Why I am a Republican

Republicanlogo_svgFrom time to time, my friends on the other side of the political aisle ask me why I choose to be a registered Republican.

As the 114th Congress begins to ramp up, and because the debate between “true conservatives” and “mainstream moderates’ in the Republican Party once again manifested itself during the selection of House Speaker John Boehner a few days ago, I thought this would be a good time to explain why I am a Republican.

My friends in the Democratic Party do not understand my political preference. Republicans, they say, favor corporate interest over the individual. Republicans, they say, are opposed to marriage equality and a woman’s right to choose.

Because I am a moderate who supports both marriage equality and a woman’s right to choose, some of my friends (on both sides of the political aisle) wonder why I would choose to be a member of the Grand Old Party (GOP).

Before we proceed, please note that this post is entitled: Why I am a Republican, not why you should be a Republican.

It should also be noted that I do not speak for my party, and I acknowledge that my views often cause other Republicans to label me as a RINO (Republican In Name Only).

Maybe it’s because I am stubborn, or maybe it’s because I am a born contrarian, but I really think my allegiance to the Republican Party (although at times embarrassing) has to do with some fundamental core differences between Republicans and Democrats.

I am also emboldened by the statements and core beliefs of President Ronald Reagan that “there is room in our tent for many views.”

Generally speaking, Republicans believe that each person is responsible for his or her own place in society, while Democrats believe it is the responsibility of government to care for all individuals, even if it means giving up some individual rights.

Generally speaking, Democrats favor the centralization of power in Washington, D.C., while Republicans hold dear the 10th Amendment, which calls for limited federal authority and rights not specified in the Constitution be reserved for the states.

On these two core values, I strongly side with the GOP. While I believe some measure of federal regulation, whether it’s the FAA or even meat inspectors at the FDA, is absolutely necessary for the common good, I also believe in the virtue of a limited federal government and the decentralization of power.

In a true Democracy, the majority trumps the minority. In a Constitutional republic, the rights of the individual, even in the minority, cannot be trumped by the majority. In the United States, we adhere a to a delicate balance between these two types of government. (The latter being intended to thwart tyranny, which can include government overreach.)

The case for and against the GOP

Of course, there are times when I find myself at odds with my own party, but after reviewing the 2014 Maine GOP Party platform, it became quickly evident that I more often side with Republicans than Democrats.

For example, one tenet of the Maine GOP platform addresses immigration, saying we “Support the assimilation of legal immigrants into Maine society.”

Another: “The profits of an individual’s efforts and accumulation of private property belong to the individual.”

More:  “Implement a comprehensive energy policy that removes government obstacles and reduces the cost of energy for Maine families and businesses.”

“Welfare is a safety-net for Maine’s most vulnerable”

“Parents – not government – are most capable and responsible to make decisions in the best interest of their minor children, including medical, disciplinary and educational decision.”

There are many others, and you can read the full text here.

Although I agree with the majority of the Maine GOP’s platform, there some key places where we part ways, including language regarding abortion, the definition of marriage and calling for the repeal of the Affordable Health Care Act, among a few others.

The case for and against Democrats

In fairness, I also reviewed the Maine Democratic Party’s 2014 platform.  2014 MDP Platform

I found myself at odds with a majority of the tenets contained in that platform, including the nice-sounding but ill-advised “livable wage,” and increasing the minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage does not, in my opinion, “lift people out of poverty” rather it simply adjusts the height of the floor and removes incentive to advance.

The Maine Democratic Party believes that health care is a “fundamental human right.’ this logic is flawed because a “right” is not something that must be provided by obligation from another person or entity. “Rights” do not come with costs, and someone has to be paid to provide healthcare, whether it’s skilled nursing, facilities or medical equipment. For more of my thoughts on this topic, go here.

Democrats also support the ill-advised concept of so-called “net neutrality,” as if the government needs to be involved in regulating the internet. For more of my thoughts on this topic, go here.

The Maine Democratic Party opposes tort reform, a giant gift to trial lawyers and a sure-fire way to drive up costs in the private sector.

