Saturday, August 1, 2015

No 1013 "En mi opinion" Agosto 1, 2015

No 1013 “En mi opinión”  Agosto 1, 2015
“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R González Miño Editor
Lázaro R González para Alcalde del Condado de Miami

Shocking: You Won't Believe These New Allegations Against Hillary

·         Source: Daily Mail 
·         by: Laura Collins
Fears are growing among Hillary Clinton's advisors that Bill's sordid past is returning to thwart his wife's presidential campaign.

With her presidential bid the couple's relationship is the subject of renewed scrutiny bringing with it the threat of a second 'eruption of bimbos' akin to the one that almost derailed Bill's own presidential bid first time round.

In recent weeks Hillary's campaign has found itself increasingly mired in the scandals of the past.

Paula Jones, whose sexual harassment case almost cost Bill the presidency 21 years ago, has already come forward to deliver her verdict on Hillary's bid for the highest office.  
Source: Daily Mail
- See more at:

Alexis de Tocqueville Predicted the Tyranny of the Majority in Our Modern World

Alexis de Tocqueville foresaw many of our current problems.
Arthur Milikh is assistant director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics at The Heritage Foundation.
We often boast about having attained some unimaginable redefinition of ourselves and our nation. How odd, then, that someone born 210 years ago today could understand us with more clarity and depth than we understand ourselves.
Back in 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville accurately foresaw both much of what ails us and our remarkable uniqueness and strengths. Tocqueville’s deservedly famous book, “Democracy in America,” was the product of his nine-month excursion throughout Jacksonian America. The purpose of this trip was to study our country’s political institution and the habits of mind of its citizens.
America’s Place in the World
Tocqueville correctly thought the then-developing America was the way of the future. As such, he foresaw that Europe would never be restored to its former greatness—though he hoped it could serve as the cultural repository of the West.
The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.  We’ll respect your inbox and keep you informed.
Sign Up
He also predicted Russian despotism, thinking that Russia was not yet morally exhausted like Europe and would bring about a new, massive tyranny. In fact, he conjectured that America and Russia would each “hold the destinies of half the world in its hands one day.”
The majority’s moral power makes individuals internally ashamed to contradict it, which in effect silences them, and this silencing culminates in a cessation of thinking.
He therefore hoped America would serve as an example to the world—a successful combination of equality and liberty. And an example of this was needed, since equality can go along with freedom, but it can even more easily go along with despotism. In fact, much of the world did go in the direction of democratic despotism—wherein the great mass of citizens is indeed equal, save for a ruling elite, which governs them. In a strange sense, Tocqueville would think that North Korea is egalitarian.
Despite his hopes for America, Tocqueville thought grave obstacles would diminish our freedom—though he didn’t think them insurmountable.
The Power of the Majority
Most alarming to him was the power of the majority, which he thought would distort every sphere of human life.
Despots of the past tyrannized through blood and iron. But the new breed of democratic despotism “does not proceed in this way; it leaves the body and goes straight for the soul.”
That is, the majority reaches into citizens’ minds and hearts. It breaks citizens’ will to resist, to question its authority, and to think for themselves. The majority’s moral power makes individuals internally ashamed to contradict it, which in effect silences them, and this silencing culminates in a cessation of thinking. We see this happen almost daily: to stand against the majority is to ruin yourself.
Moreover, Tocqueville feared that the majority’s tastes and opinions would occupy every sphere of sentiment and thought. One among many illuminating examples is his commentary on democratic art. He foresaw that the majority would have no taste for portraying great human beings doing great deeds. Art used to be the pictorial representation of man’s connection to the natural or divine order to which he belongs. But in modern democracies, art would go in the direction of the majority’s tastes: it would be abstract, focused on color and shape.
Why? Because to experience this kind of art, one needs to only have senses, whereas to experience the art of the past, one needs an education in the classics—the Bible and ancient literature especially. It’s easy to pontificate about Jackson Pollock, while it’s difficult to understand Michelangelo. But most revealing is that abstract art is an expression of democracy’s hatred for human greatness, the very theme of art.
Tocqueville’s Predictions About the Modern State
The influence on the mind of democracy and the majority weakens and isolates individuals. This creates fertile ground for a new kind of oppression that “will resemble nothing that has preceded it in the world.”
Tocqueville foresaw an “immense tutelary power”—the modern state—which would degrade men rather than destroy their bodies. Over time, he feared, the state would take away citizens’ free will, their capacity to think and act, reducing them to “a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd.” Are contemporary China and Russia substantially different?
But Tocqueville did prescribe some solutions. He hoped that those having read his prescient book would come to understand that the defects of modern democracy require great attention and careful management. Specifically, he hoped, we would strive “to preserve for the individual the little independence, force, and originality” that remains to him.
In other words, when looking at any given policy, our lawmakers might look not at the benefits for their home district, or vainly calculate attention from the next media hit, but rather look at what any given policy proposal’s long-term effect will be on securing freedom and rights. Making individuals stronger, more independent, more able to resist the tyranny of the majority and of a constantly growing administrative state is the goal.
Tocqueville’s critiques are given in the spirit of friendship. He wanted us to “remember constantly that a nation cannot long remain strong when each man in it is individually weak, and that neither social forms nor political schemes have yet been found that can make a people energetic by composing it of pusillanimous and soft citizens.”
On the 210th anniversary of Tocqueville’s birth, asking contemporary Americans to pick up “Democracy in America” is perhaps too great a request. Nonetheless, we may at the least recall his clarity of vision and take seriously that America requires statesmanship and intelligent guidance to fight off the natural propensities that diminish our freedom.
Correction: This article originally stated that Tocqueville was born 225 years ago.

