They will soon be represented by a new French MP for the recently established Northern Europe constituency comprising the UK, Ireland, Scandinavia and the Baltic states.

It is difficult to measure the exact number of French people living in the British capital. Over 120,000 are officially registered at the French consulates in London and Edinburgh, but not everybody decides to register and other London estimates put the French population at anywhere between 300,000 and 400,000 citizens.

London could hold the key to victory for any candidate as it has the largest concentration of French people across the whole constituency.

“All of the main parties have chosen candidates based in London,” says Philippe Marliere, professor of French and European politics at University College London.

“It’s going to be a London contest.”

Of the 20 official candidates for the seat, nine are based in London, and a further three live in other regions of the UK.

‘Key issue’

Although the French have long had a tradition of MPs from their overseas territories, this is the first time France will allow elected MPs for its expat population to have a seat in parliament.

The decision to create new constituencies for the French abroad was taken by former president Nicolas Sarkozy, whose government passed legislation in 2008 to give them the right to elect their own MPs.

  The French already have expat representatives in the Senate

Prof Marliere argues this can be seen a political move by the right to boost votes. Traditionally, the French abroad are less likely to support the left, even if the gap is narrowing in the UK.

Statistics from the French Ministry of the Interior show that the majority (53.05%) of overseas French citizens voted for right-wing candidate Mr Sarkozy in the 2012 presidential election.

But French people in the UK bucked this trend for the first time by voting for Socialist candidate Francois Hollande – though Mr Sarkozy won almost 52% of the second round vote in London.

Party politics aside, Prof Marliere says there are more and more French people living abroad. They can encounter problems with the education, pension, tax, social welfare and health systems in their host country, issues that an expat MP could help them with.

This is reflected in the official manifestos of the candidates, which also mention the challenges faced by French people abroad in business.

But Prof Marliere says that the “key issue” for the UK-based candidates is education, as French families are keen to send their children to French schools.

Providing a French education for their children can be costly for parents and French-speaking schools are oversubscribed.

Because of this, the French embassy, teachers and parents have been working to deal with the shortage of places, opening a new school in Kentish Town, London, last September, says Frederique Brisset, headmistress of L’Ecole des Petits and L’Ecole de Battersea.

“The choice of French schools is limited and there are fundamental differences between the French curriculum and the British curriculum.”

“French schools are not free,” says Prof Marliere. “Although the French state subsidises education by sending French teachers, the rest is not paid for by the state.”

This issue is not going away as within the UK, the make-up of the French community is changing. It is getting younger, and therefore more likely to have children.

In addition to those working in the financial sector and employed by international companies, the UK’s French population now includes “students, people in the service industries, public servants and young families”, says Prof Marliere.

French Londoners

Clelia-Elsa Froguel, a 26-year-old consultant born in France, is part of this younger generation.

She says the creation of an expat MP enables the voices of French emigrants to be heard in the French parliament.

Muriel Demarcus says that it is difficult to see how the French “MP for London” will change anything

“We are French Londoners, not expats,” she says. “The election of an MP for us is extremely important.”

While she can vote in the French presidential elections, up until now she did not vote in the French parliamentary elections because she felt she was “not represented.”

And David Medioni, a political journalist based in Paris, points out that French people in France view it as “normal” that expats should have some political say.

‘More and more British’

But others are less than enthusiastic about the idea, arguing that the MP will have little impact as the French abroad are not the government’s priority.

Prof Marliere says it is difficult to see how the French abroad can place demands on the government, as many do not pay taxes in France.

He asks: “Why would the government in France supplement our life choices?”

Key facts

• 11 expat MPs to be elected
• The other 10 constituencies include the US and Canada, South America, Spain and Portugal and East Africa
• Second round of voting will take place on 17 June
• Italy has had expat MPs since 2006
• French people in France vote on 10 June in the first round of the parliamentary elections

And Muriel Demarcus, a 39-year-old business owner, says the introduction of an expat French MP is unlikely to change anything.

