Fear not about the Ruling from the Supreme court.
Like one former Attorney said: The Supreme
Court handed Obama a cigar, but it's an "exploding cigar."
Fox News has been running videos all morning
of Obama from 2008-2009 in every interview,
including the State of the Union Address in
which he repeatedly told the American people
that this mandate will not raise taxes
on one single American, in fact
it will LOWER everyone's Taxes."
When Obama's lawyer argued before the
Supreme court, he could not get the Court
to agree on passing the Obama Care mandate
as a "Commerce Clause," so he proposed a
"Tax" which is the opposite of what Obama
promised.
Every Household who
marks their IRS form "No health insurance"
will be TAXED now according to
Obama Care and the Court.
When CNN kept repeating that the Republicans
had no Health plan, a congressman/ doctor
told the CNN anchor that CNN is spinning that idea which
is not true.
Republicans had and have a plan. They
wanted insurance companies to compete
across state borders so
everyone can look for
cheaper insurance nationwide. This is
not included in the bill.
Also, Republicans wanted a cap on what
Lawyers can sue doctors and other medical
companies to bring down the high cost of doctor's
insurance rates; but Obama refused to touch either idea.
Everyone knows that the Obama bill was behind closed doors
with back room deals, without Republicans.
The Obama bill included ideas which the
Republicans wanted to keep, also: a
"Per-conditioned" clause to protect individuals
with per-conditioned illness.
Obama supporters who thought that Obama Care was
free will be shocked to learn that Obama lied to them
and that they will be taxed if they don't pay for health insurance.
Remember when the Senior, former President, Bush said:
"Read my Lips, No New Taxes."
Friday, June 29, 2012
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Americans are Exceptional Immigrants
Bill Maher, the liberal, atheist,
comedian, made a statement
on his show that Americans
need to "get over feeling
that they are 'exceptional.'
Obviously, Maher, doesn't
know the definition of an
American.
As a comedian, he is
very funny, being so illiterate.
People who want to be
politically correct on
this subject of 'American
exceptionalism' have no
idea how America evolved
because they are completely
illiterate when it comes to
American History.
Worse, they like arguing from
an illiterate point of view.
There are Americans who
believe that America is a
country that was created
by God to be exceptional.
There is a good reason for this attitude.
First, America is the strongest so
called "super power" that is built
from the ground up by "immigrants."
We are the "melting pot of Exceptionalism"
because the laws and principals established
by our forefathers, kept all cultures and
races in America, equal in the mainstream
of commonality by learning English and the
American Constitution.
Our differences made us stronger than any
country on earth. We have fought
together side by side in two great
world wars to free other cultures
from genocide; and free other
countries from hostile evasion.
When American soldiers first
landed in France during WWII,
they were still fresh from having
just completed boot camp. The
French had been fighting a
German army unit that had
evaded one of their towns.
The could not kick out that
German occupying military
unit, no matter how many
times they tried. The French
balked at the idea that a bunch
of American green "mutts"
could do the job.
(I don't think the
French knew that
inbreeding damages the brain.
That is, keeping the blood
line pure really has the
opposite effect on the brain.
Life's little paradox).
What the French
could not do in months
of fighting in their own
country; the American
mutts did in a few days;
kicked out the Germans
in that small French town.
The ingenuity of a
combined immigrant
force under one Nation:
the United States.
What is important to
remember is that our
forefathers insisted upon
all immigrants
"assimilating into the mainstream"
when they came to America;
in order to strengthen the nation.
I took a college history course
on the assimilation of
immigrants into the American mainstream.
Yes, it was brutal for some (American Indians)
and easy for others (Asians and Europeans).
This subject should be taught in
every high school because our
nation cannot survive without
bringing together all immigrants under a common interest.
People trying to be politically
correct by rejecting "English"
as the national language of
America are just that: Political.
Being political "Divides"
the common good of the nation.
Just last year, German chancellor Merkel,
said that our American forefathers
got it right by forcing people who
chose to become citizens of a
country, must assimilate into
the mainstream of that country's
basic principals and values in
order for the country to survive
by bringing different cultures
to the table for the common
good of the country.
When people are not taught
how to live together under a
common Language and Constitution;
they kill each other.
The Chancellor realized
their own mistake when
they allowed another
culture to live in German
without assimilating;
that is
they were not required to learn German,
they were allowed to live together in one area
practicing only what they brought
with them from their old country.
It was enough separation
of the different cultures
within the host country
to cause nationwide unrest.