California....Home of the...

"Interesting that the LA Times did this.  Lou Dobbs reported this on CNN and it cost him his job.  The only network we would see this on would be FOX.  All the others are staying away from it.  Whether you are a Democrat or Republican this should be of great interest to you!

Just One State - be sure and read the last part...try for 3 times.

This is only one State....If this doesn't open eyes, nothing will!

From the L. A. Times.

1. 40% of all workers in L.  A.  County (L..  A. County has 10.2 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes.  This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants working without a green card.
(Donald Trump was right)

2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.

3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.

4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.

5. Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.

6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.

7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.

8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.

9.  21 radio stations in L. A. are Spanish speaking.

10.  in L.A.  County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish.  (There are 10.2 million people in L.  A. County.)

(All 10 of the above facts were published in the Los Angeles Times)

Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare. Over 70% of the United States 'annual population growth (and over 90% of California, Florida, and New York) results from immigration. 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.

We are fools for letting this continue.


Send copies of this letter to at least two other people.  100 would be even better.

This is only one State...If this doesn't open your eyes nothing will, and you wonder why Nancy Pelosi wants them to become voters!


Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you.  Nancy Pelosi wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income.  In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement.  This woman is a nut case!  You aren't going to believe this.

Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds!

Alas, it is true -- all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities!

This woman is frightening. She quotes...' We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this?), and in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest.  (I am not rich, are you?)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:

'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities.  For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities.  Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans''.

(Read that quote again and again and let it sink in.) 'Lower your retirement; give it to others who have not worked as you have for it.' Send it on to your friends.  I just did!  This woman is out of her mind!!!!!


Cover Oregon Scandal Illustrates the Arrogance and Audacity of Failed Big Government