“After four or five years you turn a corner and you become more and more British. I don’t think we are French any more.”

The successful candidate will sit in the French National Assembly in Paris and will have the same duties as any other French MP, representing a vast constituency stretching across 1.5m sq miles (4m sq km).

Prof Marliere expects that the elected representative will divide their time between the French capital and their home country, making frequent trips to other regions.

Although the figures are disputed, the London population has grown so big that it is sometimes referred to as France’s sixth city. Because of this, French people in other European countries, such as 22-year-old Maite Delvarre from Stockholm, say that the views of non-UK based constituents won’t be heard.

“The culture in the UK and the Nordic countries is not the same. That’s why we need somebody else here.”

Even for experts like Prof Marliere, the outcome of the election is difficult to predict.

“It’s totally new. Nobody knows what is going to happen.”

I am not saying my problem with Mr. Romney was that he was a fascist.  I have written I could not trust a person who changes his beliefs regularly.  However, I am smart enough to see how democrats out voting republicans in republican primaries has brought us Traditional Values people and conservatives to the choice of Milt Romney.

The reality is that America is in great danger.  The issue is no longer Mitt Romney.  The issue is the death of America through Socialist fascism. 

Obama does not know better than most of us.  Obama’s accomplishments are his healthcare reform and spending 7 trillion dollars.  Obama and his bureaucrats are using Obama-care to interfere with the religious liberties of religious organizations. Obama-care is an extreme financial burden on individuals, organizations, and companies. The interest on monies Obama borrowed are increasing the American debt everyday

Mr. Mitt Romney is a better leader.  His resume is the resume of a talented proven leader.  He knows how to cut spending (including employees) in order to save a company.  He will be able to downsize government and save tax payers money. 

I have written that the relationship between government and the citizens is a delicate balance between governing and freedom. Mr. Romney understands that it is not governments’ job to manage, orchestrate, or run the American free enterprise system.  Governments exist to administrate government departments and protect the public welfare.

 Threats to the public welfare have to be legitimate not perceived threats.  Capital investment is not a legitimate threat to Americans.  Investments fuel business start-ups, which in turn fuel job growth and economic growth.

For too long the liberal democrats have been brainwashing Americans in to hating the American free enterprise system.  Since Obama took office he has been criticizing chief executive officers, Wall Street, and other symbols of the successful American economy.

Yet all these ingredients are necessary for a prosperous economy and successful people.  We need not give up on ourselves.  Everything that is, was, and will be is still possible.

Freedom fuels the greatness that decent and good people can create.  Even in these troubling times I believe that the majority in any people group are good and decent people.  The average person does not believe that his or her success is invested in how much he or she can take from his or her neighbor.

Only Obama and his kind think in such foolish terms. Who spent the US into great debt?  That would Mr. Barak Hussein Obama.  The rich, successful, and wealthy people of America did not borrow and spend America into the current economic mess.

Furthermore, I have no problem in supporting Mr. Romney.  I had the opportunity of watching Mr. Romney’s speech at Liberty University (my Alma matter) and this morning I saw Mr. Romney’s speech to the Hispanic Economic Coalition.

These were great speeches focusing on the public policy initiatives that will lead America out of this current economic mess.  Low taxes, low government spending, and low government regulation will allow for greater investment in American and Americans.

However, do not be fooled. I have my eyes wide open, looking for any signs of wavering by Mr. Romney.  If I see any wavering on ultra conservative issues, I will report it.  My report will not be to knock Mr. Romney down, but to help him improve as a servant of the people.

I want Mr. Romney to win because America will win.  I am fully aware of the challenge.  Liberals are resorting to all their tricks.  The network news is liberal. These liberals are manufacturing polls to make Obama appear more attractive and to demoralize conservatives.

This is why every voter is going to be necessary.  Traditional Values and conservatives have to vote and help promote and market Mr. Romney.

