Cosby, Drugs & Rape

I believe that what Bill Cosby did to all those women is despicable. I must admit it was difficult to convince me that he was guilty, but now I realize he did some horrible things.
However, let’s put this in proper perspective.

I saw a man on TV tell a joke. The man said that God made wine to increase a man’s courage and decrease a woman’s inhibitions. Millions laughed, but not me. What the man was implying was rape. Indeed, such a thing is very close to what Cosby did.
Bill Cosby used Quaaludes. The so-called joke suggested alcohol. In the end, it has the same results, though ludes are stronger and more effective.

My first question is why does such a man get away with telling a joke like that and thousands of men actually practice such a thing while Bill Cosby has the book thrown at him.

In truth the one is rape just as much as the other. The only difference is the choice of drugs. To be sure, Cosby was also guilty of using an illegal drug, but in effect, both are guilty of rape.

Again, I do believe that Cosby is a monster and should spend the rest of his life in prison.

However, while we are at it, maybe we need to throw a few others in prison who have done the same thing, but used alcohol instead.

Of course, it can be said that the woman gets drunk with the intention of implying consent. The truth is, how do we know without something in writing? She can imply consent and claim she didn’t. On the other hand, she can withhold consent and the man can claim she implied consent.

The same thing can, of course, be said about Quaaludes. Did the women take the drugs, knowing and consenting to what followed? It truly creates a horribly murky swamp of legality and mores.

By the way, Bill Cosby is not the only one with such morality. As far as I know, Cosby is not even accused of sexual assault. Regardless, it is a well accepted fact that Bill Clinton is likely guilty of several cases of assault and rape. We are told, of course, that it was private and we had no business considering it.

Indeed, his wife became his primary defender to the point that she managed the so called “Bimbo eruptions.” To be sure, his method of defense was to attack his accusers.
John and Teddy Kennedy are held in high esteem by the democrats and yet we are pretty certain that each killed at least one woman. With their money and power, much of it was covered up. Even then, some of it seeped out into the public, though the media cooperated in the cover up.

There is another question that comes to mind about Cosby, or more accurately it is an observation. For decades, there was nothing said about what Cosby did. Apparently, the efforts to keep it quiet were successful. I wonder if the reason was that no one wanted it to come out, including the victims.

I know it is a horrible thing to suggest. Yet, it was not until he started telling young black men to be more responsible that the complaints started occurring.
It is not a suggestion. As I said, it is only an observation. Yet, it does make me wonder if he would have ever been accused of anything had he kept his mouth shut.

For those who would like see the books that I have published through Amazon.com you can look at my Author’s Page at

amazon.com/author/story_teller

…or, if you prefer, just look up my name on Amazon.com.

Abuse of Power

From 1977 to 1997 a man often called B1 Bob (Robert Dornan) held seats in the House of Representatives in three districts, first Los Angeles then Orange County.  I was actually brought up in a city in Orange County and I am very familiar with the area.

I can remember watching him speak on C-Span for five minutes a night.  Though he was Republican, he angered some from both sides of the aisle.  It was considered one of the most conservative parts in California.  Indeed, it was one of the most conservative districts in the country.

The Democrats got tired of hearing his remarks each night so they moved a bunch of Hispanics into the district.  Some might argue the point, but they can’t argue the facts.  Among other facts, the year he was voted out of office there were 624 illegal Hispanic votes that they were able to find.  Knowing the area, I would suspect that it was far worse.

So, the Dems pushed him out of office and silenced his voice.  No matter what anyone may say, I believe it to be illegal and an abuse of power.  It is the way the Dems and media work.  If someone raises a voice against them, they silence them.  It is something they learned from the communists.  Now, people are reluctant to say anything that is not politically correct, lest they lose their job, position or political standing.

On or about 1996, I sat down and started writing my first book, “The Ring.”  My motive was to sell a million copies and stop thousands from using drugs.  Hopefully, it would stop some from starting to use them and get others to stop using them.

It never happened.  Mostly, it was because it wasn’t a very good book.  The grammar was bad and the story wasn’t any good.  Over the years, I have made corrections and enhancements to it.  One of my readers was a technical writer and provided a very good grammar correction.

Someone else decided to use my title in their book.  I didn’t like their book, though it was commercially successful.  To keep my book from being confused with the other, as well as the movie that followed, I changed the name of my book to “The Secret of the Ring.”  I decided it was a much better title and I am very glad I made the change.

