Xeon

No disrespect, but this topic reeks of absurdity to one who actually knows and appreciates the dynamics and richness of one's history. I wonder if Xeon is actually a European in Blackface.

Not hardly. There is nothing absurd about the topic other than the misguided efforts of Negroes to recreate themselves with silly and ridiculous names.

For the general community I recommend the book Africanisms in American Culture by Joseph Holloway. There are many essays which address the African-American naming convention and linguists assert it is a carry over of Niger-Congo…..

A lot of times people think AA's are mispronouncing English words when in fact they are African. For instance, MASSA is not……..

This means nothing. Your efforts so use some kind of pseudo Afro-nudnik linguistic chicanery does not fly with me. I could care less about your so-called name analysis. While your efforts as a self taught toponymist is commendable, I’m really not interested in your name analysis since it has no meaningful bearing nor impact of the gritty reality of everyday black life. So, I’m not going to waste my time countering the obvious my friend. Next……

The so-called made up names adhere to a convention that purposely distinguishes it from Anglo saxon names. This isn't a "travesty" but a clear and conscious effort for identification after one's identity has been stripped due to enslavement.

Let me be clear about something. I have no problems with blacks adopting non-western names. If they understand the possible consequences of doing so, then so be it. My objection is to the self ghettoizing group-think that manifests itself in the form of "childish names" (most ending with the “a” vowel) given to virtually an entire generation! And the intellectually vacuous argument that Negroes are doing this as an attempt to separate themselves from white America is equally stupid. There are many non-traditional and non-European names to choose from for your child if that is your desire. But this pseudo-Afro-pollyanna-group-think of making up these doofus names speaks for itself.....

Not all Black people are of the ignorant notion that European names are better "sounding" than "Black" names.

Really? Well, I don’t recall the assertion that European names sound better. That type of argumentative mendacity serves no purpose. Next…..

A matter of fact, when one does a comparative analysis of African and Indo-European languages, one will come to find out that a large number of English, Latin and Greek terms are in fact African (see……… under European tongues, which one "sounds" more absurd? The imitator or the originator?

Uh huh, and you can prove this? You have documented sources that are recognized by linguistic scholars and credible academic institutions that can verify your pontifications? Ok, I’ll listen. Produce it……

The majority of European names are "made-up" and have lost or have no meaning. A lot of them are the result of folk etymology. At some point in history all names are "made-up." I can guarantee that you don't know what the name America means but you will still call yourself an American! America comes……..

Ya know, I don’t want to appear to be disrespectful Mr. Imhotep, but the above represents the type of meaningless incongruous blather and pseudo Afro-nudnik intellectualism that strains reality. Sorry, but I can’t say it any other way……

Why don't don't you do your own bio? No one knows the history, facts and details better than you. You should make it as gritty, factual, realistic and intriguing as possible. I believe writing your bio would not only be a literary challenge but also a cathartic adventure. From what you've said, it doesn't appear that you are short on intriguing subject matter.

The Republicans' big lie about reconciliation

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

Thursday, March 4, 2010; A21

For those who feared that Barack Obama did not have any Lyndon Johnson in him, the president's determination to press ahead and get health-care reform done in the face of Republican intransigence came as something of a relief.

Obama's critics have regularly accused him of not being as tough or wily or forceful as LBJ was in pushing through civil rights and the social programs of his Great Society. Obama seemed willing to let Congress go its own way and was so anxious to look bipartisan that he wouldn't even take his own side in arguments with Republicans.

Those days are over. On Wednesday, the president made clear what he wants in a health-care bill, and he urged Congress to pass it by the most expeditious means available.

He was also clear on what bipartisanship should mean -- and what it can't mean. Democrats, who happen to be in the majority, have already added Republican ideas to their proposals. Obama said he was open to four more that came up during the health-care summit. What he's (rightly) unwilling to do is give the minority veto power over a bill that has deliberately and painfully worked its way through the regular legislative process.

Republicans, however, don't want to talk much about the substance of health care. They want to discuss process, turn "reconciliation" into a four-letter word and maintain that Democrats are "ramming through" a health bill.

It is all, I am sorry to say, one big lie -- or, if you're sensitive, an astonishing exercise in hypocrisy.

