Toyota Prius, COEXIST, & Hillary-Supporter Follies

Toyota Prius, COEXIST, & Hillary-Supporter  Follies
By: Michael D. Tobin Sep. 16, 2016

For audio broadcast select: http://www.spreaker.com/user/mxpw/toyota-prius-coexist-hillary-supporter-f

Video

According to Dictionary.com, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/follies , one of the six definitions of folly is defined as, the state or quality of being foolish; lack of understanding or sense.

King Solomon wrote: Proverbs 19:3 A person’s own folly leads to their ruin, yet their heart rages against the Lord. 

Just take a look at this picture, and you have to wonder in bewilderment as to just what is wrong with certain people, old and young alike, in this case turns out to be a male senior driver, who I actually saw get out of this harmless-looking disaster of a carbon footprint at a popular fitness center. Like a gumshoe I waited for my opportunity to snap a pic of the bumper with no prying eyes to wonder what this character is doing photoing someones car. 

Notice the stickers begin with Christ, and ends with hell, I mean Kaine, Hillary's V.P. choice. Does this supporter know something we don't know? You know Hillary is a hell-raiser. But you probably don't know Hillary and Trump, the other opposition front-runner, are actually related all the way back to the old European blue-blood days. I actually wrote extensively about that relation here: "Donald Trump & Hillary Clinton Royal Presidential Bloodline Cousins?" By: Michael D. Tobin March 6, 2016 https://michaeldtobin.blogspot.com/2016/03/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-royal.html

Is the driver or owner of this car really a Hillary supporter, though? Maybe the irony of Christ in the beginning, so-called coexistence in the middle, symbolizing one-world religion, government, and monetary is man's goal from earliest history, and finally will end in hell and the lake of fire for Satan and friends. Maybe this guy just stumbled by happenstance on this far fetched display. Who knows. But when you study western civilization and politics, something even more troubling than the interesting facts that one family have always run the worlds governments and it's inhabitants for quite a few centuries, you'll find that along with evil satanic stories withing the bloodlines, cruel and inhumane rule and every type of geographical domination imaginable to every historical period until now, there has been this competitive nature within these families where eccentricity often is the only thing these families really care about. So that is the reason for my pondering as to why would Hillary choose a V.P. choice the the name Kaine, when it is synonymous with hell? I say it's because she is evil and she knows it and she loves it. 

So onward with yet more troubling aspects of citizens who vote for certain candidates whose track records absolutely contradict what these voters seemingly advocate. They pretend that their motivated by the sentiment of, "can't we just all get along?" But in reality these supporters are one, two, or all of three things: defiant, deceived, or they just don't care anyways.

Where am I going with this you may be wondering? I'll summarize and then you may go about your business. And don't forget to vote. (BTW, I've already considered independent candidates and like everyone else, we seem to all mesh together as if it is science and chemistry of a certain amalgam only has one thing possible instead of us having our own free will. Kind of like Silly Putty or a Slinky expands and comes back every time. We'll do the same thing as we're supposed to do and see only two candidates and believe all others are hopeless, and we'll vote for one of only two.

So in summary: Why did I refer to the Toyota Prius as a harmless-looking disaster of a carbon footprint? Because the batteries require many times more of earths and our atmosphere's destruction to create, thus a carbon footprint, than any of our atmosphere and earth will be saved by driving the vehicle during the lifetime of the vehicle. There is no way the gas savings, quietness of the vehicle, and lack of emissions will make up for what it takes to create that one battery that helps power the vehicle. But the driver either doesn't care, or they have been deceived to believe they are doing Mother Earth a favor.

Just the same as these voters are easily deceived or convinced that they can fool many people, but not all the people into thinking that they really do want to coexist, yet really, they are not of a coexistent desire, they will still vote for someone who is known to take from those who work, and give to those who won't, simply for a vote. These voters claim they desire coexistence, yet they vote for candidates who legislate the unborn to death by abortion, denying that life of ever hoping to be a part of the so-called coexistence they tout. These supporters claim they are for compassion toward those who can't fend for themselves and or participate in society through work and career due to physical inabilities or health reasons, yet the facts show their motives go far beyond helping those who can't, and in turn have created a whole society of supporters who are rewarded for willful ignorance and laziness, in exchange for their votes. No longer can we be as assured as before, that anyone from customer service, construction, food distribution, schools and teachers all the way up to our elected and appointed officials even know what they are talking about or are supposed to know as a skill.

