In light of the recent revelation in Chicago of the details of the shooting death of Laquan McDonald by police officer Jason Van Dyke – along with the many other questionable killings of Black people by the police, should America change its policy on how it defines justified use of lethal force by police?  Since the police have repeatedly lied about situations involving the use of force – especially lethal force – and their superiors and ambitious politicians have conspired with them in covering it up, should the ludicrously high bar that must be surmounted in order to convict a police officer of a crime be lowered?  Should they be treated the same way that every other American citizen is treated when they are alleged to have broken the law?

For example, when a person who has committed a crime(s) in the past is caught and faces a jury in court lawyers for the plaintiff and lawyers for the defendant will vet the opposing witnesses to determine their credibility.  If a witness is a liar, substance abuser, has a criminal history or whatever the case may be this is brought to light so that jurors can factor it into their deliberation.  If that person is convicted, the judge takes their past criminal history into account when he sentences them.

Why shouldn’t it work this way with police officers, whether they are witnesses or the defendant(s), when they find themselves in untenable situations?  This is not to say that the nature of their job and the stress that is an inextricable part of it should not be given special consideration and if there is sound reasoning, allowed to mitigate the ultimate determination as to whether their actions were justified.  But when there is overwhelming evidence that their actions were not justified the problem should not be winked at because they are police officers and it would be too hard to overcome the high bar that would allow for a conviction.  They must not be allowed to go unpunished because what they did would reflect badly on the police department or because ambitious politicians want to avoid having such a loss reflected on their record.

It is reasonable to assume that to not hold police officers accountable for their actions would only embolden bad police officers, reinforce their negative behavior and create a systemic problem involving excessive use of force and other abuse of authority by unscrupulous police officers.  It appears that this is what has already been allowed to happen in police departments throughout the country and that it will only get worse if it is not faced up to, addressed and corrected.  If history is the prologue, neither police officers on the streets nor management in police departments will voluntarily take the lead in fixing this problem and ambitious politicians will continue to do what ambitious politicians do.  It is becoming increasingly obvious that social and political pressure will need to be applied to force those responsible to address and correct this problem.

This problem is not something that is new!  We can go back decades and come all the way up to the Laquan McDonald case and time-and-again find that in too many instances management and political leaders have completely shirked their responsibility or done just enough to dispel the publics’ outrage.  The very people that are supposed to be serving and protecting us at times commit crimes to protect those who serve and protect us but abuse their power in the name of serving and protecting us.  This is not acceptable and must not be tolerated or condoned.

Many times, as in the Laquan McDonald case, police officers who abuse their authority and commit crimes are only held accountable when there is visual evidence – such as a video, that in essence catches them in the act.  Even then, a great majority of them have been exonerated, allowed to go free and remain on their job; this should not be!  Police management and police unions, which have a fiduciary responsibility to fight for its members, should fight to protect police officers.  But they only sully their reputation by being overzealous in protecting dishonest police when they know that they are guilty.  They must find a way to honorably fulfill that responsibility and let the lawyer(s) of those accused handle a vigorous defense of them.

When politicians are a part of the problem and/or solution they too often place their career ahead of a true solution to the problem and resort to sophistry or some other smoke and mirrors approach in order to accomplish their proverbial kick the can down the road routine.  Case in point, the announcement by Chicago’s Cook County State’s Attorney, Anita Alvarez, on the day before the dash cam tape of the shooting of Laquan McDonald would be released, that she charged police officer Jason Van Dyke, the policeman that shot and killed Mr. McDonald, with first degree murder.  Authorities had fought against the release of this tape for at least fourteen months and during that time officer Van Dyke had remained on the police force.  Why did Attorney Alvarez decide to charge Officer Van Dyke the day before the release of this tape and immediately promulgate her decision?  And why did Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel suddenly decide that after this fourteen month period it was now time to request help from local religious leaders?