In an op-ed in Tuesday's Post, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) offered an excellent example of this hypocrisy. Right off, the piece was wrong on a core fact. Hatch accused the Democrats of trying to, yes, "ram through the Senate a multitrillion-dollar health-care bill."

No. The health-care bill passed the Senate in December with 60 votes under the normal process. The only thing that would pass under a simple majority vote would be a series of amendments that fit comfortably under the "reconciliation" rules established to deal with money issues. Near the end of his column, Hatch conceded that reconciliation would be used for "only parts" of the bill. But why didn't he say that in the first place?

Hatch grandly cited "America's Founders" as wanting the Senate to be about "deliberation." But the Founders said nothing in the Constitution about the filibuster, let alone "reconciliation." Judging from what they put in the actual document, the Founders would be appalled at the idea that every major bill should need the votes of three-fifths of the Senate to pass.

Hatch quoted Sens. Robert Byrd and Kent Conrad, both Democrats, as opposing the use of reconciliation on health care. What he didn't say is that Byrd's comment from a year ago was about passing the entire bill under reconciliation, which no one is proposing. As for Conrad, he made clear to The Post's Ezra Klein this week that it's perfectly appropriate to use reconciliation "to improve or perfect the package," which is the only thing that Democrats have proposed doing through reconciliation.

Hatch said that reconciliation should not be used for "substantive legislation" unless the legislation has "significant bipartisan support." But surely the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, which were passed under reconciliation and increased the deficit by $1.7 trillion during his presidency, were "substantive legislation." The 2003 dividends tax cut could muster only 50 votes. Vice President Dick Cheney had to break the tie. Talk about "ramming through."

The underlying "principle" here seems to be that it's fine to pass tax cuts for the wealthy on narrow votes but an outrage to use reconciliation to help middle-income and poor people get health insurance.

I'm disappointed in Hatch, co-sponsor of two of my favorite bills in recent years. One created the State Children's Health Insurance Program. The other, signed last year by Obama, broadly expanded service opportunities. Hatch worked on both with his dear friend, the late Edward M. Kennedy, after whom the service bill was named.

It was Kennedy, you'll recall, who insisted that health care was "a fundamental right and not a privilege." That's why it's not just legitimate to use reconciliation to complete the work on health reform. It would be immoral to do otherwise and thereby let a phony argument about process get in the way of health coverage for 30 million Americans.

ejdionne@washpost.com

NY Governor Under Fire: Calls For Paterson Meeting

Updated: Thursday, 04 Mar 2010, 2:39 PM EST

Published : Thursday, 04 Mar 2010, 6:23 AM EST

MYFOXNY/AP - The Reverend Al Sharpton is hosting an emergency meeting with minority leaders in Harlem on Thursday night to discuss whether Governor David Paterson should resign.

Pressure is mounting for Paterson to step down following several recent scandals.

The NY Post reports Sharpton- who has been a supporter of the embattled governor- may be rethinking his position.

A Democratic party adviser tells the Associated Press the meeting will take place at a restaurant.

Paterson was accused Wednesday of breaking ethics laws when he sought and obtained free Yankees tickets for the 2009 World Series and then may have lied about his intention to pay for them, according to a state report.

He faces penalties of nearly $100,000, and the case was referred to the Albany County prosecutor's office and the state attorney general for possible criminal investigation into whether Paterson or anyone else gave false answers to questions by the Public Integrity Commission or backdated a check to pay for the tickets.

One of the stereotypes of poorly-educated, poorly-socialized whites is that they name their kids things like Billy Bob and Betty Lou, and give them the middle name Wayne (News of the Weird keeps a running list of murder suspects with that middle name). They get called "poor white trash" or "hillbillies" instead of "coons". What is the equivalent of what you call "coonery" for Latinos? Naming their kids Aztec names? Or Inca names like Tupac? Or even just calling them Pablo..........

Well, for the record, unlike Negroes, Latinos (as a group) do not have the notoriety of giving their children absurd names. I’m sure you can find examples of such nonsense but such cases are a fractional minority -not the standard. The vast majority of Latino names are Anglo and Spanish (e.g., David Morales, Maria Torres, Tony Hernandez, Michael Velasquez, etc). And the most popular names for Latino babies are Maria, Jose, Diego, Mariana, Santiago, Valeria, etc. I have yet to see Latino children with names like Abcde (yes, this is not a typo, it's true), Ty’Reesha, Antwan, Shawanda, Tomique, LaPrell or Tysheena. The Latino names are real. They have origin and history unlike the Negro names which are obviously made up, juvenile sounding and ridiculous. Sorry, but facts are facts. No amount of reactionary obfuscation or fatuous rationalizing will change this……

My question remains this: is name foolery a behavior that can be quantitatively distinguished among races, like teenage births? Or is it a generalized behavior that gets commented on only when blacks do it, like eating watermelon, for example?