Finally, the folly of it all is that the United States, the last developed nation in the world now who's freedoms haven't been obliterated,  is still the greatest nation only because this whole distribution of wealth, communistic, anarchistic, rebellious attitude has been legislated through our U.S. Constitution, well enough to barely last roughly two and a half centuries, and literally is very near the point of being able to withstand it's defiance of and lack of adherence to, of it's survival. And these voters and supporters of our recent political choices back to a hundred+ years ago which led to President Roosevelt's "The New Deal." The New Deal morphed from helping the devastated into a literal entitlement, and the type of thinking involved in it's creation led to environmental aspects of our government granting un-elected officials to regulate and seize private land and property at the organizations whim, such as The Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Services, Environmental Agency, etc..., and onward to the new Homeland Security who can now arrest and detain an d even kill a U.S. citizen without Due Process which the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, all is made null and void at the whim of un-elected officials instead of Congress. 

Worse yet is soon, depending on who you vote for, we will or we will not be able to defend ourselves effectively in our own homes that the Second Amendment allows us to, depending on where you live, but the inability to legally do so will soon disappear throughout the country, depending on who you vote for. that's worse than folly. How about the First Amendment? We can barely THINK freely, let alone SPEAK freely, unless you're not a Christian of course. Watch out when you buy a bunch of flashlights and batteries at Home Depot. Watch out if you buy over seven day's worth of food and supplies if the weather is peachy. Or watch out if you are opposed to abortion. Or watch out if you don't trust our government. Or watch out if you don't kick all males out of the salon so a Muslim woman can remove her hijab. (Liberals reading or listening to this: I have many Muslim friends and I will defend them in a heartbeat because they are now American. NOT a transplanted pest or anti-American citizens. You know what I am talking about.) Or watch out if you're an NFL team who are not allowed to honor our nation's police officers and law enforcement with a small symbol on your jersey for a game and are not allowed, yet one player can wear socks with a picture of a pig in a cops uniform during games. (Colin Kaepernick) Watch out when your child is suspended for using the name, God, in her essay. Watch out watch out watch out. So the most folly is that you, the reader, may not even care; until YOU are violated. Etc... etc... etc...
All this and more lies ahead, depending on who we support and vote for. 


Please help me to respond to natural disasters as a Billy Graham Rapid Response Chaplain and support God's Extended Hand homeless ministry by purchasing my first and new e-book released this year by selecting this link:

Making America Righteous-Again: From Bitterness To A Delight Kindle Edition
by Michael D. Tobin (Author)  https://www.amazon.com/Making-America-Righteous-Again-Bitterness-Delight-ebook/dp/B01A1JPHUC

You may support my efforts through my paypal account at this link:https: //www.paypal.me/michaeldt

WHO, WHERE AND WHEN U.S. DEMS/SOCIALISTS GOT ILLEGAL VOTING IDEAS?

  WHO, WHERE AND WHEN U.S. DEMS/SOCIALISTS GOT ILLEGAL VOTING IDEAS?

By, Michael Tobin

 By now, you just may be aware of this two-term administration and government entities such as IRS, public services agencies, schools, libraries, mainstream media etc..., activities during both Obama elections, such as official voting mail-outs instructing people on their mail-outs who and what to vote for. It's already acceptable for personal campaign offices to do that, but since when has tax dollars been able be used by agencies to do the same thing? Never thought of that? well that is what democrat-leaning public tax recipient organizations I've listed above actually do.
   But what about the voters/ Are you yet aware of the thousands of non-citizens bussed in this past election, all told to vote for Obama? How about the electronic voters votes being switched from their G.O.P. or conservative or libertarian votes, to Obama? Wow must've been a glitch?
   Well, are you aware during the early 1990's Bill Clinton's 1st and 2nd terms focused heavily in the Baltic areas? WHAT did they learn over there? here's what they learned, and guess who got the glee, joy and privilege to put this knowledge to use. You guessed it. Read this and weep.  

