
Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren debated last night in the senate race in Massachusetts. They tell me now the race is tied. I had thought that Warren had pulled ahead. They say Scott Brown has been trying to desguise himself as a moderate. Of course with Mitt Romney as Governor, he claims he got bills passed with the state legislature 75 percent Democratic. This he says to prove that he is a compromizer. Well, here is a debating point. The President should say to Romney, "Then I suppose you are against the obstructionist tacticts of the tea party congress in their failure to work with me and get needed jobs legislation passed these past two years to put America back to work. If on the other hand you say the reason why you don't criticize this Republican congress is because you agree with them, aren't you contradicting yourself? I would further ask you, is this your 'real feeling on the matter" or do you take positions dependant on whose paying you the big Money, hmmm? Now apparently in California you dare not vote for the Green candidate because there is a massive insergent effort by the Mormon and Catholic Church to register voters republican. And Nicole Sandler says that if a pastor tells you how to vote from the Pulpit you should turn them into the IRS because they should lose their tax exempt status. I don't believe ANY church should have tax exempt status. The Bible says in Romans 13 that all Christians are to be "good citizens", which means things like paying your taxes, as Jesus told us to do. But it's amazing how quickly they'll discard the Bible when it becomes "inconvienient" to follow it. There are vast segments of the Latino community where they almost totally disassociate "politics" from the exercise of their Christian faith. In the Latino culture they would consider it an insult and infringement for the local Priest to tell them how to vote. These people divide moral issues that white people are so uptight about- - from issues of "government" such as taxes and funding and programs and such. So speaking in these churches would be of little avail, so the theory goes, in recruiting Latino Catholics to vote the way the tea party wants them to.
It seems that Mitt Romney has lied about his family history. There should be no news there since Mitt lies about President Obama so much. As such he is violating another Biblical commandment not to bear false witness against thy neighbor. You see he faboricated the whole story about "Being ordained by the Mormon Church to set up shop in Mexico. Mitt Romney's great grandfather actually fled the Arizona border to Mexico because he was convicted of purgery regarding a land fraud case. It so happened that when George Romney as a young lad reentered the Union, that he was given "sanctuary" from the Mexican Revolution and as such he got tax dollars most people wouldn't ordenarily get. So much for Mitt's "government spongers" remark. Now there is the whole thing with the Arizona-ization of America as other states like Virginia, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina adopt these racial profiling laws for law enforcement to keep aliens out. The LAPD made it their policy to follow the Constitution and not interfere with matters of immigration, which is the exclusive domain of the federal government. But the Republicans have in their Party Platform this year this extreme position of the racial profilers, which Obama filed suit against. By the way Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are best buds. There is no rift between them. The two men are close and the reason why Romney picked Ryan is because they are in such tight accord. The President needs to remind the American people of these things during the debate, i e that if you vote for Mitt Romney you are also casting a vote for Paul Ryan. But the funny thing is now in Tuscon- - - they have been the object of the ire of the Voting Rights law for thirty years and that Tuscon is under "desegregation orders" by the federal government. But now Tuscon is censoring their school books and ninety books and videos on Mexican heritage, have been conthiscated and the teachers told it was illegal to teach Mexican history and culture in the classroom.
In Pennsylvania a ruling came down by a Judge Simpson, the issued an injunction against voter purgers and the requirement of photo ID's for getting to vote. But they also say "Of course the regestrars can still hassle you with questions about it. You're just not required to respond". This one guy named Nathan Sprawl - - the same guy involved in Florida, has set up a new organization without his name on it because he is under investigation or indictment for regestration fraud. The name of the organization he heads is the Strategic Allied Consultents. Anyhow one trick of these regestrars is to say they are from the County office, when they're not, which might be a felony right there. First they pretend to be poll takers, but if you say you're Obama they'll pass you by but if you say you're for Romney they'll then get you registered to vote. These Republicans are guilty of "Projection" in that what they accuse others of they are guilty of or already planning to do themselves. This isn't the first time this trend has caught my eye. So they'll come down hard on Acorn, which is out of business now, when what they themselves are doing is far worse, often just forging - - filling out whole registration forms. The bottom line in all this is that everybody's got to be on their toes. These people see 2012 is perhaps their last chance to take over the country, lock, stock, and barrel, before future demographics make this feat impossible. Given all this it's funny how seldom AG Eric Holder's name ever comes up in the news.
