Monday, November 3, 2014

No 784 "En mi opinion" Noviembre 3, 2014

No 784 “En mi opinión”  Noviembre 3, 2014

“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño   EDITOR
"Government's 1st Duty is to protect the people, not run their lives." ~ Reagan
Ciudadanos del Condado Miami Dade, estimados amigos: Hasta hoy a un día de las elecciones de medio término han botado solamente unos 20,000 electores. El condado tiene más de 2 millones de personas.  Es algo deprimente que tan pocas personas hayan usado su derecho a elegir a quien les va administrar la vida.
Todos se quejan de que los políticos que tenemos sean UNA MIERDA pero la culpa es nuestra porque solo un grupo que bota son los que eligen a los comemierdas y a los ladrones para que dirijan el destino de nosotros. Queda el día de hoy y mañana para cerrar las elecciones. En mi opinión tenemos un gobierno que es una porquería. Tenemos la oportunidad de poner personas mejores en el congreso y sacar a toda la metralla que tantos problemas han causado apoyando al presidente africano. Salga de su enquilosamiento moral, enajenante y político y bote, BOTE quitese la morrina y el desencanto BOTE. Lázaro R González Miño. Nota: aquí debajo tienen la forma que yo voy a botar (Muy conservadora)  Usted hágalo, como le de la gana, pero HAGALO!!!
Elecciónes de Noviembre Mañana Martes 4 de Noviembre 2014
Yo botare así:
Este mensaje estará aquí hasta el día Martes 4 día de las elecciones.
1.  Para gobernador y vicegobernador: Rick Scott y Carlos López Cantera.  
2.  Para fiscal general: Pam Bondi
3.  Para Funcionario Principal de Finanzas:  Jeff Atwater
4.  Para Comisionado de Agricultura:  Adam Putnam
5.  Representante ante el Congreso, Distrito 23:  Joseph "Joe" Kaufman
6.  Representante ante el Congreso, Distrito 24:  Carlos Curbelo.  
7.  Representante Estatal, Distrito 100:  Martin a. "Marty" Feigenbaum
8.  Representante Estatal, Distrito 103:  Manny Díaz, Jr.  
9.  Representante Estatal, Distrito 105:  Carlos Trujillo
10. Representante Estatal, Distrito 110:  Jose Oliva
11. Representante Estatal, Distrito 111:  Votar por uno 
12. Representante Estatal, Distrito 112:  Daniel Díaz Leyva
13. Representante Estatal, Distrito 114:  Erik Fresen
14. Representante Estatal, Distrito 115:  Michael Bileca
15. Representante Estatal, Distrito 116:  Jose Felíx Díaz/Carmen Sotomayor
16. Representante Estatal, Distrito 118:  Frank Artiles
17. Representante Estatal, Distrito 119:  Jeanette M. Nuñez
18: Tasador de Inmuebles:  Pedro J. García
19. Enmienda #1-Water and Land Convervation-Conservación de Aguas y Tierras:  No.  
20. Enmienda #2-Marihuana:  No.  
21.  Enmienda #3-Nombramiento Eventual para Ciertos Cargos Judiciales Vacantes:  No.  
22.  Preguntas del Condado-Enmienda para permitir bibliotecas en parques:  No.
23.  Preguntas del Condado-  Eximir al Parque Regional de Fútbol de Miami-Dade del Articulo 7:  No.  
24.  Preguntas del Condado-  Permitir terrenos para acampar y alojamientos/cabañas en el Parque de Matecumbe:  No.
25.  Enmienda para eximir del Articulo 7  la ampliación de la Universidad Internacional de la Florida en los predios de la Fería de la Juventud:  No.
26.  Imponer otro impuesto a la propiedad para cubrir el gasto de construir una Corte que reemplaze el edificio del Cielito Lindo:  No.  
27.  Juez del Condado, Grupo 19:  Frank Bocanegra
28.  ¿Se deberian retener en sus cargos los tres jueces del Tribunal de Apelaciones:  Thomas Logue, Barbara Lagoa, y Vance E. Salter?  Si.
La decisión es suya.  Compartan cualquier información que piensen que es importante con sus familiares y amigos.  Pidanles que voten por cualquiera de los candidatos que ellos merecen que se merecen su voto, pero que voten.

The Press Is Souring On Obama

"The Obama administration has been 'more dangerous to the press' than 'any administration in American history.'"

DON IRVINE  
The deteriorating relationship between the mainstream media and President Obama was highlighted once again this past weekend when USA Today Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page said that the Obama administration has been “more dangerous to the press” than “any administration in American history”:
“This administration has been more restrictive and more challenging to the press, more dangerous to the press, really, than any administration in American history, in terms of legal investigations…and I think access to the White House has just gotten worse and worse.”
Page made her remarks at a White House Correspondents Association seminar meant to help reporters deal with the lack of transparency by the Obama administration. Her words echoed those of former New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson, who said earlier this year that, “It is the most secretive White House that I have ever been involved in covering.” That’s in addition to Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer, who said, “This administration exercises more control than George W. Bush’s did, and his before that;” and more recently, New York Times reporter James Risen, who said, “I think Obama hates the press.”
And they’re liberals!
Obama has no one to blame but himself for the soured relations with the media. After all, not only did they fall all over themselves to support his candidacy, they provided valuable cover for his mismanagement of the economy and largely ignored the scandals that were engulfing his administration. In return, the media received limited access, threats of prosecution for not revealing sources, and demands to change pool reports, to name a few things that have infuriated them.
Even though not everyone in the media has soured on Obama, there has been enough backlash to ensure that his last two-plus years in office won’t be the love affair it was when he was first elected.
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/press-souring-obama/#TAvykwR6uBMcy46A.99