 http://latviansonline.com/commentary/article/8548/ 

May 26, 2013

Non-citizen voting in Latvian local elections

Klavs Zichmanis

One of Russia’s foreign policy objectives in the former Soviet space is non-citizen voting in local elections. The upcoming Latvian municipal elections again put this issue on the front burner.
In the early 90’s, several international organizations (IO) designated the OSCE (Organisation for Security Cooperation in Europe) to recommend that Latvia grant non-citizens the right to vote in municipal elections.
Pressure also came from Russia, which uses the OSCE recommendation to harass Latvia to advance its geopolitical interests. The IO were motivated by several considerations: strengthening democracy in the new post-Soviet states, extending Western influence, and ensuring long-term stability in Eastern Europe. What concerns the IO most is ethnic conflict, as in Yugoslavia, and which see the solution in political participation.
The West emphasizes civil, social and political rights. The OSCE recommendation adds political rights for non-citizens. However, the principle of national sovereignty does not allow foreign countries to dictate citizenship standards to other states, resulting in a conflict between the OSCE recommendation, international convention and Latvia’s standard of political rights only with citizenship. The EU has no policy regarding non-citizen participation in local elections and only allows citizens of member states to do so.

Estonia’s Choice

Estonia adopted the OSCE recommendation for one reason. When restoring citizenship in 1991 on the principle of state continuity, Estonians were about 62% of the population, and with inclusion of pre-war minorities, citizenship rights were granted to around 68% of the population. The strict Estonian position on citizenship caused Soviet era migrants in the Narva region to threaten separation from Estonia when around 8% non-citizens adopted Russian citizenship. To prevent secession, Estonia expanded citizenship eligibility and adopted the OSCE recommendation, thus allowing non-citizens to vote every four years in local elections. However, they could not join or start a political party. This pleased the OSCE, but did not change Russian foreign policy towards Estonia.

Latvia’s Choice

Latvia did not accept the recommendation because there was no secessionist threat. Latvia sees political participation as a citizen’s prerogative. Neither the Latvian Constitution nor its laws permit voting for non-citizens. In 1991 the low proportion of Latvians raised concerns about a possible Soviet migrant takeover of power. The first Citizenship Act of 1993 highlights this concern. Heated debate with the IO forced a change in the law, and by 1998 it was modified, removing the citizenship window system and allowing all Latvian born children to obtain citizenship on an ius soli basis, thus increasing the number of citizens.

Definition of Non-citizens

Residents of a state consist of citizens, foreign nationals, the stateless and near-citizens. Foreign nationals are individuals who legally reside in or visit a country. Stateless persons have no citizenship whatsoever and legally reside in a country but without its diplomatic protection. Near-citizens, or in Latvia nepilsoņi, have civil, social, and partial political rights, including diplomatic protection from Latvia, that is, they are almost citizens. Countries that use this status can adapt it to meet its needs.
In Latvia, political rights of near-citizens include being up to half of all members in a political party. As party members, they can defend their interests by influencing all party activities. Allowing voting in municipal elections would give an additional political right.
Latvian near-citizens status was a compromise with the OSCE’s desire to involve the stateless in political decisions. Non-citizens make up around 13% of the population. Of all citizens, 72% are Latvians and 28% are minorities. Of the total population, from 2001 – 2011 minorities declined by 23%, Latvians by 6%, and near-citizens also decreased significantly. About one-third are of pensionable age. Non-citizen Latvian born minor children are entitled to citizenship as a parental decision.
Russia’s strategic goal is to create a Russian led Eurasian Economic Union. This strategy is seen in its diaspora policy, investment policy and initiation of the language referendum to make Russian Latvia’s second official language. Russia is not interested in minority integration into Latvian society, but manipulates human rights issues to exacerbate ethnic relations. Russia’s demand that Latvia grant citizenship automatically to non-citizens is absurd as this disputes the very legitimacy of the Latvian state.

Ideological Victory

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold and ideological wars were won by the West, affording a sense of superiority for its understanding of politics. The idea that pre-existing political models could be used in Eastern Europe without deeper analysis even though no historical precedent for such major change in a large area involving hundreds of millions of people existed is a consequence of this feeling of superiority. Western democratic interpretations became universally applicable. But if a political ideology is almost perfect, historical comparisons to it are unnecessary and potentially devastating. The consequence of the Soviet legacy is one such damaging criticism and thus is ignored. Years after the Soviet collapse, Western researchers realized the limitations of the pre-existing model approach. The OSCE recommendation was created in this ideological victory period.