Dean Chambers | 
No Obamacare
WCHS - Charleston, WV
·         Share on Facebook44
Liberal Democrats had the audacity to believe that something as complex as providing health care to millions of citizens could be more effectively administered by government bureaucrats who had no experience or training in administration of this sector of the economy, than by the experienced and trained experts who managed the provision of health care in the private sector.
In Oregon, Governor John Kitzhaber and his administration were confident the state would lead the way, setting the example for many others, in how it would set up its state Obamacare exchange and administer the signs-up for the program. After spending more than $300 million setting up the state’s health care exchange, not a single citizen of the state signed up for Obamacare via the website before it was closed down. The Cover Oregon failure was such a political liability, for a governor in a heated battle for reelection in 2014, that Kitzhaber appointed his chief political advisor and campaign consultant, Patricia McCaig, to lead and carry out the closing of the site to protect the governor’s campaign for reelection.
In the process, they came up with the brilliant idea to deflect attention from their own glaring incompetent and rotten corruption and squandering of about $300 million in Cover Oregon by blaming the whole fiasco on Oracle, the information technology firm they brought to try to fix the doomed health care exchange website. They not only blamed Oracle for their failure to make Cover Oregon work, they filed a lawsuit against the company claiming they were responsible for the failure. Kitzhaber and McCaig not only presided over the failed Cover Oregon, but they further compounded the mess by suing Oracle.
While the lawsuit against Oracle is wasting time and resources in the court system in Oregon, there are still many unanswered questions about how and why Cover Oregon failed to sign up a single citizen to Obamacare, and where all that money was spent. Taxpayers were taken for $300 million and no one appears to know where all that money went.
Furthermore, as Gov. Kitzhaber got himself into trouble from other scandals as well as this one, he took the path of least resistance earlier this year and resigned his office. Clearly this whole mess needs to be thoroughly investigated, and it looks like the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Utah Congressman Jason Chaffetz, is going to step up and conduct just such an investigation of what happened and where the money went in the Cover Oregon fiasco.
The failure of the Maryland Health Connection state Obamacare exchange has lead to a out-of-court settlement with the company contracted to create it, Noridian Healthcare Solutions. The Washington Post reported about this last week. In the settlement announced earlier this month by Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, Noridian will pay $20 million upfront and another $25 million over five years in annual installments of $5 million. The money will be split between the state of Maryland and the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Exactly how much of the settlement funds goes to the state of Maryland appears to have not been disclosed.
Maryland was among the 14 states that established their own state healthcare exchanges under the Obamacare program. The Maryland state exchange failed just minutes after it opened on October 1, 2013, despite Noridian’s $193 million contract to bulid and implement the exchange in that state. The settlement still needs regulatory approval before it is finalized.
The Cover Oregon website never worked, and didn’t sign up a single state citizen for Obamacare. Those who were able to sign up had to fill out and file paper applications for Obamacare. Those who did sign up for Obamacare, if they were not eligible for full government subsidies for their health care, signed up for plans that offered sub-par coverage combined with excessively high premiums and shockingly gigantic deductibles. When the stores of Obamacare health care policies with $5000 and higher deductibles came out, it was clear that Obamacare was a joke. Clearly such a poor designed plan seemed like it was either massively incompetently conceived or it was deliberately designed to fail. It clearly was anything but evidence that Big Government and liberal bureaucrats could administer such an important sector of the economy, such as health care, more efficiently and effectively than it was administered prior to Obamacare by the health care system we had in place.
As Cover Oregon failed quite disastrously and miserably, other state exchanges failed and the entire Obamacare system is proving unworkable. There is increasing talk about how the so-called health care reform signed by President Barack Obama is soon going to descend into a “death spiral” that collapse Obamacare into a black hole of epic failure. To succeed, economically, and bring in enough revenue to pay for those who qualify for subsidies (which is needed if Obamacare is going to cover any significant percentage of those who lacked health care insurance), it would have to sign up enough paying customers enrolling in those ridiculous plans with the sky-high deductibles. Since more who signed up for the program were those eligible subsidies, and not the ones who would be paying out of pocket, the whole system teeters on collapsing because the individual mandate is not succeeding in forcing millions to sign up and pay for Obamacare at the exchanges. The whole Obamacare system might yet go the way of Cover Oregon.
The entire Cover Oregon mess shows that liberal Democrat politicians had the audacity to think that government could manage such a large sector of economy and provision of health care better than could the private sector. And when it failed, it illustrated the arrogance of liberal politicians, such as Gov. John Kitzhaber, who believed he could cover up the epic failure of the state Obamacare exchange by put a political appointee in charge of closing it down in time to save his reelection as governor of Oregon. Conservatives warned that government would not manage health care better than the private sector, and that enacting Obamacare would only make the health care system worse. The failure of Cover Oregon only proved this to be more true than any critics of Obamacare ever expected. It also proved, once again, that liberal Big Government is not the solution to our problems.
That warning was given quite clearly in 2010 as Congress debated over enacting Obamacare. But the liberal Democrat majorities ignored the warning, as did the president, and Obamacare was passed by narrow, partisan majorities in both houses of Congress, not receiving a single Republican vote on final passage. Cover Oregon, and Obamacare, are a prime example of the corruption, failure and incompetence in public policy that we were when Democrats alone, governing in one-party fashion and refusing to work with and compromise with Republicans, decides public policy. The arrogance displayed here should be enough alone for voters to be extremely hesitant to ever trust liberal Democrats to “reform” health care every again.
Dean Chambers, inspired by the ideas of freedom and the principles of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, is an independent journalist, founding and editing two independent newspapers while in college.