It brought out an aspect of the book I hadn’t considered, the concept of power.  While Scott Williams, the main character of the book gained a great deal of power; though he had the desire to use the power only for good, in the end, he realized he didn’t use the power properly.  Hence, though he learned the secret of the ring, he had not yet learned the secret of the use of the ring.

Now, it is not just a book about drugs, but also about the use of power.

It brings a question to my mind.  If I were given a great deal of power, would I use it properly?  I certainly would like to think I would.  I would certainly want to use it properly, but would I have the wisdom to go along with the power.  I would like to think that I would use it to help others, but I wonder if I would do something stupid and use the power to hurt others.

I look around me and I see people misuse power all the time.  To be sure, many of them might actually think they are doing good.  On the other hand, there are some that obviously use their power for themselves and to hurt others.  Certainly Hitler, Lenin, Stalin and their bunch did not have the well-being of others in mind.  They obviously abused their power intentionally.

I look at people like Rep. Pelosi and quickly form an opinion.  I try to give her a little consideration, but the woman seems to be full of egotism.  What good can she ever hope to accomplish when she used her power to devise a healthcare system that currently costs me over a thousand dollars a month, more than half my social security?  Apparently, she thinks of a thousand dollars as crumbs, but I don’t.  Moreover the vast majority of us don’t share her values.

Nonetheless, I wonder, does she abuse her power because she wants to or does she really want to accomplish something good?  Regardless, her damage is great and widespread.  Sometimes well-meaning people can do more damage than those whose intention is destruction.  They do more damage through ignorance than intent.  Then again, she might really intend to do the damage.  Is she really that ignorant or is her abuse on purpose?

I have no doubts about the Clintons.  Both of them have made it clear that they intend to abuse power and you dare not get in their way.  If you doubt it, ask the women who were dealt with as “bimbo eruptions.”

I heard Mrs. Clinton say that she was Methodist and that she believes in faith and works.  I don’t share her beliefs, but if what she said is true, she is some very serious danger.  Actually, if she maintains that belief, the Bible makes it very clear that she is in deep trouble anyway.  She is accusing Jesus telling a lie.

Either way, they certainly did their share of power abuse.  If she had won the election, she would have done far more.  (Sort of scary to think how close she came to it.)

I looked overseas and saw doctors refusing to let a child go to another country in hopes of helping the child.  This is at least the second time it has happened.  The only reason I can think of such a mindset is so that the doctors will not be proven inept.  Then, what really scares me is that the doctor’s word is final.  There was no intervention from the government.  I am sure that one word from the prime minister would have been enough to put the child in a plane to Italy, but Prime Minister May did not let out so much as a peep.  Tell me that is a proper use of power, please.

Money is often the source of abuse of power.  (If you do as I say, I will make you rich.)  Then again, sometimes it is a trade.  (As the saying goes, you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.  It is, so to speak, a trade in favors.)  The problem is, they trade, we suffer.

The Bible speaks of bribes once or twice.  It causes those in authority to make poor decisions.  You don’t believe the Bible.  Look at the example.  Obama care was passed because of a multi-million dollar bribe made to a Louisiana senator.  (maybe representative, can’t remember for sure, same difference)

I’m told there are thousands of people who have offices on K Street who have legal jobs of bribing government representatives.  That’s right.  It’s legal.  In banana republics, they might bribe public officials, but at least it isn’t legal.  We permit the bribery.  We just call it lobbying.  (I don’t know where that word came from.  What does a lobby have to do with bribery?)

And, of course, the end result is abuse of power.  Indeed, it is the way our government works.  Not only is it accepted.  No national government representative can succeed without it.  Once I finished studying The Constitution and found out how our government really works, I wonder how the US has survived as long as it has.

The worst part about it is that nothing can be done to stop it.  I am not sure that even an amendment will stop it.  I suspect that such an amendment would be impossible.  Even if such an amendment was passed, it would not take long to find a way around it.

As I said, if I was given great power, I would hope I would not abuse it.  The problem is that the abuse of power has become so common place that it has become the norm.  No one who gets into government has any hope of avoiding abuse of power.  No one in government has any ethics.  If anyone with ethics does try to wiggle his way in, he gets trampled by those who don’t.

