NATASHA "NAME BRAND" AND BOBBEE BEE: MOTHERS TEACH YOUR DAUGHTERS

by Janelle Harris

1. Her family history and the struggles and stories of the people who came before either one of them.

2. Her flaws and her heartbreaks, as hurtful as they might be, because perfection isn’t realistic but disappointments are. They, however, aren’t the end of the world unless you let them be.

3. Pride in being who she is, from her quirks and craziness to her most laudable qualities, and the lesson to never over-invest in her beauty without equally investing in her intelligence.

4. How to understand her worth. Power and self-confidence ebb and flow — sometimes up, sometimes down — but a person’s worth doesn’t budge.

5. Respect for God, for herself, for nature and for her elders.

6. How to make choices and be prepared for the consequences, whatever they are, without blaming other people or beating up too badly on herself if things don’t go as planned.

7. The importance of taking care of herself — physically with checkups and prevention, yes, but also with a holistic approach to her self-care: Mental, spiritual and emotional.

8. How to forgive herself and other people, because the burden of resentment and unchecked anger will make her miserable and unpleasant.

9. The dreams that she didn’t realize. Not everything we aspire to is going to come to pass and there is mourning for those losses, just like anything else. But learning how to regroup and move on is essential.

10. How to save money, handle credit, pay bills on time and appreciate everything you have, even if it’s not always enough.

11. The fact that morals and manners may not be flashy or sexy, but they are the dividing factor between people with home training and people other folks can’t wait to leave.

12. How to be prepared for the –isms: racism, sexism, classism. Because at least one of them is always going to be a factor, in some way or another.

13. The qualities to look for in a man worth marrying, and the difference between a boo thang and a husband.

14. The importance of family and friends that are like family, because you’re only going to have a limited number of people who are down for you no matter what.

BOBBEE BEE: YOU ARE A LIAR!!!

by Eric D.Graham

America was build on a lie because Christopher Columbus didn't discover America. The Native Americans didn't celebrate Thanksgiving. Jesus is not white and George Washington had slaves.

As a result, Duane Alan Hahn said that a Liar's motto is "If at first you don't deceive, lie, lie, and lie again."

So Let the Truth be Told: Crooks lie, Criminals lie, Children lie, Parents lie, Husbands and Wives lie, News Reporters lie, Teachers lie, Lawyers lie, Politicians lie, Police Officers lie, Preachers lie, the Government lies and even you and I lie.

But can you spot a liar, if you saw one. Because the Lie is written all over your face according to Marc Salem, a leading authority on nonverbal communication and interpersonal skills, who reveals how to spot a liar in his book The Six Keys To Unlock and Empower Your Mind.

Here are a few hidden clues.

1. Sharp Pauses
 

When a person is lying, the pauses are longer in the middle of the sentences, provide short answers to questions and take longer to begin their response than someone who's merely nervous. After all, they need time to create the lie. 

 

2. The Eyes are the Windows to the Soul
 

See where the eyes go after you ask the question. People tend to look up to the right to visualize or invent, a response and down to the right to invent sounds. We often recall the truth by looking up to the left or down to the left .

3.Excessive gesturing
 

When people lie, they move their hands alot, nervous movements like scratching the body or fiddling with a pencil. If a candidate is asked a question & immediately pick up a pen and begins playing with it, something's a miss subconsciously.

 

4.Lack of gesturing.

The rehearsed or practiced liar, who has planned his deceit ahead of time, will try to control gestures. Many politicians are coached to stay still during TV appearances. They keep their face inexpressive, upper body stiff and legs often crossed.

5. READ HIS LIPS

Look for unusual movement of the mouth, lips, or tongue, while discussing weapons of mass destruction in recent interview, former Vice president Dick Chaney bit his lips, sucked them inward more than half a dozen times.

Tight lips indicate you may be planning to keep the truth in. If you actually suck the lips in, you maybe withholding anger.

A dry cough or cracking voice is psychological response to the discomfort of lying.

When you are nervous your mouth becomes dry and you lick your lips and swallow as you struggle to find the right words to say.

6.HAND HIDING

Hands symbolically express the emotions of the heart which is why liars tend to keep them hidden. Research on handshakes shows that the single most important factor is palm-to-palm contact.

