"Every Mother's Son"

"Every Mother's Son", forms an unbreakable bond, one the

'#MeToo' movement seeks to shatter when it finds a 'son' 

guilty solely on an accusation and a 'mother' brokenhearted 

watching his life destroyed and being unable to stop it.

Unfortunately, a troubling number of women with a righteous

contempt for those accused of sexual assault believe any man

is guilty even without learning the facts supporting the accusation.

They are frozen in their thinking, guilty must be the verdict!

To them, all accusations are credible, nor are they interested in

jurisprudence that allows accusations presented and adjudicated

under the law.  They find the process too slow, too 'messy' and

more importantly, too risky, as the results of "justice being served" 

might prove the alleged innocent.

This is the world  the '#MeToo' the movement wants to live in,
but it is also the world lived in before, during the  "Inquisition", 

started in 12th century France!

Every mother's son should not pay a price for something he did

 not do.

Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

Should Non-Profits be allowed to use "political intimidation"

Its my understanding that non-profit status is a privilege 

the IRS grants to organizations which meet criteria within 

the code. Within this code we find non-profits "must be 

organized and operated exclusively for "exempt purposes".

With more than 1.5 million non-profits its impossible for the 

IRS to properly oversee that only 'exempt purposes' occur, 

which opens the door for the privilege to be abused, even to 

the point of doing damage to individuals, businesses and 

even other non-profits.

Which brings me to the subject question... 

Should Non-Profits be allowed to used "political intimidation"? 

Intimidation can take many forms, but is easily recognized when 

the damage is inflicted. And, by any reasonable understanding 

'intimidation' would not fit into the category of an exempt purpose.

Recently this abuse of non-profit guidelines was seen at the

Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Planned Parenthood,

two prominent non-profits, more political activist organizations

than non-partisan non-profits.

The Southern Poverty Law Center  (SPLC), doesn't even try to 

hide its desire to  intimidate.  It has shamelessly promoted its

list of "hate groups" which it actively publicizes and uses to 

destroy, through intimidation, as has done quite often and 

successfully for years.

The SPLC's intimidation campaign is now seeking to destroy the 

David Horowitz Freedom Center by contacting the two largest 

credit card services,  Mastercard and Visa, demanding they 

refuse to do business  with his Freedom Center, that would 

shut down its primary fund raising mechanism.  

The story: https://bit.ly/2OYUzPW

Most recently Planned Parenthood successfully got an Austin 

movie theater to not show the movie, "Gosnell", the true story 

of an abortion doctor now in jail.  The target is not a single

theater it is ANY theater that dares to show it.

 Story: https://bit.ly/2xNHmDt

Non-profit status was included it the original Revenue Act 

of  1913 for a purpose, but it was not to do harm through 

threats or intimidation. The laudable reasons for non-profits

seem to be forgotten when zealots run them.

Non-profit were meant to "further a social cause or advocate

a point of view", but not at the expense lawful enterprises or

individuals. 

It one thing to address issues but quite another to intimidate 

businesses  as these two non-profits and I am sure so many 

others are doing. Its time the IRS gets tough on these abuses. 

Regards,

Anthony Bruno

Sen. Schumer can be mum when it serves him well.

Schumer Demanded FBI Probe Kavanaugh, Was Mum On Wife’s Role in NYC Deadly Crash

September 21, 2018

Democrat minority leader, Chuck Schumer has deemed Brett Kavanaugh accuser’s claims against the judge as “extremely credible”.

Yes, the pathologically partisan senator has proclaimed that;  6 different FBI background checks, days of grueling testimony and an endless number of character witnesses to the contrary, Christine Blasey Ford’s 36-year-old allegation, unsupported by specific critical details such as year, time, and place, is plenty good enough for him!

Chuck wanted the FBI to “reopen” their background investigation, although he wasn’t precise as to which of those half dozens should be reopened.

Schumer demanded the feds step in and get to the bottom of this;  no matter how long it takes.  He wanted them to find all the answers, especially if there are no real answers to be found.

Seeing Senator Schumer shamelessly preening in front of friendly cameras never comes as a surprise to anyone paying attention.

But, what even Schumer watchers may not know is;15 years ago, during what would normally have been one of those classic ambulance chasing media moments Chucky lives for, he was nowhere to be found.

In the fall of 2003, there was a horrific, deadly ferry boat crash in the senator’s very own New York City. 

Strangely absent, was the typical spectacle of Schumer racing for a camera and calling for an over-the-top federal look into the circumstances surrounding one of the worst public transportation disasters in NYC’s history. There was none of his usual bluster crying out for increased regulations and punishment for all those responsible. He went underground. Why?

Because hidden from public view, the key player entwined in this calamity, was one Iris Weinshall.

Here’s the story:

On Wednesday, October 15, 2003, the Andrew J. Barberi crashed full-speed in a concrete pier at St. George ferry terminal, killing 11 and injuring 165. The crash was so horrific, then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg felt compelled to issue a statement saying it was not a terrorist attack.

Facing multi-million dollar lawsuits the NYC Department of Transportation had the hard-hearted chutzpah to claim the clearly avoidable tragedy resulted from an Act of God.  Not only was that pathetic argument debunked to the tune of well over $50 million, but 5 people were charged in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York with 11 counts of seaman’s manslaughter and making false statements.

In addition, an independent federal report found fault with upper management ruling, “the lion’s share of culpability in this case as resting with the high-level management of the Ferry Service.”, given this was just the kind high profile catastrophe Senator Schumer would normally use to bleat about dramatically expanding the Fed’s role; where was Chuck?

