Is this the time for us U.S. citizens to ask?  Are we in the real United States? Or are we living under the claws of oppression?   LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE Shutdown or Freedom.

Out of Focus

As an independent voter I feel offended by the tone of Mr. Cohen’s article in the The Washington Post about racial divide on voting.  The tone appears as if white voters vote based on race.  Yet, according to the same article “... 80 percent of all nonwhites supported Obama, including 95 percent of black voters”   

Culture attachment is omitted as a factor on minorities voting.  We immigrants even in the second generation tend to believe politicians.  I am speaking from an immigrant’s viewpoint—I am naturalized. 

According to immigrants, thus minorities other then black, we have been brainwashed with the philosophy that the Democratic party is the savior of the working class.  I was in the box, and as a democrat I voted by party lines.  But, then I faced reality:  My party raised my taxes, my meager income shrunk.  I became non-affiliated. 

Now, our president quotes an incomplete report as if all figures were in.  Those of us who are informed vote based on facts.  As voters start to see facts and the lack thereof, we move to the candidate who appears more honest.—it’s about credibility, not racial emotions. 

Are Our Judges Ignorant?

Voter ID Law Struck Down.

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - A federal court has ruled against a Texas law that would require voters to present photo IDs to election officials before being allowed to cast ballots in November.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

My Comment

This Federal Court’s decision demonstrates the ignorance of our leaders—Judges in this case.    

“…it imposes strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor, and racial minorities…”

Do these judges know how the poor and minorities live, to make such statement?  The poor and minorities live without banking accounts and without credit cards. 

It is common knowledge, to open a banking account the citizen needs an ID.  Thus, these judges are assuming that the poor and minorities do not have IDs.  The poor and the minorities who are too poor to have banking accounts, do their financial transactions by money orders and money-grams, and Western-Union. 

Do these judges know that to buy a money order or to cash a check, or send or receive from Western –Union, the client has to presnt an ID.  So, poor people have at least one ID.  If the ignorant judges mean the poor as being the homeless, these judges are showing their ignorance there too.  For, to stay at a homeless shelter the patron must provide and ID.  

Every body has an ID.  The only people who don’t need an ID are the people who live 100% off the street—that is a very small number, even among the homeless.  Such people who live off the street, don’t vote; they are detached from society.   So we need leaders—especially judges, to be people from the lower strata of society, people who know what life is all about; otherwise, ignorance rules, as in the voting ID situation.

 

LDS Money

In response to Bloomburgs' Caroline Winter on the LDS Church's Money
of July 18 2012

LDS Money

When there are disasters, the LDS church is normally one of the first to pump aid in the form of food, and emergency items needed.  Sometimes, the LDS church even gives such help via other charitable organizations—the goal is to help the needy.  So, the LDS church needs money to help the needed; but of the church’s money, there is none for personal use.  So, how does the Red Cross help? How does our Government help?  The answer is with money.  In the LDS church nobody asks you individually to pay tithing; that is a personal option between the person and God.  I joined the LDS church almost 30 years ago, and I have attended about a dozen wards (congregations) because I have moved around; and I always felt comfortable.  No one ever told me that I had to pay tithing.  As a former Catholic, I was raised on faith and giving to God.  Other denominations/churches that I have attended also have tithing.  Who pays for the chapels and other buildings?  Who pays for the farms to help the poor.  My Jewish and Muslim friends pay tithing too, so what is the author Caroline Winter trying to prove?  It would be ethical for the author to mention that LDS chapels are built 100% from Church Headquarters’ funds, and the money to maintain the building and all activities comes 100% from Salt lake, and money to help the needy comes from salt lake.  Also, there are wards that could never maintain their own building because of economic-demographics.  Yet all LDS buildings have the same level of comfort.  That is in tune with the popular agenda of equality.  Winter’s article appears to be based on envy rather than the truth.  A good journalist has the ethical duty to present both sides of the issue—side by side, for the reader to form the conclusion.