Secret Deal Between Turkey And U.S. Will Sell Out The Kurds

...details of a deal between the Obama administration and the...
Last week, Western Journalism reported that Islamic State had succeeded in drawing Turkey into the Syrian war after a suicide attack by a Turkish terrorist affiliated with ISIS killed 32 young Kurds in the border town of Suruc in Turkey.


Turkey responded to the attack by launching airstrikes on ISIS positions in Syria. This happened a day after a telephone conversation between President Obama and Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan in which the latter agreed, for the first time, to allow the US-led coalition against ISIS to use a Turkish air force base for strikes against Islamic State.
Shortly after Turkey entered the battle against Islamic State, it became clear that the government in Ankara had another reason to interfere in Syria and Iraq. Turkish airplanes attacked Kurdish positions in northern Iraq, and the Syrian Kurdish militia YPG reported on Monday that Turkey had shelled their positions in the border area.
Turkish media revealed at the same time details of a deal between the Obama administration and the AKP-dominated government in Ankara and reported a conflicting narrative of why Turkey intervened in Syria and Iraq.


A Syrian journalist reported that US administration officials contacted the Turkish government last month after the Turkish army amassed forces along the Syrian border. This happened after the Kurdish YPG militia conquered vast territories in northeast Syria and seized the strategic border town Tal Abyad in Syria.
Erdogan and Turkish Prime Minister Davutoglu vehemently oppose the establishment of a Kurdish autonomous area or an independent Kurdish state along the Turkish border because they fear it will lead to increasing separatism among its own six million-strong Kurdish minority.
The Turks told Administration officials that they had drawn a red line from Aleppo to Kobani and that they would not allow more Kurdish advances along the border. The Americans were receptive to this message and saw an opportunity to finally enlist Turkey as a member of the anti-ISIS coalition. Negotiations started; and after a month, a deal was reportedly closed.
The US Air Force could use the Incirlik air force base in Turkey but had to allow Turkish oversight of the targets it would strike in Syria and Iraq from Incirlik. This means that strikes that would help the YPG seize more territory along the Turkish border would be vetoed, according to the Turkish outlet Today’s Zaman.
In return, the U.S. would cooperate with Turkey to establish a so-called ISIS free buffer zone in the north of Syria. Officially, the Turkish government says that it wants this buffer zone to keep ISIS away from its border and to relocate the one and a half million Syrian refugees in Turkey. The Syrian Kurds, however, think that Erdogan and Davutlogu want to drive a wedge between the three Kurdish cantons in Syria–and by doing so want to prevent the establishment of a Kurdish autonomous area in Syria, Reuters reported.
The U.S. administration denies that it is collaborating with Turkey to create a buffer zone based on the Turkish model, Bloomberg reported.
“We’re not out there staking out zones and doing some things that I know have been discussed in years past — no-fly zones, safe zones. What we’re trying to do is clear ISIL,” a senior administration official said. “I think it’s important not to confuse that with staking out these zones that you can identify with road signs and on big maps, and that’s just not what’s happening.”
“On Monday, a White House official told an audience in a closed-door meeting at the Middle East Institute in Washington the same thing about there being no safe zone inside Syria, according to two people who were inside the meeting. The Obama administration is sending a delegation back to Turkey next week to work on exactly what the new cooperation along the northern Syria border will look like, the official said,” according to Bloomberg.