 

When people don't get this contact, they wonder what the other person is hiding. They'll stick their hands in their pockets, clench them, or hold them behind their back.

7.HALF SMILES.

A smile is the most common facial expression to make emotions. If is often used to hide displeasure and anger.

A real smile changes the entire face. The eyes light up. The forehead wrinkles, the eyebrows and check muscles rise.....

8.EXCESSIVE CONFIDENCE

 Think of this as the super smooth salesman effect.

 Look for nonverbal communication, which include voice, tune, volume, and speaking rate that sound overconfident. You can spot a liar by going with your gut impression.

Listen for anything that doesn't sound normal.

If you feel something is out of norm, even if you can't articulate it specifically, you are probably right.

Both President Bush and Condi Rice display this behavior.

9. CREATION OF BARRIERS

Just as we pull down the shades when we don't want others to see into our home, we close off entrances to our body so our feelings aren't seen.

There are windows at the bottom of our feet, kneecaps, bottom of the torso, middle of the chest, neck, mouth, eyes, and top the head.

A liar tends to close off these entrances- putting clothing over them, turning them away from the person's he is talking to, putting objects or furniture between himself and others, or simply folding his arms. When someone's windows are closed, we don't feel as comfortable with the interaction. Please read "In the Mind of Bobbee Bee" the cartoon every week on the http://www.blackathlete.com/

BOBBEE BEE: We’re All Cheneyites Now’

By Todd E. Pierce

Dick Cheney’s ideology of U.S. global domination has become an enduring American governing principle regardless of who is sitting in the Oval Office, a reality reflected in the recent Ukrainian coup, the 2011 “regime change” in Libya and drone wars waged in several countries by President Barack Obama.


The final form of this ideology took shape in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union when the world was then to be subjected to eternal U.S. military dominance, as revealed in the leaked “Draft Defense Planning Guidance” (DPG) devised by Cheney’s subordinates when he was Defense Secretary under President George H.W. Bush.

Since then, Cheney has been so successful in propagating this ideology of permanent U.S. domination abroad and rule by a “unitary executive” at home that it has now survived multiple changes of U.S. presidents largely intact. It is so much attributable to Dick Cheney that it merits his name: Cheneyism.

As unprecedented as Cheneyism may be – not even history’s most power-mad conquerors ever envisioned anything like “full-spectrum dominance” – President Obama has cemented Cheney’s ideological legacy by continuing his unilateralism and even expanding it into such executive powers as targeted killings of American citizens accused of terrorism.

Cheney’s ideology combines militarism under a state of permanent war with an un-American, anti-constitutional authoritarianism. It also embraces an aggressiveness toward past, present and possibly future adversaries, especially Russia.

Robert Gates, who was CIA director in 1991, has written in his memoir Duty that with the collapse of the U.S.S.R., Cheney “wanted to see the dismantlement not only of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire but of Russia itself,” so “it could never again be a threat to the rest of the world.”

Little wonder that Russian President Vladimir Putin concluded that denying Russian access to Crimean ports via the coup in Ukraine was just one step in a larger U.S. plan to deny Russia a means of naval defense, just as he might have seen the Kosovo War in the late 1990s as a move against a Russian ally.

While there remains some slight domestic opposition to Cheney’s most visible legacy, the U.S. global military prison at Guantanamo, there is virtually no deviation in the United States from the core of Cheney’s ideology.

That is, the unrelenting pursuit of total U.S. global military domination as outlined in the Defense Planning Guidance. This February’s successful subversion of Ukraine’s democratically elected government by Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland is merely the latest example of U.S. policies first conceived and promoted by Cheney and like-minded ideologists, including Nuland’s husband, renowned neocon Robert Kagan, a co-founder of the Project for the New American Century.

If there was any doubt about the continuation of Cheneyism under Obama, the activities of Nuland – a Bush-43 holdover who was promoted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then Secretary of State John Kerry – shows there was no real break in foreign policy with the change of administrations in 2009.

As revealed by Nuland, there has not been a Russian policy “reset” by the U.S.; it was a mere subterfuge. And as Putin is learning, any objection to U.S. strategic expansionism is treated as “terrorism” or “aggression” and becomes a pretext for U.S. diplomatic, economic and military suppression of the “threat.”