You can chekc her article at:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-10/how-the-mormons-make-money#post_comment

The Bible is Clear About Sex and /sexual-misuse.

In reference to Blasphemy:
by Paul Oestreicher (from alternet.org) April 23, 2012 "Was Jesus Gay? Probably The evidence that he may have been what we today call gay is very strong. But even gay rights campaigners in the church have been reluctant to suggest it."

-----------------------------------------------------

MY  RESPONSE

To those who have not studied the bible, Paul Oestreicher may be able to appear with a valid argument.  However, to those who have read the bible, for decades, the picture is clear: Either Mr. Oestrecheicher intentionally wants to mislead his readers, or he does not remember what is on the bible—if he actually has read it. Intension seems more evident.

There have been those across the ages who want only certain parts to the bible to stand. They want the bible to justify their chosen life-style.  That would be like us wanting just certain parts of the US Constitution to stand; than we could all have machineguns and bombs, and militias. We all know better than that; just like our US Constitution, the bible has to be taken as a whole.

The word “love” in the bible is taken as total-respect, and total-devotion, and voidness of evil: “Love thy neighbor”, “Love God”, Love one another”.

One example is clear, while Peter told Jesus that he could die for Jesus, when the pressure came, Peter denied Jesus three times. So, if the bible mentions that Jesus loved John more than the others, it is because John did not have fear. That can be seen when Peter and John ran to the tomb, Peter stayed at the door, while John went inside the tomb.

We can see that the others were not as devoted to Jesus’ cause. And Jesus said that He came to do His Father’s work—devotion to the cause of God. Thomas at first did not believe that Jesus had resurrected. Do we have a clue of lack of love and dedication. We can see that the others were not as devoted to Jesus’ cause. And Jesus said that He came to so His Father’s work—devotion to the cause of God.

Another clue: The apostles strictly advised the new members to stay away from “fornication, and away from sex with those of the same kind (homosexuality)” The bible stated that false churches would come. Are those who mix the teaching of Christ with sinful activity the fasle churches? That is what the Catholic Church did when they mixed paganism with Christianity—325 AD.

Now, which part to the bible doesn’t Mr. Oestreicher understand, or has not yet read?

War on Drugs or you your money?

It is not worthy to repeat what has been said so many times before, rather it might be prudent to point at the proven evidence of exactly one century ago. The same scenario with brain sensitive substances. But, the results are so good, that I have to make reference to Prohibition.

About a century ago, tyrants decided to influence the government to act in tyranny and oppress the people by “Prohibition”. In the nation of the “Free”, the people sought to be free and ignored tyranny. Since alcohol became illegal, and whatever is illegal makes people question why, unless it is something bad, restriction entices people to looked into it, to see why. But, yes, alcohol is a drug and is bad.

Thus criminals prospered by “crime”, only criminals had access to manufacturing, selling and distributing whine and alcoholic products. Since there was no other way to get what for thousands of years had been free, territorial wars were common; thus murder was part of business. The force of capitalism was in control under the nose of government that said you could not do it.

Then the spirit of common since prevailed by the influence of capitalism still. The government decided to have a share on that criminal trade. We ended up with a government department dealing with Tobacco Alcohol and Firearms—growth in government, that is good for politicians. Better yet, now all those criminal substances that had been used freely for thousands of years before prohibition, became free again—but, only if you pay the government—it sounds like taxes.

Now, governments around the world have an excuse to tax tobacco and alcohol, more government growth. It makes politicians appear as if they really care for the people who voted them into office. Since the governments assumed the role of the criminals, those alcoholic substances became controllable, with permits to the same criminals who had not gotten caught.

Politicians around the world demonstrated what the law of prohibition was. Alcohol is part of their entertainment, as it has been for thousands of years, for everyone else.