Regardless of what the rationale might be for how the shooting death of Laquan McDonald was handled, my point is that there continues to be a problem with the policing of American citizens.  And further, if our leaders do not address and correct this problem; at best, it will slowly continue to grow and at worst, it will spiral out of control and create even greater problems that have the potential of wreaking havoc in communities throughout the country.

Eulus Dennis

There is no doubt that to talk about the police, politicians, politics and the Supreme Court in one article, make it interesting and have it make sense without it being so long and boring that none of you will have the stamina, let alone the desire, to read it would be a yeoman’s task; but I will try to accomplish that task.  If you made it passed the first sentence then I am going to trust that you will make it through the entire article as well.

I will keep it as short as possible while making sure that I get my point across and provide the reader with food for thought on some very important current issues.  I also hope that this article will motivate you to get informed and get out and vote in the upcoming 2016 presidential election and any other elections of officials to public office.

Although some of the positions that candidates are vying for – especially at local levels – may appear to you to be lowly and insignificant and not worth the time that you would spend to vote; most times, somewhere along the way, those who hold these positions will deal with issues that will ultimately have an impact on you and the community in which you live.  That is just one among the many reasons why you should always take the time to vote.

I haven’t posted an article for quite some time so please bear with me if this one becomes a bit lengthy.  America is faced with many problems right now, domestic and foreign, that should be receiving our full and most sincere attention.  Yet, our politicians continue to purposely create situations that require government to divide its attention and divert some portion of it from the real problems in order to address ridiculous self-made problems that are a result of petty partisan politics.

Although given America’s and the world’s current situation this is hardly the time for such partisan politics, the atmosphere and tone of the 2016 Republican presidential debates seem to be an harbinger that says a new leader will exacerbate the problem rather than give one hope for the future and the feeling that things will change for the better.  Specifically, this seems to indicate that rather than pulling America together and healing festering wounds, there is great potential that a new leader selected from among these existing 2016 candidates will instead rip the scabs from even more wounds and widen the social and financial gaps that already exist.  None of these candidates appear to possess the gravitas that is required of a person who is worthy to occupy the Oval Office.

There are those in our society who believe that America is so far advanced now that the playing field has been leveled and there is no longer a need to monitor social issues or be concerned about how America’s wealth is distributed because everyone has an equal chance to prosper.  They believe that there is no longer a need to monitor America to assure that all of her citizens are treated equally and have the same opportunity to achieve the American Dream based on their own effort and willingness to work hard.  It appears that the highest court in the land agrees with those who feel this way because in 2013 U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, whose opinion carries an extreme amount of weight, said that Section 4 (b) of the Voting Rights Act was no longer needed.

Unfortunately, this is not the case.  When we look at what has happened in many states to obstruct the ability of American citizens to vote or completely block them from voting we can see that we have not yet eradicated America of the prejudices that exist in the area of voting rights.  It is obvious that these prejudices have a disparate impact on people of color and the poor.

If we delve deeply into the rationale of the Voting Rights situation in these states and examine it closely, we will find that this line of thinking is not focused solely on voting rights but on social issues as well.  Whether or not it is the result of collateral damage, this approach to governance also impacts on financial issues between the subject group and those at or near the top of the social stratum ladder.

And, again unfortunately, voting rights and even some semblance of a level playing field as regards financial opportunities, which impact on the distribution of wealth are not the only areas where we continue to struggle to achieve a level playing field; we are still struggling to achieve equal justice under the law for all of our citizens.  Police brutality is still rampant, especially as regards African Americans, and sentences for African Americans who break the law are much more severe than they are for their White counterparts.

The Voting Rights Act was gutted in June 2013 because the US Supreme Court believed that the section that it rendered void was no longer needed.  This appears to be in error based on what is occurring in many states with regards to the obstruction of citizens’ ability to vote; with these states working to make it harder rather than easier for citizens to exercise their right to vote.