America was built on the tradition of the potential behind freedom.  I heard Mr. Biden, vice president of the US, retort that liberals dream  and want personal success.  It is apparent liberals want to be the only ones that have their dreams come true.

I am not a slave of Obama.  I was born free and will die a free man.  It is impossible to remain free when Obama wants to take everything I earn.

Let us have a mature and serious conversation on petty envy. My life is not defined by how much more my neighbor has than I have in life. This is Mr. Obama’s campaign in a nutshell.  In this year’s presidential election, Mr. Obama cannot campaign on Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay Cuba, the national debt, tax reform, and illegal immigration reform.

Afghanistan is a mess.  The US has no influence in Iraq.  Egypt, Libya, and all the other Arab nations who went through the Arab spring are now under Muslim extremist’s control, i.e. Iran’s control.  The residents of Gitmo were not giving civilian trials and Gitmo was not closed down. Ninety five percent of Americans did not get their Obama promised tax cut.  Obama did not cut the deficit in half.  He doubled the deficit.  During Mr. Obama’s first two years the democrats were in charge of the Legislative branch and the Executive branch and did not bother to construct one immigration reform bill.  To date Mr. Obama has not issued any immigration reform public policy.

However, there are still people high on the novelty presidency of Obama.  We cannot allow this man to ruin America.  I have set aside my concerns about Romney.  America is more important than my personal held belief system.  In addition, Romney is not a deviant.   Mr. Romney is educated and has excellent experience administrating large systems, such as the Olympics. Mr. Romney is also a person with high moral character.  Any one when compared to Obama has high moral character.

Therefore, please get involved in building a better tomorrow for all Americans.  Vote republican for president and congress. In addition, get involved in the Romney optimistic and positive public relations effort.

Mr. Romney, why do you want to be president of the United States? First, let’s visit the obvious answer, “to serve the people of the United States.” That answer would immediately peg my bull s**t meter in the red. Another answer – “I believe that I can bring the United States back to its former greatness.” There goes my BS meter again. Another answer, “President Obama has failed during his four years in the Oval Office and needs to be replaced and I believe that I am the best man for the job” That one almost broke my BS meter.

To be fair, let’s admit that President Obama hasn’t been a stellar president, he’s made mistakes, as we are all prone to do. His past three years has mostly been on-the-job training as he doesn’t have an impressive resume in politics, foreign policy or economic training. He’s had to rely mainly on supposed qualified experts in most all departments and they have failed him in helping to solve our problems. These experts have been career politicians who are protecting their jobs, first and foremost and to that end, give advice beneficial to theirselves and their friends. Hopefully he’ll see the error of his ways during his second term and kick the bums out.

Romney, on the other hand, probably has already selected those friends, and big dollar campaign contributors, he wants sitting beside him if, by some odd chance, he is elected. You can rest assured that they will be professionals in making “behind closed doors” deals, hiding bribes and are 100% corrupt. Romney’s idea of doing what is best for the American people is doing what is best for Mitt Romney and to hell with the law and the Constitution, as he has already proven. He has stood before the American people for a year, maybe longer, and has lied through his million dollar smile (it was my idea to bail out the auto makers), made promises he has no intention of keeping (to be fair, all politicians do that) and probably has already made plans for raping the American economy even more.

I have voted in every presidential election since 1963, some of the candidates I thought were well-qualified and deserving, others should have been prosecuted and/or impeached. Through each presidency, each sitting president had one thought in mind, how to make money from their term after leaving office, either though speaking fees or book deals. Each presidency has had their share of scandals; sex, bribes, corruption or favoritism. Only after the invention of the Internet (Al Gore had nothing to do with it) and the reaffirmation of the 1st Amendment did speaking one’s mind take off. Every one with a computer can get on line and speak what’s on their mind, a few have crossed the line and threatened candidates, giving the rest of us a black eye. I thought the last election was crucial, a tossup between King Bush and Obama and blogged almost every day. But this one in November will be even more important, the outcome defining the United States for decades to come.