Saddam Hassan had three cultures
in Iraq who did not peacefully
assimilate after his death:
Kurds, Shitis, and the Sunni.
Saddam tried wiping out the
Kurd culture in his country
because they were not considered
valued citizens, only occupiers
of northern Iraq.
America does not deny immigrants,
who chose to become citizens,
their heritage or cultural
richness that they bring to America.
Their homes and communities
can practice and share the best parts of their heritage.
It's what we teach in our schools
that should bring us together.
Learning to speak English.
Learning the American Constitution.
People who are here to change America
from what made it great in the first place,
think we should be more like Europe
which is presently sinking into the abyss
of financial woes because of socialism.
If you want a "failed society" (Europe)
collapsing because of it's unsustainable,
government controlled, budget;
you should move there.
"Socialism—defined as a centrally planned economy in which the government controls all means of production—was the tragic failure of the twentieth century.
- Library of Economics.
"http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Socialism.html
I dare say that anyone who doesn't
believe in American Exceptionalism,
also, doesn't think like an American
because he was never
taught the value of becoming an American;
An Exceptional Immigrant.
comedian, made a statement
on his show that Americans
need to "get over feeling
that they are 'exceptional.'
Obviously, Maher, doesn't
know the definition of an
American.
As a comedian, he is
very funny, being so illiterate.
People who want to be
politically correct on
this subject of 'American
exceptionalism' have no
idea how America evolved
because they are completely
illiterate when it comes to
American History.
Worse, they like arguing from
an illiterate point of view.
There are Americans who
believe that America is a
country that was created
by God to be exceptional.
There is a good reason for this attitude.
First, America is the strongest so
called "super power" that is built
from the ground up by "immigrants."
We are the "melting pot of Exceptionalism"
because the laws and principals established
by our forefathers, kept all cultures and
races in America, equal in the mainstream
of commonality by learning English and the
American Constitution.
Our differences made us stronger than any
country on earth. We have fought
together side by side in two great
world wars to free other cultures
from genocide; and free other
countries from hostile evasion.
When American soldiers first
landed in France during WWII,
they were still fresh from having
just completed boot camp. The
French had been fighting a
German army unit that had
evaded one of their towns.
The could not kick out that
German occupying military
unit, no matter how many
times they tried. The French
balked at the idea that a bunch
of American green "mutts"
could do the job.
(I don't think the
French knew that
inbreeding damages the brain.
That is, keeping the blood
line pure really has the
opposite effect on the brain.
Life's little paradox).
What the French
could not do in months
of fighting in their own
country; the American
mutts did in a few days;
kicked out the Germans
in that small French town.
The ingenuity of a
combined immigrant
force under one Nation:
the United States.
What is important to
remember is that our
forefathers insisted upon
all immigrants
"assimilating into the mainstream"
when they came to America;
in order to strengthen the nation.
I took a college history course
on the assimilation of
immigrants into the American mainstream.
Yes, it was brutal for some (American Indians)
and easy for others (Asians and Europeans).
This subject should be taught in
every high school because our
nation cannot survive without
bringing together all immigrants under a common interest.
People trying to be politically
correct by rejecting "English"
as the national language of
America are just that: Political.
Being political "Divides"
the common good of the nation.
Just last year, German chancellor Merkel,
said that our American forefathers
got it right by forcing people who
chose to become citizens of a
country, must assimilate into
the mainstream of that country's
basic principals and values in
order for the country to survive
by bringing different cultures
to the table for the common
good of the country.
When people are not taught
how to live together under a
common Language and Constitution;
they kill each other.
The Chancellor realized
their own mistake when
they allowed another
culture to live in German
without assimilating;
that is
they were not required to learn German,
they were allowed to live together in one area
practicing only what they brought
with them from their old country.
It was enough separation
of the different cultures
within the host country
to cause nationwide unrest.
Saddam Hassan had three cultures
in Iraq who did not peacefully
assimilate after his death:
Kurds, Shitis, and the Sunni.
Saddam tried wiping out the
Kurd culture in his country
because they were not considered
valued citizens, only occupiers
of northern Iraq.
America does not deny immigrants,
who chose to become citizens,
their heritage or cultural
richness that they bring to America.
Their homes and communities
can practice and share the best parts of their heritage.
It's what we teach in our schools
that should bring us together.
Learning to speak English.
Learning the American Constitution.
People who are here to change America
from what made it great in the first place,
think we should be more like Europe
which is presently sinking into the abyss
of financial woes because of socialism.