I continue to come across and read many articles about police brutality and police officers abuse of their authority.  Those who reject and speak out against this behavior and want it to be corrected are not saying that all police officers are bad and they hate them; they simply want this behavior to be corrected.  That is why I continue to be amazed at how Patrick Lynch, who is the president of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association and should be providing an example of leadership, consistently labels anyone who does this as police haters.  He did it to President Obama, he did it to Mayor Bill de Blasio, he did it to Reverend Al Sharpton and he did it to anyone who showed support for the Black Lives Matter movement and those who joined them in protests against police brutality and the use of excessive force by police.

I recently read a number of Associated Press articles about what is happening at the University of Missouri, the demands that African American students have made there and how those demands raise memories of and almost mirror those of the demands that were made at that university in 1969.  I also read an article in the Washington Post about Margaret Spellings being named as the University of North Carolina (UNC) system president.

I mentioned police brutality and how the police abuse their power and the articles regarding the demands that African American students are making at the University of Missouri along with the decision that the Supreme Court made to gut the Voting Rights Act for the purpose of providing examples.  These examples are beneficial in explaining why congress should correct the Supreme Courts misstep in its decision on the Voting Rights Act as soon as possible; before things blossom into the kind of problem that America is experiencing with policing its citizens and what appears to be history repeating itself with the civil rights movement.

Example one, there is no doubt that police officers have an extremely hard job to do and they face death every day that they put on their uniform.  They face individuals daily who are angry, frustrated and disillusioned, any one of which could snap and try to maim or kill them.  This is stressful and likely keeps them always on high alert.  That notwithstanding, they must still treat all of those whom they police equally, exercise control and use only the amount of force necessary to bring those who resist their authority under control.  Currently this is not the case.  Instead, police brutality is entrenched in police forces around the country, police officers regularly abuse their power and police and the communities that they serve and protect are at odds and have a strained relationship.

Example two, as already mentioned the demands that young African American students are making on college and university campuses around the country now are much like those that were being made in 1969 during the latter stage of the 1960 Civil Rights Movement.  The 1960 Civil Rights Movement includes Bloody Sunday, which occurred on March 7, 1965 shortly before the Voting Rights Act was signed into law.

Based on these examples and what is currently happening in our country, it appears that we are in danger of coming full circle on these issues.  The situation can only be exacerbated by the Supreme Court’s decision to gut the Voting Rights Act and congress’s refusal to correct this change and make any required adjustments to assure that the law will withstand Supreme Court scrutiny.  Congress should look closely at history and learn from it.  They should also consider our current situation with respect to the overall justice system and continue to work hard to prevent things from getting out of control while they work to correct the problem.

Politicians and politics are at the center of many if not all of these problems that we are experiencing and that is why I mentioned Margaret Spellings being named as the UNC system president.  Ms. Spellings was the Secretary of Education while George Bush was President and was responsible for the No Child Left Behind program.  She is a controversial figure and some members of the board that selected her and many of the UNC students opposed her appointment.  According to an article in The Washington Post by Valerie Strauss dated November 14, 2015, she was appointed by way of partisan politics.  Since politicians are at the center of these problems voters must work to assure that they are at the center of solving them.

One can understand if many of us harbor some ambivalence and are frustrated, afraid and anxious about what is happening around us and are intimidated by the pace at which it is happening; especially if you are a part of a majority that will soon become a minority.  I am of the opinion that even African Americans who have long been among the minorities have some anxiety and ambivalence about the impact that the current majority among the minorities will have and which direction they will press America to take.

The constant beacon of hope is that Americans have always been and still are a resilient people.  That is why we must get passed our frustration, fears and anxiety and elect politicians that will work hard to assure that they find the best path forward for our country.  I believe that we can and will do this because we know that it will make our democracy stronger and more representative of whom we really are as Americans.

Eulus Dennis

I recently read an article in The Denver Post by John Frank in which Governor John Hickenlooper commented on Hillary Clinton’s e-mail dilemma. I was especially drawn to it because the title of the article was ‘Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper expresses doubt about Hillary Clinton amid e-mail controversy.’ After I read the article and contemplated its title, I did not think that the title was fair based on what was in the article.

