The LCR Editor – Page 7

Gun Control: Could It Be That Easy?

Let’s be honest, the NRA’s grip on today’s politics and the fervent insistence on unlimited gun ownership based on second amendment rights will prevent all guns from being confiscated. That said, it is possible to address gun violence, specifically in response to the exorbitant number of mass shootings our nation has had, without taking all guns from everyone (which we know wouldn’t happen anyway).

The tide seems to be turning in terms of responses and reactions to mass shootings, especially after the recent shooting carried out at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on Valentine’s Day. This shooting is still being covered in the news over a month later, whereas previous mass shootings have disappeared from conversation in less than a week. Although nothing concrete and nationwide has been passed so far, the proposed “Federal Extreme Risk Protection Act” may be the closest to “common sense gun-control legislation” we will ever see.

The proposal would allow for those in close contact with individuals displaying concerning behavior or indicators that might suggest an impending violent outburst, to file a federal court petition, barring that individual from buying or possessing firearms. In an effort to not completely enrage second-amendment enthusiasts, individuals with a petition brought against them will have the opportunity to defend themselves and appeal the decision.

I am aware that the United States will never be one of those countries with zero guns. As much as it may reduce violent instances or be the right thing to do, it will not happen. But I do think “red flag” gun legislation is a reasonable medium that satisfies our need to do something and while continuing to allow the “responsible” gun enthusiasts to keep their arms. As much as the second amendment gives us the right, not every citizen can handle that right safely.

Sports and Religion… Eagles Redefine Faith

If you haven’t noticed, the Philadelphia Eagles are not shy about thanking who they feel is most responsible for their athletic ability and team success. Whether you’re a religious person or not, it’s hard to push back on their collective sentiment considering their season ultimately ended with them defeating the favored New England Patriots in Super Bowl 52 (2/4/18).

Coaches, trainers, teammates, parents, the list goes on of who athletes usually thank first whenever a mic is shoved in their face after a big game. But not these Eagles… that first breath is reserved for their Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, which was the common (genuine) theme you heard over and over after winning Philadelphia’s first pro football championship in more than 50 years.

You often hear a pro athlete here or there thank the Lord for their on-field success, but the Philadelphia Eagles all seem to be on the same page. Almost like political pundits sent out with their talking points prepared to answer contentious questions on the Sunday morning talk shows, they didn’t skip a beat. Do a little digging and you quickly find out this isn’t just for show. A majority of players attend weekly Bible class, and many of them were baptized over the past year like Marcus D. Johnson.

“Last night I took another step forward in my faith. First time being baptized, and it wouldn’t have been possible withouth these group of MEN in this picture. Corporate worship is a beautiful thing!! Cleansed and reborn in Jesus name!!” – Marcus D. Johnson, Eagles Wide Reciever, (featured image above was posted by Marcus on his Instagram account: @mojomdj with this caption on October 12th, 2017) His picture garnered 4,600+ likes and nearly 300 comments.

“I wouldn’t be out here without God, without Jesus in my life… Unbelievable. All glory to God.” – Nick Foles, Eagles Quarterback, Super Bowl 52 MVP

Evangelicals, many of whom publicly support President Trump, have also been quick to publicly support the Philadelphia Eagles for their strong faith and Christianity. However, after the Super Bowl, many of these religious God-fearing Eagles quickly stated that they would not be attending the White House for the traditional visit. We’ll see if Evangelical support dwindles considering the White House will likely respond as time passes.

Either way, a quote from Tight End Zach Ertz might sum up the Eagles potential impact on millions of people around the world who have been questioning their faith.

“…faith and football this Sunday is huge. This is a platform to draw people to the Word, to Jesus. It’s not something we take for granted by any means.” – Zach Ertz, Eagles Tight End

Whether you’re a super religious person or not, it’s safe to say many people are probably re-examining their faith because of the Eagle’s willingness to publicly state how strong theirs is, and it’s hard to argue that’s not a good thing.