The names themselves are a travesty. The argument or defense of such behavior is people are free to name their children as they please. Sadly, this is correct since there is no law (nor should there be one) that prohibits someone from naming their child as they please. This not a legal issue but one of intelligent and mature decision making. You are free to stab yourself in the eye with a lead pencil but is it an intelligent or mature thing to do? And since Negroes (as a group) tend to indulge in this behavior more often (nonsensical names), they are noted for doing so. It is what it is……

Simply claiming that blacks do it more often doesn't make it so, and certainly doesn't answer the question of whether it may be just one more black stereotype (like watermelon) and something that ticks off certain black folks because it's a stereotype.

No, it is so. Why? Because seeing a black child with a ridiculous sounding name is not uncommon. But other groups having such names is uncommon. That is not to say they do not exist, but it is uncommon. To see a young black child with a name like Shalonda, Demarcus or Laquisha is no longer unusual. But to see a non-white child with a name like Blueberry, Apple, Elijah Blue, Diamond or SueLynn (yes, those are actual names given by whites) is uncommon. The most common baby names (for whites) in the past three years consists of names such as Noah, Madison, Olivia, Ethan, Addison, Daniel, Elijah, Charlotte and Sophia. Of course such names are too boring, uncreative, dull and not different enough for American Negroes. We know this…..

It may be a fact that blacks give weird names more often than whites do. But anecdotes don't prove that.

No my friend, I’m sorry but attempting to suggest stating that a generation of blacks have been given silly and oftentimes childish names, is no more than subjective anecdotal musings, is incorrect. Once again, it is what it is…….

Here's an anecdote fer ya: one of the most prominent white families in this country named their kids Willow, Piper, Track, Tripp, and Trig. I haven't heard anyone call that "self-extirpative." You betcha. [wink]

Ha! Ha! Ha! Nice try. But I can top that. More than a year ago, a white man in New Jersey called attention to himself when a bakery refused to put the name “Adolf Hitler” on his small sons birthday cake. The same bakery also refused to make a cake bearing the name of his daughter, JoyceLynn “Aryan Nation” Campbell. His other daughter “Honszlynn Hinler” Jeannie Campbell, was named for Schutzstaffel after Heinrich Himmler who was head of the Nazi SS. But fools like the guy in New Jersey and the so-called prominent white families you mentioned, are in small percentage. The embarrassingly silly names given to black children by their parents does not represent a tiny minority. Just take a national poll and ask teachers and educators in large urban areas about the names of the black children on their school rosters. End of subject…..

P.S. I just got off the phone while writing this post. A good friend of mine who is a pediatrician in Sacramento, responded to this subject with the following: “ Listen, I see more kids in one week with these ridiculous stupid names then you will see in a life time……and most of them are black.” Those are his words and medical working experiences –not mine.

If most black Americans claim native blood how would the claim make them different?

Different from what? It just means they are lying. Somehow, having a black on black genetic heritage is not sufficient for many American Negroes. They have to claim Native American or other non-black genealogy to the mix. Being black is not enough. They want to claim genetic heritage of other groups (that would never -ever claim black genetic heritage!) in order to feel good about themselves (IMO). Perhaps this sub-conscious loathing or dissatisfaction with being just black is the result of generations of racist psychological warfare? Just a suggestion......

Most so called black Americans appear mixed to me though I can't say I'm concerned with the particular details of what they are mixed with.

I could careless also. Do black Americans look mixed? As compared to whom? Blacks, like other racial and ethnic groups show diversity in their physical phenotypes also. I have met Africans who looked like someone from, let’s say, Cleveland or LA and American blacks who looked African. Only a DNA examination could provide a more accurate picture. Just looking at someone and making a racial genotype assumption is not always accurate.

Troy?

Troy would be an excellent choice. But his high standards of morality and incorruptibility would rankle the those who provide the needed elements for mold to grow.

Or are youse gonna let a white guy do it?

