we should boycott Starbucks and drink a coffee at Toby Keith's new restaurant chain

As of this morning my blog had 4,202 views for 159 blogs, an average of 26 views per blog. I have reached into at least 14 countries. Nice!
The second amendment to the US Constitution reads:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Despite all the legalistic wrangling and NRA propaganda, questions remain. How can a militia be well regulated if there is no "roll call," no list of members? What well regulated militia does not know which weapons are in who's hands? When has the well regulated militia made an acceptable appearance in US history? It wasn't Shay's Rebellion. Was it the KKK riots in this post-Civil War era? The Birmingham church bombings? Post-Katrina shootings in New Orleans? Where will the next militia action be? Will it be similar to the Crimea incursions? Will it be in Texas or Arizona's Maricopa County? Will the "well regulated" aspects be provided by county sheriffs?
Following is my 2nd highest-rated blog:

So the CEO of Starbucks "asks" patrons to leave their guns at home and gets pandering-pundit-patter about what a brave man he is. His workers are directed by company policy to serve the gun crowd politely. Screw him. Toby Keith, the United States Uber Alles Nashville-type country star bans guns in his restaurants, totally playing against type. God Bless him. Here's a link to the story.

My parents, conservative Reagan-loving Southern Baptists, would have called Starbucks "a rough place" and warned against going there because, in their world, decent eating and drinking establishments don't have guns or threatening feelings in the air.

This, to me, provides a parable, but parables must have endings that teach a lesson. And must not this parable end with the "good son" (prissy Starbucks) getting the short end of the stick while the "prodigal son" (Toby Keith) wins all the kudos?

Really, people. In every city I see a Starbucks I also see local coffee bars. You don't have to give up your lattes to take a stand! BOYCOTT STARBUCKS, specifically over the issue of guns. Send the message. Let Starbucks become havens for the type of person who wants more guns in our society, people who will sacrifice children for a poorly-conceived conception of the 1st Amendment's place in our Constitution.

Pass it on.

German Nazis lost WWII, but fascism won

I am thinking about a new approach to my blog and will relatively soon change to a new name - "Burl Dunn (something to be determined). I am able to access statistics back to June of 2013 and I have marked all my blogs that received 20 or more views - a rather humble "best of" figure for bloggers. However, I have received views in so many countries that I am a bit proud. Today the list is: US, Germany, Brazil, France, UK, Greece, Peru, Romania, and Venezuela. I remember China, Russia, and India, and Canada showing up from time to time. When my blog gets "hits" the blogs read span many months - my blog is not a daily thing for most readers. Perhaps the hits are in response to key search words; perhaps it is due to reposting. At any rate, here is the first of a few repostings:

Fascism, like socialism, is a word that cannot be strictly defined. It's more of a continuum and we are too far along the line in the wrong way. Let's trust Benito Mussolini, a true fascist, as to what fascism is.  I get this from  http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp

He said, "Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism...
The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State...
For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence."
And from http://www.publiceye.org/fascist/corporatism.html
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."

I think it obvious that the United States takes fascist actions all the time, a good example being  the use of taxpayer dollars to bail out large corporations, to build sports stadiums for multi-millionaire owners, the utter dictatorship of the Federal Reserve, and in its perpetual use of military power overseas against nations that have not harmed us. In its "war on terrorism" the U.S. has relegated individual rights both at home and abroad to an inferior role. Thomas Jefferson's words "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" are rendered inoperable in a society that passes laws merely for the benefit of the rich, that wages war on behalf of corporate interests using its brave soldiers as cannon fodder, that imprisons its citizens at a rate that only totalitarian China approaches.
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the World Bank, and all the tools the Western World uses to impose strictures on less powerful nations are a kind of corporate fascism. The actions of the U.S. and the World Bank both within and without its borders are not based upon philosophy. They are based upon CONTROL, mostly control of oil. Exceptions to the so-called philosophy are easily obtained through the proper application of bribes, excuse me, political donations (free speech, says the Supreme Court). It seems that a 100,000 dollar contribution to either the Republicans or the Democrats brings a one million dollar reward. Laws that make the words "open market" and "free trade" a joke will be passed for you. A million dollars might buy you a war. And in the chaos of war pallets of one hundred dollar bills "disappear." 
So many Americans only get worked up about issues that are ginned up by our corporate media - like the NSA violations of "privacy." I just can't believe that Americans could think their privacy had not been utterly violated by the Bush-era Patriot Act and even the No Child Left Behind Act - a law purporting to be about education, and yet it required public schools to hand over private information about minor children to military recruiters.