The answer is easy if you know two things. The Commissioner of the New York City Department of Transportation was Iris Weinshall. Iris Weinshall was Senator Schumer’s wife. If this was unknown at the time it’s not the reader’s fault. The power couple was very careful covering their tracks. In July of 2006 Iris, as a defendant in a related lawsuit, went so far as to have the hyphenated Schumer part of her Weinshall-Schumer name removed and both were virtually unreachable for comments regarding the deadly accident.

While others were disciplined, fired and/or served jail terms Ms. Wesinshall had the remarkable good fortune to serve in that position for another four years. She then took a job at the City University of New York, ironically tasked with overseeing the planning, building, and maintenance of physical structures.

A running joke has been the most dangerous place to be standing in between a camera and Chuck Schumer. On October 15, 2003, literally, the most dangerous place to be standing was on ferry under the control of a NYC agency headed by Mrs. Charles Schumer.

If Schumer continues his factually unfounded vendetta against an honorable Brett Kavanaugh, the Dem pol should be reminded of events 15 years ago that drove him to keep his mouth shut.

Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

Sen. Grassley on the Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing.

Committee Chair Sen. Chuck Grassley needs to make 

a statement concerning the recently concluded Kavanaugh 

Confirmation Hearing.

As much as he provided fair and equitable leadership, it

was not enough get any sense of 'comity' the Senate

prides itself on.

I hope Grassley offer such a statement, such as below.

The Senate hearing to confirm the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh

for the vacated seat on the Supreme Court has been a circus from day one 

which could have been predicted soon after the announcement by President

Trump on July 9th.

It did not take long for Democrats​ to 'fill in the name' of the already created, 

scripted criticism to be used over and over against whomever Trump chose.

From the first, all Democrat members ensured the hearing would not go 

without interruption. First, they provided tickets to people interested 

in disrupting the proceedings, not respectfully listening to what was 

being said.  

But, this was not the worst of this 'circus', what we saw next surely 

was, the performance of Democrats on the committee themselves,

all showed little interest in a respectful query of Judge Kavanaugh, 

only an ongoing attack on him.

The foregone conclusion was obvious and two fold.  Even before 

the hearing began every Democrat said they would not confirm the 

nomination, while a few Republicans wanted assurances on 

concerns they wanted addressed.

After a three day hearing that included three sessions of questioning 

Kavanaugh by all twenty-one senators, totaling one hour each

they hearing ended, with only the scheduled vote on Sept. 19th 

to be taken.

The next day I learned from Sen. Diane Feinstein that she received

a letter from a woman that claimed she was sexually assaulted by

Judge Kavanaugh when they were teenagers, over thirty years ago,

information Feinstein new about in July!

Now, the Democrats, who I remind you, were not going to vote

for Kavanaugh at all, want to bring in this women, now a professor

to address the committee.

But, even that does not seem to be enough, now the women's lawyer

is demanding an FBI investigation before she speaks to our committee

which the Democrats demand as well.

I have to call this as I see it, a slow moving flow of lava to scuttle the 

appointment of Judge Kavanaugh which I will refuse to allow.

Our committee will not submit to demands by either party or any

individual. I will call for a vote at the earliest, not negotiate with 

Democrats that from the beginning had little interest in Judge 

Kavanaugh's of the law.

As much as I empathize with Prof. Ford, beyond allowing her to 

address the committee, I will not delay the the vote for demands

of any nature, by anyone. 

Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

"The Coddling of the American Mind"

I am not sure you are aware of or read this subject book, but I did come

across the one hour CSPAN video "The Coddling of the American Mind",

in which the authors, Greg Lukianoff and Johnathan Haidt discussed it.

From the introduction:

Something has been going wrong on many college campuses in the last

few years. Speakers are shouted down. Students and professors say they

are walking on eggshells and are afraid to speak honestly. Rates of anxiety,

depression, and suicide are rising—on campus as well as nationally.

How did this happen? 

I did not read the book, but I learned enough from the one hour CSPAN

video to see a glaring omission, the possibility that "coddling" began

when raising children changed in our country, with the birth of "latch

key" school age children, leading to the the current state we are in!

Perhaps I am 'old school'  but discussions  of "micro aggression", "safe

spaces" and "demands of the students",  etc.  never occurred forty odd

years ago, which is more than troubling when the authors did not

delve into what could be the source of many of the problems today.

To me, the current method of public education may be the cause and

needs to be examined and compared with earlier education and

societal rearing. 

Did replacing at home development with day care have played a role?

Perhaps the uptick in single parenthood, leaving millions without the

presence of a father figure.

In K-12 we learned  the building blocks required to become responsible

adults. Observing that college students need "coddling"  also shows

many have yet to reach adulthood.

Even the word 'rigger', used to describe teaching, has been reduced to

a pacifier, perhaps to mislead parents, as true 'rigger'  and structured

standards were replaced with more relaxed ones so students could easily

advance without learning what is needed to meet the next grade's standard;

none which the authors discussed.

Our country turned for the better when more women with children chose

to pursue careers, but it needs to be understood such a change has a price,

and should be part of the discussion if there is to be a serious discussion.

Nor, did the authors address what else happened when women entered

the workplace; the 'delegation' of  parenting to public schools as well.

What was taught in the home was no longer taught at all.  The maturity

of children entering college was nonexistent in many, still immature,

leaving it up to administrators to handle, a task universities were never

charged to provide.

I don't know of anyone, other than Charles Murray, with  the courage

to compare then with now, so the public understands for themselves,

not be dependent on the education professionals to add another layer

of bureaucracy that fails public education as earlier ones have.

Pass along this email to friends in teaching.  AS always, your feedback

is appreciated.

This is the link to watch the video.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?450784-1/the-coddling-american-mind


Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/