Government Spending in the US There are three levels of governments in the US: federal, state, and local. The following table shows current spending for federal, state and local governments, and also total overall spending. Federal spending includes grants and transfers to state and local governments. State and local government spending includes “direct” spending on programs only.

Government Spending in the US
There are three levels of governments in the US: federal, state, and local. The following table shows current spending for federal, state and local governments, and also total overall spending. Federal spending includes grants and transfers to state and local governments. State and local government spending includes “direct” spending on programs only.

Because we are stupid, we don’t pay enough attention to state and local elections. Yet state and local government still has the most day-to-day significance in our lives. When did that thought occur to me? When I had a conversation with Chris Crawford, he pointed out that it is state and local governments that police our communities, run our schools, and build and maintain our roads. Except for a huge tax bill, the average American (We who live around our nation’s capital obviously have a different experience.) doesn’t see nearly as much evidence the Federal Government is doing anything. Yet we vote in relatively large numbers in presidential elections, and turnout in local elections tends to be pathetic.

Even though I am a longtime observer of politics, it occurred to me that Chris had observed something fundamental that I had missed. After spending a little more time with him, I decided Chris is both thoughtful and a hard worker. Therefore, when Chris announced his intention to run as a Republican for Chairman of the Board of County Supervisors, I decided to give him my support.

Meanwhile, we have an electoral snafu that has made Republican incumbents, especially Corey Stewart, anxious.

Prince William County’s electoral board decided Wednesday against allowing a Republican primary for candidates for the Board of County Supervisors after the local party committee missed a deadline for requesting it.

The 2-to-1 decision — with the board’s two Democrats siding against the Republican — means that board Chairman Corey A. Stewart (R-At Large), three other Republican supervisors and Sheriff Glenn Hill must seek renomination through unpredictable individual caucuses or party canvasses.

The officials, however, said they are preparing to contest the electoral board’s decision in Prince William County Circuit Court. (continued here)

The electoral board met March 11, 2015.  The minutes are interesting (see here, H/T to The court date has been scheduled.

A hearing to determine whether Prince William County Board of Supervisors Chairman Corey Stewart – and three other local Republican incumbents – can defend their seats in the June 9 primary has been set for this Friday at the county courthouse.

According to Supervisor Marty Nohe, R-Coles, retired Judge Paul Sheridan, formerly of the Arlington County Circuit Court, will hear the case. Nohe is a plaintiff. (continued here)

What happens if there is no Republican primary. Well, there is a viable alternative that will not cost the taxpayers anything. On April 25, 2015 (The official call is here.), Prince William County, City of Manassas, and Manassas Park of the Republican Party of Virginia will hold party canvass. The Republican Committee of Prince William County had intended to request primaries as well as hold the canvass, but if the primary option is not available, then the party canvass can be made to work to nominate all the party’s candidates.

So why the anxiety? There are basically two issues.

  • Running a party canvass takes lots of volunteers. However, it also takes volunteers to man the polls. So that is not an insurmountable problem, but we Republicans each must make a personal commitment to making the party canvass work.
  • Fewer people participate in party canvasses. Generally, only those most interested in politics will show up. That tends to make those candidates who depend upon big donors and campaign advertisements more nervous.

As a result the electoral snafu, many who might not have taken Chris Crawford‘s candidacy seriously gave him a second look. Generally, most have been impressed. Therefore, whether there is a June primary or not, it looks like Corey Stewart has a serious opponent.

Other Views On Chris Crawford

News Papers



Posted in 2015 Election, candidate support, Chris Crawford, Republican Party | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment


From here.

From here.


What do we get out of the corporate mass media these days? We get sex, violence, lots of advertisements, misinformation, and political propaganda. We don’t necessarily get much coherent thought. Here is a silly example.

What is going here? Why all that garbage? The corporate mass media exists to make money. Its success is defined by profits, and advertisers provide those profits. Therefore, in order to get an audience for advertisements, the corporate mass media broadcasts cheap sex, gory violence, sensational news, and whatever propaganda the corporate leadership thinks will lead to increased profits.