Why not? What do they have to loose? Being a Negro has never provided immunity from corruption, graft or fallibility......

Xeon, if we were standing next to each other, I would first ask you, why did you ask the question? Well, because, I think it would have saved a lot of my following reply.

No particular reason. It is not a trick question. I was just wondering what type of book you would like to write. Bio, fiction, non-fiction, etc. Just curious…..

That looks like a good one Xeon.

It is. It's part of a trilogy of books Richard Evans wrote about the rise and fall of the Nazis. Fascinating reading. William Shirer is also one of my favorite writers who has written a number of books about Third Reich. His most famous is the “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”. A monumental book that is riveting to read.

Very interesting question! According to a man who has performed DNA testing on black Americans, only approximately 10 percent have Native American ancestors: He said many blacks wrongly believe they are descendents of Native Americans.

"If you ask 10 African-Americans if they have Native American ancestry, eight of them will say yes, but when we actually test them, it's less than 10 percent," Kittle said.The…….they pretty much match to there about 95 percent of the time," Kittle said.

Nice post. I agree that this woman certainly looks black. I would say that she is until otherwise proven not to be. As far as American Negroes claiming to have Indian ancestry, I have always laughed at this sad self perpetuating fabrication. I’ve heard it all my life. I don’t know of too many Negroes who have not made this bogus genetic claim.

There was a show on television not too long ago that addressed DNA testing of prominent American blacks (Tina Turner, Maya Angelo, Skip Gates, et al….). All professed to having Indian ancestry. All tested had none. I also recall the scientific fact that less than 10 percent of American blacks actually had Native American ancestry, was stated. I was elated to see this mythical collective nonsense exposed. But it matters not since befuddled American Negroes will continue telling this lie in order to be different. It’s so sad but very true…..

This is brain dead argument. Attempting to create a faux pas argument of parity of ridiculous names between whites and blacks is laughable. American Negroes have made a science of naming their children with ridiculous names. Yes, whites also have penchant for stupid names. No doubt. But the percentage of post 1970 Negroes who were given doofus names by their misguided parents, has no rival….PERIOD! So the apocryphal attempt to justify self extirpative behavior by Negroes by pointing to that of whites doesn’t cut it. Nice try…….

At one point, I was watching a popular TV baby-mama-drama-daddy-DNA show and I could not help but notice the over whelming number of doofus names of the mothers and their fatherless children. I started writing the names of the mothers and children down until I collected 34 different embarrassingly silly names (Ra'Shaniqua, Ja'Quarius, Latonda, Shequeeda, Tyisha, Mar'Quita, Toree, Ty'Ressha, Tayqueeda, LaQueesha, etc, etc.....). The coonery continues…….

Carey, what type of book are you interested in writing?

Just started......

Hey Everybody

Long time...I know. I trust you all have been well. It's good to be back, but this new site is crazy. I hope to get the hang of it soon.

Ciao

Welcome back....We need all the pro-active posters we can get.

Yawn.......The man became irraitated.....So what? His concerns are still valid and real. Another bullshit "I gotcha clip".....Nothing new here......

I listened to the audio link. More Negro cat fighting drama at its best. Not a big fan of either but I have to agree with Sharpton on this issue. I’m very disappointed with Tavis and his on going rabid anti-Obama rants. He is a closet Machiavellian favorite for the Limbaugh’s, Becks, the FOX Channel Pravda and the Tea Baggers. I have no idea what Tavis and his Negro apparatchiks expect from Obama. All of his programs for housing, employment and health care affect all Americans –which includes black people. I guess Tavis wants a special "black only" program drawn up by the president. First of all, every single legislation the president endorses includes black people. Secondly, as Sharpton quipped, it would be political suicide for Obama to attempt to implement a “black only” program when millions of non-black Americans have lost their jobs and are about to lose their homes because harsh financial times. Thirdly, what the vast majority of people do not understand is the presidents job centers around national security and any legislation or policy changes that involve funding has to approved by congress. DO YOU THINK FOR ONE SECOND WITH THE CURRENT DEEP PARTISAN GRIDLOCK IN CONGRESS, THEY WOULD CAPITULATE TO “BLACK ONLY LEGISLATION”? Never mind your emotional gut feelings and passionate desires, do you realistically think that could or would happen?

