Wednesday, May 11, 2016

My Letter to President Obama 05/11/2016

I will give you an example. Henry Kissinger's quote released by Wikileaks, "The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer," likely brought a smile to his legions of elite media, government, corporate and high society admirers. .
I grew up during the Vietnam era. You are honoring the "Butcher of Cambodia" and my respect for you just went down by several notches. You should have asked Joe Biden, not Hillary Clinton, on who to trust and listen to. This black mark will follow your administration's legacy forever. What's next? Are you going to honor Dick Cheney? How about Donald Rumsfeld? We could also see if there are any Nazis left in Columbia or Brazil to let you honor them, also. I want to tell you something. When I saw you walking around the White House on the news with George W. Bush, my heart sank because I could see on your face in those photographs that you were listening. He is a master of lies and playing stupid. He learned that from his father, the master of ceremonies at the Carlyle Group round table of defense contractors and basically what we call the Military Industrial Complex, who was another con man who ruled the world through the military. The day G.W. Bush, his son, got up at the podium on television and said, 'You can't fight terrorism with conventional warfare!" and then set about getting congress to let him lie us into two wars by lying to them, I knew that sometimes the president's job is to be the front man for criminals, if he chooses to. You aren't part of that administration (LBJ through Nixon) and the idea that war for profit while sending young men and women into a meat grinder when technology like you have used instead of boots on the ground, works just fine.
One of the main reasons I hate Hillary Clinton now, is the people she chooses to hang out with.  One of them is Henry Kissinger and the other Madeleine Albright. She takes advice from the former on being Secretary of State and from the latter on financial things. It should have been the opposite since Kissinger is highly invested (corruption wise) in both the Military Industrial Complex and Israel. Quit sending them millions of dollars a day and see what happens over there. You are screwing the American people on the advice of a war criminal and letting Wall Street run amok based on advice from a hedge fund manager. You are an extreme disappointment to me and millions of Americans who defended you, as we did Bill Clinton, when he signed our futures away to Wall Street and foreign labor through NAFTA and the repeal of Glass Steagall.
If you are another Republican in sheep’s clothing then I am also disgusted in myself for not seeing it coming.
Goodbye, Mr. Sellout.
Now I feel stupid for voting for you twice.

Monday, May 9, 2016

Let's Call It What It Is, PLEASE!

I want to preface this by saying I wrote this as a response to the inane raving article written by Chez Pazienza at
I posted a comment twice as long as this and they won't allow anything I write on this website, evidently because my ArizonaMildman comment doesn't appear there.
"I believe this incident was staged because I have realized that Clintons use the same Karl Rove style dirty tricks that all Republicans do, by hiring their same campaign strategists and propagandists, like David Brock, who says he will deliver the election for Clinton. If you don't believe he said that, here: That is why I think of them as Republicans. They can't win if they don't cheat. The sign that man was holding at the Clinton rally was about the never ending war that the Clinton regime wants us thrown into against our wills - to help the media and the Military Industrial Complex make huge profits but I see the author of this post doesn't mention one word about the issues in this article. 
You want expletives? Good, here is one for you. I call BULLSHIT on this entire article and the never ending VICTIM SCENARIO that all the "Clinton-istas", as many of the mainstream media has dubbed them, like this blogger is obviously, keep trying to paint the primary with. 
One more angry expletive remark is that Clinton isn't being targeted because she is either a woman, a victim, weak, or someone precious, she is being outed for being what she is, an angry, deceptive, evasive, lying asshole and a war hawk who converses with, regularly, and admires Henry Kissinger (Who most people who were alive in that time period, consider a worse war criminal than Dick Cheney, and she has become an oligarch who has turned her political career from being a Goldwater bigot into a high finance "foundation" owner, whose stance on Wall Street criminals is to hang out with them, including Madeleine Albright who is now a hedge fund manager. 
Then there is her daughter who is already making millions for being born a Clinton (Yeah, she is your average kid next door, right.). 
Put all that in your article next time for some reality check talking points."

Final point here, they "edited out" my comment since it would have been all the truth and would have made their victim narrative sound as silly and immature sounding as it is.

