The Necessary Lies Of Omission Delivered To Advance The Secular Progressive Agena

YES. This is a provocative photograph to the left.  Redacted out of a need to retain some measure of taste and respect on this blog. I ran across this picture on "Google Images" as I was searching for the picture in the "editorial Photoshop image" below..  I typed in "Black Male" while I had the "Google Safe Search" turned off.

I assure you that I did not reconnect with some "closeted feelings" upon seeing it.  I can't relate to this picture at a foundational level.

I have no "gravitational pull" into silence for fear of being called a "homophobe" for daring to make observations about the cross between the human gender phenotype AND societal ramifications in the failure to enforce certain standards of behavior and agreed upon "normalcy".  The term is merely used to bully people into silence by placing them on the defensive.

The picture, however provocative was a perfect choice based on two references to homosexuality related issues that I heard about this week.

Earlier this week I listened to NPR's "Tell Me More" in which a show guess discussed his positive HIV status while living in Washington DC - the city with the fastest rising rate of HIV infections in the nation.




In order to debate this first important point properly - think about the confluence of:

• A Large Black Population center which has a high "victimization rate" from some agent of harm
• The coordinated "struggle" against this agent as a means of mitigating its ability to harm

With that in mind - DO YOU THINK that this fact would play a more prominent role in the story about the general subject?  Why is it that the pattern that are seen in Washington DC which lead to this life changing and potential deadly set of events was not more substantively emphasized by show host Michel Martin or the guest who is infected with the HIV virus?

In my assessment - Because such a focus would compel Jose Rameriz and others who are practicing such "risky behavior" to possibly change their pattern of behavior - beyond the mere wearing of condoms - it is par for the course for the progressives to avoid anything that will render a SELF-INDICTMENT as they recognize some of the consequences as their ideological dogma becomes the prevailing force.

Mr Rameriz ultimately argues that it was "lack of education" on the risks of unprotected sex that exposed him to the "exchange of body fluid" that ultimately lead to his infection.

The popular argument is to render everything in terms of "RIGHTS".  Those who claim to be the agents for expanded RIGHTS have claim to a higher moral standing than those who figure that 'man has not changed over time'.   The culture and traditions that have been forged over time and passed down are very likely due to the fact that our ancestors, along the line, had to deal with the full consequences of every "human issue" that we deal with today.

Instead by outsourcing their indictments to the national government they are temporarily able to mentally escape from the consequences of their unwillingness to enforce cultural strictures upon behavior in the areas they control.  Thus the failure is that the greater society, through the government has failed to provide for everyone equally.  Their own ideology will stand more resolute than ever, seeking "social justice".

(I like Michel Martin but.............)  Notice that when a left wing activist (or even radical) is a guest on "Tell Me More"  there is no hint of friction between the guest and the show host.  I noted previously that Rich Benjamin - the Black, Progressive-Fundamentalist male who went to the "Whitetopias" to report on how the other half live.   He returned to "Tell Me More" as a "live out" gay male and told Mrs Martin that he planned to boycott all heterosexual marriages until he and every other homosexual was allowed to marry who they choose everywhere in America.

This radical attack on our traditions did not trigger the "teeth grinding" that is readily apparent as Mrs Martin interviews a social conservative who dares to proclaim that certain problems that we face today are not because of the need for more (secular) progression but because we have fallen away from certain tenants that allowed these challenges to be mitigated and the exceptions managed.

Is it so that the proposals made by  "conservative" to enforce certain traditions is more harmful than what we see in the way of HIV infections in Washington DC?

Worse, when a hot spot like Washington DC is identified - I used to be able to count on Cynthia Tucker, former opinion page writer for the Atlanta Journal Constitution, to render an indictment upon the Black Church for their bigotry in ALLOWING their community members to get infected and potentially die.  Ms Tuckers pace was at minimum two such columns each year.

When it comes to accepting the notion that the male sexual appetite and occasional lack of aversion to the intrinsic RISKS of a "body fluid exchange" within an orifice that does not have the naturally produced lubrication that a vagina produces, thus creating abrasions through which "infected body fluid" reaches the blood stream - there is nothing short of ideological bigotry that prevents this fact from being considered.