NPR took a rightward turn in 2000 - watch what you say!

I am frustrated by the ongoing bias among "liberals" that National Public Radio, NPR, is a fair voice, even a liberal voice, in the US media. I began to notice a right-wing bias in NPR's reporting during the Bush v Gore Supreme Court Decision. And it goes on daily. When will a longterm employee of NPR speak out?

It would help if there were articles like Owen Jones' analysis of what is happening with the BBC, here on the Guardian/UK website. His analysis of conservative attacks on the BBC perfectly mirrors what happened to NPR. The tactics that have worked for American conservatives are exported worldwide. Even ultra-right electoral gurus find work abroad, but the UK right-wing attack on journalism needs no outside help. The Tories understand the tactic of defining the debate, of controlling the "facts" of the debate. As the right shifts they pull the left along until the center cannot hold.

the grass roots must be watered, the Military/Industrial/Secrecy/Prison Complex must be starved.

Ted Cup's editorial in the US edition of the Guardian states his belief that the CIA may face a formidable challenge in the US Senate. One can only hope. I believe that, given a world in which so many facts are utterly unavailable to the public, it makes sense to go with one's gut reactions. If one takes no stand until the facts are known then no stand will ever be taken. And a stand against the United State's spy network is long overdue. It has broken faith with the expressed ideals of the nation and the world. It has become the enemy of truth and freedom. It creates the very conditions it argues it must fight against!
I don't know yet what to think of President Obama's reaction. Just because he is letting the disagreement between Senate overseers and the CIA stew in their own juices for now does not mean he will not take the right stand in the end. The right stand, in my mind however,  goes well beyond slapping the CIA for lying to and intimidation of the Senate. There are, no doubt, existing spy agencies within our government that the public does not even know about. Hell, there are likely to be PRIVATE outsourced spy agencies with no oversight at all. In this sick age of privatization, our government allowed the company-formerly-known-as-Blackwater to run a private army. The nation that set up protocols and rules of behavior after WWII has blatantly thumbed its nose at the entire world. WE can do anything WE want and we'll rub your nose in it after.
I fear their is no evil the US government could do that will rouse the People to righteous indignation. I fear we are all too scared of losing our jobs, of being painted as unAmerican. We let the Supreme Court elect a President, to allow billionaires to spread propaganda. We are allowing states to gerrymander and change election laws in ways that will make it impossible for the People to change the government through the electoral process. We won't even stand en masse to demand rational, Constitutional gun laws. And now Democrats are using the open carry of guns as an issue to try to win over a few nuts to their side!
My gut reaction? WE THE PEOPLE have surrendered our government to the Military/Industrial/Secrecy/Prison Complex. Who we elect no longer matters. The Complex is entrenched. No one person, such as a new Martin Luther King, could survive long enough to rally us. Somehow there must be a nonviolent uprising of hundreds and then thousands and then tens of thousands of Americans. How? Well, all I know is that I will begin my search for a group to join- a local group with whom I personally interact. The internet will not save us. Sitting back and watching the show will not save us. I once participated in an action in which young liberals took control of the Alaskan Democratic Party. Grass roots.
Pete Seeger said, "Find a place you love and dig in." I love my country. Let us all begin by expressing our views whenever we hear contrary views expressed, at work, at church, in schools. The right speaks out loud, but the left just thinks to themselves. The right organizes, the left merely votes.

Adolph Reed, Jr. on Salon and in Harper's are must reads.