Even Al Sharpton sees the foolishness of such a misguided hazard attempt. It would be the greatest and most appreciated gift Obama could serve to his political detractors and haters. I know Tavis is very passionate about his black agendas and concerns. And he should be commended for such. But he really needs to back down and shut the fuck up about a black only legislation fantasy. It is never going to happen –PERIOD! But do not misunderstand me. I’m for any legislation or polices that benefit black people. But to expect Obama to draw up a black only agenda has Tavis Smiley fantasies, is simply no going to happen. And contrary to what Smiley believes, the Republicans and rank and file white racists would be more "elated" with Obama attempting to introduce a black only agenda than he is.

sister you have been brain washed into thanking the ideal man is a white man. just like they teach u that there is a white Jesus(pbuh). do you know that it took 500 years of beating and rapeing the blak woman and forcing blacks to eat the wost foods for you to feel this way today.

Why would you even bother to respond to such a childish brain-dead post written to provoke.......

I suspect these types of kids will be more likely end up painting their bellies, the colors of their home team, and attending over priced football games, rather than sitting on some judical bench or being a captian of industry.

Troy, if you believe that, then you are extremely naive..........

I belive it because black youth dont know who they are. There are no positive roll models. Most guys they look up to are ether drug dealers or users. single mothers raising boys by themselvles. boy still crave they male image to look up to. There is no direction for our youths on a positive level. Look at china they have currulim for study starting they childern very young. knowledge instills disiplent and thats what our youths need.

Well, unfortunately, all of this is true. The absence of black male fathers, positive role models and mentors has taken its toll. What is the future? Looks kinda grim at this point.....

You deny being an "Obamanite", Xeon, but in your passionate defense of him you proceed to engage in the very hyperbole you accuse his critics of using. Sounds like the rant of an "Obamanite" to me.

Wasn’t a rant my dear, I only stated the facts. Obama cannot procced with the policy and legislation changes he wants because of congressional partisin gridlock. The republicans will resist anything he proposes –it doesn’t matter what it is. The democrats are splintered and no longer hold the voting edge needed to proceed forward. He will be harshly criticized from the left and the right on national security –not matter what he does. Those are the documented facts –not hyperbole.

BTW, many voices in the growing chorus of Obama detractors are black Democrats. And in your attempt to cast him as a political martyr, you overlook how millions of people, like you, still support him.

I could care less what the so-called others think. What exaclty are these so-called detractors angry about? Health care reform? Bail outs? Job losses? National security issues? What??? I am not about to join the venomous railings of the Limbaugh’s, Palin's, Beck's, FOX channel news, the Tea Baggers or the noodling Negro haters. I stick with the facts and not groundless political and race propaganda.

I do not think the man is flawless nor do I believe he is a martyred messiah as you have suggested. I just know that he cannot affect the changes we need until the congressional gridlock is resolved (which ain’t happnin’ any time soon). He has done things that I did not agree with but regardless, I am not about to join a chorus line of boo’s and jeers that has no real substance. Sorry, but we can be civil and agree to disagree on this……

Jesus! If you are coming back hurry up while there is still somebody left here to greet you.

Good point. I've been waiting for this new forum to take off.......

Xeon, why is this news?

Because it is. It’s all over the West Coast. Sorry if it offends you but it did happen….

Seriously why do you even care about this. I'm not saying you should not have posted this, but I'm interested in understanding why you even care what some children are doing off campus no less.

Well, why are you interested in any news….period? But to answer your question, when white college students take it upon themselves to cynically personalize tributes to Black History month and MLK Day with “ghetto parties”, there is a good chance it will make the news. This type of obnoxious behavior has not only happened at UCSD and Clemson University. It happens more often than reported. For example, there was a serious controversy concerning a black ghetto fabulous party given by white first-year law students at the University of Texas at Austin a few years ago in celebration of Martin Luther King Day. But it didn’t end there. Turns out students at the University of Connecticut School of Law also opted for do-rags, gang signs, gold teeth, 40 once malt liquor bottles, black face, white girls wearing braided weaves and sticking pillows in their back sides, carrying fake made up welfare checks and a fake hand guns in their waist bands during an off-campus party.