The Democrats also favor increasing the number of terms that a legislator can serve. Frankly, I think eight years is plenty and we don’t need professional politicians in Augusta.

The opposing party also opposes the Keystone XL pipeline, a project I vigorously support. (Pipelines are much safer than trains; and that oil will be shipped one way or another)

The Democrats also believe that a greater portion of tax revenues should come from the income tax, calling sales taxes regressive. I believe the exact opposite.

Democrats believe it is “appropriate to impose higher taxes on sin taxes. I smoke cigarettes and drink beer. Enough said.

Among many other things, Democrats believe that government pensions should be exempt from income taxes. As the spouse of a government worker, I concede that my opposition to this is not self-serving. Then again, I think we should all strive to be a bit less “self-serving.”

Now, I do find myself in agreement with many of the Democrats core principles, but I am also wary of the feel-good language and the dangers of good intentions. Democrats support workplace safety, a strong education system, marriage equality and a woman’s right to choose.

So, in the end there are inherent strengths and weaknesses in each party.

But when I do the math, it turn out that I am a Republican, even if in name only.






Ginger or Mary Ann?

Gilligan's Island (US TV Series)It’s become an age-old question: Ginger or Mary Ann?

And more often than not, men between the ages of 40 and 60 do not hesitate with their response.

With the passing yesterday of Donna Douglas (Elly Mae Clampett), I once again started thinking about the television shows of my youth. And more than any other popular show of that genre (The Brady Bunch, The Partridge Family, The Beverly Hillbillies or Room 222), Gilligan’s Island has achieved iconic status in the world of pop culture and recently celebrated its 50th birthday.

Gilligan’s Island ran between 1964 and 1967 on the CBS network.

We all know the plot and the premise of Gilligan’s Island, but let’s save the critiques for later.

Mary Ann (Dawn Wells)

Mary Ann (Dawn Wells)

Of the two single women stranded on the tropical island (Mrs. Howell was taken), if you put farm girl Mary Ann Summers up against Hollywood movie starlet Ginger Grant, Mary Ann almost invariably trumps her much more curvaceous, sexpot co-star, among both men and women.


I’m not entirely sure, but I have a theory.

It’s because Mary Ann was the essence of innocence. She was nurturing (forever making coconut cream pies for her fellow islanders) She was modest, honest and just a little bit sassy.

On the other hand, Ginger was narcissistic, insecure and rather one-dimensional.

Men, more often than not, choose Mary Ann because of deeper instincts than sexual desire. Would you want Ginger to be the mother of your children? Would Ginger nurture you when you were sick with island fever? Probably not.

Men may choose Ginger for a night, but Mary Ann was a keeper.

Women choose Mary Ann, I think, because she embodies a better reality about women. Women are tired of the images of female body perfection that has been forced on them through media for generations.

But let’s not dance around the also obvious.

Mary Ann was smoking hot in her own right. Her shorts were always short and tight. She may have worn a farm girl’s checkered shirt, but even in the early 1960s, Mary Ann was not afraid to expose her midriff, tying that symbolic shirt of innocence around her waist.

That’s my theory about why Mary Ann trumps Ginger, despite the latter’s overt sex appeal.

In the end, virtue always wins, and Mary Ann managed to stay on the right side of that line for three years, and in our minds for 50 years thereafter.

I close by asking you to take a simple poll: Ginger or Mary Ann?


Looking ahead: 2015

What's ahead for 2015?

What’s ahead for 2015?

Will the Patriots win the Superbowl? Will racial tensions in the United States escalate? Will the economy boom or bust? What stories will dominate news headlines in 2015?

Every year, I ask my friends to make predictions about what will transpire in the coming year. Their answers are often funny, sometimes insightful and always appreciated.

In reviewing last year’s predictions for 2014, my friend Bob Mentzinger offered the most accurate predictions.