If you want a "failed society" (Europe)
collapsing because of it's unsustainable,
government controlled, budget;
you should move there.
"Socialism—defined as a centrally planned economy in which the government controls all means of production—was the tragic failure of the twentieth century.
- Library of Economics.
"http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Socialism.html
I dare say that anyone who doesn't
believe in American Exceptionalism,
also, doesn't think like an American
because he was never
taught the value of becoming an American;
An Exceptional Immigrant.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
MARTIN LUTHER KING, Jr. WAS A REPUBLICAN
For those of us, who did not, either, live history nor read history.
Dr. Alveda C. King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., states:
“My grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr., or ‘Daddy King’,
was a Republican and father of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
who was a Republican.”
Was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. a Democrat? That is the question!
By Dr. Rich Swier on July 5, 2008 | From fromtheduke.blogspot.com
http://www.zimbio.com/Martin+Luther+King+Day/articles/462/Dr+Martin+Luther+King+Jr+Democrat+question
WHY MARTIN LUTHER KING, Jr
WAS REPUBLICAN.
....... In that era, almost all black
Americans were Republicans.
Why? From its founding in 1854 as the
anti-slavery party until today, the
Republican Party has championed
freedom and civil rights for blacks.
And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the
Democrat Party is as it always
has been, the party of the four S's:
slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.
It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in
slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes
and Jim Crow laws.
The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and
terrorize blacks.
The Democrats fought to prevent
the passage of every civil rights law beginning with
the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the
civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.
During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the
Democrats who stood in the school house
doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let
loose vicious dogs.
It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who
pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent
troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools.
President Eisenhower also appointed
Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court,
which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education
decision ending school
segregation.
Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's
issuing an
Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military.
Not mentioned is the fact
that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to
effectively end segregation in the military.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded
as a proponent of civil rights.
However,
Kennedy voted against the 1957
Civil Rights Act while he was a
senator, as did Democrat
Sen. Al Gore Sr. Civil Rights Act while he was a
senator, as did Democrat
And after he became President, Kennedy was
opposed to the 1963 March
on Washington by Dr. King that was organized
by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black
Republican.
President Kennedy, through his brother Atty. Gen.
Robert Kennedy, had
Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI
on suspicion of being a Communist in
order to undermine Dr. King.
In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's
leaving Memphis, Tenn., after riots
broke out where a teenager was killed,
Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd (W.Va.), a former
member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a
"trouble-maker" who starts trouble,
but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited.
A few weeks later, Dr. King returned
to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.
Given the circumstances of that era,
it is understandable why Dr. King
was a Republican.
it is understandable why Dr. King
was a Republican.
It was the Republicans who fought to
free blacks from slavery and amended the
Constitution to grant blacks freedom
(13th Amendment), citizenship
(14th Amendment) and the right to
vote (15th Amendment). Republicans
passed the civil rights laws
of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights
Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction
Act of
1867 that was designed to establish a
new government system in the Democrat-
controlled South, one that was fair to blacks.
Republicans also started the NAACP
and affirmative action with Republican
President Richard Nixon's 1969 Philadelphia
President Richard Nixon's 1969 Philadelphia
Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher)
that set the nation's first goals and timetables.
that set the nation's first goals and timetables.
Although affirmative action now has been
turned by the Democrats
into an unfair quota system, affirmative action
was begun by
Nixon to counter
the harm caused to blacks when
Democrat President Woodrow
Wilson in 1912
kicked all of the blacks out of
federal government jobs.
Few black
Americans know that it was Republicans
who founded the Historically
Black Colleges and Universities.
Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois
was key to the passage of civil rights
legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media
stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen
wrote the language for the bill.
Dirksen also crafted the language for
the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.
President Lyndon Johnson could not
have achieved passage of civil rights
have achieved passage of civil rights
legislation without the support
of Republicans.
Critics of Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater, who ran for Presidentof Republicans.
against
Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force
the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws
and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights
legislation. Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater also ignore
the fact that Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address
delivered on Jan. 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal
action, but only 35 words were devoted to civil rights. He did
not mention one word about voting rights.
Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest
against the Vietnam War, Johnson referred to
Dr. King as "that Nigger preacher."
Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist
"Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party.
"Dixiecrats" declared that they would
rather vote for a "yellow dog" than
vote for a Republican because the
Republican Party was known as
the party for blacks.
Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their
political careers as Democrats, including Robert
Byrd, who is well known for having been a
"Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan.