Amenper: The Democrats need a candidate like a Democrat they used to have.
Henry "Scoop" Jackson
Sometimes we forget the times when the Democratic Party was not the Socialist Democratic Party- party.
Ronald Reagan was a Democrat. This year marks the 103th, anniversary of the birth of Henry M. “Scoop” Jackson, one of the towering figures of American politics in the latter half of the 20th century and the avatar of neo-conservatism. A Democrat representing the state of Washington in the U.S. Senate from 1953 until his sudden death in 1983, he deserves to be recalled not only because he merits honor but also because little of today’s politics would be comprehensible without understanding his 30 years in office.
Senator Henry M. Jackson, the Washington Democrat who served in Congress for more than half of this century, ran for President twice and he emerged as a leader of a strain of Democrats committed to a strong national defense and skeptical of their party's impulses in foreign affairs.
These Democrats, some of whom called themselves neoconservatives, often regarded Mr. Jackson as the symbol of the party's traditional center.
They supported him vigorously when he campaigned for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 1972 and 1976; the Democrats need a candidate like a Democrat they used to have. He was Henry "Scoop" Jackson and the Republicans need a candidate like a Democrat they use to have. He was Ronald Reagan.
Jackson was the father of neo-conservatism, a legacy that troubles some Democrats today. Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and Paul Wolfowitz all worked for or with him. These Jackson alumni planned and promoted the Iraq war during the Bush administration.
“Scoop” Jackson was a traditional Democrat, that tradition began dying after the Johnson presidency, as the party’s nomination of George McGovern in 1972 and Jimmy Carter in 1976 (and he would die again if could see the Barack Obama administration)  
Perhaps a better proof of what would happen to Scoop Jackson today was the fate of Joseph Lieberman, the last of the “Jackson Democrats,” who was his party’s nominee for vice president in 2000 but could not get renominated for his Senate seat in 2006.
In the 1970s and 1980s there were many of Jackson Democrats and many references to the “Jackson wing” of the party. The meaning was clear: Democrats who cared deeply about defense issues and were hawks.
They believed in military superiority for the United States, and supported big defense budgets.
More important, they believed that American power was a great force for good in the world, which was not the view taken by the “McGovern wing” of the party—whose heir Barack Obama seems to be
He also was a leading advocate of the antimissile missile, arguing that the Soviet Union was a ''dangerous, unpredictable opponent.'' He held up approval of the first treaty on limiting strategic arms, insisting that future treaties not limit the United States to missile levels inferior to those of the Soviet Union.
He was perhaps the most vociferous Democratic opponent of the second strategic arms pact.
Senator Jackson won perhaps his greatest attention for his efforts in behalf of Israel and Soviet Jews.
"I wanted to work for Scoop Jackson. He was the last Democrat who embodied the high tradition of internationalism," said Charles Horner, a former aide who is now a scholar at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C
He did not think sending a small peacekeeping force was the right role for a superpower, he thought they would be a target, and he worried what would happen if they were killed—exactly what happened in 1983. The idea that Jackson was a mindless hawk, rather than a careful proponent of American power, is and always was ridiculous. The year was 1980. The Iranian revolution had toppled the shah’s regime, the Soviet Union had just invaded Afghanistan and the United States’ president, Jimmy Carter, was widely perceived as a weak leader.  But read this quote from Jackson —“There is a need for the U.S. to make careful decisions, stand by those decisions, and avoid sending false or conflicting signals”—and what of course comes to mind is Obama and his Syria red line. There, Obama made an off-the-cuff threat about what we would do if chemical weapons were used, told allies we would move to enforce the threat, and then backed off at the last minute. It’s exactly what Jackson was warning against. This is nonsense on stilts. Jackson opposed the kind of policies that are central to this administration, and would have been appalled by the massive cuts in the defense budget, the imprudent (there’s that word again) rush to the exits in Iraq and Afghanistan, the effort to engage American enemies without reinforcing American power, and very clearly by the story of the Syrian red line. As to the current Ukraine crisis, an old line of Scoop’s from the height of the Cold War comes to mind: “the Russians are like a burglar going down a hotel corridor, trying all the doors. When they find one that’s unlocked, they go in.” Jackson strongly opposed the world view that calls for American weakness and withdrawal, and was the leading opponent of the Nixon-Kissinger version of détente—in good part because he thought weakness would invite aggression, which is just what Lindsey Graham said.
Many former Jackson staff members became disillusioned with the Democratic Party during the Carter administration and later supported President Reagan. As a group, they were known as the "neoconservatives," or neocons.
When Reagan presented Jackson's widow, Helen, with a posthumous Medal of Freedom in 1984, he said: "I am deeply proud — as he would have been — to have Jackson Democrats serve in my administration. I am proud some of them have found a home here."
Years later, many of those Jackson Democrats are credited with helping devise Bush's war on terrorism and invasion of Iraq.
Perle and Jeanne Kirkpatrick, former U.N. ambassador under Reagan, serve on the board of the Seattle-based Jackson Foundation, which provides grants to nonprofits and educational institutes.
Former House Speaker Tom Foley, who also worked for Jackson, and longtime civic leader Jim Ellis are also board members, as are Peter Jackson and his mother.
Charles Horner, and Douglas Feith were former Democratic aides to Jackson who, disillusioned with the Carter administration, supported Ronald Reagan and joined his administration in 1981, later becoming prominent foreign policy makers in the 21st-century Bush administration. Neoconservative Ben Wattenberg was a prominent political aide to Jackson's 1972 and 1976 presidential
In the post-9/11 world, Scoop Jackson seems fresh again. And Democratic candidates would do well to speak his language on national security
His legacy found expression within the Reagan administration where a number of Jackson’s followers helped shape policy. Jeane Kirkpatrick, who had been Scoop’s representative (along with Ben J. Wattenberg) to the Democratic platform committee in 1976, became Reagan’s ambassador to the United Nations and the chief exponent of his foreign-policy philosophy. Richard Perle became assistant secretary of defense, formulating positions on armaments and arms control, while Elliott Abrams, who had also worked in Scoop’s Senate office, became assistant secretary of state and point man for Central America policy during the Reagan administration. A number of other Democrats closely affiliated with Scoop—Max Kampelman, Paul Nitze, Eugene V. Rostow, Richard Schifter, to name a few—also took on important roles.

