Yesterday during the Pittsburgh Steelers vs Washington Redskins game, Kyle Shanahan, son of the head coach of the Washington Redskins, and the offensive coordinator for that team sent in one of the stupidest plays I’ve seen in an NFL football game.

Josh Morgan, the wide receiver for the Washington Redskins, threw a 30 or 40 yard pass downfield to the quarterback, Robert Griffin III. The pass was under-thrown which allowed known Steeler headhunter Ike Taylor and lesser-known Steeler defensive back and headhunter Ryan Clark to catch up with the play. Ryan Clark went helmet-to-helmet with the defenseless RG III, who had suffered a concussion about three weeks ago. No penalty was called by either of the two officials who were at the scene. Instead, in a call loved by many Steeler fans including my nephew, Antione, RG III was flagged for offensive pass interference.

After the game, Mike Shanahan, attempted to justify the play call. “What normally happens on that play — and I’ve ran that play probably 10-15 times with Elway, probably more than that, probably 20-25. (And) I’ve (run) it with Steve Young.”

Well, I doubt he ran that play “probably 10-15 times (or 20-25 times) with Elway”. He then threw the receiver who threw the pass, Josh Morgan, under the bus, stating that he shouldn’t have thrown the ball unless RG III was wide open.

In my not-so-humble opinion, both Shanahans should be terminated by the not-so-bright owner of the Redskins, Daniel Snyder, who proves over and over that being smart is not as related to accumulating wealth as is being lucky.

And, as I go, name me another NFL coach or offensive coordinator who would call the same play if Robert Griffin III was their franchise quarterback and acknowledged hope for the future of their team.

The facts are here:




My opinions.


What America Will We Pick? | The Moderate Voice

What America Will We Pick? | The Moderate Voice.


Oct 28, 2012 by 

WASHINGTON — This election is only tangentially a fight over policy. It is also a fight about meaning and identity — and that’s one reason why voters are so polarized. It’s about who we are and who we aspire to be.

President Obama enters the final days of the campaign with a substantial lead among women — about 15 points, according to the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll — and enormous leads among Latinos and African-Americans, the nation’s two largest minority groups. Mitt Romney leads among white voters, with an incredible 2-1 advantage among white men.

It is too simplistic to conclude that demography equals destiny. Both men are being sincere when they vow to serve the interests of all Americans. But it would be disingenuous to pretend not to notice the obvious cleavage between those who have long held power in this society and those who are beginning to attain it.

When Republicans vow to “take back our country,” they never say from whom. But we can guess.

Issues of race, power and privilege are less explicit this year than in 2008, but in some ways they are even stronger.

Four years ago, we asked ourselves whether the nation would ever elect a black president. The question was front and center. Every time we see the president and his family walk across the White House lawn to board Marine One, we’re reminded of the answer.

The intensity of the opposition to Obama has less to do with who he is than with the changes in American society he not only represents but incarnates. Citing his race as a factor in the way some of his opponents have bitterly resisted his policies immediately draws an outraged cry: “You’re saying that just because I oppose Obama, I’m a racist.” No, I’m not saying that at all.

What I’m saying is that Obama’s racial identity is a constant reminder of how much the nation has changed in a relatively short period of time. In my lifetime, we’ve experienced the civil rights movement, the countercultural explosion of the 1960s, the sexual revolution, the women’s movement and an unprecedented wave of Latino immigration. Within a few decades, there will be no white majority in this country — no majority of any kind, in fact. We will be a nation of racial and ethnic minorities, and we will only prosper if everyone learns to give and take.

Our place in the world has changed as well. The United States remains the dominant economic and military power; our ideals remain a beacon for those around the globe still yearning to breathe free. But our capacity for unilateral action is diminished; we can assert but not dictate, and we must learn to persuade.

Obama’s great sin, for some who oppose him, is to make it impossible to ignore these domestic and international megatrends. Take one look at Obama and the phenomenon of demographic change is inescapable. Observe his approach to international crises in places such as Libya or Syria and the reality of America’s place in the world is unavoidable.

I’m deliberately leaving aside what should be the biggest factor in the election: Obama’s policies. It happens that I have supported most of them, but of course there are legitimate reasons to favor Romney’s proposals, insofar as we know what they really are — and the extent to which they really differ from Obama’s.

In foreign affairs, judging by Monday’s debate, the differences are too small to discern; Romney promises to speak in a louder voice and perhaps deploy more battleships, but that’s about it. Domestically, however, I see a clear choice. I consider the Affordable Care Act a great achievement, and Romney’s promise to repeal it would alone be reason enough for me to oppose him. Add in the tax cuts for the wealthy, the plan to “voucherize” Medicare and the appointments Romney would likely make to the Supreme Court, and the implications of this election become even weightier.

