “disgusting,” “offensive,” and “a historic low” in campaign advertising. Meanwhile Davis continues to defend the ad.

Activist actress Gwyneth Paltrow throws a glitzy fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee, headlined by Pres. Obama; dinner cost $15,000 per person. When introducing the President, Paltrow gushes about Obama’s “handsome” nature, and adds, “It would be wonderful if we were able to give this man all of the power that he needs” — obviously forgetting for at least a moment that we live in a democracy, not a dictatorship.

The elections are close…

Ebola is closer…

So much in the world tempts to rattle our thinking. All these headlines, stories, and too much sensationalism threatens to disrupt a person’s commitment to express gratitude. But today, I refuse to allow all the crud in the world to keep me from being thankful… to keep me from holding on to what is noble and good and true…

… which, by the way, is none of the above.

Respectfully…