In 1991, as conceived by Cheney and other Pentagon ideologues, such as Paul Wolfowitz and David Addington, this strategy of constantly violating other nations’ sovereignty has been waged both by military and political means, as in the old adage that war is an extension of politics by other means (and vice versa).

Yet, the scale of this persistent U.S. subversion of other nations’ sovereignty has never been seen before, not even in pre-World War II days by German and Japanese agents or by the Soviet Comintern, none of whom had military commands covering the entire globe.

Cheney may never have served in uniform but he thoroughly internalized the precepts and practices of authoritarian militaristic regimes as an ideologue and infected U.S. political culture with this contagion. Roots of Cheneyism Like many other extremist ideologies, Cheneyism grew out of defeat. In this case, the U.S. military defeat in Vietnam and the political defeat of Richard Nixon’s administration where Cheney began his career in national politics.

As occurred with Field Marshall Erich Ludendorff and a then obscure corporal named Adolf Hitler following Germany’s defeat in World War I, a similar “stab in the back” legend was created by the U.S. military and political leaders after the Vietnam War.

They never understood, as General Frederick Weyand did from the beginning, that the Vietnam War was unwinnable by the U.S. military. Instead, political leaders such as Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon along with strategically challenged Flag Officers, the likes of General William Westmoreland and Admiral U. S. Grant Sharp Jr., held that the U.S. would have won if the “will” to fight hadn’t been lost by the American people.

They blamed this on the media and the resultant dissent to the war. Consequently, it became a priority of the U.S. government to control access to information in future wars through censorship and secrecy, to ensure public support through carefully crafted propaganda, and to keep a close eye on any potential dissenters, with various forms of detention available to suppress a disruptive opposition or to stop the dissemination of embarrassing state secrets.

However, even these benighted officials recognized that the U.S. Constitution was an obstacle to the wartime authoritarianism that they aspired to entrench in the U.S. political system. They saw the “exigencies” of war – even the undeclared kind – as shoving the Constitution aside. The “fountainhead” for this ideology was the Office of Legal Counsel’s opinion written by William Rehnquist in 1970, “Re: The President and the War Power: South Vietnam and the Cambodian Sanctuaries” (the so-called “Rehnquist Memo”).

This memo asserted the right of the U.S. to wage preemptive war on the thinnest of grounds. This political viewpoint was internalized by many military officers and some political officials, including Cheney, notwithstanding their oath to defend the Constitution. The consequences are evident today in the hyper-secrecy and information control policies adopted since 2001 and the arguments by the likes of Cheney for even harsher authoritarian policies.

On Sept. 25, 2001, just two weeks after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, John Yoo, a lawyer who worked for President George W. Bush’s Office of Legal Counsel, summarized the concept of unconstrained presidential power. “It has long been the view of this Office that the Commander-in-Chief Clause is a substantive grant of authority to the President,” Yoo wrote. “The power of the President is at its zenith under the Constitution when the President is directing military operations of the armed forces, because the power of Commander in Chief is assigned solely to the President.”

As support, Yoo cited the Rehnquist Memo. Though terrorism was always seen by the U.S. Army as mere “sporadic attacks,” not rising to the level of war, the U.S. media’s immediate conflation of the 9/11 attacks as an “act of war” was the final piece necessary to fully implement Cheney’s ideology of permanent warfare by citing the vague threat of terrorism and thus justifying unlimited presidential powers. As a further rationalization for his “unitary executive theory,” Cheney cited the 1987 congressional Iran-Contra committee’s “minority report” that he and other Republican members drafted in defense of President Ronald Reagan’s defiance of legal constraints on his execution of foreign policy.

In the report, Cheney details Reagan’s “struggle” against those legal obstacles as justified by the Constitution’s separation of powers that Cheney argued empowered the President to cast off the shackles of both U.S. and international law in the name of “national security.”

Then came the other foundational document of Cheney’s ideology: the 1991-92 draft Defense Planning Guidance, wherein the Defense Department under Cheney declared de facto global military domination by the United States (as described in Harper’s Magazine). While the DPG had multiple authors – and it became known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine – the draft report was prepared under Cheney’s sponsorship as Secretary of Defense.