After listening to "Tell Me More's" predecessor "News And Notes" on the subject I came up with the observation that the official secular progressive response to the challenge is to hand out "pills / pamphlets/ prophylactics and devices" all with the goal of teaching the "body fluid exchangers" how to properly install the "body fluid capture devices" but carefully avoiding the subject of the social structures necessary to functionally "slow the roll".

(The most effective contraception for a Black man is marriage to a working woman with a few kids to mange.  :-)  Show him the good life that you have together and the consequences of his "thinking with the wrong head".  This will more comprehensively change his behavior on average.  [Then Herman Cain had to mess it all up, causing our spouses to look at us funny.  I don't know anyone named Ginger though.  ] )

Why isn't anyone doing an inspection of Washington DC?
I recall posting, about 4 years ago, the news of a report which said that "Abstinence Only Education Is Not Effective".  In the audio report from "Black-wing Talk Radio" a local Atlanta social advocate pointed to the increasing rates of STDs among young Black people as proof that "AOE" is a failure.  She forgot to note that the City Of Atlanta Public Schools and the majority of other progressive school districts NEVER adopted the principles of "AOE" as pushed by the Bush Administration. 

NOTE: This IS NOT an advocacy for Abstinence Only Education.  It is only a call out of the fraud and hypocrisy over the debate.  As I recall only $100 million was allocated each year but with the amount of blame it got - this potential $2 million per state was the most EFFECTIVE government program ever implemented IF you judge it by the claims made against it for causing teen pregnancy.

In Washington DC and other HIV hotspots that very same spirit which causes certain operatives to blame AOE beyond the unintended consequences that it could have possibly caused - for nothing more than IDEOLOGICAL INDICTMENT purposes - are the very same people who won't dare go near an attempt to inspect their theories as it relates to Washington DC having to suffer the burden of their ideologically induced public policy.

Obama's Evolves His Views On Homosexuality As He Launches Another (Wink Wink) "Humanitarian Mission" Upon Africa

No sooner than Obama released his new foreign aid policy that inspected the treatment of a nation's "homosexuals" did the Obama sycophants at MSNBC's "The Grio.com" re-Tweet a press release praising the new "Obama Administration" policy".  Never before have presidential danishes served at the Black Progressive Press-White House Strategy Coordination Session extend so far into an administration's term.  But I understand.  As MSNBC's Al Sharpton said - "We have never had a Black (Progressive) President before.  We don't know how to engage and confront him".  Trust me, Rev Sharpton - if Herman Cain was in office - YOU would have "figured it out by now".

The Obama policy which adds a checklist item of "homosexual rights" to the list by which a nation receiving American aid must be compliant in. 

This line of reasoning is akin to those who see the logic in "Hate Crimes" here in America.  (I call them "Thought Crimes").

Not only is it true that ANY physical assault on ANY citizen should be illegal in every nation - thus this policy shift redundant (or should I say - it exposes an agenda) it is more so true that in places like The Congo where 2.5 million Africans were killed since 1998 - THEIR INDISCRIMINATE DEATHS neither triggered a new American policy NOR was it cause for a "Humanitarian Mission" as we were told by Obama regarding Libya.  Most of these nation's can't protect their "straight" citizens let alone the homosexuals.  South Africa is the "rape capital of the world" but this lack of protection for women is not a cause for a punitive policy change.

Simply put this is only about the advancing of a Secular Progressive Agenda in the guise of "human rights".

I Do Not Blame Obama!!!!!  The Problem Is With These DEPENDENT Nations


Today the American government is lead by a Progressive-Fundamentalist administration who believes that "gay rights" should be expanded around the world.  In the past and in the future we will have a "Conservative-Fundamentalist" administration that will remove the "Gay Policy" and restore the "Abortion Ban" that Obama has lifted.

The pawn on the chess board doth move systematically.

The real issue is with the dependent nations themselves.
The consequence of looking toward outsiders to allow you to live at your desired standard of living is that "those who PAY also call the shots".

If there was ever a time for "The Least Of These" Nations to reform themselves as the central means of retaining their sovereignty NOW IS THE TIME.  

In my view a group of people, aligned as a nation must first be able to who themselves competent in defining a sustainable government - in the areas of economic productivity, education, public safety, health care and military defense from attack.  Their inability sustain themselves in these basic areas makes them vulnerable to the whims "The Economic Hitman".  (Or at least this was the case not too long ago.)