Saturday, May 7, 2016

"A Man Can’t Ride You Unless Your Back Is Bent"

Some people seem upset with me because I care about the political spectrum in this country. I don't really care about politicians or their business ventures that much, I care about people and our future. That is what is at stake. When I hear someone complaining about the constant politi-speak going on on Facebook, I want to ask if they care about the future of this country.
As long as no one discusses the issues, not the candidates and what they and their families wear, and such, we will never learn. I turned my television off years ago and when Pew Institute did a study, a few years back, on "Knowledge of American Issues", I took the test of over a hundred questions, I got 98 percent correct. They stated that I knew more than 68 percent of Americans about the real issues.
As long as the popular vote doesn't matter in Elections, over half of the eligible voters don't bother BECAUSE, it isn't just a presumption - THAT ACTUALLY MEANS it is rigged towards party insiders and people with money and power. Poor people, as has been mentioned recently, don't turn out to vote because they don't believe in a system that is rigged and gives them the candidate that they know they voted against, no matter how many of them turn out.
The electoral college system was developed by the same people who thought only rich white land owners were "knowledgeable enough" to have a say, because they KNEW HOW the country should be run.
I have NEVER in my life, seen a petition that was spread by the people of the United States to actually use the popular vote in all elections, Federal and State because, in my opinion, some people think those guys who rigged the electoral college was correct and if we actually did what the people want, we would screw things up.
That means that the majority of people in the United States believe that the majority of people in the United States are too stupid to know what is right. (Including themselves.)
I don't share that opinion. I remember when Carl Sagan produced the series "Cosmos" the first time. None of the commercial channels thought the American public enjoyed real information like that and would prefer sitcoms and other useless, mindless entertainment with no educational value whatsoever.
The only stations that broadcast it were PBS and all the commercial stations ratings took a big hit because the majority of television viewers were watching PBS that night because they wanted to learn everything the head of the Physics Department of Cornell University could teach us. 
EVERYONE - including the television producers, learned several intelligent thought provoking lessons.
If it actually hurts your brain to think and discover new ideas then turn all those posts off so you won't have to, and you can enjoy being part of the people who follow blindly and never decide a single thing about your own future. Evidently you don't care.
Martin Luther King Jr: "A Man Can’t Ride You Unless Your Back Is Bent"

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

The Arizona Right Wing Propaganda Press

I used to wonder why so many people voted for and claimed to be conservatives in Arizona. I also remember the tag line from the movie "Brave New World" which states that he who controls information controls the world. I want you to adjust your thinking here a minute.  Imagine what it would be like if you, like a jury in a court, after hearing something a lawyer or witness that was perjuring themselves said, and then being told by the judge that you are to disregard that last statement. What is I could prove to you that a monopoly bent on serving up fresh propaganda gives you your daily news? Would you listen? Could you actually listen to something said at this and ask yourself to disregard everything they say? 
Here is the truth about Arizona Newspapers. 

The Arizona Republic is a daily newspaper which became the largest in Arizona and is published in Phoenix, AZ. 

  1. It was established May 19, 1890,  and run by Dwight B. Heard, under the name The Arizona Republican. Heard continued running the paper, while being a Phoenix land and cattle baron, from 1912 until he died in 1929.
  2. The paper was then run by two of its top executives, Charles Stauffer and W. Wesley Knorpp. 
  3. Stauffer and Knorpp changed the newspaper's name to The Arizona Republic in 1930. 
  4. Stauffer and Knorpp also had bought the rival Phoenix Evening Gazette and Phoenix Weekly Gazette, later known as The Phoenix Gazette and the Arizona Business Gazette. 
  5. It was bought by Midwestern newspaper magnate Eugene C. Pulliam in 1946.
  6. This paper was ranked tenth in U.S. daily newspapers by circulation in 2007.
Like News Corps, the conglomerate news agency owned by Rupert Murdoch, Gannett controls a huge amount of the News Businesses. It overshadows News Corps in the amount of news it "oversees". It is the largest newspaper holding company in the United States. It's listing of holdings is listed at:  and I will warn you, you are going to be reading awhile. Does being the most widely circulated news make it more accurate. Not according to the tabloid news companies like News Corps.