For Cheney, it was as if he saw the Cold War as having been a winner-take-all contest for global domination. When the U.S. “won,” the countries of the world were to submit to global U.S. domination. As stated in Harper’s Magazine, the United States would move from “countering Soviet attempts at dominance to en­suring its own dominance.”

More specifically, in addition to the first objective of the U.S. being “to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival,” primary objectives were also “to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests” and to “maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.” After the draft DPG was leaked, causing controversy with U.S. allies, it was withdrawn and revised but with no substantive changes.

It was released in January 1993 as the Defense Strategy for the 1990s, just as the Bush-41 administration was giving way to Bill Clinton’s administration. If this grandiose document merely represented the excesses of one administration, there would be no need to write about it as a new American ideology.

But as Wolfowitz wrote in 2000, and quoted by author James Mann in Rise of the Vulcans, these ideas “turned into the consensus, mainstream view of America’s post-cold war defense strategy.”

Mann pointed out that Wolfowitz’s assessment may have been a slight exaggeration but – after a review of defense issues – Clinton preserved the general outlines of the force structure and strategy that had been worked out under Cheney and Wolfowitz. Cheney’s ideology of permanent U.S. dominance achieved its purest form under President George W. Bush, with Cheney as his influential Vice President. But Cheneyism also has maintained a strong foothold in the five years of the Obama administration.

Though President Obama may have learned that there are limits to U.S. military power, that message apparently never got through to the likes of Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham or to many prominent opinion leaders at major news organizations and think tanks. Indeed, broadly understood, Cheney’s geopolitical ideas have become the consensus of both Republicans and Democrats and have assumed a permanent place in “mainstream” American political thought and governance under Obama.

Cheney’s ideology, which was put into legal terms by John Yoo and other authoritarian-minded attorneys, has been adopted in large part by Obama administration attorneys such as Harold Koh on issues of presidential powers and has become embedded in American jurisprudence.

This reality is displayed in Justice Department arguments and court decisions in “national security” cases, such as unconstrained surveillance of U.S. citizens, sweeping invocation of state secrets, and defense of military commissions (where the government now invokes the martial law jurisprudence of the Civil War, describing it as U.S. domestic common law of war). David Armstrong, author of the Harper’s Magazine article on the DPG, wrote that “Cheney’s unwavering adherence to the Plan would be amusing, and maybe a little sad, except that it is now our plan. In its pages are the ideas that we now act upon every day with the full might of the United States military.”

This remains true under Obama. So, for a foreign government to anticipate how the U.S. will act, their analysts need to understand Cheneyism as a controlling ideology in U.S. policy, just as American intelligence analysts were steeped in theories of Marxism and Stalinism during the Cold War. U.S. citizens should understand the tenets of Cheneyism, too, since this arrogant ideology has the potential for disastrous consequences.

These consequences will be economic at minimum, as we have seen from the financial fallout of the Iraq War. But the consequences could eventually be strategic as well, leading to a military catastrophe as has happened to many world powers in the past. Indeed, there is a German precedent for Cheney’s ideology that is not Nazism.

Following the failure of the Imperial German Army in World War I, philosophical militarists such as Ernst Junger and authoritarian legal philosophers like Carl Schmitt came together in the “Conservative Revolutionary Movement.”

Celebrating war and authoritarianism, they believed that Germany was the “exceptional” nation of Europe, deserving of military expansion in both eastern and western Europe.

The German Conservative Revolutionaries didn’t all become Nazis, but they created a hospitable culture for them. With hindsight, they could have been called proto-Cheneyites.

Todd E. Pierce retired as a Major in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps in November 2012. His most recent assignment was defense counsel in the Office of Chief Defense Counsel, Office of Military Commissions. In the course of that assignment, he researched and reviewed the complete records of military commissions held during the Civil War and stored at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

BOBBEE BEE: STAND BY ME

BOBBEE BEE: FIGHT LESS; LOVE MORE

by Creflo Dollar

In the midst of counseling sessions, I have discovered that many married couples have never received instruction in conflict resolution strategies, they resort to settling their differences by fighting.

Here are four fighting styles to avoid with dealing with conflicts or problems. Many couples begin their marriages eager to live the fairy tale they've read about, watched on the big screen, or listened to while dancing to their favorite love songs.