If neoconservatives made an impact on Reagan’s administration, so did he on them. On the eve of Reagan’s inauguration, most or all of these old liberals were still Democrats and still liberals in the old sense, except that they had surrendered the label. But under Reagan several things drew them closer to conservatism and the Republican Party. One was the success of Reaganomics, which restored the U.S. economy to strength with high growth and low inflation after Jimmy Carter had thrown up his hands at the challenge. A second was the transformation of the labor movement from a bastion of patriotism to a vehicle for leftism akin to European labor unions; labor had once tied the neocons to the world of Keynesianism and the Democratic Party, but no more. Above all was their appreciation of Reagan himself, who steered America to victory in the Cold War and became the hero who succeeded Jackson in their hearts. This did not lead to automatic acceptance of all positions, but it did lead these old liberals to revisit conservative ideas with fresh eyes.
Irving Kristol of the conservative Weekly Standard used to be a Democrat.  He and other  neoconservatives, bound together with horror to the ascendancy of the “McGovern liberals” in the Democratic Party, and turn to conservative senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson (D-WA) for leadership.-
What we have to understand, is that what we see today, is not the Democratic Party, it is a socialist party that has nothing to do with the traditional Democratic Party.


Amenper: La Codicia Sindical
La proposición del aumento del salario mínimo y la conducta de los sindicatos, es algo que puede perjudicar grandemente la economía de los Estados Unidos.  No importa lo que piense Hillary Clinton, las empresas son en generador que mantiene funcionando la economía y los generadores de empleos. 
No se trata aunque parezca a simple vista algo como para proteger los intereses de las compañías multinacionales, que lo están haciendo muy bien bajo Obama, pero se trata de los empresarios medianos y pequeños en la economía doméstica. Son los millones de pequeños empresarios los mayores empleadores de la nación.
En los Estados Unidos de América, las empresas han perdido mucha de su ventaja competitiva en el mercado mundial en gran parte debido a los sindicatos que exigen indignantes salarios, beneficios y el poder y por los desbocados impuestos corporativos..
Bajo esta administración, los sindicatos han ganado más y más poder, con el resultado de que las empresas  no pueden competir con el resto del mundo. Los sindicatos tuvieron un propósito legítimo en los Estados Unidos en algún momento. Los dueños de negocios estaban poniendo a sus trabajadores en ambientes de trabajo peligrosos y pagándoles muy poco, pero ahora hay leyes federales asegurándose de que no pueden hacer eso ahora y no lo han hecho por muchos años por leyes aprobadas por administraciones Republicanas y Demócratas.
Estas leyes han hecho los sindicatos efectivamente inútiles y ahora esperan tomar ventaja de las empresas que les han proporcionado una forma de vida para conservar su poder político y para el beneficio económico personal de sus dirigentes.
¿Así que aún se necesitan los sindicatos en los Estados Unidos de América?
Con la inestabilidad económica los sindicatos tratando de  mantenerse fuertes luchan contra  las empresas de una manera que impiden la reducción efectiva del desempleo.
Los sindicatos representan a una muy pequeña minoría de los trabajadores de Estados Unidos. Según los números, los sindicatos representan sólo el 12 por ciento de la fuerza de trabajo. Los trabajadores estadounidenses están conscientes de que no tienen ventajas perteneciendo a un sindicato y cada día menos trabajadores quieren sindicalizarse.
Pero todavía los negocios están teniendo a ceder a la demanda de los sindicatos, incluso si no lo exigen los tiempos económicos. Los sindicatos del sector público parecen tener más poder que el privado, y en esta administración los sindicatos han adquirido un poder extremo por agendas políticas de la administración de Obama.
Mientras  que los beneficios y los salarios del sector privado se han estancado necesariamente durante la recesión, el gobierno continúa aumentando la compensación para trabajadores del sector público.
Durante el  tiempo de mayor deuda del gobierno en la historia de la nación, los sindicatos del sector público están logrando ordeñar al tesoro público con aumento de salarios de los trabajos públicos.
Los sindicatos no son necesarios para proteger a los trabajadores de las empresas, y ya van contra la libertad económica de las empresas obligándolo a obedecer a los sindicatos. El gobierno tiene leyes para hacer cumplir las condiciones seguras de trabajo y un salario decente, no necesitan a los sindicatos.
Los empresarios merecen ser capaz de administrar sus negocios. Las empresas también tienen que empezar a competir con los precios de las empresas extrajeras que tienen a nivel mundial una mano de obra barata.
Las empresas de los Estados Unidos de América no sólo compiten contra otras empresas estadounidenses multinacionales, pero con el resto del mundo. –No sólo por los sindicatos pero por los impuestos corporativos que son los mayores del mundo y aumentando bajo esta administración.
Si no lo entienden, busque quien es el fabricante de su computadora, de su televisor, y hasta la ropa interior que están usando.
 Con personas alrededor del mundo que están contentos con un salario mucho menor que el salario mínimo estadounidense, y los sindicatos exigiendo de altos salarios y beneficios de los trabajadores se hace cada vez menos atractivo para las empresas trabajar en Estados Unidos y menos atractivo el invertir en Estados Unidos.
Una empresa puede enviar las operaciones al extranjero, automatizarse, reducir su nómina para poder tratar de vender un producto que pueda competir con el extranjero.
Pero las compañías multinacionales con sus fábricas en el extranjero, están beneficiándose de esta política del gobierno.  Lo que vemos es la hipocresía de los liberales del gobierno como John Kerry y Nancy Pelosi, que tienen intereses en empresas con fábricas en el extranjero y se llenan la boca para llamarse defensores de los trabajadores.
Los sindicatos de ahora sólo están perjudicando la posibilidad de los trabajadores para competir contra otros de todo el mundo.

Los sindicatos una vez tenían un objetivo, pero ya ha pasado su utilidad y ha convertido incluso en algo que  daña a este país. Los sindicatos obligan a la gente en unirse, pagando las cuotas sindicales, y cuando piensan que es conveniente para ganar poder, obliga a la gente a ir a la huelga, que muchas veces fuerza a cerrar a centros de trabajo.
Las empresas tienen que ser capaces de ofrecer productos de calidad a precios bajos, pero cuando tienes que pagar por todas las demandas sindicales y los impuestos corporativos, se convierte en un trabajo muy duro.