Because there is too little profit in it, we cannot count on the corporate mass media to help make us better people. In fact, we have to expect them to do the opposite. Because they have goods and services they want to advertise and sell, the owners of the  corporate mass media have a vested interest in decreasing our sales resistance. In order to get our attention, there is little evidence they have any desire to produce more expensive, thoughtful programming.

Political Propaganda

The rationale for the political propaganda. That is a bit more subtle. In a society as large and complex as the United States, when we look too long and too deeply for conspiracies, we will most probably err. Such conspiracies may exist, but they are not generally hidden. Both the Democratic and the Republican parties, for example, each have their own designs upon this country. In the sense that we have people working together for a common purpose, these parties are conspiracies. However, they are not hidden. Even when their methods are illegal, because We the People know what they are doing and let them get away with it, we have no one but ourselves to blame.

Perhaps five or six independent corporations sounds like enough to ensure competition, but these corporations do not operate independently. Many of the same people sit are the boards of these companies.

Is The Corporate Mass Media Biased?

We have both Conservatives and Liberals complaining about news media propaganda.

Nevertheless, this a Conservative blog. What the Liberals write is interesting, but it still comes the opposition.  Therefore, here are a bunch of posts from Conservative blogs. From the Conservative’s perspective, the corporate news media is highly biased.

One thing I find peculiar about Conservatives is that we rarely complain that corporate giants have concentrated media ownership into a few hands. That is probably foolish, but we Conservatives want Capitalism to work, and Capitalism does work. What we forget is that we now have Crony Capitalism, not Capitalism. Therefore, we ought to give the research Liberals have done a second look. What have they learned that we can use?

Noam Chomsky has a Propaganda model that reflects his own biases. His theory identifies five general classes of “filters” that explains what sort of news the corporate mass media will broadcast. With a slight modification, Chomsky’s model makes sense.

  • Ownership: The biases of the owners of mass media will be reflected in the outlets they own. 
  • Funding: The funding mechanism affects what is broadcasted.  If the owners expect a news story to irk advertisers or keep people from buying what they advertise, they will not air that story. In addition, because news organizations are generally owned by much larger corporations, the owners expect the news they broadcast to be favorable to the interests of the corporation as a whole.
  • Sourcing: Because news organizations cannot put reporters everywhere, the news media depends upon their news sources to find the news their viewers want to see. That makes the media dependent upon the government and the corporate contacts who serve as their news sources. This dependency makes it difficult for news organizations to broadcast news that irks their sources.
  • Flak: What news organizations report is generally controversial. Sometimes the news organizations find themselves at the center of the controversies they report. Then they receive flak. If that flak is detrimental to their business interests, they seek means to avoid it.
  • A Narrative: News organizations like to cover a long term news story, that is, they like focus their limited resources on a particular story that rivets people’s attention. That’s one reason why the corporate news media likes nothing better than a good war in a distant land.

Chomsky generally ragged on the ownership of the news by capitalists.  However, government ownership or funding of the news media creates greater problems. Check out PBS or NPR. If corporate interests will not allow the news media organization they own to tattle on them, why would politicians allow a news organization they run or support to either to thwart their plans or tattle on them?  History tells us in no uncertain terms that we must have a free press.

What Are Christians Supposed To Do About The Corporate Mass Media?

There are various views that Christians have on this subject. Here are some of them.

Personally, I don’t see much point in watching television entertainment. I threw out my TV set over thirty years ago, and I have not regretted it. When I am at the gym, I occasionally see a TV show. Since TV screens sit in front of elliptical machines and the treadmills, I cannot easily avoid seeing the trashier stuff, but I try to ignore it. That is one time I consider my poor hearing a small blessing.

Does that mean I think everyone should throw out their TV? No, but we should be particular about the things we think about. The Apostle Paul told us to think about things that would renew our minds (see Romans 12:2 and Ephesians 4:20-24 too).

Philippians 4:8-9 English Standard Version (ESV)

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.

What should we think about? We have the beauty of the world, we have useful work, and we have people we love, but that is not enough. We each also need to spend some time reading and trying to understand the Word of God.