Movies, books, and songs can paint a picture of martial bliss that has very little to do with REALITY. In REALITY, when a couple says "I do" and attempts to live out their fairy tale of a happily-ever-after marriage,it isn't long before REALITY sets in, and they realize life is not a fairy tale.


It takes a tremendous amount of work and effort, by both parties, to achieve martial bliss.

FOUR IMPROPER FIGHTING STYLES

The Eskimo Style

In this case, one or both spouses freeze up after an argument and ignore the situation altogether, hoping time will take care of it.

They withdraw emotionally and nurse their wounds.

This is more commonly known as the silent treatment.
As a result, one or both parties become bitter because a mutual resolution is not reached.

The Cowboy Style

This is the "shoot 'em up an' leave 'em for dead!" style.
 

In the heat of passion, couples tend to say things they do not mean, words can hurt, causing a lot of damage to a marriage and severely limiting any chances of reconciling differences.
 

 
The Houdini Style

When conflict arise, one or both parties become escape artists.

He or she does not like conflict and will avoid it as much as possible.

Rather than face an issue head-on, this individual will just leave.

Often this spouse will turn to destructive behaviors such as drinking, excessive shopping, sitting in front of the television for hours, or overeating. He or she will do whatever it takes to avoid dealing with the situation.

The World Boxing Association Style

Here we have one or both parties handling conflicts with their fists.

He or she may begin to deal with an issue rationally, but anger often takes over, and the individual becomes physicallly abusive. 

This spouse may be an abuser who is in need of counseling.



No matter what situation you may face as a couple, realize that fighting is not the best way to resolve conflict.

 Pray about it and seek God's wisdom in every circumstance.

From Winning in Troubled Times: God's Solutions For Victory Over Life's Toughest Challenges by Celo Dollar.

BOBBEE BEE: YOU HAVEN'T LEARNT YOUR LESSON YET?

This article first appeared on BASN on Feb. 10, 2010. But due to the recent sex scandal involving New York Congressman Anthony Weiner and former Governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger, we felt it was worth republishing.

"I was unfaithful. I had affairs. I cheated. What I did was not acceptable." -- Tiger Woods.


By Eric D.Graham

NORTH CAROLINA (BASN) -- As Tiger Woods tries to deal with his promiscuity and possible divorce with his wife Elin, he is probably seeking advice from his agents, PR people, marriage counselors, and old golfing buddies. But I honestly believe he should just sit down and read the Book of Proverbs in order to gain a "little wisdom" about his current situation. The Book of Proverbs is one of the books of "wisdom" of the Old Testament that contains instructions for us to live by in our daily lives.

The instructions are practical and not complicated and easy to follow. For this reason, I recommend that the Book of Proverbs be required reading for every professional athlete, school teacher, movie star, business man, politician and student.

For instance, Chapter 10 verse 1 simply states: "A wise son makes a glad father but a foolish son is the grief of his mother."

This is quite simple, but so true.

Because one of the greatest sights in sports history was when Tiger was captured by the cameras hugging his father, Earl in a warm embrace with tears running down his face as he won his first Masters at 21 years old at Augusta.

Now, that was truly a picture of a proud father. But that memorable moment of sports history has been replaced with the painful expression on the face of Tiger's mother Kultida Woods as she leaves the airport while being harassed by paparazzi after her son's sexual affairs were leaked to the press.

Let's remember, there is nothing new under the sun.

So even though, we are discussing Tiger Woods scandalous affairs, the wisdom in the Book of Proverbs applies to you and I as well.

Let's continue.

Proverbs Chapter 5: verses (1-5) states: My son pay attention to my wisdom. Listen to my words of understanding. Be careful to use good sense and watch what you say. The words of another man's wife may seem sweet as honey. They maybe as smooth as olive oil. But in the end, she will bring you sorrow.

Now, former mayor of Detroit Kwame Kilpatrick should have paid attention to these words before he lied under oath about those steamy text messages to his chief of staff Christine Beatty.


Kwame' Kilpatrick however is not by himself because former Tennessee Titans All-Pro (QB) Steve McNair, who was killed in a bloody murder suicide at the hands of his mistress Sahel Kazemi, also failed to listen to the wisdom in the Book of Proverbs.