Amenper: ATRASANDO EL RELOJ
Daylight Saving Time terminó hoy, 2 de noviembre a las 2:00, ¿o debo decir a la 1:00?  Porque lo que esto significa es que tuvimos que atrasar los relojes  una hora y conseguimos una hora extra de sueño.
 Pero no todos estaban durmiendo, si había una pareja haciendo el amor a la 1:55 AM terminaron a la 12:55 así que no han hicieron nada, nada sucedió, esa hora no existió, no son culpables si estaban cometiendo adulterio.
 Esto es a lo que se nos estaba tratando de decir  Bill Clinton con respecto a su relación con Mónica Lewinsky, cuando dijo que lo escucháramos bien, que él nunca había tenido relaciones sexuales con esa mujer.
Pero la gente no lo creyó, es que los republicanos no quieren entender la resbalosa honestidad del pobre Willy.
Lo mismo pasa si padecemos de estreñimiento, aunque el laxante te haga efecto a la 1:55 cuando termines a las 12:55 todavía tienes el episodio de estreñimiento, porque no hiciste nada
Pero ¿se han dado cuenta? Somos una hora más joven, porque no vivimos por una hora de 1 a 2 AM.
Por eso me siento más descansado cuando me levanté por la mañana.
Quizás esto que digo arriba en broma, hace evidente la tontería satírica del humor negro.
Pero la justificación del cambio de tiempo diciendo que es para ahorrar energía, es la evidencia de las tonterías de la corrección política, una tontería que parece humor negro, un racista pudiera pensar que la persona que se le ocurrió esa justificación era un negro. 
Uno no apaga o enciende las luces por el reloj, pero por la claridad o por la oscuridad. 
Claro que es conveniente el cambio de hora, porque oscurece más temprano y la noche es más evidente, pero no por el ahorro de electricidad por el reloj, aunque no se cambiara el reloj se ahorraría lo mismo.
La hora y el tiempo está más allá de nuestro control, y el reloj de la vida sigue avanzando sin importar cómo llevamos nuestras vidas aunque atrasemos o adelantemos nuestros relojes.
Lo único que podemos hacer es maximizar el tiempo que tenemos y sobre todo de aprender del tiempo que hemos vivido.
Se aprende a vivir por la historia que estudiamos y la historia que hemos vivido personalmente.
La historia no es todo, pero es un punto de partida. La historia es un reloj que usa la gente usa durante su tiempo político y cultural de los momentos que viven y que sirven de experiencia para ellos y para los que después estudian sus decisiones durante su vida en la historia..
Es una brújula que usan para encontrarse en el mapa de geografía humana, que les dice dónde están pero, más importante aún, lo que deben ser y hacer, de acuerdo con lo que el reloj de la historia les ha enseñado.
No podemos retrasar el reloj ni podemos corregir el daño ocurrido, pero nosotros tenemos el poder para determinar el futuro y para asegurar que lo que no pasó nunca pasa otra vez. 
Por desgracias el ser humano no parece entender esto, por eso nos han atrasado el reloj de la historia y nos están tratando de llevar a la hora pasada con el fracasado sistema comunista


Amenper: ATRASANDO EL RELOJ
Daylight Saving Time terminó hoy, 2 de noviembre a las 2:00, ¿o debo decir a la 1:00?  Porque lo que esto significa es que tuvimos que atrasar los relojes  una hora y conseguimos una hora extra de sueño.
 Pero no todos estaban durmiendo, si había una pareja haciendo el amor a la 1:55 AM terminaron a la 12:55 así que no han hicieron nada, nada sucedió, esa hora no existió, no son culpables si estaban cometiendo adulterio.
 Esto es a lo que se nos estaba tratando de decir  Bill Clinton con respecto a su relación con Mónica Lewinsky, cuando dijo que lo escucháramos bien, que él nunca había tenido relaciones sexuales con esa mujer.
Pero la gente no lo creyó, es que los republicanos no quieren entender la resbalosa honestidad del pobre Willy.
Lo mismo pasa si padecemos de estreñimiento, aunque el laxante te haga efecto a la 1:55 cuando termines a las 12:55 todavía tienes el episodio de estreñimiento, porque no hiciste nada
Pero ¿se han dado cuenta? Somos una hora más joven, porque no vivimos por una hora de 1 a 2 AM.
Por eso me siento más descansado cuando me levanté por la mañana.
Quizás esto que digo arriba en broma, hace evidente la tontería satírica del humor negro.
Pero la justificación del cambio de tiempo diciendo que es para ahorrar energía, es la evidencia de las tonterías de la corrección política, una tontería que parece humor negro, un racista pudiera pensar que la persona que se le ocurrió esa justificación era un negro. 
Uno no apaga o enciende las luces por el reloj, pero por la claridad o por la oscuridad. 
Claro que es conveniente el cambio de hora, porque oscurece más temprano y la noche es más evidente, pero no por el ahorro de electricidad por el reloj, aunque no se cambiara el reloj se ahorraría lo mismo.
La hora y el tiempo está más allá de nuestro control, y el reloj de la vida sigue avanzando sin importar cómo llevamos nuestras vidas aunque atrasemos o adelantemos nuestros relojes.
Lo único que podemos hacer es maximizar el tiempo que tenemos y sobre todo de aprender del tiempo que hemos vivido.
Se aprende a vivir por la historia que estudiamos y la historia que hemos vivido personalmente.
La historia no es todo, pero es un punto de partida. La historia es un reloj que usa la gente usa durante su tiempo político y cultural de los momentos que viven y que sirven de experiencia para ellos y para los que después estudian sus decisiones durante su vida en la historia..
Es una brújula que usan para encontrarse en el mapa de geografía humana, que les dice dónde están pero, más importante aún, lo que deben ser y hacer, de acuerdo con lo que el reloj de la historia les ha enseñado.
No podemos retrasar el reloj ni podemos corregir el daño ocurrido, pero nosotros tenemos el poder para determinar el futuro y para asegurar que lo que no pasó nunca pasa otra vez. 
Por desgracias el ser humano no parece entender esto, por eso nos han atrasado el reloj de la historia y nos están tratando de llevar a la hora pasada con el fracasado sistema comunista