There was a Law and Order program where this troubled seventh grader was a problem in class and later his inner drug induced rage prompted him to off two of his classmates. He lived in a fantasy world when he was on this drug called Adderol or whatever. Antidepressents, notibly, seretonin uptake inhibitors, create this quality in less than two percent of the people who take it, mostly kids. His mother gave it to him "for his own good", you might say. I won't summarize the whole plot here but clearly you can see that scientologists have a thing or two right when they come against drugs. Scripture says not to "Provoke" our children, and I would assume that means provoking them to murder. Mitt Romney is said to have slammed one of his son's faces into a bowl of oatmeal just "Joking around". Johnny Cash's father, when his older brother died, said of the surviving son, "You know, the wrong son died". How can a teenager live with such a condemnation by his own father. A guy like that might even do time in prison. Actions have consequences. Even Neil Savedra said of God "You know- - unlike us, God's accounting system is so exact that he cannot forgive so much as one sin just by - - Letting it Go". (Selah) Neil also says of mankind, "People don't change". To God, we are as dead as a marble statue in an art museum. The dead become highly predictable. To the exact extent something is predictable, to that very extent said entity loses his free will. Neil says you can "be a good guesser". Well, yesterday the Dodgers had won five games in a row. Many odds makers might well say "Well the odds are they're going to start losing games". We boldly predicted a Dodgers win over the Giants. But can you "predict" what someone is going to order for dinner? The day of my Uncle's funeral we were scheduled to go to the Cheese Factory. I love cheesecake Ergo, one might "predict" that I would have cheese cake, particular when I wasn't paying for it. But I didn't. Due to the stress of the day my appetite may have been down. And we ate outdoors in oppressive heat, further depressing my appetite So I declined. Only someone holding all the cards, or to be exact, "The answer sheet" would be able to predict the correct outcome. People in their karmic orbits- - analogus to approaching the North Pole- - the circles get smaller and smaller as directions get harder and harder to get a "take" on. "Direction", in this case, meaning "Free karmic will". Tracing a circle on the edge of an hour glass cone- - one would see that as one passes the "nader" point- - the lines move from counter clockwise to clockwise, or "direction reversal". But one projecting the distance on a graph- - one could fall literally to Infinity before hitting bottom. But if "Free will" diminishes - - then predictability increases - - and the Dead are completely predictable. Just as a status is dead to a man, who created it, so we are Dead to God, who created us. And since God is also Dead to us- - God in in a perverse sense, becomes so "predictable' you can read Him like a book. Mitt Romney is Dead. Mitt Romney has also become quite Predictable, in that one should never underestimate his capacity to Screw Up beyond one's greatest Imaginings. Being predictable- - - he can't be really a very good chess player, nor would he be an effective negotiator. His very use of the 47% phrase, indicates that not only cannot we believe in Mittens to ever Improve, he does not believe himself that his fate will ever Change.. (Selah)
Yesterday in that class we learned more of how the Mind works. For instance if we are told to count the F's in a piece of writing we routinely scan out the OF's as words because we see them as not important. Also the human mind is by nature rather dislexic. There was another experiment of 'How many of these words are misspelled. Can you read this at all?" It turned out that EVERY word over three letters in length was spelled incorrectly with the letters out of sequence. But it takes a while for this major fact to dawn on you. Also when we read colors printed in font of a different color than the word they spell and we are instructed to name the color of the font, it's amazing how many mistakes we make, because the logical and the verbal takes precedence over our actual senses. Also it's amazing how cliche ridden our English language is, such as the saying 'You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink", or "That's like leaving the fox in charge of the hen house". It's amazing how agrarian and animal centered so many English language cliche's are. Also, our children are not learning them as we did, and they ran an