Psalm 19:7-11 English Standard Version (ESV)

The law of the Lord is perfect,
    reviving the soul;
the testimony of the Lord is sure,
    making wise the simple;
the precepts of the Lord are right,
    rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the Lord is pure,
    enlightening the eyes;
the fear of the Lord is clean,
    enduring forever;
the rules of the Lord are true,
    and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
    even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
    and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned;
    in keeping them there is great reward.

What passes for entertainment and moral instruction in the corporate mass media is not good for us. Too often it is directly contrary to what scripture teaches. Homosexuality is wrong. Shacking up is wrong. Running around nude is wrong. Trying to inflame lust in others for things they cannot afford and don’t need is wrong. Coveting the riches others is wrong. Yet clever men and women have spent decades slowly morphing — distorting — the values of this nation. Some even try to persuade us the Bible supports their foul practices. That’s why we need to become familiar with what the Bible says and why the Bible says what it says.

When the Apostle Paul wrote to the Galatians (people he converted who lived in central Asia Minor), he wrote against agitators who wanted to teach the Galatians a distorted version of the Gospel of Christ. Here is how Paul began his condemnation of those agitators.

Galatians 1:6-9 English Standard Version (ESV)

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

Think about it. Even people who had spoken to the Apostle Paul could be led astray. So what are we to do? To defend ourselves and our loved ones from people who would lead us astray — to put on The Whole Armor of God, we each need to read and study the Bible.

Other Views (Citizen Tom does not endorse the links below. That includes the RT video. The point is only one side is discussing the consolidation of the corporate mass media.)

Posted in Culture War, Information Warfare, news media bias, Philosophy, religion, unraveling | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Bonhoeffer’s Solution to The Problem of Pain: reblog from With All I Am

peacecrossPrayson Daniel does not post with great frequency, but then again his posts are thoughtful, and they make us think. So it was with Bonhoeffer’s Solution to The Problem of Pain.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer saw and experienced the unmistakable face of pain and suffering during the reign of Nazism in Germany. During his time at Berlin-Tegel Bonhoeffer exchanged letters and wrote notes that are now known as Letters and Papers from Prison. It is in these letters and notes Bonhoeffer explored the problem of pain and suffering. His address of human suffering does not flow from a philosophical armchair reflection as a passive observer but rather that of a deeply moved spectator. It is for that reason we do not find any  classical defenses such as of John Hick’s Soul-making theodicy and Alvin Plantinga’s freewill-defense in his writings.

Bonhoeffer’s solution to the problem of pain and suffering, to which I concisely introduced, was crafted  during his solitary confinement ward at Berlin-Tegel Military Detention Center where Bonhoeffer was imprisoned for his participation in a failed plot to assassinate Hitler. Tegel was the place where he spent his last eighteen months. He was executed on April 8th 1945.

What can Christianity offer in times of prevailing evil? God, in Christianity, according Bonhoeffer, is not deus ex machine, a being that mechanical appears to solve our insoluble problems. He is not a being that we evoke as an explanation of unexplainable due to our epistemic limitation. He is not a being that we call upon to offer us strength in are powerless and weakness moments. No. If Christian God was such a being, then He is no longer needed in the world that is “coming of age”. We are beginning to finally solve our problems. Such a God is “pushed further away and thus is ever on the retreat” (Bonhoeffer 2010: 408-9) (continued here)

Because  focuses on philosophical concepts, he does not often quote scripture. I expect that in part explains the nature of the comments he gets. Unbelievers do seem to resent scriptural quotations.

There is a place for what  writes. It is not enough to quote scripture. We must also understand what scripture is saying to us.

Whenever I reblog a post, I like to add my own two cents. I will do my best to relate my understanding of what  wrote back to scripture.

Cent Number One

What is the relevance of saying “God, in Christianity, according Bonhoeffer, is not deus ex machine, a being that mechanically appears to solve our insoluble problems”?

Wikipedia offers this explanation.

Deus ex machina

The term has evolved to mean a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly resolved by the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability or object. Depending on how it is done, it can be intended to move the story forward when the writer has “painted himself into a corner” and sees no other way out, to surprise the audience, to bring the tale to a happy ending, or as a comedic device.