Amenper: Edmund Burke and Obama
Edmund Burke born in 12 January, died July 1797, Burke was an Irish statesman born in Dublin; author, orator, political theorist, and philosopher,
Burke is regarded by most political historians in the English-speaking world as the father of modern English conservatism.
Burke's ideas placing property at the base of human development and the development of society, were radical and new at the time
The economist Adam Smith remarked that Burke was "the only man I ever knew who thinks on economic subjects exactly as I do, without any previous communications having passed between us"
Burke believed that property was essential to human life. Because of his conviction that people desire to be ruled and controlled, the division of property formed the basis for social structure, helping develop control within a property-based hierarchy. He viewed the social changes brought on by property as the natural order of events, which should be taking place as the human race progressed. With the division of property and the class system, he also believed that it kept the monarch in check to the needs of the classes beneath the monarch. Since property largely aligned or defined divisions of social class, class too, was seen as natural—part of a social agreement that the setting of persons into different classes, is the mutual benefit of all subjects.
In the nineteenth century Burke was praised by both liberals and conservatives.
Winston Churchill, in "Consistency in Politics", wrote:

On the one hand [Burke] is revealed as a foremost apostle of Liberty, on the other as the redoubtable champion of Authority. But a charge of political inconsistency applied to this life appears a mean and petty thing. History easily discerns the reasons and forces which actuated him, and the immense changes in the problems he was facing which evoked from the same profound mind and sincere spirit these entirely contrary manifestations. His soul revolted against tyranny, whether it appeared in the aspect of a domineering Monarch and a corrupt Court and Parliamentary system, or whether, mouthing the watch-words of a non-existent liberty, it towered up against him in the dictation of a brutal mob and wicked sect. No one can read the Burke of Liberty and the Burke of Authority without feeling that here was the same man pursuing the same ends, seeking the same ideals of society and Government, and defending them from assaults, now from one extreme, now from the other.

The most known quote of Burke is “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
He was an English Patriot, but he supported the American Revolution.
Burke took a leading role in the debate regarding the constitutional limits to the executive authority of the king. He argued strongly against unrestrained royal power and for the role of political parties in maintaining a principled opposition capable of preventing abuses.
Burke expressed his support for the grievances of the American Colonies under the government of King George III and his appointed representatives.
On 19 April 1774 Burke made the speech, on American Taxation (published in January 1775), on a motion to repeal the tea duty,

But I want to play a game.
I want you to think that Burke is not speaking to George III,
 I want you to think that Burke is speaking to Obama.:

Leave the Americans as they anciently stood, and these distinctions, born of our unhappy contest, will die along with it. ... Be content to bind America by laws of trade; you have always done it. ... Do not burthen them with taxes. ... But if intemperately, unwisely, fatally, you sophisticate and poison the very source of government by urging subtle deductions, and consequences odious to those you govern, from the unlimited and illimitable nature of supreme sovereignty, you will teach them by these means to call that sovereignty itself in question. ... If that sovereignty and their freedom cannot be reconciled, which will they take? They will cast your sovereignty in your face. Nobody of men will be argued into slaverySir, let the gentlemen on the other side ... tell me, what one character of liberty the Americans have, and what one brand of slavery they are free from, if they are bound in their property and industry by all the restraints you can imagine on commerce, and at the same time is made pack-horses of every tax you choose to impose, without the least share in granting themWhen they bear the burdens of unlimited monopoly, will you bring them to bear the burdens of unlimited revenue too? The Englishman in America will feel that this is slavery; that it is legal slavery, will be no compensation either to his feelings or to his understandings.

George III didn't listen to Burke, you know the rest of the story, THE TEA PARTY, the American Revolution.
Will Obama listen to Burke?
THE TEA PARTY is coming, the revolution will follow.

 

Amenper: AMENPER@aol.com

Six Islamist activist in the White House and one coming.
Look who's new in the white house!
Arif Alikhan - Assistant Secretary for Policy Development
for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Mohammed Elibiary - Homeland Security Adviser
Rashad Hussain - Special Envoy to the
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)
Salam al-Marayati - Obama Adviser and
founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council
and is its current executive director
Imam Mohamed Magid - Obama's Sharia Czar from
the Islamic Society of North America
Eboo Patel - Advisory Council on Faith-Based
Neighborhood Partnerships
Abu Bak al-Baghdadi- Advisory Council of the Unites States  Armed
forces .
(well the last person mentioned is just a product of my
 imagination, but you never know, it could be possible
one day.  Abu Bak al-Baghdadi is the Commander in Chief of ISIS,
and  it looks like he is already advising Obama)
This is flat-out scary!!! The foxes are now officially living in the
hen house...
Now ask me why I am very concerned!!!
Do you feel OK with this???
How can this happen, and when will we wake up???
We are quiet while our Country is being drastically changed!!!
We’ve got to have some relief starting with the 2014 Elections!
PLEASE PRAY FOR AMERICA AND THE PEOPLE.
Remember:  IT'S NOT WHAT WE GATHER IN LIFE BUT WHAT
WE SCATTER


            Breaking: Judge In Mexico Has Ruled Sgt. Tahmooressi To Be Released Immediately

The Mexican judge has decided to set him free without issuing any determination regarding the firearms charge being pursued by authorities.

According to recent reports, a judge in Mexico has ruled that jailed U.S. Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi will be released immediately after spending most of this year behind bars in that country.
The 26-year-old, who was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder before his arrest in March, has sparked widespread support among Americans demanding his release. Veteran and venerable talk show host Montel Williams has been a vocal critic of his treatment by Mexican authorities, claiming he has had no access to proper treatment for his disorder.
Read more at
http://www.westernjournalism.com/breaking-sgt-tahmooressi-released-immediately/#4EIKYksh11TmGTP0.99



Why Romney Calls Obama’s Plan for Illegal Immigrants ‘Shameful’

Mitt Romney had some harsh words about what he called President Obama’s plan to “unilaterally” grant amnesty to illegal immigrants after next week’s midterm elections.
“[It is] is a very shameful thing,” the 2012 Republican presidential nominee said yesterday in an interview with MSNBC’s Ronan Farrow. “It’s very clear that what he wants to do he knows will be very unpopular, and so he won’t tell the people until after the election. That is really a very cynical thing and inappropriate.”
While campaigning in Arizona near the Mexico border, the former Massachusetts governor also criticized the president’s lack of leadership in the Ebola crisis. “Mr. President, you’re in charge,” Romney said. “[T]his is the responsibility of leadership.”