But it was a great ‘hook’ and I must admit that as a relatively new blogger, I don’t know a whole lot about these kind of things – but I am learning – so who am I to judge. Basically, while saying that Secretary Clinton was qualified to do the job, what Governor Hickenlooper said was that her e-mail server problem had the potential to present pitfalls that could cost her the nomination. He did not express any doubt about her or her ability to do the job.

In this article someone made a remark, which seemed as if it were in passing based on the amount of attention afforded to it, which suggested that Governor Hickenlooper should run for President. Although this remark sounds like, and likely is, a farfetched idea I have some thoughts about it.

Back in January 2011 when Mr. Hickenlooper was first sworn in as governor, my thoughts were that he was almost indiscernible as a Democrat. This quirky man appeared to be more of a hybrid between Democrat and Republican. At the time, I did not understand this and thought more along the line of him being someone that would readily sell out the Democrats. In my mind he was, and I will use the term created as an analogous to the acronym RINO, a DINO; Democrat In Name Only.

At the time that I first began having these thoughts, Mr. Hickenlooper was the incumbent mayor and as mayor all of the Republicans seemed to love him. I don’t think that the independents were far behind the Republicans in this love fest. But as I continued to follow the governor’s political career I began to have a clearer understanding of who he really is: he is his own man.

As much as I hated to admit it because of my long-held feelings that he was a sellout mayor who was really a Republican disguised as a Democrat so that he could play both sides and reap the political benefits, this mayor was just the governor that Colorado needed. With this being Colorado and with the direction in which the political winds were blowing, we needed someone who could assess various situations, seek the advice of those around him, assimilate that advice and still make his own decisions based on that advice.

We did not need someone who would give in to the strongest voices among his advisors, whether those voices were coming from hardliners whose persuasions were skewed to the left or to the right, but someone who would be his own man. We needed someone who would be his own man and yet be someone who was credible to Democrats, Republicans and independents. That man was John Hickenlooper.

To say those five words – ‘that man was John Hickenlooper’ – would have been too much of a mouthful for me when Mr. Hickenlooper first became mayor but I have since evolved. I have learned that this is the kind of person that is built for reasonable political discourse and compromise and who is among the least likely to sell out; it seems that he is rock solid when it comes to standing on principle.

Before I begin to sound more like Governor Hickenlooper’s PR man than a blogger who is simply trying to share some meaningful information with voters I will refer you to an article that I wrote on him back in November 2014. The article is entitled ‘Still, Governor John Hickenlooper’ and you can click on the title link to read it in its entirety.

As far as the farfetched suggestion that Governor Hickenlooper should run for President is concerned, even if he did decide to run for President the earliest that he could do it and remain in good standing with his fellow Democrats would be in 2024 if the 2016 Democratic nominee wins the general election. However, as previously mentioned, Governor Hickenlooper seems to be built for the kind of responsibility that the President of the United States would have and he seems to have the ability to assimilate and responsibly use the advice of his advisors.

Is it reasonable to believe that he could become President? I think so; if Michael Bennet, Governor Hickenlooper’s Chief of Staff when the Governor was mayor became a US senator from Colorado, why can’t the governor become President?

Although, as far as I am aware, he has never exhibited any desire to run for President he is, after all, a politician. And since politicians are cut from a special bolt of cloth and they are all driven by their political ambitions, as farfetched as the idea of a run for president might sound, do not be surprised if it comes to fruition.

The downside of a run for President in 2024 for Governor Hickenlooper would be that he would be 72 years old and that would put him right around the age that Senator Bernie Sanders is now. Is that too old? I don’t know but I did hear somewhere that to get old is inevitable but to age is a choice. So like I said, do not be surprised if a run for President by Governor Hickenlooper comes to fruition.

Eulus Dennis

Two powerful and courageous Republican women, and I want to emphasize the word women, because of an article that I wrote and posted to this blog on May 20, 2015 entitled ‘Just an attention grabber…Or maybe the real deal.’  That article was inspired, in particular, by a newcomer to politics by the name of Stacie Gilmore who was running for City Council in Denver, Colorado and in general by all of the women in elected positions at federal, state, and local levels of government who are stepping forward as willing leaders of our country, states and cities in times of challenge and controversy.