Although Mentzinger inaccurately predicted that George Zimmerman will kill again (Strike One), he was one of only two friends who predicted that Maine Governor Paul LePage would be re-elected. He also opined that the Carolina Panthers will win the Super Bowl, and that it will snow through April (Two more strikes) but he accurately predicted that the Dow would hit 18,000 in 2014.

So what do my friends have to say about 2015?

My friend Bob Meyers offered a dire prediction related to last year’s bear hunting referendum:

“The last of the polar ice cap will finally melt off and the resuling rise in sea levels will flood the major cities along the East Coast. Some polar bears will manage to swim to high ground in Maine where biologists will discover to their horror that they don’t like donuts.”

My friend Gina Hamilton focused her prognostication skills on international events:

 “It will come out in February, after Russia rises up and overthrows Vladamir Putin, that the U.S. was in cahoots with the Saudis and Kuwaitis to drive down oil prices to harm Russia’s economy. The side effect, harming U.S. oil interests, was somehow not considered.”

My friend Val Brikates Kennedy offered two predictions:

“1.We’ll find out that Lindsay Lohan is the real Sony hacker because she’s still pissed that James Franco won’t admit he had sex with her. 2. Bruce Jenner becomes Brenda Jenner.”

My friend Daniel Parenteau was a bit more somber with his predictions:

 “1. The FCC will block the Comcast / Time Warner merger and approve the AT&T / DIRECTV deal. Both events will set sizeable rate hikes in motion as a growing number of Cord-Cutters will embrace both over-the-air and webstreaming as their news and entertainment sources.

“2. The GDP will top and stay at 3+ percent while unemployment continues its downward trend to 5 percent. Wages will realize very modest gains across the board and the Fed will raise interest rates as the Dollar remains strong. China’s economy will continue to slow and Russia is in real trouble both economically and militarily – expect a stronger Russian/Chinese Alliance and strategy that will challenge the West.

“3. Locally, Biddeford’s economic landscape will grow in 2015 with the development of commercial properties and business, but there will be an infusion of small businesses that will feature specialty goods and services that will draw consumers regionally. The city will continue to grow as a food mecca that will be a heavy draw. Some guy I know may even try his hand at bringing an eaterie featuring some of his historical and cultural heritage to the mix. 2015 will be an epic year!”

My friend Gary Aldrich offered an even more somber prediction for 2015:

“We will lose one of the former Presidents this year…either Carter or the elder Bush….will bring the country together briefly for this moment.”

My friend John Day let his political leanings show with his predictions for 2015:

“The US Supreme Court will throw Obamacare into turmoil by ruling that federal tax subsidies in state exchanges are unconstitutional and the High Court fires another cannon ball across Obama’s bow by agreeing to take up the law suit filed by 22 states claiming Obama’s executive memorandum granting amnesty to 5 million illegals overstepped presidential powers.”

And finally, last year’s winner, Bob Mentzinger, took another stab at making predictions for the year ahead:

“1) Dow 19,000; Obama still “socialist”
2) China’s real estate bubble pops; oil goes to $40
3) House GOP drafts articles of impeachment
4) Bernie Sanders into presidential race as an independent
5) Major U.S. power grid or other infrastructure (bridge, e.g.) failure
6) Warmest year on record.”

But what about my predictions?

1.)  I will go out on a limb and say that the following individuals will all announce that they will seek the presidency: Hillary Clinton, Rand Paul, Bernie Sanders, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio.

2.) I predict the Denver Broncos will win the Superbowl; and sadly,

3.) I predict that racial tensions will continue to escalate as the gap of income disparity continues to widen, despite record market gains.


So, there you have it. It looks like 2015 will be an interesting and offbeat year. Happy New Year to you and yours, and may the coming year bring you good health, joy and prosperity.







‘Tis the Season

Another Christmas is right around the corner, and this holiday feels different from so many others that have come and gone.

I suspect some of you may be feeling the same way, considering the stress that too often accompanies the holiday season.

christmas-tree1I’m not sure why I am having a harder time getting into the spirit of the season this year. The awful part of this is that there is no good reason for my absence of holiday cheer. I am incredibly blessed; more than I should be.