Eagles Decline the White House

This past week Philadelphia sport fans have been celebrating the city’s first Super Bowl Championship, FINALLY! Along with post-win celebration comes, usually, the invitation to the White House. Some Eagles players have already publicly stated that they have no intention of going, and that’s their right.

The notion that teams or team members who respectfully decline the White House are anything but respectfully allowed to do so, is misguided frustration about ideas of tradition, patriotism, racism, and a variety of other ‘isms. Citizens can be critical of the country or unsupportive of the president and still love, respect, and support the country, as well as respect the office of the president. These ideas are not mutually exclusive.

They have every right as a team to decline the invitation. Their decline was respectful, and they’re are allowed to say no. Respect for anyone, even the president, does not mean acquiescing to every request and whim.

Response: Tell us what you think! Should sports teams be able to decline White House invitations?

Cape Town Water Crisis

An entire country is about to run out of water, and no one’s talking about it.

Cape Town, South Africa, is predicted to run out of water on April 15th. The drought in South Africa began in 2015 and is now reaching a critical point, highlighting the severity of the water situation, as well as the lasting effects of the apartheid and the inequality resulting from it.

Cape Town, the nation’s tourist destination, is the most noted area affected because of the decrease in tourism and the clear divide in response between the rich and the poor. While the shortage will affect everyone in the city, the differences in approach are worth noting; the one million residents who live in the informal settlements only make up 4.5% of the water usage (USATODAY) and as water becomes increasingly scarce and restrictions tighten, these people make a tangible change to their consumption. While the notion of the suburban to high-income areas is “we’ll buy it.”

It’s important to note that the poorest group, the smallest group, who is using the least amount of water between Cape Town’s demographic groups, is also being blamed for worsening the shortage and wasting water, while 70% of water is used in formal homes- highlighting the divide. (USATODAY)

When the water runs out, the rich will not be able to “buy” more and blaming the poor will not bring it back. As South Africa prepares to run out of water, will they also prepare to come to grips with the influence inequality has had on their water supply?

The (White) Women’s March

This past weekend, on the anniversary of Donald Trump’s inauguration, people from all walks of life gathered in the streets to bring awareness to sexism, sexual assault, misogyny, reproductive rights, and feminism, as well as celebrate equality and the power of women’s (and allies’) voices in this nation. Seeing people all over the country take to the streets for a second year in a row to protest our current administration and its policies as well as celebrate the power of women, is a welcomed resistance against the current and historic oppressions facing women and other marginalized communities.

However, the marginalization and alienation that The Women’s March and resurgence of the feminist movement exist to fight, lives within these movements. Even in a collective, all our voices are not heard. The traditionally marginalized voices of women of color and POC members of the LGBTQ+ community are still muffled, if not ignored all together.

True progress comes when black women’s issues are women’s issues, when trans issues are women’s issues, and when having a seat at the table is more than a token appearance, but an investment in the thoughts and minds of those who are different from yourself.

The feminist movement historically and notoriously ignores intersectionality, and has never been inclusive of all groups, making it a somewhat problematic movement. That is not to say its problematic nature invalidates its main goal of equality. The Women’s March and the feminist movement are making progress in society, but not progress for everyone. The change being made is positive, but as a society, we’ve still got a long way to go.

Oprah is Not the Answer

The response to one unqualified celebrity is not another unqualified celebrity from the opposing side. Although Trump and Oprah are completely different as individuals, business people, pop-culture personalities, and potential politicians, neither are qualified to run the country. The notion that Oprah would win because she’s more widely liked, is great, I’m all for a minority as president, or a woman president, or both. But, of course Oprah is well liked, the entirety of her successful career was built on winning the hearts of middle-American housewives. Although I’m sure Oprah is well intentioned, and she probably aligns with many people’s political views, but she’s still not qualified for the intricate and critical role of President of the United States or to make her political leanings a legislative reality.