For instance, Proverbs 5 (5-8) states: "She is on the way to death, her steps headed straight to the grave. She gives little thought to life. She doesn't even know that her ways are wrong. Stay away from such a woman."

Isn't it amazing how accurate these scriptures are?

Even in 2010, these scriptures paint a perfect picture, especially in the case of Tiger Woods.

Let's see what Proverbs says about Tiger Woods, who allegedly had unprotected sex with hardcore porn-star Joslyn James.

"Stay away from such a woman. Don't even go near the door of her house. Or you will give riches to others. And the best years of your life will be given to someone cruel.

Let's examine the word cruel.


Another word for cruel is merciless, cold-blooded, heartless, meanness, sadism, or savagery. Do you remember 1988 when, then, R&B Bad Boy Bobby Brown had a hit song entitled "Don't Be Cruel" with lyrics that sounded something like this:

"We used to hang out tough. Just kickin' around. We discovered a love that had never been found. You gave me your heart, I gave you my mind. But a true love affair we could never find. Although I want you bad, I can let you go. Cuz' there's a lot of girls out there that won't say no. Roll to the fact that I want you Jackie. I want you more than human eyes can see. But you had to start illin', tryin' to make a killin'.Thought about the dollars I make, And you were willin'."

Damn, that's prophetic.

Because Miss.Joslyn James had her own press conference with her attorney Gloria Allred demanding that Tiger Woods apologize to her face-to-face. Recently, Ms. James also appeared on Inside Edition reading all her private text messages that allegedly Tiger sent to her. She also made a shocking claim that she was pregnant with Woods' babies.

The first pregnancy, she claimed to have had a miscarriage. The second pregnancy, she claimed to have had an abortion.

Now, that's cruel.

Unfortunately, everybody, who's connected with Pro-golfer Tiger Woods, is trying to cash-in on his adulterous affair, lawyers, magazines, news programs, talk-show hosts, psychologists, photographers, sports writers and even rappers.


Yeah, rappers.

Recently, on FUSE TV's Hip-Hop Shop hosted by music journalist Toure', New York rapper Maino revealed that he has a new song entitled "Get 'Em Tiger" which he hopes to get one of Tiger's mistresses to appear in his videos.

Now, that's a low, down, dirty shame. But don't be surprised, however because that's exactly what the Book of Proverbs said that people would do. "Strangers will enjoy your wealth and what you worked so hard for will go to someone else."

Reportedly, if Woods' wife Elin Nordegren divorces him she could receive more than half a billion dollars.

Wow!!

Now that's some serious cash. Woods, who reportedly is "close friends" with NBA legend Michael Jordan, should have learned from his double-dealings which cost him around $168 million when his wife of 17 years Juanita Vanocy divorced him.


Woods, however is no different from any other man, who has cheated on his wife and felt that they would never get caught with his hand in the "cookie jar"


Whether it's Presidents John F.Kennedy or Bill Clinton, Reverend Jesse Jackson, ex-presidential candidate Gary Hart, former New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey, or South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford. Because what is done in the dark, will come to the light.

The Book of Proverbs, however cleverly states it this way. "The Lord sees everything you do and he watches where you go. And an evil man will be caught in his wicked ways; the ropes of his sins will tie him up. He will die because he does not control himself and he will be held captive by his foolishness.

Tiger definitely was a fool. But regardless of whether, it was Tiger Woods, Charles Barkley, Pastor Jim Swaggart, or former NY Governor Elliott Spizer, all of them fell victim to beautiful women.

Their lascivious appetite for sex, however led all of them to pay for prostitutes in order to receive sexual pleasure.

In chapter 6 :( 25-26) the Book of Proverbs warned us about dealing with these seductive street walkers. "Don't desire her because she is beautiful. Don't let her capture you by the way she looks at you. A prostitute will treat you like a loaf of bread. And a woman who takes part in adultery may cost, you your life."

The last verse is a powerful one "A woman who takes part in adultery may cost you your life."

Ask NBA Hall of Famer, Earvin "Magic" Johnson, whether this verse is true?

Because on November 7, 1991, like Tiger Woods, he also held a press conference to announce that he was HIV-positive.

But despite Tiger Woods' shortcomings and infidelities, the world shouldn't hate him. Neither should they hate Senator John Edwards. Or Talk-show host David Letterman.