The Turkish government, however, insists that a buffer zone will be created; so it’s hard to see how the U.S. Administration will prevent Turkey from doing so. Besides, the Obama official Bloomberg quoted said the U.S. is “trying to clear ISIL”; so in the end, the territory will be free of ISIS if everything goes well.
There is more.
Some Turkish media and the outlawed Kurdish Workers Party PKK say that Turkish intelligence and security forces might have been complicit in the Suruc suicide attack. They point to the fact that shortly before the blast, PKK activists were banned from entering the building where the attack took place while the terrorist got through security control.
This might sound far-fetched; but this past weekend, the British paper The Guardian delivered new evidence that the Turkish government has given support to Islamic State in an attempt to overthrow the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.
An anonymous Western official told The Guardian that when US Special Forces raided the compound of ISIS commandant Abu Sayyaf in Syria in May, they found proof of an oil trade between ISIS and Turkey worth tens of millions of dollars per year.
“There are hundreds of flash drives and documents that were seized there. They are being analyzed at the moment, but the links are so clear that they could end up having profound implications for the relationship between us and Ankara,” the Western official Told the Guardian.
As Western Journalism reported last week, the Turkish Intelligence Service MIT has been delivering weapons and ammunition to Islamic State as well.
The Turkish government has clearly used Islamic State to get rid of the Assad regime but has apparently come to the conclusion that direct intervention in Syria has become necessary because of Kurdish national aspirations and because of the overall situation in the country. It has become clear that Syria as we know it has ceased to exist, and Erdogan wants to be in the position to determine the future of the areas that border Turkey. So the Turkish government has clear goals and acts accordingly.
The same cannot be said of the U.S. administration, thinks military affairs analyst Jennifer Dyer.
She wrote that the U.S. military does not understand the new partnership with Turkey because there are no territorial or operational objectives–and there are no clear directives on the use of military power. She recalled how another U.S. operation to improve the situation in Syria without clear objectives became a huge failure. Dyer was referring to the training of a new local ground force that was supposed to turn the tide in the never-ending war. Nine months after the announcement of this plan, only sixty fighters have been recruited and trained. Basically, the U.S. is in this partnership for the convenience of Turkey, she concluded.
Some analysts say that there is another conclusion that can be drawn. By entering into a partnership with Turkey at a time when Kurdish forces were the only ones who succeeded in driving Islamic State out of territories in Iraq and Syria, the Obama administration seems to be selling out the Kurds.


M. Aleman

Miren bien a lomejor esta su casa en esta lista.
Ya vi y la mia no esta.
Estos dos hermanos rompieron el "hijaputometro", el pueblo cubano no ha podido levantarse y quitarse esta "claque" del lomo. Cuantas oraciones van por el termino de esta dictadura ???? Solo Dios y la Virgen lo saben. Tal vez podamos ir a Cuba y verla libre de estos ipos, si el Señor lo permite !!!OJALA...
   Ni siquiera el sanguinario Stalin necesitó tantas mansiones
para hacer gala de su hegemonía.
Analisis de un Robo Total..Las casas de Fidel...docenas de mansiones y fincas...para su uso personal y para su familia y sus invitados...increíble...
P.S. En definitiva son más de 5 décadas de la peor de las dictaduras conocidas. 
Además de ésto son dueños de la isla, ¿No?