[edit]< From Wikipedia at


Pulliam era

Pulliam, who bought the two Gazettes as well as the Republic, ran all three 
newspapers until his death in 1975 at the age of 86. A strong period of growth 
came under Pulliam, who imprinted the newspaper with his conservative brand 
of politics and his drive for civic leadership. Pulliam was considered one of the 
influential business leaders who created the modern Phoenix area as it is known
Pulliam's holding company, Central Newspapers, Inc., as led by Pulliam's widow 
and son, assumed operation of the Republic/Gazette family of papers upon the 
elder Pulliam's death. The Phoenix Gazette was closed in 1997 and its staff 
merged with that of the Republic. The Arizona Business Gazette is still published
to this day.
In 1998, a weekly section geared towards college students, "The Rep", went into
circulation. Specialized content is also available in the local sections produced for
many of the different cities and suburbs that make up the Phoenix metropolitan 

[edit]Gannett purchase

Central Newspapers was purchased by Gannett in 2000, bringing it into common 
ownership with USA Today and the local PhoenixNBC television affiliate, KPNX
The Republic and KPNX combine their forces to produce their common local news
website, It is the most-visited site in the state of Arizona 
and is among the most-trafficked newspaper websites in the U.S.  ..."
Now, let's suppose some cosmic judge told us to disregard everything we heard 
from a corporate monopolized news organisation and think for yourselves. ..."
Now, let's look at the word MONOPOLY and I don't mean the game from Parker 
Brothers. Let's look first at the criticisms of the game Monopoly. Again from 
Wikipedia:  "...Wired magazine believes Monopoly is a poorly designed game. 
Former Wall Streeter Derk Solko explains, "Monopoly has you grinding your oppo-
nents into dust. It's a very negative experience. It's all about cackling when your
opponent lands on your space and you get to take all their money." 
Most of the 3 to 4 hour average playing time is spent waiting for other players 
to play their turn. Board game enthusiasts disparagingly call this a "roll your dice,
move your mice" format. ..."
So, even the game monopoly is about learning to be greedy, selfish, and vindictive
which is why monopolies are supposed to  be ILLEGAL in the United States. 
The legal term is defined as:
"...1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.
2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government.
3. the exclusive possession or control of something.
4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service.
5. a company or group that has such control. ..."
So, you tell me, should we disregard everything they tell us or maybe the ques-
tion that is more pertinent should be, "CAN YOU disregard the statement?" con-
sidering it came from a biased source?
If you can, keep reading. If you can't then you need to read this: Blocks To 

Friday, April 15, 2016

An Epiphany Wrapped In Disappointment (SMH)