Consider why men worship idols. We want a god that answers our concerns. We don’t want to suffer. We want an end to our suffering. That, I think, is why some people refuse to believe in God. If they cannot have the god they want, they don’t want any god at all.

Cent Number Two

When God suffers with us, what does that mean? I am not certain. I think it means something different to different people. After all, if Christianity is about establishing a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, then each of us has the opportunity to have a unique relationship with Jesus.

When I consider the cross, I think of God suffering to pay the price for my sins. In all my life, I have never suffered that way. I have suffered. I have been terribly afraid for others. My pride has been hurt, but I have appealed to God, not called upon Him suffer with me. I have never asked to suffer with him.

Nevertheless, I understand that there is something to be learned from suffering. So I have slowly learned to look at suffering from the perspective of these verses.

Hebrews 12:3-11 New King James Version (NKJV)

For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls. You have not yet resisted to bloodshed, striving against sin. And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons:

“My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord,
Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;
For whom the Lord loves He chastens,
And scourges every son whom He receives.”

If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? 10 For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness. 11 Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.

My guess is that Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s wisdom and understanding easily surpassed my own. So that when he suffered he felt God was with Him, and he was learning from the Master Himself.

Bonus Cent

It seems there is no doubt the Apostle Paul felt the presence of our Lord in his suffering. It is also clear that Paul often well understood why he suffered.

2 Corinthians 12:7-10 New King James Version (NKJV)

And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure. Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me. And He said to me,“My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness.”Therefore most gladly I will rather boast in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong.

At least in this life I doubt I will ever take pleasure in infirmities (Paul only did so for Christ’s sake). Yet if I learn what our Lord wants me to learn from whatever I must suffer, then I too can learn to be strong when I am weak.

Note: I have heard about the man for years, but I have never read anything he wrote. I think  has inspired me to order one of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s books. I guess that will be Letters and Papers from Prison by Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Posted in Philosophy, religion | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments


This is the third in a series of posts that proposes to answer the following question.

Can you name a single thing Jesus said which was genuinely new, original, or useful?

We had The Presentation Of The Question in part 1. If you wish to understand why we are considering this question and how we intend to answer it, please visit part 1.

With respect to the question above, here we will examine the following.

Why Did He Do It?

This is the thing unbelievers have trouble with. This is the thing that leaves believers in tears.

Philippians 2:5-11 New King James Version (NKJV)

Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

What the unbeliever has difficulty understanding is Philippians 2:8. How could anyone, much less God, could humble himself so much? For what? What troubles some believers is Philippians 2:5, the impossibility of ever matching such love. What angers other believers is the notion they should love anyone else more than they love themselves. You see, even the demons believe (James 2:19).

Why did He do it? Because it states the reason so concisely, John 3:16 is the most popular of Bible verses. John 3:17 reminds us that this is only the first coming of Christ. John 3:18 reminds us that we will be judged and those so judged will perish.

John 3:16-18 New Living Translation (NLT)

16 “For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. 17 God sent his Son into the world not to judge the world, but to save the world through him.

18 “There is no judgment against anyone who believes in him. But anyone who does not believe in him has already been judged for not believing in God’s one and only Son.

The unbeliever wonders. What did I do to deserve such judgement? What does Jesus’ death on a cross have to do with me? What is this foolishness?

1 Corinthians 1:18-25 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

18 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written,

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
And the cleverness of the clever I will set aside.”

20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, 24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

We like to think “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.” Such words appeal to our pride. We like to think that our fate depends upon our own merit, but in God’s eyes “all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6).

We are God’s children, and just like our own children we too need to be made respectful and obedient. Yet here the analogy breaks down for we need God far more than our children ever need us.

Ephesians 2:4-9 New King James Version (NKJV)

But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Consider the problem God has with us. He is holy. We are not. He loves us and wants us to spend eternity with Him, but He will not tolerate our rebellious nature, certainly not for all eternity. Moreover, justice requires that we pay the price for our sins, and that we cannot do. What sacrifice could we offer that would atone for disobedience to God? Therefore, unless we repent and pay the price for our sins, what is God to do with us?

Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection solved our dilemma. Jesus did what we cannot do. He lived perfect life, and He allowed Himself to be sacrificed in our place for our sins. When we accept the grace and mercy Jesus offers us — when we repent for our sins and commit ourselves to following in Jesus’ footsteps — His sacrifice covers our sins. We become acceptable to God. Instead of being permanently separated from God (consigned to Hell), we can be in His presence.

Was Jesus trying to do anything new, original, or useful? With respect to what passes for the wisdom of this world, probably not. The Jews understood the notion of original sin, and Gentiles could see the human race is flawed, but consider what pride demands. Don’t we all want to believe that whatever needs to be done “I can do myself”?

What Jesus explained is we cannot do what needs to be done. We must have faith in Him.

John 14:6 New King James Version (NKJV)

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

Was this teaching a new idea? I think so. Is this teaching useful? That depends upon whether we believe.

Some References

Posted in Culture War, Philosophy, religion, unraveling | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 53 Comments


Ferguson - MissouriBecause it is a pointless distraction, I had not planned on posting again on THAT DISTRACTION IN FERGUSON, MISSOURI. However, after I left a comment on The Ferguson Report @ Amusing Nonsense, I decided I may as well post my comments.

siriusbizinus apparently accepts the Obama administration’s view that what is going on in Ferguson, Missouri is all about racial bias on the police force.

I just read this article over at Yahoo News about the report that the Department of Justice just sent out about the Ferguson Police Department. There’s a lot of striking information in there (including some really discriminatory emails). What gets me the most is how much the DOJ found. It’s like Ferguson PD wasn’t even trying to hide a police culture that discriminated against black people. (continued here)

I can’t read minds, but it looks to me like our Attorney General is trying to aggravate our racial troubles, not fix them.  So left this comment.

Citizen Tom
MARCH 6, 2015 AT 9:41 PM

Let’s review the history.

A white policeman shoots a black guy.
The corporate news media declares the shooting racially motivated.
The government, DOJ, steps in. Instead of calming the situation, the Attorney General promotes the notion the shooting was racially motivated.
A Grand Jury investigation confirms the black guy is a huge brute who robbed a store. When the policeman stopped him, the black guy tried to take the policeman’s gun. Frightened for his life, the policeman shot the black guy in self defense.

How likely is it that the DOJ has issued a self serving report on behalf of its boss?

Of course,  just pointed back to that DOJ report. It is curious how people miss the point. So I wrote this.

Citizen Tom
MARCH 7, 2015 AT 7:17 AM

What makes a man remarkable is that no credible “evidence” can be found against him (Daniel 6:1-5). (Note that I did not include the link to this verse in the original comment.)

We can look at any police department in the country, and we will most likely find the sort of “evidence” the DOJ found. That would include the DOJ. In fact, the guy running the DOJ needs to be investigated for racism.

Wherever we find man, we will find sin. Wherever we investigate, we will find “evidence” that supports the charge of excessive pride, and all racism is is an unjustified pride in one’s race (Strangely, black racism seems to be politically correct, and white racism seems to be politically incorrect.). Moreover, “evidence” can be misrepresented to mean what it does not, especially statistical evidence.

Since Ferguson is an area experiencing “white flight,” if the authorities there were not experiencing difficulties keeping the lid on racial tensions, that would be remarkable. As it is, the discovery of racial tensions has nothing to do with the DOJ report. The case that supposedly brought the race issue to light in Ferguson never had anything to do with race. The news media and our Attorney General just used that shooting to aggravate racial tensions. As if the shooting had been racially motivated, the Attorney General just shifted the focus to the Ferguson police department. Since people no longer expect anything except hype and bias from it, the news media does not bother covering up. That outfit just continues pushing its narrative.

If our Attorney General were actually trying to tamp down racial tensions, then he would have stayed out of Ferguson, Missouri. Even though there was lots of news media hoopla, THAT DISTRACTION IN FERGUSON, MISSOURI from start to finish was a phony story.