Why Social Justice is a Contradictionby Terry Applegate

Speaking on the occasion of the creation of the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument in California recently, President Obama declared it to be “an issue of social justice.” Well, this was certainly giving a new stretch to an old term. In what way could the creation of a National Monument be considered to be an act of social justice? It certainly could not be just to the owners of the properties there who will no longer be able to use their property as they saw fit. For them, it will be an act of injustice, a taking of their previous right to property and the free enjoyment of it. For these people, an act of injustice has occurred. So, how can “social justice” trump “individual justice”? Or, is that not even possible?
The ‘social’ in “social justice” implies a group of people, not merely an individual. Hence, social justice means justice for a group, not for a person. But can there be justice for a group that doesn’t create injustice for individuals? Probably not. Here’s why; justice is defined as someone receiving their just deserts, punishment for criminal actions, rewards for virtuous deeds. This is hard enough to achieve on an individual level.
But, on a group level, social justice becomes impossible. Has everyone in the group been equally culpable or, worthy? Not likely. Is everyone not in the group equally guilty or not? Of course not. Hence, by its very nature, every act of ‘social justice’ MUST result in injustices for certain persons. Consequently, since socially just acts are, in their very nature, unjust, there is, in reality, no such thing as social justice.
Most people visualize justice as being blind. Think of Lady Justice holding a sword in one hand and scales in the other. She is often depicted blindfolded so as not to be prejudiced by “who” someone is, so she can judge justly according only to ones deeds and not according to one’s position, status or any other attribute. But, since social justice implies justice for a group it automatically means removing the blinds from Lady Justice. Now, she must see if one belongs to the defined group or not. Depending on “who” she sees, not what that person has or has not done, justice is then meted out. Social justice thus cannot result in blind justice which we inherently think is fair.
We see the fallacious concept of social justice used all the time to create classes of people based on race, gender even grouping people by whether or not they have committed specific unmentionable sexual deeds. If you are in the created class you receive special treatment or remuneration based on some perceived wrong that has been ‘committed’ against the class. The excluded class (the rest of us) must pay the price of justice to the victimized class. This might entail paying monies to right the wrong or, the granting of privileges such as preferential hiring for jobs, preferential entry for university admissions, preferential judicial privileges for suing others, etc. None of these advantages are available to the rest of society outside of the class. By not treating individuals as individuals but by placing them in assigned classes and treating the classes equally rather than the individuals equally there are necessary gross injustices created in both punishing the innocent and rewarding the guilty.
This forcing one class of people to pay the price for a perceived wrong done to another class then is prima facie unjust. Every member of the protected class has not been harmed. In many cases classes are formed based on supposed damages to the classes’ ancestors. This results in extending the past injustices into the future as innocents are made to pay the price for crimes committed by others even before the blameless people who are ‘righting’ the wrong were even born! This is flagrantly unjust.
Why then do terms like social justice gain wide credence and get used to justify inherently unjust actions? There probably are two main reasons why this happens. First, our governors don’t have the patience to do true justice even though that is their job. Were they to pass righteous judgment on each and every act it would be too messy and time-consuming for ambitious officials intent on improving the world. It is much quicker to advocate for social justice and be done with it in one fell swoop.
Second, our political crusaders want to accomplish social goals that would never pass muster with the citizenry openly, so they must cloak their sinister programs under the guise of social justice or other grand-sounding schemes in order to re-distribute resources and privileges to their chosen and favorite clients.
When it comes to justice, the consequence of thinking ‘socially’ rather than ‘individually’ results in spreading guilt to everyone rather than just the perpetuators of the wrong. Hence all now suffocate under a shadowy cloud of collective guilt and are cowered into not saying anything with a ring of a moral tone to it because no one is worthy to make a judgment – all are as guilty as whoever would be condemned. This is what we now call ‘tolerance’ (except for Christians). Christians are not tolerated because they refuse to think ‘socially’ and are adamant that people be treated as individuals and not collectively. Christianity holds open the door of redemption for individuals. Christ does not save a group, he saves one person at a time. An individual can repent, be saved, take on the mind of Christ and be cleaned up. But there is no system for collective redemption. The collective on-going guilt of those buying into ‘social justice’ results in a never ending gloominess of heart that cannot be assuaged.
By spreading the guilt and responsibility to everybody, the truth of mans’ sinfulness is acknowledged, the fact of a moral universe is affirmed, but the possibility of Christian salvation is denied. A virtual hell on earth is created, the perfect playground for our self-anointed elite to be offering up a never ending menu of potential fixes for what ails us but which can never be cured.

.¡¡¡En los últimos tiempos mi vida se complica !!!.

M. Aleman

La ansiedad es incompatible con la construcción.                                 El mundo se ha vuelto muy vertiginoso. La velocidad pretende ser un valor y la eficiencia fugaz se ha convertido en el paradigma del éxito y el fracaso.