I didn’t vote for Obama in 2008, thinking he was the worst candidate. Now, with Romney as the other choice, I’m not so sure but what other choice do I have? And like 2008, I will be speaking my mind while keeping it civil, on topic (I hope and will try to do so) and only what can be proven. Libel and slander will not be tolerated, even if they are my own, personal thoughts (lawyers and politicians have a unique way of twisting the truth to and the law to their advantage).

No matter who you favor and support, the November election is important, as is every election, and I encourage each and every American to go to the ballots and make your voices heard.

I’m not really sure why they still bother to ask us to vote, or what we are even voting for anymore. There is no such thing as a politician that’s actually for the betterment of mankind, and for the most part they’ve even stopped pretending to be. Politicians have their own agendas they don’t need to know ours, and if you don’t like it switch parties, where you will just find another politician that doesn’t concern himself with the worries of the common folk. There is no longer any real difference between the Republican and Democrat parties, except for the lies they choose to tell us, when it all comes down to the fine print they re all working for the major corporations, and our opinion means nothing at all.

Please, believe me when I say, I want to still trust in our Government, and consider that the wars we fight are for our protection and the betterment of mankind. But that assumption has been eaten away by the consistent lying and all to frequent coincidences surrounding the stories given to us by the Government. Is it any real wonder why nearly every other country hates America? Try thinking of it on a much smaller level, when the majority of people you know tell you not to hang around a certain person, isn’t there usually a pretty good reason for that. It’s not jealousy of your freedom I’ll tell you that much.

Corporate America can not survive without the support of our leaders, nor can they prosper to unlimited expectations without nearly completely controlling natural resources. the common man is no longer a necessity for our skills and determination, we have been replaced with cheap labor and hi tech machines or software. We have dug a hole so great that the little man can no longer see the light, or grasp the reality of the predicament that the big man looking down on us, has put us into.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this article, not everyone is going to agree every single person has their own perspective. I do believe though, that if you take a long hard look at society, how we began to where we are now, you will surely see the downward spiral we are in. There is no complete fix to our great nations situation, but without at least making an attempt to fix it, then it will always remain completely broken. I am in no way against our Government in general, I just fill that they have taken us down a road that’s definitely not in our best interest. If the changes are going to be made then they need to be made soon, keeping the interest of the people at heart and not the controlling corporations. These are just my political thoughts and opinions, if they even open one persons eye’s then it was worth the effort.

D.S. Duby

If you liked this, please check out these other articles by this writer,

http://socyberty.com/crime/welfare-and-its-impact-on-a-once-great-nation/

http://gomestic.com/emergency-preparation/are-you-prepared-to-survive-after-civilization-falls/

http://socyberty.com/work/contractor-or-con-artist-home-repair-and-new-construction-projects/

18 year old Harry Styles from One Direction, considered the “ladies man”(Yeah if you have lowered your standards for fish eyes!) has been sighted and caught making sweet flavors with American model Emma Ostilly, 18, at Grey Lynn’s Gypsy Tea Rooms on Thursday night, before sharing a kiss outside the blonde’s flat at around 1.20am.

Two nights later, Ostilly reportedly snuck in to the group’s Langham hotel room after the boys’ Auckland gig at Waitakere’s Trusts Stadium.

The pair reportedly met when Ostilly featured on the group’s video for Gotta Be You, shot last Spring in her home city of New York. The romance comes just weeks after Styles ended his relationship with TV presenter Caroline Flack, 32.

An onlooker who saw Harry and Emma in one of the city’s bars said: “They really seemed to have a ­connection and only had eyes for each other.”

The group touched down at Auckland International Airport on Thursday night, with a crowd of Directioners awaiting their arrival at the Langham Hotel, where the group stayed.

Horan tweeted after the game: “Just been to watch new zealand vs australia in the rugby league, not a patch on union.”