Pelosi said we need to pass Obama Care so we can find out what is in it.  It is not the statement of an honest person.  It leads me to believe that she is certainly one of those who like to abuse her power, along with most of the Dems.  Moreover, she and they seem to also like to abuse people.  They are hungry for power.  They want to tell us what to do and what to think.

It seems to me that someone wrote a book about that.  Oh, yes.  It was called 1984.  Well, maybe the prophecy was a little late, but certainly accurate.  Given a few years, and people like me will no longer be able to express my opinion.  A few years more and there will no longer be people like me.  Opinions like mine will no longer be allowed.  We will be told what to think and what not to think.  Those who step outside the boundary will quickly be penalized by the thought police.

Fear

Fear can be a good thing, or not so good.  It can keep us from doing stupid things and it can cause us to do stupid things.  Sometimes when we face fear, we become heroes, sometimes cowards.

I don’t mind telling you, I faced my times of fear.  In 1968, I got off a bus in San Diego and put my feet on some yellow foot prints painted on the asphalt.  …and I was afraid.  I spent a year in Vietnam.  While there, I had my moments in fear, even before the plane landed in Da Nang.  I don’t guess I need to tell you, I was not alone in my fear.

Recently, we all saw what happens when two parents fear for the life of their child and a government fears for a revelation of a substandard health care.  It would appear to me that the English government had but one reason for not allowing a child to go outside the islands for possible care; Italy’s doctors might have succeeded where British doctors didn’t.  They feared that it would uncover that they might have done something wrong.

…and so it was that an innocent three-year-old child died at the hands of substandard health system that is being run by a substandard government.  Though the Prime Minister had nothing to do with the death, she must share the guilt.  There is no doubt in my mind that she could have done something, but, instead she ignored the situation, as if she never read or heard about it.

My guess is that she was acting, or perhaps more accurately, not acting out of fear.  After all, she might lose votes in Parliament if her government were to be exposed for their fear.  Certainly, the last thing Parliament wants is to have the world find out that their wonderful health care system isn’t all it is supposed to be.

I don’t know if anything could have been done for the child.  I do know that it shows a pattern.  It is not the first time it has happened and I am sure it won’t be the last.  To me, it sounds like a good reason to avoid going to London on holiday, especially if you have children.  If your 2 year-old gets sick while there, you just might not be able to get him out of the country.

More-than-that, we will never know what was wrong with the last child.  No one outside of the country will be able to look at the body.  No one will be able to tell the world that some mistake was made during his diagnosis or his treatment.

It is but one small reason that a nation’s government should never manage healthcare.  Just think, if we had national healthcare, that poor child might be yours one day.  He will lie at death’s door.  Even if you know a way to bring him back to good health, even if you know a doctor who can heal your child, there will not be one thing you will be able to do.  The healthcare system will be afraid that you just might prove them wrong and they can’t afford something like that.

If your child does die because of some blunder by a state doctor, who is there to find out?  Certainly not the state.  They have too much to fear to do something like that.

I once heard someone say, “If you think healthcare is bad now, just wait until it is free.”  It is one one of my greatest fears.  You see, I lived under single provider healthcare while I was in the Corps.  My oldest son almost died of tonsillitis though he was treated by Navy doctors for a week.

Finally, I went to a civilian doctor who said he was barely able to breath because his tonsils were so swollen.  I really hate to think of what might have happened if I didn’t have that option.  Just remembering how close I was to losing him makes me more afraid than I ever was in Vietnam.

 

A Little Privacy

When I was selected for grand jury duty decades ago, I learned a great deal.  I would suggest that one and all, if you are given the chance, take it.  It is a very enlightening experience.

First, it will open your eyes to the sort of people that are in this world.  Believe me, they are not all good.  Second, it will help you to realize that what you read in the paper is not always as it appears.

Indeed, there are many things it will teach you.  However, the one thing I learned on the first day is something they should teach in school, but don’t.  To the best of my knowledge, no one ever taught me one thing about grand juries or their purpose in all my twelve years of going to school.

Fortunately, the district attorney told us about them.  They actually serve three purposes.  They can perform investigations.  Indeed the grand jury I was on did perform a small investigation.  Primarily, the district attorney presents evidence and on the basis of that evidence, they vote, true bill or no true bill.

The interesting part about this is that if a true bill is returned, no one knows but the district attorney (and his team) and those on the grand jury.  The one being charged does not get a chance to pack his bags and head for Mexico, which he could do if he was forewarned.