I have a loving, beautiful and supportive wife (Don’t ask me how I pulled this off, because I have no clue).

I have two healthy, wonderful step children, a beautiful home, modern appliances and a good job with benefits, funny co-workers and a flexible boss.

I have two dogs that love me unconditionally and two cats that keep me on my toes.

I have an extended family that is more supportive than dysfunctional. Heck, I even have new tires on my truck, not to mention access to health care and a set of tools that I don’t know how to use.

So, why shouldn’t I feel jolly and bright as this holiday approaches? What has me feeling cynical and ready to scream, “Bah Humbug” at random strangers?

Maybe, just maybe, I have too much. Maybe, just maybe, I have forgotten why we celebrate this holiday.

This realization came to me as I began to reflect on Christmases past; on Christmas celebrations that did not come with so many expectations of the so-called perfect holiday.

As I contemplated these ghosts of Christmases past, it occurred to me that two particular Christmas holidays stood out as my favorites.

1.) Homefries with paprika

It was the Christmas of 1997, and I was 33 years old, virtually unemployed and living with three roommates on the third-floor of a Munjoy Hill apartment in Portland that was much closer to the bottom of the hill. I did not own a car, nor did I have a girlfriend.

I was, in every sense of the word, a loser.  At least, that was my opinion of myself back then.

These aforementioned roommates of mine were unruly slobs who liked to drink, stay up late and delighted in terrorizing my cat. They were lovable guys, actually; but it grew wearisome picking up after them and tolerating their frat-boy behaviors. On the other hand, they were covering my portion of the rent. So, there’s that.

Luckily, my three roommates were all headed to their respective homes for the holidays, and I was not. To me, this was the ultimate Christmas gift: I would have the entire apartment all to myself for a few days. I spent almost an entire day cleaning the place, lit some candles and then planned what I would do on my solitary Christmas.

Only a few weeks before, my sister gave birth to my oldest niece, Kaitlyn.  I had a little more than $20 in my pocket, so my Christmas shopping was going to be limited. So, on December 24, I trudged down Congress Street and stopped at the CVS store. I bought a rather inexpensive frame and some parchment paper; and then trudged down the hill toward the Hannaford store, where I bought a thick ham-steak, half-dozen eggs and some egg nog before heading home.

I loaded my word-processor with the parchment paper and drafted a poem for my niece; a poem to celebrate her first Christmas. Satisfied with the third version, I placed it in the frame and wrapped it.

I opted to attend Midnight Mass at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, and by the time I walked back home, a quiet peace and serenity enveloped me. I was exhausted, but content.

I fell asleep reading Ben Bradlee’s autobiography and awoke on Christmas morning happier than I could recall. I boiled some potatoes, setting them in a skillet with globs of butter, chopped onions and doused with paprika. In a separate skillet, I fried that ham-steak, while working to scramble some eggs and coordinate the timing of my toast.

It was a kick-ass breakfast that I washed down with a quart of egg-nog. I fell asleep again in front of the television, with my cat curled on my chest.

I had not only survived a solitary Christmas; I relished it.

2.) Reindeer tracks

It was the  Christmas of 2001. A few weeks prior, I met Laura Kidman and we began dating on a regular basis. She owned a small home in Old Orchard Beach and had two young sons that I had met just a couple of weeks before Christmas. I was the editor of a small, local newspaper. I drove a 1993 Ford Escort wagon with a really bad exhaust,

Between us, Laura and I did not have two nickels to spare, but I remember how warm and cozy her house felt when she invited me over on Christmas Eve. Looking back, the “cozy” feeling probably had something to do with the house being 550-square-feet.

The boys were still young enough to believe in Santa Claus. Tim was six, and Matt was four. I bought them each several presents, which were wrapped and placed under the Christmas tree after they went to bed. Laura’s sister had helped me pick out a necklace, which I would give to my future wife on Christmas morning. But as midnight, approached, I opted to give Laura a more significant gift.