Meanwhile, fifth member Zayn Malik visited Karangahape Rd’s The Tattooed Heart, and got a native New Zealand fantail inked onto the back of his neck.

The group have now travelled to Wellington ahead of their show at the capital’s St James Theatre tonight, which is also sold out.

One Direction are flying home to the United Kingdom on Wednesday.

For more, look here.

http://socyberty.com/issues/one-direction-fans-express-hatred-for-one-lucky-lady/

http://notecook.com/desserts/fruits/one-direction-tries-tasty-treats-in-australia/

This inspiration is for Americans.

We have holidays like Independence Day, Memorial Day, Veterans’ Day and others. They come, we commemorate the events that led to their institution, and then we forget them until the following year.

This past Veterans Day caused me to ponder a little longer on the sacrifices and gifts that our veterans have given to us. Many men and women and boys and girls and dogs and mules and pigeions and more have served this country to preserve our right to liberty, justice and freedom. Just how important is liberty to you? How important is justice to you? How important is freedom to you?

With thoughts of 1774-1791 on my mind and especially after viewing World War I documentaries, I realized that although we live in different times and circumstances, we have similar threats to liberty, justice and freedom. Who would have thought that the biggest threats to liberty, justice and freedom would come during a time of relative peace on Earth? Who would have thought that the biggest threats to liberty, justice and freedom would come from American businesses?

In attempting to maintain market share and profits, some American businesses engage in persuading our local, state and federal officials to write laws and institute measures and sanctions that protect their businesses and industries from competition. However, we have learned in school that competition is good for the us, the consumers of American goods and services. Preventing competition can lead to high prices, poor quality goods and services, and a host of other unfavorabe circumstances.

Yet, several American businesses have considerable lobbying muscle that threatens our health, our wealth, our liberty, our justice and our freedom: Big Agriculture companies, Big Pharmaceuticals companies, and Big Oil.

Please view the following short video, or please bookmark this page and return to view it when you have more time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUFSdsffCgQ&feature=youtu.be

Who owns America? We the people! We need to put aside our idols from time to time and investigate what is going on around us. We need to make the time to investigate some other internet sites that have direct impact on our daily lives. One such site is the one below.

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/state-legislatures.html

You are somebody. Your vote matters. Your vote counts. Local, state and federal officials who sell us out for their own greed need to be removed from office. People who care about this country and its people need to voted in to replace them. Power to the people and not to the businesses and institutions that sell us out!

If you have read this, if we lose our liberty, justice and freedom, you now know why and how it happened. America, it is time to put away our idols and reclaim this country for the freedom of the people, for which it stands: one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

It was not a casteist counter-revolution that contributed to her downfall. If there was a determination on the part of floating voters who had supported her in 2007 to defeat her this time, the reasons lie in her perceived arrogance. Indian elections have repeatedly demonstrated that the key to electoral success lie in forging a social coalition of castes and communities and diluting doctrinaire beliefs. Mayawati once held the potential of forging a dalit-led social coalition. Her style of governance added to dalit self-confidence but it alienated other communities. They combined against her and neutralised the impact of a stupendous dalit mobilisation.

The BSP combined the attributes of a social movement and a political party. Kanshi Ram’s vision had envisaged dignity and empowerment through the capture of political power. Mayawati carried forward that legacy, achieving electoral victory in a caste-ridden society. But over the past five years, that purposefulness came unstuck. The BSP’s grip on dalits remained broadly intact but the nimble footedness and flexibility necessary for a political party suffered as a consequence of her own high-handedness.

For Rahul Gandhi too, the hyper-involvement and aggressive posturing of the past month was driven by a desire to set the Congress back on track in India’s largest state. The heir apparent of the Congress knew that a good showing in UP would firmly establish his political legitimacy. This understandable mission was, however, marred by impulsive politics.