Another
former "Dixiecrat" is former Democrat
Sen. Ernest Hollings, who put up
the Confederate
flag over the state Capitol when he was the governor
of
South Carolina. There was no public outcry
when Democrat
Sen. Christopher Dodd praised
Byrd as someone who would have been "a
great
senator for any moment," including the Civil War.
Yet Democrats
denounced then-Senate GOP leader
Trent Lott for his remarks about Sen.
Strom
Thurmond (R.-S.C.). Thurmond was never in
the Ku Klux Klan and
defended blacks against
lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes
imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Byrd and
Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and
Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched.
The
30-year odyssey of the South switching to the
Republican Party began in
the 1970s with President
Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," which was
an
effort on the part of Nixon to get Christians in the
South to stop
voting for Democrats who did not share
their values and were still
discriminating against their
fellow Christians who happened to be black.
Georgia
did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states,
including
Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats.
Today,
Democrats, in pursuit of their
socialist agenda, are fighting to keep
blacks poor, angry and voting for
Democrats. Examples of how egregiously
Democrats act to keep blacks in
poverty are numerous.
After wrongly
convincing black Americans that a
minimum wage increase was a good
thing, the
Democrats on August 3 kept their promise and
killed the
minimum wage bill passed by House
Republicans on July 29. The blockage
of the
minimum wage bill was the second time in as
many years that
Democrats stuck a legislative
finger in the eye of black Americans.
Senate Democrats
on April 1, 2004, blocked passage of a bill to renew
the
1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans
and vetoed
twice by President Clinton before he finally
signed it. Since the
welfare reform law expired in September
2002, Congress had passed six
extensions, and the latest
expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the
Democrats are
school choice opportunity scholarships that would help
black children get out of failing schools and Social
Security reform,
even though blacks on average lose
$10,000 in the current system because
of a shorter life
expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs.
77.5
years for whites).
Democrats have been running our inner-cities
for
the past 30 to 40 years, and blacks are still complaining
about the
same problems. More than $7 trillion dollars
have been spent on poverty
programs since Lyndon
Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any,
impact
on poverty.
Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats
blame
Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities
,
then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans.
In order
to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black
vote and free black
Americans from the Democrat Party's
economic plantation, we must shed
the light of truth on the Democrats.
We
must demonstrate that the Democrat Party
policies of socialism and
dependency on
government handouts offer the pathway
to poverty, while
Republican Party
principles of hard work, personal
responsibility,
getting a good education
and ownership of homes and small
businesses
offer the pathway to prosperity.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican
Choosing A Leader
Choosing a Leader for our Country
Following my last blog on "our life experiences," life experience
alone is not enough; nor just
empathizing with others; if we don't choose
wisely which life experiences to focus on that will bring
about the greater good for mankind.
It's important to evaluate a candidate's religious
practices because it becomes an indoctrination
into a certain belief and way of life.
We need leaders in
all levels of government and society who will
rise above their life experiences.
The most universal leaders that come to my mind
are Martin Luther King, Jr.,
and Mother Theresa.
Mother Theresa stands out
because she was discriminated against
by her own patriarch church (who pray to
Mary, of all people).
She was not allowed to be a Pope or priest,
although she went into the bowels of the earth to rescue the innocent and hopeless.
We know what kind of leader these people were through
their actions and behavior.
Mitt Romney was born and reared in his faith.
The Mormon church is somewhat of a mystery
since it is relatively new and considered a cult by some.
Whatever the faith, Romney doesn't seem to have
any dead bodies or ghosts in his closet: second wives,
drugs or alcohol, except for pranks. We know because
the Liberals have been through his closet twice.
Some people will say that the Mormon
church did not allow blacks to become priests until 1978;
although discriminatory, it doesn't come close to the
discrimination against women in the Catholic church.
John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic to become President,
the public knew that women were being
discriminated against by the church, even as Kennedy
was being sworn into office.
Being indoctrinated by one's faith, I wonder if the Pope
had been a woman, would Kennedy have felt so powerful
over all those women he screwed.
The Mormon church is similiar to the Catholic
church with its patriarch system. Both religions are
rather frightening to me.
..."Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the
last 20 years".. ' of his adult life'.." .. ..has a long
history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede
is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that
the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with
its own "terrorism."
Yes, we all can agree that Bin Laden hated America for
intruding in his country's politics. It doesn't help to
justify the killing of thousands of innocent people
by blaming America.