A few years earlier, my mother had given me the Nativity set that I had grown up with. From that Nativity set, I removed the Joseph figurine and wrapped it carefully. When I gave Laura that gift, I explained that I would do my best to match Joseph’s love for a child that was not his own.

Before driving home, I went out to the front porch and leaned over with a broom to create reindeer tracks in the snow.

I went back to Laura’s home on Christmas morning to watch the kids open their presents and to point out that the reindeer had landed in the front yard. They believed it for a little while, but were relentless in interrogating me about it. It was a magical day, and I felt as if I had truly turned some kind of corner that could never be reversed.

Neither of these stories are intended to diminish the wonderful and magical Christmases of my youth. My parents outdid themselves at Christmas. We decorated the tree as a family, listening to Nat King Cole and Johnny Mathis sing about the magic of the season. There was always, and I mean always, a giant orange tucked in the bottom of our stockings; my sister and I were often given matching pajamas on Christmas eve. We each had our favorite ornaments to hang on the tree. Fond memories, that must adapt to changing realities.

And what I realized today is that the more I have; the more comfortable I am, the more the magic and splendor of Christmas escapes me.

Because Christmas is not about stuff, credit-card balances, news headlines or any of the other things that can weigh us down throughout the rest of the year.

Christmas is a reprieve for those who choose to accept it.

No matter where you are, no matter your circumstance or fortune, I wish you all a very Merry Christmas


‘All I know is that I know nothing’

imagesBy Dawn Carey

Socrates was a classical Greek philosopher who has been credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy. It is believed that his knowledge is only conveyed through his students, among them, Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon, and Aristophanes


According to Plato’s ‘Apology’, a friend of Socrates (Chaerephon) asked the oracle at Delphi if anyone were wiser than Socrates; the Oracle responded that no one was wiser. Socrates challenged this answer, (because he believed he possessed no special wisdom) by questioning the wise men of Athens (poets, politicians, etc.). His conclusion was that the Oracle may be correct; while the experts claimed themselves to be wise, they were not. This, he decided, explained why the Oracle had made such a conclusion; he was the only person aware of his own ignorance. Because of his non-conforming behavior and his challenge to authority, Socrates was put on trial for ‘wrongdoing’. He was found guilty of corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens and of impiety and sentenced to death by drinking a mixture containing hemlock (1).

While there is MUCH more to the story of Socrates and his philosophies, which have had a significant influence on Western philosophy, I think his belief: “All I know is that I know nothing” encompasses every aspect of current society and ideas, or lack thereof.

We have a problem in this country, and around the world… we all think we KNOW everything; don’t we? I believe this is the reason for the gridlock and insanity we see in Congress, and all around us. People are too busy knowing it all to listen to anyone else. Before a person can even begin to share their thoughts, recipients of communication shut down; they tune out and immediately distract themselves by formulating a rebuttal to a preconceived idea that they haven’t even heard. I see it regularly, a group of people actually TALKING at the same time, over one another… totally in their own reality, having their own dialogue with themselves; it’s quite comical, actually. They’re all speaking at once, and don’t even recognize that there are three other people doing the exact same thing! I’ve also noticed people asking questions, but not listening to the answer, instead, they answer their own question, aloud, interrupting the person of whom they’ve asked the question. Again, it would be almost comical, if it weren’t so distressing.

As much as we’d like to believe that we are oh-so-wise, wouldn’t we become even wiser if we listened to others ideas? No one person knows everything, we are ALL wrong, on occasion. It’s okay to be wrong, its okay to not know. It’s okay to change one’s mind… as they say: “change is the only constant”. Don’t we attain and education, and read, etc. to learn new concepts and ideas? What kind of information are we cheating ourselves out of by being close-minded and falsely assuming that no one is more knowledgeable than we are; that we are the wisest? We are not, but by being open-minded enough to shut up and LISTEN to what others have to say, we could become wiser than we are.  When we shut ourselves off, because we think we have all the answers, we suffer greatly, individually, as well as, collectively. Sometimes, we need to just ‘shut up’ and listen (hear).