experiment on "finish the expression" and got some very amusing answers from sixth graders. Nicole Sandler says she tends to be an Idealist rather than a Pragmatist. Actually I fall somewhere in the middle of this idiological spectrum, and let Prudence, one of my segen cardinal virtues- - - decide. I refer to cardinal virtues as Causative virtues. There can be Primary causitive virtues and Secondary causative virtues, formed, as with colors, by mixtures of the Primary ones. All of the resultant virtues are what I call Pure Virtues- - like the pure rainbow of colors that used to adorn a Capitol record label. Justice is an effect as most people think of it, as in "All I want is justice". Technically the Causative virtue is the "Pursuit - - - of Justice". Love might be called an "Effect" but not really a Cause. The reason why LOVE is not a cause is that it requires mo personal volition or effort, in most cases. The object of our LOVE dictates the emotion. It's like saying this candy bar TASTES good, or it sure FEELS hot today. These are Sensual attributes- - and one might say Passive by nature. Some of my cardinal virtues have Objects such as Perseverence- - - and Faithfullness. One could argue that an improper or Evil 'Object" taints the candinal virtue. I would only say that the Virtue is not at fault, only how it is employed is a fault. One can praise an Evil person is he is morally Consistent with his own Values. Then there are people like Mitt Romney who are Loyal to nothing- - not even their own cause of Evil. It's all what mood they wake up in that morning. So it is with a flake and a flip-flopper. But some virtues such as Prudence - - - are Causative - - - but it's not a trait people wax sentamantal over. A woman may like to be wined and dined and sent flowers and a greeting card on her anniversary. But you won't most likely read in a greeting card "You know - - when I think of your Prudence it just warms the cockles of my heart an it's such a comfort to me". But most people don't break down the gramatical and logical flow-chart structure of words. For instance a "Realist" has what I call a "naturalistic" definition and a pragmatic definition. The natural definition would go something like, "Sure- - I believe in seeing things for what they ARE and not for how I'd like to envision them". This is true in natural science, as well as "human nature" science disciplines such as socialogical considerations and the realm of statistics, surveys, and polls. So - - when you say you are a "Realist" you need to know the whole Mode of the Speaker's reference point.
There is an addage of "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink". The meaning of this little parable is that sometimes you think you have "set everything up to make the choice obvious" but for some the choice is not obvious. Lyndon Johnson thought Ho Chi Min would go for a whole hydroelectric modern system of dams and power and water works and flood control and the like. But Ho wouldn't bite. There is one difference between "God" and a jackass. That's because if you place a carrot in front of the jackass and a cattle goad behind him, the ass will move forward. But these sort of tacticts don't work with God. God is what one might call "insensable" to human common sense. Gene Scott's definition would preclude God's even being what we call "Alive". Because Gene's definition of "Alive" used to be "A capacity to relate to one's environment". This is what God never did. Some would argue that "God is Great - God is Good" because "He did things like create humans in his own image with a Free Will, and he also created Compassionate and Caring human beings". I must take this oppertunity at this time to introduce another work into your lexicon. The concept of an "A prior existance". Soren Kirkagard talked about this. This is assuming the Existance of something without having to prove it. It's a "given". Dick Schimmel, my old Sunday School teacher used to say "It's like in Math. We ASSUME the number ten - - or the number one". Nobody asks you to "prove" the existance of mathematical numbers. We do this with other things. We assign A Prior status to our civil rights such as Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. We do it with Free Will and pastors are always saying God won't violate that. But they never stop to tie cause to effect. You see all of these virtues I've named here are human value virtues - - NOT GOD'S. God doesn't care. We saw some property of creation and decided we liked what we saw and placed a great value on it. Abraham placed a great value on his son Isaac, but God didn't care. God didn't