We shouldn’t be recreating a bad situation with someone who’s personality the country likes a little better. I understand that the last election was unbelievable and unprecedented. But now that there is a precedent for a celebrity president, doesn’t mean we should do it again. We’re talking about The President of the United States, a position we used to think required a competent, qualified individual with a proven track record in a relevant field. That may not be in the job requirements anymore, but look what it’s done for the country; possible nuclear war, poorly handled natural disasters, immigration and foreign affairs nightmares, and racial tensions and hate crimes at an all-time high. Oprah, as much as she is a savvy business woman, cultural icon, philanthropic juggernaut, and well-liked by almost everyone, she is not qualified to be president.

[H&M Board of Directors] Diversity = 0%

H&M is a global brand; but as you can see from the picture above, their board of directors lacks diversity, any diversity. The Stefan Persson family, the Swedish billionaire founding family, owns the majority of voting shares, and by any metric you prefer they’re clearly a successful brand.

However, “Coolest Monkey In The Jungle” is probably a phrase every business should know not to associate with black people in their marketing campaigns, let alone a young black male… especially a company like H&M, the second largest clothing-retail company in the world with more than 4,500 stores and 130,000 employees. At least you’d think they’d know not to do such a thing, but apparently not.

H&M has often used black models and other people of color to represent their brand. Just take a look at their 2016 Annual Report, which is their main snapshot and pitch to current and potential investors…

So if these are the images they portray to their investors, why would they think a young black male in a “Coolest Monkey In The Jungle” hoodie would fly?

Lack of diversity, pure ignorance? Either way, when will large companies stop making such careless mistakes that threaten their bottom line? The Weekend quickly responded and tweeted to his 8 million + followers that he would no longer be working with them.

The 24/7 meme creators quickly responded. Too bad this isn’t the image H&M released in an attempt to market their youth apparel.

Instead, they signed off on an insensitive and offensive image, which will probably end up being the first of many marketing blunders of 2018 that offends people of color.

[2017 In Review] Kaepernick Vs. The NFL… The LCR Responds…

Kaepernick certainly made his mark in 2017, and whether you agree with his position or not, he sparked a national conversation that everyone was forced to address. While the protests might be dying down, NFL viewership took a huge hit and even the President surprisingly jumped into the conversation.

Many people thought Kaepernick and other players were disrespecting the military despite Kaepernick saying his peaceful protest had nothing to do with the military. Many people chose to focus on the actual protests instead of WHY they chose to protest in the first place, which was police brutality and social injustice. How convenient and comfortable to focus on the former and not the latter?

Different perspectives matter. We asked 5 of our contributors with different political views to weigh in on the Colin Kaepernick situation during the height of the protests earlier this year, and this is what they had to say…

“As someone who has worked in sports, I have tried to understand Colin Kaepernick’s dilemma in light of some athletes with less than perfect pasts. Michael Vick is one of the first names that comes to mind. He was involved in dogfighting, which led him to serve 18 months in prison. Just months after his release, he was signed by the Philadelphia Eagles and went on to sign a $100M contract. Regardless of his wrongful actions, Vick continued his NFL career. | Ben Roethlisberger was accused of sexual assault on multiple occasions. His actions led him to being suspended for four games because he was found to be in violation of the NFL’s personal conduct policy. Regardless of his wrongful actions, Roethlisberger continues his NFL career. | Colin Kaepernick is not a convicted felon, he has not been accused of any crimes, nor did he commit any acts deeming him worthy of suspension. He peacefully protested by not standing for the national anthem, and he consistently works to achieve social justice for his community. Yet, he still remains unsigned while the Miami Dolphins recently pulled Jay Cutler out of retirement to fill an open roster spot. There are clearly other factors in play aside from athletic ability. Some NFL owners are claiming that they are concerned about the reactions of their fan bases if they were to sign Colin Kaepernick. Let’s assume that this is a legitimate concern. There have been NFL teams who signed convicted felons and athletes accused of committing serious crimes. If owners are more hesitant to sign a social activist than a convicted felon, what does that say about the fan base they are catering to?” – Muslim Female Democrat