I am finally, like several people I know, disillusioned. I say that as I realize I have been fighting a good fight in my mind and expecting change when all I got was eight years of smoke and mirrors. I am not upset with Barack Obama because he is black. Those people STILL deserve to be living in a cave or under a rock.
I am upset because he implied that he really wanted things to change. He got all the incremental things that are just realistic, like the ACA implemented. He got some things done on evolution of thinking started that allowed for Gay Marriage. He has been really good at speaking about healthy intelligent educational opportunities for those who need it. He has helped the "judgement free" poor people harder for the banks and other financial predators to virtually destroy. Those things and his wife's health for children initiatives will go down as shining achievements.
He can't change congress and we are watching this year, how they have inserted themselves through corruption and malfeasance, election fraud, bold faced election tampering and voter machine hacking, into the biggest control position in history in the U.S., congress. That will be material for a whole different article.
Last year before this election sequence, I would have disagreed with anyone saying that Barack Obama was Republican Lite. I was expecting him to do some really "down with the people" things the way Bernie wants to do, and I realized it is NEVER going to happen. The Republicans in congress have taken on the role/persona of being the bad guys but they are all working together. This whole "screw the tax payers for/to our benefit" thing going on in D.C. is in every chamber, oval office to the Supreme Court, and it is powered by big money interests, and THAT is the great American problem.
Throwing us a bone that is purely superficial is NOT what the Democratic Party is supposed to be. When he came in asking for change, then has been changing shit that doesn't matter, isn't really what I expected, either. Pragmatic to these people (The catchword they keep using to describe slow change.) doesn't mean what they think it means.
What the mood is saying is, "We screwed you and put you between a rock and a hard place and then made YOU, the American Tax Payer, pay to fix the things we screwed up so we could get paid.
What Republicans run on are matters that are either already decided or insignificant to anything in reality. They might as well be saying, "We want to make it a law that all people bathe with lye soap! That is the only way people who are truly spiritual and conservative/Republicans should smell. We are presently in congress, wasting the time of the taxpayers, and have written and act like we we are trying to enact legislation to return us to the days of lye soap!" Meanwhile, a certain portion of the country that doesn't know anything but that their friends or relatives told them they were "conservatives, religious, and Republicans", as if those things were genetic and unavoidable, jumps up and down cheering, only pausing to drag their knuckles, metaphorically speaking, like a tie to an ancient past that never has existed and logically never will be - as long as anyone with brains can muster one last sensible argument.
Those people have developed a word to use that means it is OKAY FOR ME to act anyone I want because I have a) Jeebus, b) the 'gubment', or c) my community, on my side. That is the Republican excuse, as I am going to call it from now on.
I recently heard several people who have bought into the whole Republican Lite ideals expressed by the "Clintonistas". (I say this collectively since they have shown they think alike and have an idea how this "democracy" for the Oligarchy should work.) Bill Clinton very clandestinely put the repeal of Glass/Steagall which helped destroy our economy, the implementation of NAFTA, which helped destroy our factory base, and opened the door to Republicans, as well as Democrats, using money from special interests in place. Basically, behind our backs with no media scrutiny or public fanfare of any kind, turned the Democratic Party into Republican lite and Barack, after coming to Washington, fell in line.
I miss the vision I had of the young African American crusader who was going to change us but now that he has really just jumped right into bed with the Clintons, The DNC, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (No lite about her, she is PURE Republican while calling herself a Democrat just to get paid, because, well, evidently the opportunities in the GOP are limited for women.)
They have been throwing around this word I don't like, which is like saying "fecal matter" when 'shit' would have sufficed, and I am tired of it. The word is "PRAGMATIC".
They might as well be saying, "Change - which we will let occur, SOME DAY, after we think about this for A REALLY LONG TIME (indefinitely), LIKE YOU HAVEN'T BEEN WAITING SINCE 1964 FOR EQUALITY AND THE 1950s FOR THE CHANGE WE WERE PROMISED (After we had already tightened our belts BECAUSE OF being patriotic through WWI, WWII ,and the Korean War), and pick EVERYTHING to pieces over fears that (I don't know, maybe JEEBUS wouldn't like it, yeah, that sounds good!) when in reality, the problem is merely that, it might actually work (OMG!) and people might actually achieve ACTUAL equal opportunities."
There are several definitions, but "treating historical phenomena with special reference to their causes, antecedent conditions, and results", and "of or relating to the affairs of state or community." are what they seem to be trying to tell us it means.
But the archaic versions of the word is what they are doing: "busy; active.
officious; meddlesome; interfering" and "dogmatic; opinionated" as well as "an officious or meddlesome person" is what they are using it to do.
What they are saying, in other words, is using much thought to bring about change, only if historically significant, while what we want isn't radical, it is realistic, and if we ever want to stop being screwed over by the (I even have to use this word, since the rednecks always blame the wrong people in it saying, "GUBMINT") (all three branches of the fed and all branches of state) government.
I would almost contend that Fox News isn't a antecedent of the government and an instrument which is against the White House, as it is portrayed, but another tool, poised to play devils advocate in several non-important arguments, in order to placate and distract us, like most churches, and professional sports are put in place to do.

Monday, March 21, 2016

The Progressive Party Day One

What I am calling for today is a new party, conceived in the original intention of the founding fathers, except not owning slaves and not deciding only rich white land owners vote. Shall we say, for the sake of my argument, an ACTUAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY, but since that name has already been copyrighted by people who now seem to be moving towards the same fascism which is disturbingly familiar in the hearts and minds of Republican candidates for the past 20 years, I am calling for a new party. Right now there is a split between progressives and Democrats. All this need for a party split is going to change the face of politics.
The Clinton-ese establishment DINOs, (Democrats in name only) have become a blue coated branch of the right wing. Basically, they are undercover Republicans and many of them have been exactly that since the sixties and only used the name to give us the illusion of caring about the middle class and not being racist.