There is a positive way to preach (Martin L. King, Jr.) and
a negative way to preach (Rev. Wright).
Candidate Obama was allowed a pass by the liberal news
media when his pastor accused him of dumping him, just to get elected.
It's not illegal to dump your friends or "uncle" as Obama referred to him.
But it does say something about Obama's character.
Discrimination divides people into groups and if the message
is always negative; the problem persists. When Obama gives "inflammatory"speeches, he pits one
group of people against another:
Black vs. White
Rich vs Middle class
Private vs Public sector (unions)
Conservatives vs Women ( war on women)
Illegals Aliens vs Legals Aliens or American citizens
Obama might have dumped his pastor, but he did not
dismiss the sermons; as Rev. Wright's rhetoric
still echos through Obama's actions to make groups of
people angry amongst each other.
It's an old tactic that a boss I had used among employees.
Employees were always fighting amongst each
other because of some issue the boss
instigated. This way the boss could "pretend" to
solve the problem he started.
No one talked about polygamy until Romney's Mormon
polygamy ancestry were exploited by the press.
Obama was never vetted for the Presidency in 2008
because he had all his records sealed from
the public; but now, in 2012, that Obama is being, somewhat
held accountable; it has come to light that Obama's Kenya family
still believes in polygamy. His father was a
bigamist, with a wife in Kenya while married
to Obama's mother.
Both Romney and Obama do not practice polygamy
or bigotry from what we are told.
I am sure both candidates would be polygamists if the law
allowed, since its in their culture.
Since this is a social economical ideology, both candidates
would approach the polygamy issue differently as President.
Romney a businessman, believes in private enterprise
as a solution against bigger government. He most likely,
would support all his wives on his private income.
On the other hand, Obama, most likely, would have the government
supporting his wives considering his social programs.
Last month Obama developed a chart based on the
life of a 'single, healthy, woman,' under his policies: "the Life of Julia."
as she goes through life with government assistance
from the age of 3 to 72.
He should call this program, "Daddy Government's Little Girl."
Life being a paradox of events, we already know that any
candidate striving to reach the highest pinnacle of his political
career; he/she will be dragged through the gutter, first.
Any person with a grain of brain knows the stench will not go
away even after they leave the office.
Keeping in mind that the most qualified
person for the job of President of the United States
will never run for that office.
Following my last blog on "our life experiences," life experience
alone is not enough; nor just
empathizing with others; if we don't choose
wisely which life experiences to focus on that will bring
about the greater good for mankind.
It's important to evaluate a candidate's religious
practices because it becomes an indoctrination
into a certain belief and way of life.
We need leaders in
all levels of government and society who will
rise above their life experiences.
The most universal leaders that come to my mind
are Martin Luther King, Jr.,
and Mother Theresa.
Mother Theresa stands out
because she was discriminated against
by her own patriarch church (who pray to
Mary, of all people).
She was not allowed to be a Pope or priest,
although she went into the bowels of the earth to rescue the innocent and hopeless.
We know what kind of leader these people were through
their actions and behavior.
Mitt Romney was born and reared in his faith.
The Mormon church is somewhat of a mystery
since it is relatively new and considered a cult by some.
Whatever the faith, Romney doesn't seem to have
any dead bodies or ghosts in his closet: second wives,
drugs or alcohol, except for pranks. We know because
the Liberals have been through his closet twice.
Some people will say that the Mormon
church did not allow blacks to become priests until 1978;
although discriminatory, it doesn't come close to the
discrimination against women in the Catholic church.
John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic to become President,
the public knew that women were being
discriminated against by the church, even as Kennedy
was being sworn into office.
Being indoctrinated by one's faith, I wonder if the Pope
had been a woman, would Kennedy have felt so powerful
over all those women he screwed.
The Mormon church is similiar to the Catholic
church with its patriarch system. Both religions are
rather frightening to me.
..."Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the
last 20 years".. ' of his adult life'.." .. ..has a long
history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede
is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that
the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with
its own "terrorism."
Yes, we all can agree that Bin Laden hated America for
intruding in his country's politics. It doesn't help to
justify the killing of thousands of innocent people
by blaming America.
There is a positive way to preach (Martin L. King, Jr.) and
a negative way to preach (Rev. Wright).
Candidate Obama was allowed a pass by the liberal news
media when his pastor accused him of dumping him, just to get elected.
It's not illegal to dump your friends or "uncle" as Obama referred to him.
But it does say something about Obama's character.