Also, if a no true bill is returned, nothing happens.  Not only does the suspect not find out about it, but none of his friends, neighbors or family find out about it either.  It is one of the great parts about our justice system.  If the DA can’t get a true bill, he can’t ruin your reputation.  This is especially good, because if the DA can’t get a true bill against you, your boss will never know you were under investigation.  Neither will your girlfriend or boyfriend.

Moreover, it has been commonly held that any investigating body should keep things private for that reason.  In general, police do not go around telling the world that they are investigating John Doe until they have sufficient evidence to charge him with something.  I think everyone can see that this is a good practice and should be carefully followed.

Knowing this, I was surprised that when the southern US district court judge gave out the name of person “number three” when the demand was made by the an attorney representing The New York Times and some news channel.  She should have refused.  The man was not being charged and wasn’t even being investigated.  He wasn’t even a suspect.  Apparently, what he was guilty of was holding a few conversations with a friend, an attorney who also represents President Trump.

So, the Judge ordered the name be made public and we all now know he is Sean Hannity.  In this case, it did no harm.  However, it could have.  As it was, Mr. Hannity had to defend himself before Fox News, though he did nothing wrong.  Had it been something that he wanted kept quiet, too late now.

One of the things our justice system is supposed to do is protect the innocent people from being railroaded by over zealous investigators.  The judge, at the least, should be censured.  Yet, we have not heard one peep from the Bar association.  We have not heard a complaint from any official.

This of course means, if you are conservative, the justice system will not protect you.  Indeed, you need to be careful who you talk to.  You will need to be wary of what you say.  You will need to take care at hiring a lawyer.  Else, if you don’t, your name might appear on the front page of one of the best known newspapers in the world.

On the other hand, if you are a liberal, don’t worry about it.  It will never happen to you, that is, unless all the newspapers and media suddenly become conservative.  Then where will you be?  No need to worry.  That will not happen in our lifetime.

Compromise

I seldom want to quote Bernie Sanders, but I just heard him say something undeniably true.  “What was once considered radical is now mainstream.”

Sounds like a good reason not to compromise to me.  If he has his way, we will compromise all the way to communism.  As he said, we are already over half way there.  On the other hand, liberals never want to compromise when it means moving toward being more conservative.

As Lady Margaret Thatcher once said, (No matter how slow it is going, why get on the train if it’s going the wrong way?)  Notice I used parenthesis instead of quotes because it is a paraphrase.  I heard her on TV one day and I am not sure of the precise words.

I agree with what she said, but I think I would have said that doing such a thing is, “Crazy Nuts,” if I may quote the title of one of my own books.

Should you like to see any of my other titles, you might check my authors page at

http://www.amazon.com/author/story_teller

Or you can simply log onto Amazon.com and enter my name in the search box.  Please do not confuse me with that other Ben Rhodes, the one that worked for Obama.

A Few Words About Self-Driving Cars

I am sure there is much to be said about this subject, but let me start with the obvious.  I would suspect there are hundreds, maybe thousands of lawyers that are salivating at the prospect of taking some big company to court over an accident piloted by a computer.

First, there is the possibility of suing the car manufacturer.  Then they might sue the company that built the computer, or one of the sensors.  Then there is the software company or person who wrote the programming of the computer.  Then again, why discriminate.  They can sue all of them and let the jurors sort it out.

Each time they level a lawsuit, it means 40% of something they would be able to put in their pocket.  My guess is, few if any of the suits would go to court.  The defendants would not want to set any kind of precedent, so they would likely settle out of court.  They would admit no guilt and the plaintiffs would agree to drop the suit.

It would mean, after an accident, the lawyer would raise his hand and say “Suit,” and the defendants would ask how much.  Then, the nation would have two more instant millionaires,  The lawyer and his client.

Then again, I’m not sure.  It might be four more millionaires.  It is entirely plausible that the parties from both cars might sue to to get a piece of the pie.  On the other hand, what if there are more than two cars involved.  The little glitch in the software just might cause a ten car pileup.  I don’t want to even think about that.

The point is, the lawsuits are no longer limited to the tens of thousands of dollars that an individual driver can cough up.  We are talking megabucks now, millions of dollars over what we now call a fender-bender.  Every dent is a possible lawsuit.