First, Rahul based his intervention in UP on the belief that the Youth Congress had established a formidable network of young Indians driven by a desire to change the culture of politics. The problem was that the network Rahul sought to create had little or no relationship with the pre-existing Congress. UP saw the bizarre spectacle of an ‘old’ and largely dispirited Congress being out of synch with those who fancied themselves as the new inheritors. The argument that the party organisation failed to harvest the goodwill generated by Rahul is specious. The UP Congress suffered from the problem of incoherence.

Secondly, having chosen a (flawed) management model to undertake a blitzkrieg, Rahul chose to supplement it with a blend of paternalism and sycophancy. The overuse of the family in the Amethi-Rae Bareili-Sultanpur belt, the inclination to refer to himself in the third person and his inability to go beyond the lofty generalisations of ‘development’ ensured that his energetic campaign was seen as part of the seasonal tamasha-no different from the Amitabh Bachchan shows hosted by a beleaguered Samajwadi Party in 2007.

Rahul professed to stand for a modernity that would transcend the preoccupation with caste politics . Yet, his style was paternalistic and more befitting an inheritor than a reformer. The Congress’ disappointing performance wasn’t entirely the responsibility of Rahul but it exposed the limitations of Rahul’s messaging-particularly when contrasted with the understated earthiness of Akhilesh Yadav. India has changed, but Rahul persisted with an outmoded imperial style.

Finally, Rahul failed to factor in the absurdity of Delhi dictating the political agenda of an increasingly federal-minded India. He didn’t gauge that regional parties can’t be beaten by a squad of paratroopers. After 1991, UP is becoming more self-contained. Rahul tried to reverse this localism with a contrived national thrust which, alas, was a euphemism for his own political career.

The UP election should, ideally, add to the learning curve of all the four parties. Unfortunately, despite the routine assurances of ‘introspection’ that come with setbacks, the inclination to disregard history has been unfailing.

There will be a flurry of post-mortems on the Congress’ electoral reverses in UP, Punjab and Goa. The underlying problem, however, is that the Congress remains a fundamentally flawed political organisation with a medieval “high command” culture. According to the Peter Principle, people in an organisation tend to rise to their level of incompetence. In the Congress, ministers and MPs rise to the level of incompetence of the party’s feudal leadership. The spectacle of fawning Congressmen and women trying to ingratiate themselves with the family symbolises all that is wrong with not only the Congress but all dynastic political parties: sycophancy, mediocrity, nepotism, incompetence, corruption.

Unfortunately, the example set by Indira Gandhi, when she inducted son Sanjay into politics in the 1970s, has been copied by a clutch of smaller, regional parties like the SP, DMK, SAD, NCP and TDP. Two of these are BJP allies; two are Congress allies. The success of the feudal Badals (SAD) in Punjab in alliance with the BJP and of the equally feudal Yadavs (SP) in UP underlines how dynasty has eaten into the vitals of our politics. If India is to prosper as a nation, dynastic politics must end. It is an historical legacy the Congress should not be proud of. And it could yet be the petard on which it is hoist in the next general election.

Momentum for a new Third Front, independent of the Congress and the BJP, is meanwhile building. Can such a front provide a credible alternative in the next Lok Sabha election? A group of ambitious regional leaders such as Nitish Kumar (JD-U), Mamata Banerjee (TMC), Naveen Patnaik (BJD) and J.Jayalalithaa (AIADMK) could easily muster around 110-120 Lok Sabha seats between them in the 2014 Lok Sabha poll. Other regional parties, including the resurgent Samajwadi Party (SP), might coalesce around them, taking the tally to within striking distance of 200 seats. Jayalalithaa has made clear her intention to be part of a new coalition that chooses the next prime minister. Mamata is searching for a larger national role outside the shadow of the UPA. Nitish and Naveen could play leading roles in this new coalition of “the states”.