Discrimination divides people into groups and if the message
is always negative; the problem persists. When Obama gives "inflammatory"speeches, he pits one
group of people against another:
Black vs. White
Rich vs Middle class
Private vs Public sector (unions)
Conservatives vs Women ( war on women)
Illegals Aliens vs Legals Aliens or American citizens
Obama might have dumped his pastor, but he did not
dismiss the sermons; as Rev. Wright's rhetoric
still echos through Obama's actions to make groups of
people angry amongst each other.
It's an old tactic that a boss I had used among employees.
Employees were always fighting amongst each
other because of some issue the boss
instigated. This way the boss could "pretend" to
solve the problem he started.
No one talked about polygamy until Romney's Mormon
polygamy ancestry were exploited by the press.
Obama was never vetted for the Presidency in 2008
because he had all his records sealed from
the public; but now, in 2012, that Obama is being, somewhat
held accountable; it has come to light that Obama's Kenya family
still believes in polygamy. His father was a
bigamist, with a wife in Kenya while married
to Obama's mother.
Both Romney and Obama do not practice polygamy
or bigotry from what we are told.
I am sure both candidates would be polygamists if the law
allowed, since its in their culture.
Since this is a social economical ideology, both candidates
would approach the polygamy issue differently as President.
Romney a businessman, believes in private enterprise
as a solution against bigger government. He most likely,
would support all his wives on his private income.
On the other hand, Obama, most likely, would have the government
supporting his wives considering his social programs.
Last month Obama developed a chart based on the
life of a 'single, healthy, woman,' under his policies: "the Life of Julia."
as she goes through life with government assistance
from the age of 3 to 72.
He should call this program, "Daddy Government's Little Girl."
Life being a paradox of events, we already know that any
candidate striving to reach the highest pinnacle of his political
career; he/she will be dragged through the gutter, first.
Any person with a grain of brain knows the stench will not go
away even after they leave the office.
Keeping in mind that the most qualified
person for the job of President of the United States
will never run for that office.
Sunday, June 10, 2012
Our Life Experiences
After reading, The dollar barrier to mental health
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/
1206498
by Michael Kimber, a mentally ill person, whose life experience
has compelled him to speak about the stigma of mental illness;
I, also, feel compelled to address the topic of our life experiences
in more general terms.
The lack of understanding of any given topic will always be present.
Everyone has their own personal life experiences
that don't always transcend beyond their own
feelings.
This is what makes our world so diverse and mostly combative;
not supportive. Why we have so many wars. Why there is unfairness.
No matter how much sympathy we show others; we will never
reach that level of understanding unless we feel their pain.
When I was young and married, before I had children, I read a
story about a young couple who went on a road trip with their baby.
It was snowing and they got stuck in the snow on a deserted road.
To keep warm they decided to wrap themselves in all their clothing.
For some reason, they laid on the ground and the
mother put the baby on top of her body to protect it.
As it got colder, the mother took clothing off of her own body
and wrapped the baby in it. As a result, when they were found,
the mother had frozen to death, but her baby and husband were alive.
I remember quite clearly telling a mother of 5 children of how
distressing this story was to me. I asked her why the mother
chose to die; protecting her baby at all cost; when I thought
that the baby was expendable.
She could always have another one, but now the child
is motherless and the father has no mate.
A dysfunctional family.
Looking back, with much amusement, at my lack of life
experiences, I couldn't empathize with
this mother, at that time, in my life.
I am sure the mother who listened to my explanation
was horrified by my attitude.
She said that once I am a mother, I will understand.
Generally speaking, it does not surprise me that
even now, I tend to think negatively about
universal empathy among human beings.
We cannot know every experience that every person
has on earth which leads to religious, cultural
and national wars. We will never be enlightened as a
global community.
We are mostly peaceful because of nondiscriminatory
government and religious laws that are created
to force us to be civil to each other.
Presently, there are no global laws enforced to protect
the Syrian people from their own lawless
government; no matter how much sympathy the entire
world feels. There were no laws protecting
the Jews in Germany; until there was WWII to force
laws to protect them.
It will take nondiscriminatory
governmental policies and
fair law enforcement to make groups
and nations more caring about each other.
This is also why Michael Kimber realizes it's important,
as the victim, to reach out to other mentally ill
victims. Having them collectively speak out to
create an empathy force; much like the
Civil Right's movement that created
laws to protect them from being mistreated by
society; and, in particular, the government.
Following this line of thought "life Experiences":
My next blog: Choosing a Leader
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)