It is all ironic.  Eventually, the driver-less cars will be safer than those driven by humans.  It is quite possible that the computer just might reduce crashes and deaths on the highway.  The computers, after all, have three advantages over humans.

Computers are not distracted.  That little instant that a man takes his eyes off the road to look at that barely dressed woman will no longer be a problem.  That misbehaving child in the back seat will not keep you from seeing that car pull out in front of you.  Moreover, should you nod off from staring at that endless ribbon of highway, it’s no problem.  The robot has it all in control.

It takes us humans about 1/4 of a second to react to an emergency.  From the time we see some child dart out in front of us to the time we put our foot on the brake, it takes at least two tenths of a second.  On the other hand, the computer would apply the brake in millionths of a second.  Even at thirty miles an hour, a car can travel quite a distance in a quarter of a second.

It has often been asked, what if the computer fails.  What if a component goes bad.  Today’s computers are incredibly reliable and will likely become far more reliable in the future.  On the other hand, we humans can and do fail from time to time.  I have known of many accidents that were the result of someone pressing on the throttle instead of the brake.  Then too, there are a few of us that are old.  If a heart goes out while we are driving, it can cause people to die… besides the heart attack victim.  Besides, even young people can have heart attacks, or black out from other ailments.

In the long run, computers will be far more reliable, though I would still be hesitant to put my life in the hands of one.

However, until something is done with the legal aspects, autonomous cars will continue to be the exception rather than the rule.  It means that women will not be able to put their makeup on at seventy mph and men will have to ignore that good-looking woman walking by.  As usual, it will be the lawyers that will impede the progress.  Even when it makes the roads safer, the driver-less cars are going to have to wait.  There is no way that our legal system will be able to handle it.  Our courts will be so backed up that they won’t be able to deal with the less important things… such as rape, robbery and murder.

Besides the legal problems, there are the recalls.  One accident, and it would likely result in the recall of millions of autos.  Talk about a nightmare.

Then again, there is one thing that I am really looking forward to… keeping all those alcoholics from driving.  That in itself would save uncountable lives, pain and suffering.  The problem is, as long as lawyers make the laws, driver-less autos will remain quite rare.

Controllers and Floaters

The following is the premise of a group of my books about a group of people called floaters and another group called controllers. While neither group really exists, I do believe there are people who like to control other people. Some were called kings, some emperors, pharaohs, etc, they do their best to take control of all the world. They are also on a smaller scale. Some are politicians, some are businessmen, some lawyers. In the previous post, the controllers are the communists. Unfortunately, those protecting the Vietnamese gave up and let the communists come in and take control.

In the world I’ve created in my books, the controllers have natural enemies. They are called floaters. After you have read the below premise, you might decide you want to visit my little world. I think it is better than the real one. If only floaters were real. Maybe then, we would not have health care systems that require women to be covered for prostrate cancer. We would not require men to be covered for miscarriages.

The following is an excerpt from the foreword in the book, “Wolf.”

————————————————————————
There are controllers in this world. They are part of a large organization that want to control the world as well as each other. Some go into business and use the business laws to take control. Some go into politics. Others simply linger in the background and provide backing for those who are willing to do their bidding.

Though controllers use various methods and though they compete viciously with each other, they will unite in a minute for one purpose, to kill floaters. The floaters are the only people who can stop them from reaching their goals. As long as one floater lives, they know they cannot achieve world dominance.

For this reason, they will stop at nothing to kill any floater. For this reason, floaters must work quietly. They must never reveal who they are. If they do, they know that they will be hounded by the controllers until they are dead.

Not all controllers know about floaters. It is something they keep within the higher ranks. It would seem contrary to their desire to destroy the floaters, but if the floaters were revealed to the public, the controllers would also reveal themselves. If they and their purposes were revealed, it would make their goals unattainable.
—————————————————————————

Unfortunately, there are no floaters. At least some of us must take up our cause and fight for our freedom every day. If we don’t, the controllers will take it from us. They have already attacked our freedom of speech, religion and the right to use weapons to protect ourselves.

Most of us are like the farmer in my previous post. We are completely oblivious to the fact that the controllers, the real ones are after our freedom. One day we will wake up and find we are under the control of a controller who calls himself, president. He will take control by promising us free food, housing and phones.

For those that would like to browse my author’s page, simply enter the following URL in your browser.

http://www.amazon.com/author/story_teller