La política no es la excepción a la regla y abundan movimientos partidarios que brotan y aspiran a subirse a esa ola. Pero no menos cierto es que esos mismos espacios políticos que han nacido como aluvión y crecido velozmente, tienen demasiado de circunstancial y de efímero. Así como aparecen con gran rapidez, también se desploman a idéntico ritmo. Nada bueno puede venir de la mano de hazañas meramente espasmódicas.

Ciertos sucesos casuales pueden ser funcionales a la aparición de un contexto extraordinario, diferente, que genere gran expectativa dadas sus singulares características. Pero nada es mágico en esta vida. El solo hecho de creer en esa fantasía es una muestra de una dudosa inteligencia.

Las construcciones llevan tiempo, esfuerzo y sacrificio. No se puede crear algo serio en tan breve lapso. Y en política mucho menos. Se debe trabajar duro, cultivar relaciones sólidas, articular ámbitos genuinos de discusión, intercambio y consenso. Pero también son esenciales los liderazgos criteriosos para lograr que lo que emerge se constituya en algo respetable.

Lo auténticamente bueno, lo que realmente vale la pena, es siempre el fruto de una larga serie de aciertos y también de desatinos, pero sobre todo, de esos cimientos sólidos que se han edificado a lo largo del tiempo, gracias a la voluntad de aquellos que creen férreamente en esa posibilidad que permite soñar, bajo la condición de tener los pies sobre la tierra.

El ilusionismo en política jamás sobrevive. Las campañas proselitistas profesionales, las brillantes estrategias de marketing especialmente diseñadas, los candidatos que, desde fuera del sistema aterrizan en la actividad partidaria, son solo recursos, ardides, que pueden funcionar en el corto plazo, pero que no garantizan nada suficientemente sustentable.

Los atajos son trucos que sirven para acortar camino, pero hacer política no es solo lograr eventuales triunfos, ni colarse por un resquicio. Eso puede ayudar pero nunca dejará de ser un simple hito en el complejo y prolongado sendero que conduce hacia la realización de grandes propósitos.

Por eso, cuando se observa el escenario político actual, y se percibe con tanta claridad la desmesurada ambición de ciertos personajes por alcanzar el poder a cualquier precio, no se puede menos que anticipar que esos intentos culminarán sin pena ni gloria. Lo grave no es el final de esas instancias, la mayoría de las veces, absolutamente predecibles, sino el desperdicio de energías y el derroche de ilusiones que ello implica.

Sumarse eternamente a nuevos proyectos es una gimnasia demoledora, que desgasta, corroe la confianza y destruye a quienes deciden hacerlo. En la política, como en casi cualquier ámbito de la vida, se trata de construir de a poco, con paciencia, consolidando paso a paso, tropezando a veces, pero asimilando el resbalón, para capitalizarlo y avanzar nuevamente desde allí.

Para eso resulta imprescindible disponer de perseverancia para evolucionar, humildad para comprender el recorrido y capacidad para rodearse de los mejores. La idea no es transitar un desenfrenado derrotero, repleto de angustias y premuras, sino más bien dedicarse a colocar ladrillo sobre ladrillo, con la serenidad que ese trámite requiere para no empezar de nuevo a cada instante.

Quienes pretenden modificar el curso de los acontecimientos deben entender el sistema y su detallado funcionamiento. Si ya lo han descubierto, pues entonces habrán entendido que esto no es para improvisados seriales y mucho menos para ansiosos crónicos.

Los que están en el juego desde hace mucho saben muy bien como sacarse de encima a los arribistas de siempre. Es cuestión de tener la templanza suficiente. Entienden que todo lo que escala rápido, desciende con similar prontitud. Solo se trata de esperar, porque lo que germina repentinamente, con personalismos y mezquindad, no tiene chance alguna de perdurar.

Si realmente se desea cambiar el rumbo, deberán primero comprender que esta no es una carrera rápida, sino una maratón, una verdadera prueba de resistencia. En esa disciplina se deben manejar los tiempos con talento, dosificar los ritmos con creatividad, guardar el aire, apurar el paso cuando sea necesario, pero también registrar que la meta está bastante más lejos de lo que parece y que apresurarse es sinónimo de frustración asegurada.

