We’ve come a long way, but we’re not there yet

It’s been nearly 50 years since Martin Luther King Jr. said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” 

The “I Have a Dream” speech laid out a dramatic vision calling for not only racial equality, but an end to discrimination.

We’ve come a long way since, but we’re not all the way there yet. Every day people are still judged by the color of their skin, the flow of their walk and the style of their clothes. 

I’m lucky enough to work at night when no one comes into the office. The day shift has to look presentable to the public, but I have no such requirement, so some days I may not be as polished as others. I wear what’s comfortable and warm — or cool, depending on the weather.

I wear hats — a lot. I have many friends who have most likely never seen me without a hat on. Oftentimes, I coordinate my outfit for the day based on what hat I want to wear. The primary reason I wear them is because I like them. But there’s another deeper reason. When I was much younger, I was told that no one that wears a hat amounts to anything. That sounded like a challenge to me. I’ve worn a hat ever since.

I wore a hooded sweatshirt to work on Monday. It’s not uncommon for me to wear a hoodie to work — especially on days when the high reaches a mere 38 degrees. 

I don’t usually wear my clothing as a statement, but Monday was different. I wore my hoodie as a sign of solidarity with Trayvon Martin and those like him who have been labeled by society to be thugs and hoodlums, in large part because of their hooded sweatshirts.

Monday night I went to a vigil for Trayvon, the 17-year-old high school student who was shot and killed on Feb. 26 by George Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain. Martin’s biggest offense from what I’ve gleaned from media reports over the last month: He wore a hoodie.

I was one of about 100 people at the vigil, candles lit, sitting silent, listening to Mark Sanders, pastor of Refuge Temple of Christ in Lockport as he quoted King himself and said, “I don’t remember when it became a crime to wear a certain piece of clothing.”

Sanders pointed out that while this all may have been new to some of us, for many in the crowd it was a long-dealt-with issue. 

Sanders said, “I don’t have all the details. I just know that something stinks.”

I don’t have all the details on the slaying of Trayvon Martin either, but I will tell you that I believe it was a slaying. From what I can piece together, he was hunted down and shot — primarily for wearing a hoodie. And being black.

We’ve come a long way since 1963. We’re not there yet, but outpourings like the one I saw on Monday night are helping us to get there.

Random thoughts on state of society

The debate over health care in this country has gone from bad to worse, with accusations bandied about by both sides, saying that the GOP hates women and that the left hates religion.

Personally, I think both sides might be oversimplifying the issue a bit and everyone needs to step away from the microphone until cooler heads prevail.

I can say this however: Few things sicken me more than the number of people who hate in the name of their God. I say “their God” instead of just “God,” because it’s obviously a different God than the one I know.

Using religion as a means to attack someone just seems to go against everything religion is supposed to mean. It’s as though some people’s Bibles only came with the book of Leviticus. None of that feel-good New Testament stuff. It’s maddening.

•••

The Republican race for the White House continues to muddle along, ever closer to what almost looks like a guaranteed brokered convention. As you may know, I’m a Ron Paul fan, but he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance, so I basically don’t have a horse in that race. Come April 24, I won’t be able to vote in the New York primary, but I have to imagine it will actually count this year, something it seldom does.

•••

My oldest daughter was telling me the other day that she’s scared for the future because she’ll be voting in four years, but doesn’t know anything about the current race for the White House. She then named the four GOP candidates and stated briefly what they stand for — or at least what they are perceived to stand for.

Personally, I don’t fear for the future. I fear for the present because my 14-year-old daughter who considers herself uninformed knows more about the contest than most of my adult friends.

•••

I’ve long suggested that there should be an entrance exam to the voting booth complete with five basic questions about the candidates themselves. They should be factual questions that anyone who’s voting would know the answer to. Your grade on the exam would be equal to how much your vote counts. If you get only one question right, your vote only counts 20 percent. If you get them all right, your vote counts 100 percent. This would ensure that the most important decisions made in this great nation of our are being made from those in the know.

Unfortunately, it’s not that way and everyone’s vote counts the same meaning our decisions are being made by the dumb masses.

•••

I understand political expediency and the art of compromise, but I’m disappointed that Gov. Andrew Cuomo caved on his promise to veto the legislative district lines if they were not drawn by an independent (non-partisan) panel. As such, we are doomed to 10 more years of near-guaranteed incumbency protection.

The same people who have gotten us into the mess that we’re in are pretty much a shoe-in to keep us wallowing in the same mess for another decade.

Florence Nightingale for president?

The more I hear people complain about Barack Obama, the more I like the guy.

Now to be clear, I didn’t vote for him the first time. I don’t think he’s done a particularly good job. And I probably won’t vote for him this time around. But I find myself defending him on a regular basis because of the unfounded claims made by people I can only refer to as loons.