ANOTHER BEHEADING: 21-Yr Old Beheaded In Oklahoma

Police are saying there is not connection to Islam or terrorism…let’s wait and see. Check this out…
Jacob Crockett was 19-years old, but will never see another birthday. He was gruesomely beheaded by a 21-year old acquaintance, Isaiah Marin in Stillwater, Oklahoma. Police are currently saying there is no connection of this beheading to terrorism or any specific religious group, but rather that Marin was a heavy drug user who fantasized about killing a number of people, including his victim, Crockett.
Marin actually stopped the beheading just before fully completing the act, called police and told them that he killed someone. Police found him running in bloody clothes along the road holding the large knife that he used to commit the crime.
Read more: TPNN

 

The End of the Age of Obama

We can only hope this is also the end of liberalism.
Check it out:
The end of the Age of Obama. It began with high hopes on a winter’s night in Iowa in 2008 and ended in disappointment on a crisp fall day nearly seven years later.
Sure, the president has another two years in office, but he is now the lamest of lame ducks. He is soon to face a House majority that is one of the most Republican since the 1920s, and a Senate, we hope, about to be taken over by a Republican majority. But more than this, he seems to have no friends, and few allies, on Capitol Hill.
One fact of politics that the president never fully grasped is that Congress, not the White House, is the center of our political system. Sure, the president lives in a fancy house, enjoys a full-time chef, and has “Hail to the Chief” played when he enters a room. But Congress is—as Stanford’s Morris Fiorina once put it—“the keystone of the Washington establishment.” The Framers gave pride of place to Congress, making it Article I of the Constitution, and were so worried about its potential power they divided it into two. Ideally, the modern president can use his prestige and acumen to lead Congress, but Obama has fallen far from that ideal. He has treated Congress in a supercilious manner, burned his bridges with Republican leaders, and alienated even Democrats.
Read more at http://patriotupdate.com/2014/10/end-age-obama/



The True Reason Gas Prices are Falling (Hint: It’s Not Because of Green Energy)

Stephen Moore, who formerly wrote on the economy and public policy for The Wall Street Journal, is chief economist at The Heritage Foundation.Read his research.
American workers and motorists got some badly-needed relief this week when the price of oil plunged to its lowest level in years. The oil price has fallen by about 25 percent since its peak back in June of $105 a barrel.  This is translating to lower prices at the pump with many states now below $3 a gallon.
At present levels, these lower oil and gas prices are the equivalent of a $200 billion cost saving to American consumers and businesses. That’s $200 billion a year we don’t have to send to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other foreign nations. Now that’s an economic stimulus par excellence.
There are many global reasons why gas prices are falling, but the major one isn’t being widely reported. America has become in the last several years an energy-producing powerhouse.  And sorry, Mr. President, I’m not talking about the niche “green energy” sources you are so weirdly fixated with.
Oil prices are falling because of changes in world supply and world demand. Demand has slowed because Europe is an economic wreck. But since 2008 the U.S. has increased our domestic supply by a gigantic 50 percent. This is a result of the astounding shale oil and gas revolution made possible by made-in-America technologies like hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling.  Already thanks to these inventions, the U.S. has become the number one producer of natural gas. But oil production in states like Oklahoma, Texas and North Dakota has doubled in just six years.
Without this energy blitz, the U.S. economy would barely have recovered from the recession of 2008-09. From the beginning of 2008 through the end of 2013 the oil and gas extraction industry created more than 100,000 jobs while the overall job market shrank by 970,000.
When the radical greens carry around signs saying “No to Fracking,” they couldn’t be promoting a more anti-America message. It would be like Nebraska not growing corn.
We are just skimming the surface of our super-abundant oil and gas resources.  New fields have been discovered in Texas and North Dakota that could contain hundreds of years of shale oil and gas supplies.
Here’s another reason to love the oil and gas bonanza in America. It’s breaking the back of OPEC.  Saudi Arabia is deluging the world with oil right now, which is driving the world price relentlessly lower. The Arabs understand–as too few in Washington do–that shale energy boom is no short term fad. It could make energy cheaper for decades to come.  As American drillers get better at perfecting the technologies of cracking through shale rock to get to the near infinite treasure chest supplies of energy locked inside, we will soon overtake Saudi Arabia as the dominant player in world energy markets.
You can’t have a cartel if the world’s largest producer–America–isn’t a member. OPEC will never again be able to create the level of economic turmoil that the Arab members of OPECs engineered in the 1970s with their oil embargo. And by the way: lower oil prices place increased pressure on Iran’s mullahs to abandon their nuclear program and curb Putin’s capabilities to engage in East Europe aggression.
Yet the political class still doesn’t get it. As recently as 2012 President Obama declared that “the problem is we use more than 20 percent of the world’s oil and we only have 2 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves.”  Then he continued with his Malthusian nonsense,  “Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we’d still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil.” Apparently, neither he nor his fact checkers have ever been to Texas or North Dakota.  And we don’t have 2 percent of the world’s oil. Including estimates of onshore and offshore resources not yet officially “discovered”, we have ten times more than the stat quoted by the president–resources sufficient to supply hundreds of years of oil and gas.
America, in sum, has been richly endowed with a nearly invincible 21st century economic and national security weapon to keep us safe and prosperous. The plunge is gas prices is just one visible sign of this supply explosion.  Think of how much bigger this revolution could be if we started building pipelines, repealed the ban on oil exports, expanded drilling on public lands, and stopped trying to punitively tax and regulate the oil and gas.
For much of the last forty years, oil’s periodic price spikes have remained a constant threat to growth. Higher consumer energy costs as well as increased industrial production costs weighted on the economy. Now oil is one of the primary accelerators; the new big drag on the economy is politicians who despise the carbon-based industry.
A version of this article originally appeared on FoxNews.com
The version above replaces an earlier version of this article originally published on The Daily Signal. Some of the numbers have been changed.