I got a jolt from reading an interview with Adolph Reed, Jr. on Salon. Here's the link to Thomas Frank's interview. Mr. Reed has an article in the current Harper's magazine. I think both the article and the interview are must-reads for me. I'm sure I'll have to read each twice. It's deep stuff.
I argue a lot in this space that the Democratic Party has compromised itself to the point of being useless as a counterweight to the Republican remaking of America. Mr. Reed has a grasp on this you simply must read.
I won't reiterate the arguments here, but here is one quote from Reed contained in the Salon interview: "Here’s a factoid: a Roper poll a month before the 1944 presidential election found that 68 percent of respondents said that they would not favor a political and economic system no matter what it was called that didn’t pivot off of a fundamental right to a job, that didn’t rest on the fundamental premise that everyone in a society who is willing and able to work should have a right to a job." Look how opinion has been shifted by shady pols and corporate media!
When discussing the old folks of the Tea Party movement Mr. Reed responds to Thomas Frank saying that much of the accusations about President Obama being a Socialist or a Communist are just racist code words:
Reed: "I'll tell you, it's that Birchite (John Birch Society) psychosis. This is the social base of fascism, really, is what they are."
Frank: "They don't have street gangs."
Reed: "No, thank God. Not yet anyway. And I guess that's partly because a lot of them are pensioners."
Frank: "They'll get you with their golf carts."
I can't help but think where "they" are going to get us is with their gun laws. As states add open carry of guns to stand-your-ground-laws to militias and neighborhood patrols by creeps how will we avoid the chill upon political discussion and demonstrations? How long will it take for the shooters to stand their ground in a heated debate or street protests? Do you think juries in those states will convict the shooters? I think that juries often rule against their own convictions when confronted with the hard fact of laws. If it's legal to stand your ground when threatened, if it's legal to pack heat, if a crowd of protesters illegally break out of their "free speech zone" ...  Can the armed street gangs be far behind?

Unions are made from the inside out.

                             "Amazon workers look for justice from a business-friendly Supreme Court. A case involving payment for time spent waiting in line heads to the highest court. Isn't this what unions are for? "        

So reads the headline in this Salon article by Andrew Leonard. Yes, I thought, Amazon workers need to form a union or join an existing union and make it work. The larger the organized work force,  the more a scab worker has to learn before s/he becomes profitable, the more likely it is that workers can win.

Since most "journalism" today is only opinions cast into "reporting-type" formats, I was not surprised the Mr. Leonard's article turned from facts - the real grievances of Amazon workers - to opinion. But for God's sake, can't the opinions on an ostensibly left-leaning site be reasonable and fact-based?

No. Mr Leonard states as if written in stone that, "since there are no strong unions in the tech sector, workers have no alternative but to go the courts. And if they pursue their grievances to the ultimate level, they end up before a Supreme Court stacked with business-friendly justices."

So, Salon implies that unions are entities that are handed down to workers. They aren't created by workers. They aren't weak now, but only needing a strong, united, pissed-off work force to build them up. No, there is no alternative but to turn Mr. Roberts and Mr. Thomas, et al. You know, the way the Democratic Party allowed George W. to be elected by the Supreme Court instead of standing up for the People's franchise.

        

Rand Paul makes sense on the Ukrainian crisis.

Rand Paul strikes me as an opportunist compared with his rock-solid father Ron. So, I searched for an article about son Rand's stance on the Ukraine, and, by God, he takes a peaceful stance!  This Washington Post article shows a Rand Paul very much in tune with Libertarian "peacenik" views.
On the other hand is that loose cannon Ted Cruz who was very much supported by the Pauls in his election in Texas. Here is Mr. Cruz laying out a strategy that could actually end up being the sanctions-but-no-troops approach that Democrats might take.
And then there are the sad John McCain and others of his ilk. They would probably push us to the brink of nuclear war and be happy about it.
I think the entire United States foreign policy can be summed up by the US saying, "Don't you dare do as we have done. Do as we say."
We are willing to intervene and spill our treasure, money and blood, over any issue that involves big players. We tell Iran 'you can't have the bomb,' but we don't act for the benefit of the Korean peninsula. Does South Korea have to get nuked before we act? Is there no humanitarian feeling for the North Korean population? We stand against Russian aggression, but we did nothing to prevent the Tutsi slaughter in Rwanda by Hutus armed with machetes.