Or Los Angeles Laker Kobe Bryant, who also like Tiger held a press conference admitting his adultery.

For Proverbs states in Chapter 6 (30-35): "People don't HATE a thief when he steals because he is hungry. But if he is caught, he must pay back seven times what he stole and it may cost him everything he owns. A man who takes part in adultery has no sense, he will destroy himself. He will be eaten up and disgraced and his shame will never go away."

This is so true.

The shame and disgrace may never go away from Senator John Edwards or Tiger Woods.

Their images maybe tarnished in our eyes forever.

So, for the next politicians, business executives, CEOs, educators, athletes, religious leaders and all men in general (myself included), take heed to the wisdom given by the Book of Proverbs.

"Be faithful to your own wife......"

So simple, yet so true.

NOTE: It seems as if most of the men mentioned in this article have bounced back from their affairs. This includes Michael Jordan, who recently got re-married, Tiger Woods, who got his swing back plus a new girlfriend U.S. Skier Lindsey Vonn, and former South Carolina governor Mark Stanford beat out Elizabeth Colbert, Stephen Colbert's Sister, for Congress in South Carolina.

Eric D.Graham, a graduate of Winston-Salem State University, where he received a B.A. in Mass Communication with a concentration in Radio and Television, with a minor in History, with an emphasis in African-American Studies, is currently the Managing Editor of Black Athlete Sports Network, where his articles appear daily along with his controversial cartoon character Bobbee Bee “The Hater.” Graham can be reached at lbiass34@yahoo.com or go to www.bobbeethehater.blogspot.com

BOBBEE BEE:WHAT IS LOVE?

Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never fails...But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love. 1 Corinthians 13:4-7,13

Love is patient, True love is unconditional, that is, it does not depend on the attributes or lack thereof of the person loved, therefore, it is willing to give as much time necessary, and as much space as necessary for that person to grow Love is kind and is not jealous; Love seeks to give others something of benefit for their welfare, and consequently, rejoices when they do benefit.

Love does not brag and is not arrogant, To lift one's self up in reference to others leaves no room for unconditional, graceful love. does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, To act inappropriately, shamefully (morally, especially in the area of sexual purity) is not in accordance with true love. Love never seeks it's own gratificaiton but rather the interests of others. is not provoked, Selfishness seeks to manipulate others by stimulating certain selfish emotions. Love will not do this to others, nor will it let it happen to itself. does not take into account a wrong suffered, Forgivenss. Let it go. Bitterness is the acid. You are the container. Get rid of it or it will kill you. does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth;

Love does not somehow gloss over things that are going to be hurtful. True love originates from the truth. bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. If love really is unconditional, it will hold any weight, face any doubt, persist through hopelessness, and last any trial Love never fails... If it did, would it be love? But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love. Someday, faith will not be needed, for we will see God. Hope will not be needed, for when everything is fulfilled, there is no need for hope. But love, yes, to it there will be no end. If it did, it wouldn't be love. If you like what you are learning, please send comments to lbiass34@yahoo.com

BOBBEE BEE: FROM PARENT TO CHILD

From Parent To Child
I gave you life but I can not live it for you.

I can teach you things, but I can not make you learn.

I can give you directions, but I cannot be there to lead you.

I can allow you freedom, but I cannot account for it.

I can take you to church, but I cannot make you believe.

I can teach you right from wrong, but I can not always decide for you.

I can buy you beautiful clothes, but I can not make you beautiful inside.

I can offer you advice, but I can not accept it for you.

I can give you love, but I cannot force it upon you.

I can teach you to share, but I cannot make you selfish.

I can teach you respect, but I cannot force you to show honor.

I can advise you about friends, but I cannot choose them for you.

I can tell you about drinking, but I cannot keep you pure.

I can tell you about the facts of life, but I can not build your reputation.'

I can tell you about drinking, but I can not say no to you.

I can tell you about drugs, but I cannot prevent your using them.

I can teach you kindness, but I can't force you to be gracious.
I can warn you about sins, but I cannot make your morals.
I can love you as a child, but I cannot place you in God's family. I can pray for you, but I cannot make you walk with God. I can teach you about Jesus, but I cannot make Jesus your Lord.
I can tell you how to live, but I cannot give you Eternal Life.