These two particular powerful and courageous women that I want to recognize and give well-deserved kudos are Republicans in South Carolina.  They are South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and South Carolina State Representative Jenny Horne.  The fact that they are from South Carolina to me makes what they did particularly courageous although they may not agree and would consider it as just a part of their job.  Once again I have to take this opportunity to say ‘how refreshing’ because this is not something that I have the opportunity to say very often about any of our politicians!

Governor Haley and Representative Horne spoke out when it was neither a comfortable time nor a convenient one to do so.  It was a time when lawmakers were discussing whether or not the Confederate flag should be removed from the South Carolina Capitol grounds.  It was a time when some people in general and likely most of those on the far and extreme rightwing in particular around the country were demanding that this flag remain exactly where it is.

Before Dylan Roof allegedly admitted to murdering nine churchgoers in the Temple Emanuel church in Charleston, South Carolina, even Governor Haley supported leaving this flag in place.  However; after this tragedy, she changed her mind.  When she changed her mind she did not play politics and pander to voters to help her politically.  Instead, she made a conscience decision to fulfill her responsibility as a leader and lead.

Representative Horne made this same decision.  As a result, the problem was resolved.  Some were elated with the outcome and others were disappointed with it; but it was resolved rather than avoided.  There will likely be strong negative political backlash for both of these women, which both were surly aware of in advance of their decision on removing the flag.

Unfortunately, the United States House of Representatives does not have a leader heading it who is willing to step up and lead in times of challenge and controversy as does the state of South Carolina.  Enter Speaker of the House, and exempli gratia (e.g.), John Boehner.  He has proven time-and-time-again that he is more into “…times of comfort and convenience.”  Since he became Speaker, he has never proven that he has the moxie to stand up to his caucus and lead “…in times of challenge and controversy.”  I cannot recall a single time, let alone multiple times, of this being the case when Nancy Pelosi was Speaker.

Although I am a longtime devoted Democrat, I know there are without doubt many Republicans with good, strong, meaningful and workable conservative ideas that are not being put forward and voiced because everyone is too busy posturing and pandering while playing politics.  I am also confident that there are well-informed Democrats and Independents of all ethnicities, creeds and colors who would readily support some of those ideas under normal political circumstances but political circumstances have not been normal from, at least, since the time that President Obama was first elected.

Our politicians need to get back on track and that is not going to happen unless we do our part as voters.  We have to get engaged in politics and remain engaged if we want our democracy to work as it was designed to work.  Let’s demand that our politicians do what we elected them to do and let us stop making decisions based on sound bites during election cycles and by simply looking at titles like Democrat, Republican and Independent.

The fact is that the removal of the Confederate flag from the South Carolina State Capitol grounds hurt a lot of Republicans who are good citizens and patriots.  Notwithstanding that their belief that this flag simply represents the history of their pride in southerners who fought bravely for the Confederacy is wrong because it is based on a lack of their knowledge of its true history; they sincerely believe that it deserves this place of honor.  And we should respect their feelings but it must be while we work to reveal this flags true meaning to them.

To remove this flag was the right thing to do.  Regardless as to whether or not we are successful in our efforts to convince dissenters of its true meaning, we should not gloat over the removal of the flag.  Instead, we should work with them to heal the wounds to all of those who were offended by its presence on the capitol grounds and those who were wounded by its recent ferruling.

What happened in South Carolina was not an easy thing for Governor Haley to deal with.  However, it is representative of the kind of things that we must deal with as a nation and is a good example of how we should go about dealing with them.  So I say kudos to Governor Nikki Haley and Representative Jenny Horne!  All of America should salute you for your willingness to lead in these times of challenge and controversy.