“Professional athletes are in large part entertainers – and public desire to tune in is why they’re paid. Most often, if they don’t introduce their views into the game, that means their athletic ability and future prospects drive their earnings potential. Kaepernick’s difficulty isn’t that different than the issue a local businessman has when he runs for local office – not everybody likes it, and some customers walk. Publicly speaking about a controversial topic is generally not a good business idea if that’s his first concern, and if owners believe he hurts their franchise value and their own personal brand image, it will be reflected in his value as a player. I disagree with Kaepernick’s method of protest, because I thought it was disrespectful to veterans. I do respect deeply his right to make his statement as an American with the right of free speech. But now he’s discovering what many veterans have known for a long time in defending the rights of citizens – that freedom isn’t free.” – Right Army Veteran

“Are NFL owners anti-controversy? Their support of players who have been arrested throughout the league (1 in 40 each year) suggests not. Is Kaepernick truly just not a good enough Quarterback to make a roster? His performance over the last 6 seasons and Super Bowl experience suggest this is not the case. Is the NFL racist? I don’t know for certain, but if so I believe racism is only one part of a larger issue here. “Us vs. Them” is the driving force behind the Kaepernick snub. He’s not doing what the NFL thinks everyone ought to do: fall in line and support the flag, the League, the Country. Consequently, it seems he is being blacklisted (ironic terminology intended). Many White athletes protested the National Anthem in the 60’s over conscription, Vietnam, civil rights, etc. There were cases of school expulsions, verbal abuse, and public ostracization. This demonstrates that when someone protests against the Status Quo – regardless of Race – there will be a backlash. It takes courage to make a stand against something you think is wrong and if you are not in the majority, there will be consequences. For tearing up a picture of the Pope on live television in protest of the Catholic Church’s well-documented history of child abuse scandals and cover-ups, Sinead O’Connor nearly lost her entire music career. If Colin Kaepernick’s intention is to create controversy to draw attention to an issue that he believes in, then this current NFL spurn might be more helpful than harmful to his cause.” – Unaffiliated Humanist Musician

“Let’s be honest. Kaepernick doesn’t have a job right now because owners see him as a liability and distraction. The issues Kaepernick represents are the very ones they want to ignore – and it probably doesn’t help that New York plans on holding a major rally for him. But let’s be even more honest, if Kaepernick had won a Super Bowl or was a huge star, these issues would probably be overlooked, i.e. Ray Lewis. Kaepernick may not be the same athlete to be considered a starter, but physically he could still be a mentoring 3rd string QB. If Mark Sanchez still has a job, then whay can’t Kaepernick? Sanchez stays quiet and doesn’t ignite the public – but that doesn’t mean Colin should be quiet on the issues that are most important to him. | What makes Kaepernick different from Ray Lewis, Michael Vick, and the majority of the Cincinnati Bengals? Kaepernick represents a social injustice issue that he is standing up for while the others were individual incidents that one can be apologetic, reprimanded, and or proven/deemed innocent.” – Independent Marketing Pro

“A man of color who stands his ground on an issue that he feels passionate about risks his successful career to stand tall and stick up his middle finger to White America. We want our men to be strong and stand for something; yet, White America wants to dictate what that “something” is. Nothing in his contract dictates that he has to forego his moral beliefs in order to use his talent to make the the NFL millions and millions of dollars. So is White America trying to prove a point by not signing him? How dare them try to tell this grown man what to think and how to feel. Are they just angry because a public figure is taking a public stand against the racist core of America? The truth hurts. Kaepernick should be applauded for his courage and lack of desire to sell out for a few pennies… Stand tall my Brother.” – Apolitical Elected Official

This article was originally published on 9 August 2017.

Trump’s Tax Bill Might Destroy the Middle-Class

Inside the numbers… According to a recent WSJ Poll, only 24% of Americans believe this is tax bill is a good idea and 41% think it’s a bad idea; 63% of Americans think it’s designed for corporations and the wealthy, and only 7% think it’s designed for the middle-class, which has been a Republican talking point over the past few weeks.