I think they actually have deluded themselves into believing having two parties on the same side of ideological thinking is a democracy BUT those of us who view pro-corporate policies for the dictionary version of corporatism: ( corporatism  [kawr-puh-ruh-tiz-uh m, -pruh-tiz-]  noun 1.  the principles, doctrine, or system of corporative organization of a political unit, as a city or state.  ) don't want that as our version of democracy. (democracy [dih-mok-ruh-see] noun 1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.)
You see, people who are democratic believe in actual government for the people (and that means ALL of the people) and not for the corporative powers because that word in itself means the same thing as fascism. (fascism [fash-iz-uh m] noun  1. a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.) That definition, in thinking about it, is what some people call communism and uninformed people on the right now believe that's Democratic socialism means, even though it is the opposite.
So in order to maintain a fascist state, one must be a dictator, not a governing servant of the people, although no fascist state comes right out and says that's what they are. When I was a kid, I was told one of the biggest differences between wonderful old U.S.A. and the other countries is that we have "free elections" and other more communist countries had "controlled elections" where the people didn't really have a say it in who won. Then I got to be around 13 years old and asked a pertinent question about "the electoral college" when I was being taught about that. I asked my 'Social Studies' teacher, "Do the electoral candidates necessarily have to vote the way the people of their district vote?" and I was told, "No, they don't. They can vote however they want."  That is number one on my list of "points of corruption" in the system.
Then there are Political Action Committees or PACs as they are referred to. My question is, why are these legal and not regulated the way they should be? And now there are PACs and SuperPACs so anyone who wants to start one can go to the election commission and start one. Stephen Colbert proved that a few years ago when he started one. It is illegal to bribe a government official. But any special interest, private citizen, corporation lobbyist, etc. can go to a PAC and tell them that if your elected official/officials don't vote the way I want, I won't donate this suitcase full of money to their campaign.
Soft money contributions are now unlimited and unregulated, as of Citizens United. The reason Mitt Romney cut his campaign staff off immediately (leaving them to pay their own hotel bills) when he lost to Barack Obama in 2012, is that he / the candidate, is able to keep any monies left over at the end of campaign expense. In this manner, many candidates run for office, never expecting or even wanting to win, only to get rich by collecting soft money contributions and keeping the remaining proceeds.
Also, there are the ultra-rich, who influence the elections through political advertising, which in my opinion, should be illegal. The person who can afford the most advertising, should not be able to control information to the public without anyone regulating whether or not there are ethics involved and the ads are true. This corruption allows the same people who sell us unhealthy foods, drugs that are dangerous, liquor, cigarettes/tobacco in any form, and anything else we shouldn't be doing by lying to us in advertising - to sell us a legal policy, candidate, or politician. 
Caucuses are corrupted. The horror stories emanating from that circular firing squad were really evident in states where the "district leaders" never showed up so no one knew how to regulate the vote and therefore had questionable motives/actions throughout.
Voting machines should be illegal. They have been hacked and corrupted in EVERY election since their inception. Also, the delegate system that Debbie Wasserman Schultz made us all painfully aware of is corrupted when someone can - or even assumes that they can do what they want despite the will of the people: her actual statement was, “Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists,” (which is what we were told Barack Obama was) So she just said that the Democratic Party voting in NOT DEMOCRATIC. She needs to be removed from her position first. I don't know how she/whoever gets appointed or elected to office or by whom she did.
Also, is she saying that President Obama was NOT a grassroots candidate and that the whole "grassroots" campaign we heard about was fake?  I think that question needs to be addressed. The main reason it needs to be addressed is so we can return to a real democracy. When that happens will be determined by us, the voters. I think we need a new party with the name "Progressive Party" to verbalize the actual change, ideologically, of what our founding fathers would have wanted, it they weren't some slave owning White Supremacists.
In my opinion WE ARE BETTER BECAUSE WE HAVE EVOLVED so our political party should also. No more two party system. When the actual system is divided by many parties on both sides, we can't let the lines be blurred or let wealth influence us. Also, in my opinion, the guy we need to fashion and lead this party in his own incorruptible image is Bernie Sanders. Please tell me what you all think.
On my last note, I will say, Bernie Sanders is right. It is high time for a political revolution in this country and no one in congress is going to pay any attention to us until about one million of us (I would suggest several million.) show up at congress doorstep and ask them, "How do you plan on getting home tonight?" Bring a fresh rope, actually more like several. Maybe we could set up and build several gallows on the front lawn of the capital building. Start discussing a date or dates (at least one week) and we should all start organizing transportation.
Welcome to the revolution. The time has come. Let's do this.
Okay, today is March 25. 2016 and something happened. For those of you who don't know, the video has gone viral of Bernie Sanders at one of his election rallies and as he was speaking a tiny bird flew near him. As the crowd said something, Bernie stopped and asked, "What?" and then he saw the bird, As he was saying, "That bird doesn't know it..." the bird flew up and landed on the podium, watching him. The video is cute, here:

Some people on social media (Facebook) came up with this emblem for the Progressive Party:

So, another update today. This is the sort of flier for the progressive party that surfaced on Facebook today: 

Saturday, March 19, 2016

Pay Attention - This Is History!

I want to impart a little history on some of my Facebook Friends. LBJ was in office from November 22, 1963 – January 20, 1969. When Martin Luther King was personally lobbying Washington, D.C. politicians and the White House about the civil rights act, they ended up meeting in the oval office a few times. As to the exact words used, only they would know, BUT, if the recollections of people who knew both of them are accurate, this is what transpired.
Lyndon Baines Johnson told Martin Luther King that they had to be "pragmatic" and use a more subtle approach about civil rights and people of color protesting. What he was asking him to do, the same way politicians and other do today is, to tell you to wait until "the country is ready" for change. Actually only small hand fulls of people weren't ready for change. That would be Southern racists.
Recently someone from my past told me she was voting for the more "pragmatic" candidate, and because Hillary is a woman. Now think about this, feminists, politicians told you for years that you had to be pragmatic about Women's Rights. Did you want to wait some more? That isn't what I remember you telling me while you were burning your bras and marching on capitals.
In my opinion, this causes me stress to hear for two reasons. One, that word I can't stand, pragmatic, means "wait longer" and nothing ever gets done. I actually know black people who are voting for Trump and Hillary Clinton, considering she hasn't done women, minorities, or children any good for decades and was originally a Republican, I find that amazing. Her ideologies still are conservative.
I would like you all to imagine if Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had decided to be pragmatic (wait longer for something to change on it's own) and gave up the civil rights movement which, some people don't realize, actually installed civil rights for all people, with black Americans in the forefront, which was the closest thing to reparations they are ever going to see.
Today a friend of mine saw black people like Chris Rock seeing things from his own perspective and sees Chris Rock's view as one sided. As I reminded him on social media, you never saw black people treating white people like this:

And you never saw Native Americans killing White Europeans over their native lands, or for that matter, handing them blankets full of small pox to wait and watch them die. I could go on, but the point is, it has been one sided as far as that goes. I don't blame anyone who has been s**t on for being upset. I, as a recovering alcoholic don't want to hang on to resentments (Especially ones I learned from someone else through fear and insecurity.) so, as the Dalai Lama says, "We all need to learn global responsibility". I am not asking people to not watch your back I am only saying don't let the defensive attitude control your frontal approach.
When we realize that we are all creatures of the earth and STOP letting past resentments based on fear based insecurities rule our lives, we will be free. That means no more acting superior for any reason (religion, race, social standing, success, etc.). 
No matter what you think you don't deserve more respect, love, or compassion as a human being, than anyone else by virtue of who you are, only by how you treat other people.
To those who keep wanting to be more pragmatic, and wait for life to change slowly on it's own, I have been hearing those words from people who don't want us to progress, since I was a child. I am done waiting.
I want you all to think about this one question.
Where would African Americans/Black Americans be right now in America, if Dr. Martin Luther King had waited to be "pragmatic"? Like I said, LBJ used those words in 1963 and signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and when I look at footage of a Trump convention I see people who still haven't learned ONE F**KING THING about equality in FIFTY TWO F**KING YEARS.
THAT is what being pragmatic with ignorance gets you.