This, I think, is what Socrates was suggesting. And THIS is why the Oracle at Delphi deemed him to be the wisest of all.

1. Fallon, Warren J. (2001). “Socratic suicide.” PubMed. PMID: 19681231. US National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. 121:91-106. Retrieved September 12, 2013.

Et Tu, Journalism?

By Dennis King

jourPlease don’t call me a journalist.  Just because I contribute once in a while to a friend’s blog does not make me a journalist.

If you consider me a journalist I will jump off the next bridge I see. I don’t know how to “journalize” or “journalate” or whatever it’s called.  I tried keeping a diary once but my life was so boring I wound up doodling on the blank pages.    I can barely spell, as it is.  I play guitar and when asked to spell it once I left out the letter “U” and added an “H.”  I have never lived that one down.   I also read a lot, and by that I mean…um..well… I take books out of the library and start reading them.

I made the mistake once of telling my youngest son (who is a gifted writer and avid reader) “I have read a lot of books front to cover”  I wish I was making that up.  I still get grief over it.  That being said, I am good at a few things.  I screw up pretty good.  I am an expert at excuse-making.  I am a savant when it comes to procrastination and I am highly opinionated.  (uh oh, maybe I AM a journalist)

All that being said, I want to express my opinion regarding the venerated and highly esteemed vocation of journalism.  Websters Dictionary defines the word “Journalist” as “One who practices Journalism”  ok that didn’t help.

All joking aside, I know what a journalist is supposed to do. He or she writes down as story.  Something big happens.  A truck hits a utility pole and the power goes out in the neighborhood.   Suddenly the driver gets blamed because someone thought he saw him texting while driving so the headline reads “Texting Driver shuts down power to neighborhood”  The anti-texting folks come to town and picket in front of his house.  He is denying it.  “My cell phone was turned off I swear !” he laments in protest.  It’s too late.  The police start an investigation but it is doesn’t matter at this point.  Al Sharpton is already on his way to offer his help to the victims of this heinous crime.

Businesses are burned, cars overturned, mayhem ensues.  Two weeks later a video surfaces showing the real culprit.  A little cat crosses in front of the big truck.  The driver swerves into the utility pole missing the poor cat.  ohhhhhh THAT’S what happened……and in the words of Rosanna Rosanna-danna “nevermind”.  That’s Journalism !!

Sometimes journalism can be that way.   Something bad happens and journalists. in their zeal. start to write what they see and hear as if it’s the gospel truth.  They report it while it is happening not considering the consequences.   Is it true?  Is it false?  What is going on here?

The question that never gets asked or perhaps gets answered prematurely is “Should we wait until we get all the facts ?”    Such is the case time and time again.  For as long as there have been journalists, there have been stories published that later turned out to be untrue, or at least not fully told until the fires go out and everyone has gone home and the damage has been done.

There have been countless stories published as truth, too quickly to be retracted that have embarrassed and sometimes even harmed folks when the truth came out later.

Richard Jewell the so-called “Olympic Bomber” was first hailed as a hero and then became a suspect in the bombing.  He went through a “Trial by Media” and his name was dragged through the mud by the media mob.  This kind of journalism has always been going on.  Did you know that Marie Antoinette never said “Let them eat cake” ?  Did you know she was just an regular girl (well at least overly pampered)  who was accused of things she never did ?  Pamphlets were printed that accused her of all various vices, which were untrue.  Death by Journalism.   There are many such modern day published headlines that have colored our view of the truth.

Just look the stories up and read about them yourself.  The list is long and the damage done was severe.  Reputations were destroyed. (The McMartin pre-school fiasco,  The Tawana Brawley story, The Duke Lacrosse scandal,  The UVA Rape story,  yes even Michael Brown’s death was full of journalistic assumptions that fed the flames, destroying people’s businesses.   Mark Twain once said “A lie can go halfway around the world while the Truth is putting on it’s shoes”

Much has been written about Journalism. From the humorous to the severe.   Dave Barry once wrote “We journalists make it a point to know very little about an extremely wide variety of topics.  This is how we stay objective”

The French poet Jean De La Fontaine once penned ” Every journalist owes tribute to the evil one” Ouch !