History, however, does not favour regional experiments at the Centre. In 1996, H. D. Deve Gowda formed the unstable 14-party United Front government with 192 seats. It was supported from the outside by the Congress which had 140 seats. The UF government lasted less than two years before the Congress, in time-honoured fashion, pulled the plug on it.

But if the BJP and the Congress each win only around 130-140 Lok Sabha seats in the next general election, regional parties would control over 270 MPs in a hung parliament. Whichever of the two principal national parties wins more than the critical threshold of 140 seats could end up supporting a regional front from outside. In 1996, the BJP won 161 seats with just 20.29% national voteshare. The Congress, despite a much higher national voteshare of 28.80%, won only 140 seats. This shows the importance of concentrated electoral support in a few constituencies over diffused support across a wider national swathe. It was the Congress, with 140 seats, not the BJP, with 161 seats, which played kingmaker to the unstable Deve Gowda and I.K. Gujral governments in 1996-98.

The Congress’ current predicament is largely self-inflicted. Dr. Manmohan Singh does not have the absolute executive freedom the Constitution guarantees a prime minister. The vacuum of leadership in UPA-2 has allowed allies like the TMC to hold the government to ransom on crucial policy issues. While the Congress has several talented MPs and ministers, they are doomed forever to serve in a party where the top job – with unfettered political authority – will never be theirs.

Few self-respecting professionals can thrive in a political organisation where the path to the top is permanently blocked. The talented professionals who do stay in the Congress comfort themselves with ministerships, governorships and parliamentary perks rather than pursue the intellectual challenge of policymaking and nation-building without fear of being vetoed by the party’s feudal hierarchy. The BJP meanwhile continues to suffer from a paucity of youthful talent. It will sooner rather than later have to bite the bullet on the leadership issue – Arun Jaitley, Sushma Swaraj or Narendra Modi – if it is to have a fighting chance in the next Lok Sabha election.

Meanwhile, five important takeaways from the results of the assembly elections:

1. Feudal politics has declining appeal. While the success of Akhilesh Yadav and Sukhbir Singh Badal might suggest otherwise, the more larger-than-life dynasties of Amarinder Singh, the scion of the House of Patiala, and the Gandhis in Rae Bareli were soundly defeated. (In the 10 assembly constituencies of Rae Bareli and Amethi – Sonia and Rahul’s parliamentary pocket boroughs – Congress candidates lost in 8.)

2. Mayawati’s defeat is a direct result of her government’s elephantine corruption. She may have won 25.9% of the voteshare (compared to the SP’s 29.2%, the BJP’s 15% and the Congress’s 11.6%) due to the locked-in Jatav vote, but the electorate has sent a clear message: corruption will no longer be tolerated. It is a message that should be closely listened to by all scam-tainted parties as they prepare for 2014.

3. Those who engage in brazen illegalities over mines, land and other natural resources will also suffer electorally. Tellingly, all four members of the Alemao family in Goa were defeated.

4. Congress leaders like Digvijaya Singh – who declared a week ago that the Congress would win 200 seats in UP, moderated it to 125 seats a few days later and finally on poll-eve announced on TV that his party would win at least 100 seats – stand discredited. A final tally of 28 seats is a rebuff not only to Rahul but his entire team of courtiers led by Digvijaya Singh and Rita Bahuguna Joshi.

5. The Muslim vote can no longer be taken for granted. Muslims today want education, not appeasement. Promises of reservations will not do unless they are backed up by genuinely secular politics and not a communal brand of politics masquerading as secularism which marginalises Muslims rather than treating them as Indians first.

As a first timer, I was very eager to cast my vote and have it be counted, as the entire country decides who would be the next president of this country. Watching the PCOS feed my ballot and registered my vote was a huge relief, like winning in the elections, and seeing all my efforts becoming a success. Looking at my right pointing finger darkened by an indelible ink, again and again for a week, was a happy nostalgia, a dirty cute for me. It reminds me of a day the Filipino people are united.