Issues may explain our sharp political divisions, but they can’t be the cause of our demographic polarization. White men need medical care, too. African-Americans and Latinos understand the need to get our fiscal house in order. The recession and the slow recovery have taken a toll across the board.

Some of Obama’s opponents have tried to delegitimize his presidency because he doesn’t embody the America they once knew. He embodies the America of now.

Eugene Robinson’s email address is eugenerobinson@washpost.com. (c) 2012, Washington Post Writers Group
Read more at http://themoderatevoice.com/165646/what-america-will-we-pick/#34Ua0WxB3wmwdeKB.99


submitted ByBK

Lawrence Wilkerson, Former Colin Powell Aide, Blasts Sununu, GOP, As ‘Full Of Racists’

Colin Powell’s former chief of staff condemned the Republican Party on Friday night, telling MSNBC’s Ed Schultz, “My party is full of racists.”

Retired Army Col. Lawrence Wilkerson made the comment in response to Mitt Romney campaign surrogate John Sununu’s suggestion on Thursday that Powell’s endorsement of President Barack Obama’s re-election was motivated by race. Wilkerson, who served as Powell’s chief of staff when the general was secretary of state during the first George W. Bush term, told Schultz that he respected Sununu “as a Republican, as a member of my party,” but did not “have any respect for the integrity of the position that [Sununu] seemed to codify.”

When asked by Schultz what, if anything, the remark said about the attitudes of the Republican Party, Wilkerson said:

My party, unfortunately, is the bastion of those people — not all of them, but most of them — who are still basing their positions on race. Let me just be candid: My party is full of racists, and the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander-in-chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin, and that’s despicable.
The retired colonel also said that “to say that Colin Powell would endorse President Obama because of his skin color is like saying Mother Theresa worked for profit.”

Powell, a Republican, endorsed Obama for the second time on Thursday morning — he also backed the president in 2008 — saying on CBS’ “This Morning” that he was “more comfortable with President Obama and his administration” than with Romney on a host of issues.

Sununu, no stranger to incendiary rhetoric this election cycle, reacted to the endorsement on CNN’s “Piers Morgan Tonight,” saying that “when you take a look at Colin Powell, you have to wonder whether that’s an endorsement based on issues or whether he’s got a slightly different reason for preferring President Obama.”

Obama himself dismissed Sununu’s suggestion on Friday, telling radio host Michael Smerconish:

Any suggestion that Gen. Powell would make such a profound statement in such an important election based on anything but what he thought was what’s going to be best for America doesn’t make much sense.

Sununu backed off his remarks shortly after his CNN appearance, issuing a statement that said Powell is a friend and, “I respect the endorsement decision he made, and I do not doubt that it was based on anything but his support of the President’s policies.”


submitted ByBK


These are the republican political leaders and republican flacks who met on the evening that President Obama was sworn in and set about to develop a plan to subvert the United States Government and our political processes: Representatives Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, Pete Sessions, Jeb Hensarling, Pete Hoefstra, and Dan Lundgren; Senators Jim DeMint, Tom Coburn, John Ensign, Jon Kyl, and Bob Corker; former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, propagandist Frank Luntz, and Journalist Fred Barnes. Do these “Americans” understand what the consequences would have been for their actions in most other nations on this planet?

Speaker of the House Boehner and Senate Minority leader McConnell were not present at this meeting, but you must be aware that no such endeavor would have been undertaken without their complete knowledge, agreement and consent.

They have certainly been successful in making it a more difficult process for the president – this one man – in his quest for reelection to a second four-year term.

But do they understand the grief, pain and suffering that their ill-conceived plans have caused untold millions of innocent American citizens?

Do you think they care?

The video attached explains it all.


Is Tavis right?



“They said Obama was winning!”

“I didn’t get to the polls, but I did say a prayer for the brotha!”

“You know they wasn’t gonna let no Black man have no two terms!”

“See, what had happened was. . . ”

“I couldn’t get my outfit together!”


“I must have caught that ‘Romnesia’ is it 2012 already?”

“They knew in the second term he was finally gonna hook US up!”

“That damn Stacey Dash!”

“They suppressed my vote!”

“I’m part of the black bourgeoisie 1%, I had to vote for RoMONEY!”

“That line was too long!”

“I ran by the house right after work cause I had forgot my sample ballot; got me something to eat, sat down for a quick minute, and . . .”

“Girl, it was raining!”

“They stole it!” (Not impossible)

“It’s a C-O-N-spiracy!”

“The media. Ok. . .Fox News Channel.”

“The Illuminati took him out . . . he wasn’t going along with the program.”

“I had to work that day.”

“I thought that was NEXT Tuesday! Dang, my bad.”
All jokes aside, too many close elections are decided by the margin of eligible voter absence at the polls. Turnout matters.

What’s YOUR excuse going to be?

submitted ByBK