As for Speaker Boehner in particular and the United States Congress in general, all of America should speak up and admonish you to take an example from South Carolina.  Act like the leaders that you were elected to be and are capable of being.  Stop basking in the sunshine of your elected office during the “…times of comfort and convenience” and running away and hiding in the nearest dark corner during the “…times of challenge and controversy” and then emerging in full schmoozer mode once they have passed.

Eulus Dennis

This article was updated on 7/13/2015 to change the word “ended” to “ends” in paragraph five (5).  A link was also added that will take the reader to an article in The Guardian by Tom Dart in the event that they want more detail on how Texans are reacting to this U.S. military training exercise called “Jade Helm.”

According to an article in The Washington Post by Kevin Sullivan dated July 4, 2015, folks in Bastrop, Texas believe that President Obama has laid plans for the United States military to invade Texas.  According to the article, the Bastrop county Republican Party Chairman said that these people are not “nuts and wackos” but are concerned citizens who are patriots.

My first thought when I read the Washington Post article was that these were just a bunch of “nuts and wackos” in one county in Texas who simply could not let the anti-President Obama bandwagon leave without them.  But then I read this article that said that a poll taken by the University of Texas/Texas Tribune revealed that nearly half of Texans fear a federal military invasion.  Say what?!

I have heard that “Don’t mess with Texas” slogan many times before; it made me shiver when I heard it then and it still makes me shiver when I hear it now.  Why would they fear a lil ole US military invasion?  Isn’t everyone and everything scared to mess with Texas?  Everybody knows that there is plenty of macho floating around in Texas and anybody who wants some can get some: remember when Bush 43 said “bring it”?  He was referring to any adversary who would dare to challenge the United States: or maybe he was referring to any adversary who would dare to challenge Texas.  Anyway, that’s macho…it’s probably a lot easier to flaunt it when you will not actually be the one who has to back it up but it’s still macho.

I found the whole thing to be laughable until politicians like Republican Governor Abbott of Texas and Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz, a junior Senator from Texas, began to weigh in on the issue.  Now it was not quite so funny because although it was just a matter of these politicians pandering for votes, for those who truly believe this nonsense it only adds fuel to the fire.  They do not look upon the kind of action taken by Governor Abbott and the kind of comments made by Senator Cruz as simply playing politics.

They do not look upon the Governor’s placing the Texas National Guard on alert and having them monitor the Jade Helm 15 military exercise by the United States military in Texas until it ends for fear that they might try to invade Texas as mere politics.  They do not look upon the statement that Senator Cruz made in Salon as mere politics:

“My office has reached out to the Pentagon to inquire about this exercise,” Cruz said. “We are assured it is a military training exercise. I have no reason to doubt those assurances, but I understand the reason for concern and uncertainty, because when the federal government has not demonstrated itself to be trustworthy in this administration, the natural consequence is that many citizens don’t trust what it is saying.”

If you would like more detail on how Texans are reacting to this military exercise, which is scheduled to begin on July 14, 2015 you can click on this link; Texans monitor Jade Helm military training amid fears of government plot.

These are people who already harbor things about President Obama that may sound absurd and like nothing more than foolishness to most reasonable people but to some – like those who believe that there is a real possibility of an Obama-led invasion of Texas, actions and comments like those just mentioned by high-level, supposedly credible elected officials only reinforce their nonsensical thoughts.

What Governor Abbott and Senator Cruz have done is just another example of how far our politicians have wandered off of the beaten path and why all of us as American voters must remain vigilant and always remind them that they are in office first and foremost to represent the American people and our interest and not to be on a never-ending campaign to be reelected.

The best and possibly only way that we can effectively do this is through fulfilling our civic responsibilities among which is voting. There is no doubt that there will come times when we will be inconvenienced by the demands placed upon us by these civic duties. But when we are tempted to gripe and complain about these inconveniences, at those times let us never fail to reflect upon what our predecessors passed through to win the right to have those duties and the right to the franchise. That will make what we must endure to fulfill those duties become much easier to bear.

Finally, always remember, your vote is the most important one of all…unless you don’t use it!

Eulus Dennis