Citizenship

Citizenship is never granted unconditionally. No country grants it to all who incidentally live in its territory. Citizenship implies a degree of exclusion: an open concept of citizenship is a contradiction. Citizenship is based on consanguinity (jus sanguinis) or territory (jus soli). Many countries use both, but none use jus soli exclusively. The Hague Convention on Nationality (1930), permits states to define its own citizens. The Convention, however, limits absolute freedom in deciding national citizenship: all inhabitants have a right to citizenship; states must avoid creating statelessness; no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of citizenship; a change in marital status should not affect the other partner’s nationality. Citizenship should serve as a basis for civil rights, political participation, social support, identity and that which serves the common good of society. The European Convention on Nationality (1997) tried to standardize EU member states nationality laws.
Assumptions about citizenship differ in Western and Eastern Europe. For Western countries, citizenship is associated with an individual’s legal obligations to the state and international law, grounded in civil, social and political rights, civil society, ‘shallow’ national culture and identity and, at least in theory, ethnic neutrality of the state, and monitoring the state applying abstract human rights standards.
Eastern Europe adds political will, a desire for ‘deep’ national cultural identity to the concept of citizenship. This desire for deep identity contrasts with the West’s shallow vision: it is hard to reconcile both views. Citizenship as a norm is not a neutral term as all countries saturate it with values, ideals and ideological significance.
Latvian citizenship tries to deal with the consequences of the Soviet legacy. Civic and national identities being weak, ethnic identity remained. Latvians assume their usual position as a minority which must be defended. Today, Soviet migrants must adjust themselves to minority status in a small country, not the war-winning plurality they had become accustomed to. In order to maintain their former status, migrants use Western minority and human rights rhetoric. Latvians must acclimatize themselves to majority status.
In 1941 Soviet authorities imposed unilaterally Soviet citizenship on Latvia, which is not recognized in international law. The Soviets granted citizenship to individuals on a request basis without naturalization requirements. However, this is how non-citizens often understand the citizenship acquisition process.
Latvia wants the security of loyalty. Offering political rights before showing loyalty does not offer security. Political rights without citizenship separate the responsibility for their actions expected of citizens. Responsibility required by law against anti-state activity cannot be demanded of foreigners or non-citizens. If citizenship is not included in one’s identity, there is no relationship between non-citizen’s political rights and his loyalty to the state.
Europe has shown that states are built on a core group, usually an ethnicity. In national consciousness the civic and ethnic, consciously or not, are closely related. Balts want to experience this form of national identity, to create a national consciousness from differing social and ethnic groups. Majority and minority cultures cannot play the same role in society. Promoting minority cultures has limitations. International and national agreements prohibit discrimination against individuals on ethnic, racial or other grounds. Minority group rights as groups are not internationally recognized, and are not in the UN human rights declaration. If group rights were to become an international standard, this would take away the legitimacy and sovereignty of states, dismantling the existing international framework, which is based on sovereign states. In 1995 the EU adopted the General Convention Protecting National Minorities recognizing several approaches to ethnic diversity, allowing states to choose their own path.

Necessary changes

The hoped for rapid democratisation of the post-Soviet space in the early 90’s did not materialize, for national development requires several generations. Western resistance to East European use of the same nation-building tools they themselves had used for centuries is illogical. New EU member states must be allowed to evolve and address nation-building challenges using the Western pattern.
It’s surprising how little violence there has been in the democratization process. Western assumptions that East European nationalism is based on ancient hatreds which the Soviet period froze creating a Pax Sovieticus, thus disallowing ethnic hatred to flourish is absurd.
Allowing non-citizens to vote or not vote in local elections puts Western and Latvian tenets at cross purposes. If political participation is an important principle for the OSCE, the Latvian political option offered to non-citizens meets these requirements. The OSCE recommendation should include them as acceptable standards of participation. The OSCE must also recognize the Soviet legacy as a legitimate historical experience and respect Baltic security concerns. The Eurocentric understanding of history, the ideological victory euphoria and bureaucratic inertia should be discarded. Unfortunately, the West is faced with a dilemma: to accept the Soviet legacy as legitimate would require taking some responsibility for the consequences of WWII up to 1991. This step the West is not yet ready to take.