Now, we even have an ex-President who refused to say he never used drugs, rather Mr. Clinton said that he “…did not inhale it”. No one can be present where smoke is present without inhaling it. It has been classified as “secondhand smoke”, in Clinton’s case “grass smoking”.

However, the war on drugs has a different base. First its source is South America, legalizing drugs would allow large sums of money into the coffers of the Latinos—no way. Secondly, the Latinos could become financially independent. In contrast we had big grain farms to produce alcohol; but coco is a natural near the Equator. Thirdly, there is a real cultural threat. Some Latino clown once bragged that he would intoxicate America—the same way, the English enslaved the Asians with the opium business two centuries ago.

But, those are small potatoes, when we compare that the war on drugs allowed governments around the world to control your money. If anyone deposits or makes transactions of $10,000 or more, the government has to be notified. It is called financial or property oppression. That is how the European governments controlled the Jews for centuries, by taking their property.

In the sixteen hundreds, the English did come to the conclusion that the ultimate weapon is not the sword, rather, it is the control of money. Without the war on drugs there does not appear a validity for governments to control your money.

Reality: Any substance altering the thinking process is bad and should not be use at all.

This is refernce to:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/leaders-rethink-the-war-on-drugs-at-summit-of-the-americas/article2402426/page2/

The Globe and Mail

Drug Policy
Leaders rethink the war on drugs at Summit of the Americas
CAMPBELL CLARK AND MARINA JIMÉNEZ

Racial Bias in America

Is this the definite pivot point that definitely bifurcates America. Our nation is struggling to maintain a face of a civilized country, then comes the testing that shows we are socially failing, and we are on the path of self-destruction.

Russia and China and Iran cold not hurt us as much as our leaders are, by oppressing one race to please the race. We have two interracial situations that developed about the same time. One situation involves two individuals, one of which one person ended-up dead and the surviving bleeding. The government decided that the surviving person be charged with second degree murder—media assisted case--Zimmerman is in jail.

A case where there is only the survivors’ words and light wounds as witnesses. That men of white race has been charged with second degree murder, while he claims self-defense. The media is all for the dead person, and the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were all over the news asking or justice for the victim--a back youth. That is the first case.

On the same East Coast, about a 800 miles north, about the same time, an unarmed white man who might have been drunk or off of his sense, wanders into a group of negro man who punch, rob and molest him, then publish their acts on the internet as the ultimate sign of victory and black-supremacy.

A city Baltimore City official-a black women appeared to support the act of their ethnic people by showing compassion on the victim while not condemning the evil doers. Al the official says is “…Their behavior was just criminal,” said Det. Nicole Monroe of the Baltimore City Police Department. She did not mention that the only reason the man got robbed and beaten was because of his race—he is white, nor did she metnion ate-crimes.

That sums to one thing “Job well done, let’s do it again.” Other than, the Washington Post, Baltimore Sun, and Media One—a black media source, I have not been able to Google other media sources. It shows that most media priorities are supporting popularism.

It appears that the Civil Rights Leaders Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are deaf to the Baltimore racial violence; or are they fake leaders, or are they racist themselves? If they remain silent on the Baltimore racial crime, they are showing themselves as ignoring racial crime based on bias favoring their black race.

Could it be that these outspoken leaders are trying to protect their criminal Afro brothers from exposure of racial motivated violence, robbery and molestation? In this case there was not just one person committing the crime, it was a group including supportive women, and filming it was a trophy.

Unless Sharpton and Jackson come clean and show their voice for justice regardless of color, so much call for their civil rights justice barking. They need to come forward and condemn the racists regardless of color.

Otherwise, they are showing the world what kind of justice they seek—Racial revenge would be more appropriate for their work. This is really the question to present Obama II, in this election year and see what kind of justice he is helping us with for the USA.

No, I will not divorce my wife because she is Afro, with prominent black features and eats cus-cus. I love people; but, justice has to be served based on the crime; act for act regardless of who gets punished; and the media and our leaders have to be part of it.