As this recent poll states, this tax plan is highly unpopular.

Without going into grave policy detail… this tax plan will absolutely benefit corporations and wealthy individuals more than the middle-class. It will increase wage inequality and shrink the middle-class, sending more households to the lower class and fewer to the upper class. Also, this tax plan repeals the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act. According to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), a nonpartisan group of economists, roughly 13 million people will lose their health insurance due to repealing the mandate.

What Republicans are not telling us, excuse me, what they’re not admitting, is that they know trickle down economics doesn’t work. They also know that corporations likely won’t hire more employees or increase wages when these tax cuts are signed into law, instead, they’ll reinvest in their businesses, buy back stock, and give out record bonuses to their top management and c-suite executives. While this tax bill adds $1.5 trillion to our national debt, they’re already planning on proposing huge cuts to entitlement programs in 2018_ all while 6-7-8 figure earners, as well as select groups like real estate developers and private equity professionals, benefit from these massive tax cuts.

With all that being said, Republican’s brilliantly designed this bill to have an immediate positive impact on most middle-class households [short-term]. But considering the personal tax provisions are set to expire in 10 years, it’s important to note that the business tax cuts will not. Therefore, the positive impact for corporations and the wealthy [in the long-term] is astounding and much greater. For example, in 2027, two-thirds of middle-class households will see a tax increase in their personal income taxes, and none of them will see a tax cut.

By design, this middle-class tax honeymoon will surely last long enough to surpass the 2018 mid-terms and 2020 presidential election. However, can Democrats capitalize on recent big wins in Virginia, New Jersey, and most recently Alabama, and pick up enough seats to challenge Trump and maybe win the White House? IF Democrats can somehow win the House and Senate, and the White House in 2020, can such a massic tax bill be easily reversed, or amended to thwart such a negative long-term impact on lower and middle-class households?

Alabama Surprises Everyone… The LCR Responds…

On Tuesday night (12/12/17), Doug Jones pulled out a narrow victory (by just 2%) over the Republican hopeful and alleged pedophile Roy Moore. For the first time in 25 years, Alamaba will send a Democratic Senator to Washington. Despite Donald Trump initially supporting Luther Strange, he eventually jumped all in to support Roy Moore. But allegations of sexual harassment and abuse proved to be too much. We asked some of our contributors to weigh in, and this is what they had to say…

“I suppose now Moore has completed the circle. Now everyone has a reason to hate him. He should have stepped aside. This to me is less of a call to halt conservatism and more of an end to the indecency that’s been endemic in our politics these past few years. Perhaps we are finally past the high water mark.” – Right Army Veteran

“Doug Jones narrowly beating Roy Moore despite Moore’s recent accusations and historically spewing racial and religious intolerance for others should be of no surprise. Alabama historically stays proud of rejecting anyone who isn’t a white Protestant, scientific facts, healthcare, education, and countless other positive elements. What should be of surprise is the nation needing the likes of Alabama. In 2017, where phones can recognize your face, the US Senate shouldn’t be one Senator away from going back to 1940. Seems we have much more work to do. Using Alabama football as an example, we’re just a field goal ahead and haven’t even reached halftime yet.” – Independent Texan Male

“Alabama stood on the right side of history in this election. While the margin was a lot closer than I would like, the best man for the job won. I really hope this is indicative of what the 2018 elections will be like. We need these small victories to keep hope alive. Way to go, Alabama!” – Center Left HR

“A year ago, Alabama overwhelmingly voted for Trump. Today marks a turning point, where the vote reflects a change in the ‘anything but a Democrat’ mentally. Perhaps there has been the wake-up call that some of us have been waiting for.”– Registered Independent Voter

“Doug Jones’ upset victory in a deeply red state bodes well for the Democrats and for the future of American politics. It demonstrates that there truly is a red line and that not any candidate can win just because of their party affiliation. That being said, Democrats need to take note of the importance of African-American voter turnout in this race and keep that in mind for 2018.”– Center Left College Student