Consider how sickening what happened in Ferguson really was. Here we have a policeman on the beat doing his job. He tries to make an arrest. The thug tries to kill him, and the national news media and our nation’s Justice Department commence to cry out for the policeman’s blood. Only the vestiges that remain of our justice system and the brave witnesses who spoke the truth prevented a horrible miscarriage of justice.

Did the Obama administration learn anything? Did the news media? No. These people continue in their desire to divide us. With the DOJ’s Report, the Obama Administration has kept the story alive and continues to stoke the fires of racism.


This Wikipedia article, Ferguson, Missouri, includes data on Ferguson’s changing demographics.

Here is DOJ’s Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department. Keep in mind that DOJ never had any justifiable pretext for doing this report. That makes it little more than a witch hunt. On page 29, the report contains this footnote.

17 This set, however, did not include any substantive information on the August 9, 2014 shooting of Michael Brown by Officer Darren Wilson. That incident is being separately investigated by the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Here from the report’s summary is the DOJ’s gobbledygook excuse for the report.

This investigation was initiated under the pattern-or-practice provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 42 U.S.C. § 14141, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. § 3789d (“Safe Streets Act”), and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d (“Title VI”).

What is news is what we make of it. It is an unfortunate fact that much of the mass media is in the hands of about six massive corporations that apparently share a similar brand of journalistic ethics and common political objectives.  Thus, most of the news media is in an uproar over the DOJ report, telling us that the rioters in Ferguson were justified.

Thus Sean Hannity has a wide open field for presenting a dissenting view (here). His evidence, our Attorney General’s words. Compare that video with the one here from The Washington Post.

BTW, if you don’t think policing involves bilking “lawbreakers” for revenue, try driving and parking in our nation’s capital.

Postscript (March 8, 2015)

 did not like the comments I left at his post, The Ferguson Report.  He summed it up this way.

MARCH 8, 2015 AT 9:55 PM

A couple things here CT –

1) The data gained from the report is being used to support a conclusion that Ferguson PD was acting in a racially discriminatory manner. If you’re going to call people out on Circular Reasoning, please identify it correctly. You are now making yourself look bad.

2) I have repeated several times that your question isn’t on topic for this post. Ulterior motives are irrelevant unless it shows the data I or Think Always is using are false.

3) I’ve given you a lot of leeway, Tom. But please make sure you are familiar with my rules for commenting. This constitutes your warning to get on topic. Either you can actually produce something that negates the data found in the Yahoo article or the report itself, or you can try a relevant comment.

As per my rules for commenting, any further irrelevant comments will be moderated like it is spam.

I guess I was not be respectful enough. What puzzles me is why my question was not relevant.

Here is the question.


So I left this comment.

My rules are commenting on commenting on other blogs are simple enough. Where I am not wanted, I don’t go.

You don’t think my question pertinent?


I think that answer enough.

Will that comment ever see the light of day at ‘s blog? I don’t know.

What was I calling Circular Reasoning? I explained in my MARCH 8, 2015 AT 9:41 PM comment.

How is the report biased? I suspect you already know. Otherwise, you could and would promptly answer this question.


So far neither of you have. Instead, you use the conclusions of the report to justify producing the report. That’s what we call Circular reasoning.

When our government spends a bunch of our money producing a report, I think they should have a good reason before they started producing the report. Given that the DOJ has been jumping all over the Ferguson police department, and it appears to quite a few people that our President and Attorney General helped to stir up the rioters in Ferguson, I think my question especially relevant. Maybe we need a report on that.

Anyway, thanks to that report, instead of being on defense, our Attorney General is now on the attack. Holder says he’s ‘prepared’ to dismantle Ferguson police department if necessary. Whether that report really provides sufficient justification for dismantling the Ferguson police force, however, is another matter (Ferguson by the Numbers). Statistics can too easily be used to mislead us.

That said, if you want to put on blinders and view the DOJ’s Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department in isolation from the circumstances and motives that led to its production, please visit The Ferguson Report.


Posted in Information Warfare, news media bias, unraveling | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 26 Comments