I hope our new president would listen to Glock 9’s Upuan, and not just sit there and enjoy his throne. Each one had their single vote for the entire country’s change. I am a Filipino, and very proud to be!

I’m confused on how you should be addressed, but I’m not confused about priorities and how to prioritize. I find most people have lost their ability to prioritize appropriately. I’m speaking about you and not the machine with a screen in front of you. I’m not speaking about people with Alzheimer’s Disease or Dementia either, although dementia can be realistic when needs and desires are confused. Yes, you can live in your little world without distinguishing between needs and wants, but how can we prioritize without the separation and what are priorities? I can list your first set of priorities, as “food, water, and air.” They are true needs for life. Now, isn’t that simple?

I can’t understand your comments for your considerations of leadership and your thoughts on how to select a leader. I would think referencing the middle of a the capitalist society to be our starting point noting people use bell curves to get acknowledgments of “mean” (average). The total of our society is based on energy. OK, for a leader, energy is a big concern, because societies are built upon productivity. Societies manufacture things. They also transport things to the market places and all of these actions require energy. Economies are the governments and the societies balancing points. Your economic energy is crud oil processing.  From a social-economics point of view, we should be concerned when over ninety-five percent of the population are the consumers. The world’s economic problems lie in the countries that do not hold the oil resources used as their economic fulcrum. Now, you know your economic balancing point, and why your society’s operable standards are balancing on it. The fulcrum is out of your hands putting your society at risk. Doesn’t this make you think twice about the wisdom of past presidents never veering to a more balanced economy for security sake.  If you think about it, it is putting all your eggs in one basket.

To maintain your society, a new energy source needs to be used. It is required to free up or float your balancing point. Alternative energy or energies are your only choices to allow fulcrum adjustments on your economic titter-totter. Alternative sources create more security for the way things are, and your country is to secure your way of life by protecting you. Evolution requires you to make adjustments, and small adjustments will not stop you in your tracks. On the other hand, a total change makes life chaotic and brutal. Human nature has created cultural diversity throughout the different parts of our world. Mother Nature knows habitability for humans requires human beings wanting different things.

If societies can’t determine their needs against feeding their desires all is not lost with our current existence. The human race continues through its diversity making The New World Order a George H. Bush and a George H. W. Bush’s pipe dream. They stood against legal marijuana, while fantasizing about the Second Roman Empire. The Second Roman Empire is their pipe dream stuffed full of dementia. Should the planet become a singular society, people would be equal to the dear in a forest. It is the habitats in control of animal populations and man would be subject to the Animal Kingdom. When dear have plenty to eat they thrive. When dear haven’t enough to eat they die. It’s Mother Nature’s population control. Your families would suffer size reductions and increases through environmental controls. Money would be a luxury of those with the world currency. The Economic Controls would be in the hands of the ruling families (Money Families). Should the world be the same as it is today the controls would be with the world’s oil barons, because they already control your society’s livelihood.

In the past, the near economic collapses and the World Recession were and are real. You currently are living in “The Great World Recession.” You are about to select your government’s leaders. Can you be wiser than your historic bumbling leaders blinded of foresight by greed. I don’t know! I hear political talk about who is conservative enough, he/she is or isn’t liberal enough, and he or she isn’t a Republican or a Democrat. For a people with a choice, your minds are everywhere except on target for a leader. Where are the priorities driving for the best man, for the job in these thoughts? You aren’t to be guided by your philosophies. Your guide should be politicians past actions.  Nothing speaks more clearly than their actions, because politicians are polished chronic liars. Your choices will be of your determined better philosophy.  Who you think is better or who performs the job?  Either can be your basis.

You identify, it is an understandable trait, but are you letting your tribal snap shot guide your decisions and not your country’s masterpiece of giving you the choice. Think on it because they are two very different things. By going with identity, you are literally saying: to hell with our community’s needs, I’m a ____________ and I will vote _________ and to think how to get the job done is another person’s problem.

The needs of my country. What foresight can I offer?