These are the same white students who may one day work in the HR dept, become prosecutors, judges, hold positions of authority and power, making decisions that impact the lives of people. So, there is a concern that the mind set that generated those inexcusable racist parties may bleed into their professional lives one day. Now, is there anything that can be done? Well, nothing I know of other than shaking of the head and letting them know how stupid and racist they are (as if that will change them). The public should know about such things. And yes, contrary to your disapproval and annoyance, it is news out here on the West Coast.

I would have been up in there playing dominoes and knocking out a 40 myself, a little NWA, Snoop Dogg playing in the background -- sounds like fun (sans the drive bys, and harrassment by the LAPD)!

Oh, I’m sure you would. In fact, I’m going back to the UCSD campus this week. I can leave a message in the student affairs center (just provide your e-mail, MySpace or space book info) that you are interested in providing ghetto culture technical advice for their next “in da hood party”. If they are going to go that route, why not get it right by someone who is willing to provide instruction and technical details on how to keep the coonery real. I’m sure they would be amused by your offer……

Are we to infer from this that you reserve the right to be the only one who can talk about "black coonery", Xeon?

Not really. Coonery is what it is (unfortunately). But if you read the entire story (ref the link), you can see there were some racist elements there. What should be done about it? Not much you can do. It happened off campus and the students are free to express themselves in anyway they want. I was just surprised that this happened at UCSD. As you may recall, the same kind of whites in "black face" "In Da Hood Ghetto Party" happened at Clemson University a few years ago. I suspect it has happened more than this across the nation. I was on the campus of UCSD Thursday and it is a somewhat diverse campus (almost half is Asian). As I said before, I was just shocked to see it happen there.

One more thing, the mayor, council man or representative (can't recall which) from Compton was railing away of how it was racist, the university should conduct a full scale investigation, the fraternity associated with this party should have their charter revoked and the students involved should have their names revealed to the public and expelled from school. Needless to say, this is not going to happen nor do I think it should.

Just havin a little fun with ya, babe.

I love it! Please continue......

Well since I prefer to think of my interest in the lives of the rich and famous as "curiosity" rather than "pathelogical" a term Xeon plays fast and loose with, I will ignore his patting himself on the back for wearing blinders

Has nothing to do with blinders. If you are curious about celebrities personal lives, fine. But my comment about the general publics seemingly pathological obsession with so-called famous peoples personal lives still stands. Just witness the countless simple-minded tabloids at the grocery store that have created an industry about the most personal and tragic details of peoples intimate lives. Tiger Woods it s perfect example. You cannot turn on the TV without seeing or hearing an up to date daily report about what he is doing, where he is going, his wife, his kids, What he is wearing, what he had for breakfast, etc, etc….. It’s pathetic…..!!!!!

Considering how Withers' long marriage to his present wife was mentioned in this documentary, the door was open to examining his personal life, and the fact that his first marriage to Denise Nicholas is ignored is not only dishonest, but bad journalism.

So you say. But once again, I could care less. But that is not the same as saying it should be omitted. You seem to suggest this. My point was very basic: “The personal lives of so-called famous people should not overshadow their creativity or accomplishments". They are two separate things. Troy stated he had reservations about Withers after learning of his personal life. I was addressing this my dear –not that an individuals personal lives should be censored or ignored. For those who have the need to know all the minutia about an individuals indiscretions and details of such, have at it…..

Certain things come with the territory of being a star. Everything unfavorable that the public knows about celebrities has been revealed in documentaries and bios…..

As it should be. You seem confused about my position. I never suggested unfavorable or negative aspects of an individuals life should be censored or omitted. Once again, I said it should not overshadow nor diminish their achievements. Their personal lives should not be a litmus test for acceptance or evaluation of their artistry. THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS. And I said that I personally could care less about their behavior behind closed doors. I never said everyone else should feel as I do....

….but there are apparently those who take pride in sticking their heads in the sand when it comes to the truth, preferring to think of themselves as purists who only care about art.

Really? Ok…..Well….I wouldn’t know anything about that. But if you say so……

Puleeze. Any broad-minded person knows that having talent is not synonymous with being angelic, and people like myself can handle the duality of genius.

I guess…..But unfortunately, the popularity of the relentless paparazzi intrusions and harassment has transformed our society into one of voyeuristic zombies. Fact not fiction….

Others prefer to sweep the truth under the rug. So be it.

Unfortunately, that is true. Personally, sweeping the truth and facts under a rug is something I have always had an aversion for. We got enough of that with eight years of the past presidential administration……