Es una pena que ciertos líderes que llegaron a la política no lo hayan comprendido en su momento. No solo ellos perdieron la ocasión de pasar a la historia al darle prioridad a sus urgencias personales. También arrastraron a muchos ingenuos ciudadanos que se montaron a esos espejismos, y cuando todo se derrumbó, no solo fueron derrotados, sino que en ese trayecto quedaron atrás buena parte de sus esperanzas, repercutiendo además directamente en cualquier futura oportunidad.

Lamentablemente, el presente reedita esta cuestión y la coloca en el centro de la escena. Muy pronto se habrá despilfarrado otra chance concreta de transformar el presente. Como tantas otras veces, se privilegiaron los intereses del corto plazo y el tren pasará de largo inexorablemente.

Parece difícil imaginarse un profundo aprendizaje de este nuevo capítulo. Más bien paree que no faltará quien vuelva a responsabilizar a los "malos de la película" por los errores propios, sin hacer la autocrítica indispensable. Nada distinto ocurrirá hasta que no se comprenda acabadamente que en política también, la ansiedad es incompatible con la construcción.

Alberto Medina Méndez


Donald Trump Isn’t Preparing For The Debate

As the frontrunner in national polls, Donald Trump will likely get the center podium in next week’s debate.
But while other Republicans running for president are studying briefing books and rehearsing one-liners ahead of the televised showdown, Trump is taking a different route, according to people who know him.
“He is unscripted,” longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone told The Daily Caller. “Un-coached. Un-handled. And no one puts words in his mouth.”
Trump’s team is emphasizing his lack of debate preparation — at least in the traditional sense — to bolster the campaign’s argument that he is not a politician.
“Doesn’t the fact that he’s at the British Women’s Open tell you something?” said somebody with knowledge of the Trump campaign operation, referencing the candidate’s jaunt to Scotland this week.
“Right now, Jeb Bush is in some Holiday Inn suite eating sucky club sandwiches, there’s some stand in, someone playing Trump, somebody playing Scott Walker, somebody playing Ted Cruz…”
“Trump’s not doing any of that,” the person added. “Trump already knows what he’s saying. He knows his own mind.”
A big question heading into the Wednesday debate in Cleveland is who will be on the receiving side of Trump’s attacks.
“I don’t think he’s going in with a strategy of ‘I have to attack this guy or I have to attack,’” the person said. “I think he’s going to go in and lay out his vision. Say what he thinks.”
“But if you’ve read his books, you’ve seen his speeches, he has a very clear maxim,” the person added. “If you attack Trump, you’re going to get counter-attacked at twice the velocity.”
Asked if Trump intends to push a specific message in the debate, the source uttered a familiar phrase. “Yes. ‘Let’s make America great again.’”

What Causes Border Surge Is Not What Obama Says

·         Source: The Daily Caller 
·         by: Timothy Meads
The Government Accountability Office stated Wednesday that confusing policy statements from the Obama administration were largely responsible for the surge of illegal immigrant minors last summer.
Seventy thousand unaccompanied children poured through the southern border in 2014. On top of those numbers, 60,000 additional children came into the country accompanied by their parents, according to the GAO.
The Obama administration previously claimed dangerous economies ravaged by drug cartels were responsible for the surge.
“Agency officials noted that a variety of factors likely caused the recent rapid increase in [unaccompanied minor children] migration, including the increased presence of coyotes, perceptions concerning U.S. immigration law, and recent improvements in the U.S. economy,” according to the report. “In addition, agency officials noted that some pervasive problems have recently intensified in some places, including rising levels of violence and insecurity and worsening economic and social conditions.”  Source: 
The Daily Caller

Lázaro R González para Alcalde del Condado de  Miami Elecciones de Noviembre 8 del 2016.  Use la boleta en blanco.
No aceptamos contribuciones monetarias. Necesitamos que se lo informe a todos los familiares, vecinos, amigos, compañeros de trabajo y a todos.

En mi opinión