All I know is that in today’s fast paced media-driven world where what happened two minutes ago is already old news, we should not listen to these voices until the truth comes out.    I have stopped tuning in to these late-breaking news stories.    I keep my opinions to myself until the very end and the jury has reached a verdict based upon evidence.  Then will I say what I think.

Unfortunately, by then, the truth really doesn’t matter.


Facts are stubborn things

A protestor in Ferguson.  (CBS News photo)

A protestor in Ferguson. (CBS News photo)

I am at a distinct disadvantage writing these words.

I am white. I am also the husband of a former police officer, thus I am somewhat biased.

But I will proceed regardless; because all the news, all the commentary, and all the passionate debate about what happened in Ferguson, Missouri has sparked my memory, jarred my thinking — all the way back to my junior year in high school when I wrote an essay about the Boston Massacre.

The similarities are striking.

History has a funny way of repeating itself; and as George Santayana said, ” Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.”

The Boston Massacre happened on March 5, 1770.

Five colonists were killed by British soldiers, who were serving as law enforcement officers to uphold the rule of law (including unpopular taxes) and other provisions of the Townshend Acts

On that fateful evening, Hugh White, a British private soldier, (Police officer Darren Wilson) stood on guard duty outside the Custom House on King Street. A young man, Edward Garrick, insulted another member of the British Guard, Capt. John Goldfinch, saying that Goldfinch had not paid a bill.

Private White injected himself into the debate and told Garrick that he should be more respectful of British officers. White, in fact, left his post, challenged the boy, and struck him on the side of the head with his musket. This attracted a crowd.

Tensions were already high between the British and the colonists. The boy’s insult and White’s reaction touched off a powder keg of resentment.

Within minutes, more than 50 colonists pressed around White,  throwing objects at him and challenging him to fire his weapon.

The crowd grew in size and the British dispatched more troops to quell the colonists, who were throwing rocks and snowballs at the officers. And  then muskets were fired. Five colonists were killed and six more were injured.

The first man killed was Crispus Attucks, an African man, who was labeled later as an instigator.

In the days and weeks that followed, there was a propaganda battle between the two sides. Everyone had an opinion.

Of the eight officers arrested, six were acquitted and two were charged with manslaughter because they fired directly into the crowd.

The attorney representing the British convinced the jury that the officers were in fear of their lives and acting in self-defense.

And who was that attorney?

John Adams, the man who would go on to become the second president of the United States, took the case because he wanted to ensure a fair trial, despite his patriot leanings.

Adams received threats and daily harassment. He feared for his life and for the safety of his family. Many colonists regarded him a traitor for representing the British.

At trial, witness statements were contradictory, and Adams seized upon those contradictions to paint an utter scene of chaos for the jurors, despite the fact that his clients were wholly unpopular.

But Adams also played the race card. Adams called the crowd “a motley rabble of saucy boys, ‘negros’ and ‘molattoes, ‘Irish teagues’ and outlandish jack tars.”

Popularity did not matter to Adams. He knew the stakes were too high to cave into the pressure of political expediency.

What John Adams said during his closing statement at trial should cause us all to pause before offering our own amateur speculation about the intent, competence or procedure of the Grand Jury in Ferguson, Missouri:

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

Flash forward to today and  yet another young man is dead, and a community is ripped apart.

We will probably never know what happened on that fateful night in August. Most of us (God willing) will never know the pain of losing a child, or the haunting nightmares of a police officer who felt out of options.

But what we do know for certain is this: that the rioting, which followed the non-indictment was not at all justified, but completely understandable. That there is still a rage and level of mistrust in many of our communities and it is there because of undeniable history.

We also know for certain that more than 100 police officers have been killed in the line of duty this year.

So let’s stop speculating and debate the things we know.

Let’s talk about how we move forward; because as history shows us, things can come apart very quickly.