see why Abraham wouldn't mind discarding his son, like last night's TV dinner tray. People and entities that create other entities, don't necessarily, and usual don't, create clones of themselves. For instance - - a woman gets pregnent and gives birth to a daughter. But can she impart to her daughter what happened to her? Can she make her own daughter pregnent or enable her daughter to make other women pregnent. A Jewish concept of God is that- - God has certain qualities- - aspects - - which would disallow God's ever becomming a mortal being. God is immutable and true and constant to his own nature. To become limited and finite would be a Violation of the very core of this Nature, according to the Jews. If an artist creates a marble status- - no matter how impressive - - would it not be a "downgrade" to say that the artists would somehow suddenly "become" his own Creation - - and be religated from flesh and blood to a block of Stone? Just to engage in a bit of personal ego centrism for a moment - - I believe that I as it were "Was created by God to preach Scientology values but to do from OUTSIDE the walls of the Church of Scientology and get my revelations directly from the Source, and not filtered through any eccliastical structure. I am as it were the watch dog who is stationed outside the house, who barks when an intruder approaches. So it is my nature to swing into action when I sense the Values of Scientology being encroached upon or assaulted. But I would be useless inside the walls of said structure and I would lose a lot of my power. Perhaps I've illustrated the point I'm trying to make. And that is that God is who he is and we are who we are and never the twane shall Meet.
"God" could not pass a typical fundamentalist ethics test. First of all many forget about the line where Jacob says "I shall go down to my grave never having seen my son Joseph again". In other words this "man of God" believed that death Is the End. The author of Ecclistiastes believed the same thing when he said "The dead know nothing". God killed David's first son with Bathsheba because the son was a product of adultry. And adultery is not as bad as rape or incest. King Josiah was a righteous man, yet was felled by an arrant arrow. But at no time did Josiah or any other dying man utter words like "The Lord has chosen to take me home". Nowhere in the entire Bible is there so much as one recounting of a person brought back to life- - of what the Afterlife was like. Not even Jesus, the son called "son of God" ventured to do this. What is more - - no Disciple of Jesus even ventured to ASK him the question". (Selah) God became angry with mankind because they were working together and cooporating by building the Tower of Babel. Are we to infer that God is an enemy of peace? Jesus said he came to set brother against brother and mother in law against daughter in law, and "I came not to bring peace, but a sword". Not one person Jesus raised from the dead spoke of an afterlife. Nowhere in scripture is it written "You will go to Heaven when you die". When St Peter was believed to have been put to death by King Herod- - when the desciples saw him alive they said "It is his angel". They believed angels were supernatural but not people. Jesus told that farmer building bigger barns "This night, thy soul shall be required of thee" but he didn't add, "And you will see me at the Great White Throne". It is also given "And what would a man give in exchange of his life?" Satan was instructed not to take Job's life. The only person who believed in the possability of life after death was king Saul, and people believe King Saul was having some sort of mental break-down. Nowhere does it expressly say that even Judas Iscariot went to hell. Neither does it ever say "Judas went to meet his Maker". Stephan had a vision of God before he died, but it never goes on to say "And Stephen went to meet his Maker". Nowhere in scripture does it ever say that ANYONE either difinitively went to Heaven or to Hell. Scripture does say "Hell was created for the Devil and his Angels". Scripture in Acts also declaires "No man hath ascended into Heaven". When a disciple dies the phrase is used "And he slept with his fathers" or some such thing. It never says "They went to be with Jesus". Jehovah God does not condemn various acts of sick vengeance which was often carried out in the Old Testament. The words "Father forgive then, for they know not what they do" are not found in most texts. Rather Jesus is constantly calling people children of the Devil, and promising vengeance on those who rejected him. You have a Bible. READ IT some time!