For example, I’ve read repeatedly that the price of gasoline has doubled since Obama became president, noting that he’s the reason that prices have jumped the way they have.

GasBuddy.com tells us that in mid- to late-2008, the price of gasoline dropped significantly in Buffalo from $4.26 a gallon to $1.81. It has been on a steady incline ever since. Worth noting here, of course, is that it was $4.26 in the summer of 2008. But to hear the loons tell it, it was $1.81 until Obama took office.

They’ll tell you, of course, that the spike in gas prices from 2005 to 2008 had nothing to do with former President George W. Bush, but the spike from 2008 until 2012 is the sole fault of President Obama.

The loons seem to believe that their guy couldn’t possibly have been the problem (this goes with the left-wing loons who serve as Obama apologists, too). The fact of the matter is, the price of things go up and our foreign policy doesn’t help matters. It is, of course, the same foreign policy that has guided us over the course of the past dozen administrations or so.

The problem isn’t Obama. And it wasn’t Bush. The problem — as is so often the case — is us. But it’s easier to blame Obama.

I don’t hear the same people who are blaming Obama for gas prices also giving him credit for the stock market. The Dow Jones Industrial Average hovered around 8,000 points when Obama was inaugurated. It now stands at about 13,000. That’s quite a bump.

Likewise, unemployment spiked at the end of George W. Bush’s time in office, hitting 7.8 percent in January of 2009. It further jumped to 10 percent in October of that year, nine months into Obama’s first term. Since October of 2009, however, it has (very) slowly but steadily declined to where it stands now at just over 8 percent.

But I hear nary a word about that. All I hear these days is gas prices. And when I do hear about the stock market or unemployment, I’m told it would be better were it not for Obama and his horrible fiscal policies. Oh and he’s a Communist.

I’ve been called a Communist before. I know what a Communist is. Barack Obama is not a Communist. He may truly be inept, but he’s not a Communist.

For the record, I’ve been called a Fascist before, too. I’m not one of those either. I’m just a guy who gets irritated by other people’s B.S.

While I’m very unlikely to cast a vote for Barack Obama come November, I do sympathize for the guy. And if I end up feeling bad enough for him, I might just vote for him.

Dear loons, you’ve overplayed your hand. And the reasonable people of the world are going to sympathize for a guy they probably would never vote for otherwise. Get back to reality so we can find someone who can actually do the job.

Rush to judgment is wrong

Rush Limbaugh has stepped in it again.

The question is, will he be able to step out of it? Or were his comments about Georgetown student Sandra Fluke too far outside the realm of what is considered acceptable for him to come back from.

For those who missed it, Limbaugh said Fluke — who testified before Congress about the need for birth control coverage provided by insurance companies — was a “slut” and a “prostitute.”

As of this writing, El Rushbo has lost no less than seven advertisers for his daily talk show. While he has apologized, it came off as forced and insincere, which it most likely was.

I wanted to write a column in defense of Rush. I really did. After all, he only said what half of the country seems to believe. The problem is, I can’t defend the half of the country that seems so clearly wrong to me.

Somehow we’ve reached a plateau where contraceptives are a dirty word, only taken by women of ill repute and only worn by men of questionable character.

I’m not entirely sure how this came to be, but somewhere in our not-too-distant past, we stumbled upon a place where it’s okay to think (and apparently speak) ill of people for living a different lifestyle than you. Ironically, this is veiled under the guise of “religious freedom.”

The same half of the country that is always crying about abortions seems to believe that anything that might prevent pregnancy — short of abstinence — is immoral and should therefore be banned. In the same breath that they denounce abortion, they also suggest that the thing that best prevents the leading cause of abortion — unwanted pregnancy — should not be used.

I can, therefore, only assume that that half of the country thinks that women should be barefoot and pregnant often (thus making more jobs available to men, I guess). Either that or they’re abstinent.

Actually, the abstinent theory might hold some water. It would explain why they’re so angry all the time.

Limbaugh and his puritan cohorts might have the First Amendment right to say what they believe, including calling law students names, but it certainly doesn’t give them any moral standing, does it?

The Puritan Right has darn near idolized Limbaugh for nearly two decades now. And they have — in fact — put him before God. I find it ironic how hateful some people think God is, prime example being the Westboro Baptist crowd.

As much as I want to defend Limbaugh’s First Amendment right and note the fact that he’s simply saying what half of the country is thinking, I am reminded that there is such a thing as being right. And defending someone who’s so very wrong just because a lot of people believe in what he is saying is definitely not the right thing for me to do.

I don’t expect any real apology from Limbaugh. Or his sycophants. I can only hope that they evolve into a more enlightened state — one in which genuine dialog trumps demagoguery.