Important! PROPOSALM. Aleman

Not new but increasingly more import to circulate.
Think clearly about this, if they view themselves as ELITE (from us) as they have proven with their separate medical and retirement programs, then why not other programs.
This is what Mark Levine has been talking about--a Constitutional convention by the States to get back to the laws of the Constitution.
This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, nothing to sign; just pass it on. This is an idea that we should address.
35 STATES SO FAR.....IT'S GROWING!
One message to forward!
Governors of 35 states have filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention. 
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Their latest stunt is to exempt themselves in all of its forms from the Healthcare Reform that they passed.  Somehow, that doesn't seem logical.  We do not have an elite ruling class that is above the law.  I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. 
If each person that receives this will forward it on to 15 people, in three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution: "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators, President of the United States, their employees, Representatives of Congress; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."


Jorge A. Villalón:

FOUR THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT MARIJUANA BEFORE VOTING
October 29, 2014 by Dr. Juan Torres
On November 4 Floridians go to the polls to decide whether or not marijuana should be legally marketed for “Medical Use”.
Depending on our personal opinion, knowledge and political vision much has been written in recent months about this subject.
In this article, I will mention four things that every citizen should know before voting YES or NO on the amendment number two.
1. MEDICAL MARIJUANA
Cannabis or marijuana has been used in medical practice in the US for many years. It is important to emphasize this point; the use of medical marijuana is not prohibited in the United States.
The Food and Drug Administration approved the drug in the 80s as an appetite stimulant and antiemetic patients with cancer, HIV related Wasting Syndrome and other chronic debilitating diseases. Some doctors have also used marijuana as an analgesic in certain conditions associated with severe or chronic pain.
The brand names of medical marijuana in the United States are Marinol y and Cesamet. These are synthetic forms of cannabis and classified in the medical literature as type C drugs according to the FDA. (The risk for the fetus cannot be ruled out. Either studies in animals have revealed adverse effects on the fetus or studies in animals and women are not available)
Patients who overdose on Marinol or Cesamet develop symptoms similar to marijuana-intoxicated individuals. Depending on the dose, these patients may have decreased motor coordination, altered mental status, hypotension, tachycardia and seizures.
2. SOCIAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL AND MEDICAL PROBLEMS
Marijuana use is associated with many social, medical and psychological problems. These problems are widely recognized in the literature but unfortunately ignored or denied by the proponents of the second amendment.
Among the major social complications associated with marijuana use are poor academic performance, premature withdrawals from school, illicit use of other drugs, interpersonal and family problems, unemployment and crime.
The smoke from marijuana contains carcinogens and cigarette smoke-like particles. Its use is also associated with respiratory diseases such as pharyngitis, bronchitis and exacerbation of chronic lung diseases such as asthma and cystic fibrosis.
Other studies indicate that smoking marijuana may increase the risk of cardiovascular problems. This risk is caused by increased levels of catecholamines and cardiac work associated with drug use. This is a concern in older people and patients with a variety of cardiovascular illnesses.
There is significant evidence in the literature that the use of marijuana causes psychosis. (Schizophrenia-like Problems). This appears to be the result of a neurochemical component called dopamine. Due to this complication, the drug is contraindicated in patients with schizophrenia.
In addition, because of potential drug interactions the public should be warned about the possibility of undesirable side effects, especially in patients with certain neurological, psychiatric, cardiovascular conditions or those under certain treatment regimens
We should also keep in mind that marijuana use is responsible for more than 400,000 visits to emergency departments in the United States due to psychosis and panic attacks.
3. AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES
Several studies have shown the dangers of driving under the influence of marijuana. An analysis of nine studies found that marijuana use is associated with an increased risk of traffic accidents and fatalities.
According to the investigators, the drug can cause a false perception of the sense of distance and drivers can follow vehicles too closely increasing the risk of automobile accidents. The findings of this study were published in the British Medical Journal.
A study by the University of Colorado recently revealed that fatalities due to marijuana use increased significantly after the commercial use of the drug was approved in that state in 2009.
The percentage of fatal accidents due to marijuana use increased from 4.5 percent in 1994 to 10% in 2011. The study also showed that fatalities in Colorado were much higher compared to states where commercial marijuana is not approved.
A more alarming study from Columbia University reported that the number of fatalities related to marijuana has recently tripled. In this study, researchers collected information on more than 25,000 drivers who died between 1999 and 2010 in six states: California, Hawaii, Illinois, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and West Virginia.
The study reported that the risk of a fatal accident to a driver under the influence of alcohol is 13 times higher compared to a sober driver. But if the driver was under the influence of alcohol and marijuana at the same time, the risk increased to 23 times higher compare to a sober driver.
4. WHAT HAPPENED IN COLORADO
The state of Colorado legalized the use of marijuana for medical use in 2009 and for recreational use in 2012. The changes that Colorado experienced in recent years are the best example of the negative effects of the law.
I will mention some of these changes:
* 26% increase in marijuana use in youth (ages 12 to 17 years)
* A survey of 100 Colorado school resources officers (SROs) revealed that the most common violation on campus is possession followed by being under the influence
* 32% increase in suspensions and expulsions from schools due to drug use.
* 48% of adults arrested in Colorado tested positive for marijuana.
* Most arrests for driving under the influence of drugs are related to marijuana use.
* Given the high taxation and cost, legalization of marihuana did not stop the black market. (Only 60 % of people who consume marihuana buy it through legal channels).
* Increase of 82% in the number of hospitalizations due to marijuana use.
* In 2013 up to 40 states received marijuana from Colorado, an increase of 397% compared to previous years.
* 18% increase in crimes against individuals and 8% increase in crimes against property.
It is noteworthy that the negative impact of consumption and the sale of marijuana in Colorado occurred massively despite the limitations provided by the law.
For detailed information on the impact of marijuana in Colorado, you can review the report of the “Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Area Trafficking” published on August 2, 2014.
Conclusions: If medical marijuana is available in the US why do we need to pass amendment number two?. Reports from Colorado and Washington State are conclusive. The sale of marijuana has a negative and harmful impact on the social, educational, medical and economic spheres.
The report of the “Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Area Trafficking” in Colorado should be an example for states that want to legalize the use of marijuana and a message to the proponents of the amendment number two.
Unfortunately, politicians like Charlie Crist ignore the facts, statistics and related damage to consumption and marketing of marijuana. No policy that ensures the safety of our citizens should encourage or support the use of drugs through constitutional amendments.
Amendment number two is a law against citizens, families and the state of Florida.
On November 4 vote in favor of FLORIDA and against amendment number two.
More information related to this topic can be found in this article published by the Heritage Foundation:


Jorge Alberto Villalón Y.

Otra perspectiva sobre el soborno.                                                                                           Una mirada excesivamente moralina suele aparecer cuando de sobornos se trata. Los que alzan la voz, las más de las veces con una enorme hipocresía, despotrican contra las prácticas corruptas e intentan explicar el fenómeno desde lo estrictamente ético.
Una reciente encuesta realizada entre hombres de negocios en un tradicional foro empresario, confirmó que poco menos de la mitad de los consultados manifestó que no sería censurable un acto de esta naturaleza.
Si bien el muestreo contempla matices en esa mitad de los entrevistados entre los que dicen que esa sería una situación aceptable solo en casos extremos y los que afirman que nunca sería un acto condenable, lo que preocupa finalmente no es esa porción, sino la elevada cuota de falsedad de la otra, esa que se espanta frente a esta realidad, ocultándose, negándolo y hasta repudiando conductas habituales propias en lo cotidiano.
La corrupción, en cualquiera de sus grados, tiene un origen concreto y su resolución no pasa ni por aterrarse, ni por negar su existencia.
Una de las claves del asunto tiene que ver con que la sociedad toda, frente a situaciones como estas, se coloca, con absoluta ausencia de autocrítica, en una posición repleta de incongruencias y cargada de prejuicios.
Son muchos los ciudadanos que defienden la vigencia de aquella creencia que dice que para que exista un cohecho se requieren dos actores, el que cobra y el que paga. Esa visión pretende, intencionadamente, quitarle responsabilidad al funcionario que solicita el pago de dinero a cambio de un favor. Lo plantean como si fuera una cuestión menor e intrascendente.
Con inusitada virulencia se inculpa con fuerza a quien está dispuesto a pagar a cambio de un beneficio irregularmente otorgado. Es solo en ese caso en el que se califica al protagonista como una persona corrupta. Para esa caricaturesca descripción, ese privado, ese particular es alguien que incita al ingenuo y desprevenido funcionario estatal a cometer un delito en el que no desearía incurrir, pero que dadas las circunstancias no tiene otra salida más que aceptar de mala gana y con culpa semejante despropósito.
Lo habitual es que este tipo de razonamientos surja de gente que reivindica, desde la derecha autoritaria a la izquierda socialista, el protagónico rol del Estado como contralor de la vida ciudadana, despreciando el papel de los individuos y el empresariado genuino en el desarrollo. Se trata de personas que atacan ideológicamente al capitalismo y descreen de sus bondades.
Es frecuente que quienes critican en los demás estas conductas sean los mismos que en su vida cotidiana, evaden impuestos, utilizan tecnología sin pagar licencias, fotocopian literatura y contratan servicios de personas sin registrarlas. Son los cultores de la doble moral de este tiempo.
La corrupción forma parte de la realidad y está presente de diversas formas en la vida terrenal. En el mundo empresario, como en todas las actividades, se puede encontrar a aquellos que disponen de un comportamiento ético, progresan asumiendo riesgos y compiten en el mercado ofreciendo talento.
Pero no menos cierto es que otra importante cantidad de personas viven a la luz de negocios espurios, de prebendas estatales, de privilegios otorgados desde las sombras del poder. Obviamente esos individuos obtienen sus ingresos gracias a la influencia circunstancial de empleados que trabajan para la sociedad desde el Estado y que con atribuciones desmedidas más una absoluta discrecionalidad, deciden los destinos de esos fondos.
Es peligroso generalizar, pero más hipócrita es hacerse el distraído y hacer creer a los demás que la corrupción incluye a unos pocos cuando la realidad muestra a diario exactamente lo contrario. En todo caso, la tarea consiste en entender lo que sucede y asumir las verdaderas implicancias de defender ciertas ideas. Un Estado grande en el que los funcionarios tienen atribuciones inmensas gracias a regulaciones impulsadas inocentemente por personas que creen en las benevolencia de sistemas intervencionistas, solo genera más corrupción y de eso también hay que hacerse cargo.
Cuando alguien "puede" pagar por un favor a un funcionario, es porque previamente alguien creó un texto legal que lo habilita. Nadie abona dinero extra por algo que no resulta necesario. Cuando el Estado exige requisitos, allí nacen los sobornos. Sin regulaciones, simplemente, eso no sería posible.
Son los votantes y sus ideas políticas, los que han generado esta dinámica interminable de múltiples controles e infinitas regulaciones. Son esas normas, esa excesiva burocracia estatal, la que multiplica los hechos de corrupción. Allí está la causa y no en la falsa moral que se pretende de los demás cuando en la vida propia se hace algo demasiado parecido.
No se resuelve nada con retórica y voluntarismo moral. El problema no es que la mitad de los empresarios reconozcan que están dispuestos a cometer cohecho, sino que la otra mitad no asuma que también lo hace. La solución pasa por comprender lo que ocurre, eliminar la inmoral burocracia, los excesos regulatorios y terminar con la cultura de pretender controlarlo todo.
Sin esa acción decidida todo seguirá igual y los políticos continuarán creando normativas, porque ellos sí saben como se consiguen recursos adicionales con esa modalidad. Por eso estimulan estas ideas, para poder crear reglas que les permitan utilizarlas para su provecho personal.
Para que un inconveniente no encuentre solución precisa de un diagnóstico equivocado. Si la evaluación de la situación es errónea, las chances concretas de resolverlas son nulas. Es por eso que no hay que cometer el infantil error de quedarse con la mirada simplista de observar las consecuencias de los hechos, sino en todo caso, si se está disconforme con el presente, comprender como funciona todo y actuar sobre las verdaderas causas que lo originan. Solo así se puede cambiar la historia. El resto es solo una versión más del cinismo contemporáneo.

Alberto Medina Méndez
albertomedinamendez@gmail.com

 “FREEDOM IS NOT FREE”
En mi opinión
No 783 “En mi opinión” Noviembre 3, 2014
“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño   EDITOR