ETHICS AND MORALITY. STOP BLAMING POLITICIANS FOR THE MORAL PRIORITIES OF THE VOTER. PT 1.

(Rand Paul)

On and On it goes.  No matter what Time of Year it is, and how Far Away the next Election may be, Controversy and Rhetoric is still the Order of the Day.

However, lets cut Through all the Speeches, News Bites and Most of All, the "BLAME GAME, " and look for the Real Cause(s) for the Lack of Progress in Creating New Laws and Public Policy that will Address any Problems the U.S. may have ECONOMICALLY AND SOCIALLY.  Is it really the Fault of our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES?  Are They ROGUE EGOTISTICAL DEMAGOGUES WHO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, or ARE THEY BEHAVING AS THOSE WHO PLACED THEM IN OFFICE EXPECTED THEM TO?

Some of the GREATEST MISCONCEPTIONS AMERICANS HAVE ABOUT THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS, ESPECIALLY ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL, INCLUDE;

-  THE DISPARITY IN POWER FROM ONE CONGRESSPERSON TO ANOTHER.

-  THE MORAL BELIEFS ABOUT WHAT ROLE GOVERNMENT SHOULD PLAY IN ADDRESSING ISSUES OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE CAN DIFFER VASTLY BETWEEN MEMBERS OF THE SAME CHAMBER, COMMITTEE, OR EVEN POLITICAL PARTY.

-  THE MOTIVATIONS THAT LED TO THE ELECTORAL VICTORY OF ONE CANDIDATE, IN TERMS OF BRINGING OUT THE VOTE, COULD BE EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF THOSE THAT PLACED ANOTHER INTO ELECTED OFFICE.

FINALLY,

WHAT IS CONSIDERED IMPORTANT, ESSENTIAL AND VITAL TO VOTERS IN ONE PART OF THE COUNTRY, CAN BE TRUMPED BY THE BELIEFS OF THOSE IN A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE FIFTY STATES.

THE PROBLEM CAN BE BOILED DOWN TO ONE ESSENTIAL THEME-  THAT TRYING TO CHANGE THE MIND OF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL ABOUT WHAT COMPRISES "GOOD" AND "ETHICAL" GOVERNMENT IS SOMETIMES USELESS. IT IS THE OPINIONS OF THOSE WHO PLACED THEM IN OFFICE THAT OFTEN CARRIES THE MOST WEIGHT.  AT LEAST THE ONES THAT:  A) VOTE.  B)  CONTRIBUTE.

Date-  6/4/2015.

FEATURE ARTICLES. WHAT PROGRESSIVES MUST LEARN. PT 6.

#2-  Stop Allowing Republicans and Tea Party Candidates

to Hijack the Moral High Ground, when its Media Campaign 

is Transparent, and Easily Refuted. 

This is another case of Progressives allowing Conservative Candidates to make assertions about members of the Electorate, without any foundation.  Further, Allowing Race- Baiting, and Nationalistic Fear Mongering to remain unchallenged is giving in to the Lowest Form of Political Rhetoric.

This is Best Exemplified by the continued attempts to cast President Obamas Immigration Policy in a way that is not Based in Reality.  It is allowing those Republican Candidates to play on the Fears and Irrationality of those Americans, who either through Racial/Cultural Stereotyping or Lack of Knowledge, believe that anyone who is not an American Citizen is Automatically either a Terrorist or a Freeloader. 

How Bad is it?  Here is an example I see all to often.

THE ACCUSATION:

ALLOWING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO REMAIN IN THIS COUNTRY,  WILL TAKE JOBS AWAY FROM AMERICAN CITIZENS.

ALRIGHT, LETS TRY AGAIN, AND SEE IF WE CAN OVERCOME  ANY FLAWS IN THIS TYPE OF STATEMENT.

Question #1-  For an IMMIGRANT To Work in the U.S., WHAT FACTOR IS MOST IMPORTANT, FOR THIS TO BECOME A REALITY?

ANSWER-  There must be a Job Available for them to fill.  If there is no work to be done, then there is no controversy.

Question #2-  If there are Jobs that cannot be filled by the American Work Force, leaving an Opportunity for Foreign Labor to come in and Satisfy the Need, What Types of Situations must have occurred for this to become Possible. 

-  There is a Lack of Qualified Applicants Legally Residing in the U.S., so turning to other sources of Labor is just a matter of survival.

-  That the Employment Opportunities in Certain Sectors of the Economy are not Appealing enough to Draw in the needed numbers among the Resident Population. This could be for Economic or Social Reasons.

-  That there are Employment Opportunities in Specific Geographical Locations, and the Local Population Cannot, for various reasons, fill the Void.

The Above Questions and Answers only Deal with Employment that is Legally Recognized By Law.  This Means that they are Subject to Government Regulations, and the Employer and the Employee must report their Association so that Proper Deductions can be made by both.  This is part of Official Recognition that a Formal Relationship Legally Exists between the Two.

However, the Problems that Stem from Legal Employment, are not the Reasons for the CURRENT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION CONTROVERSY.

(TO BE CONTINUED.)

Date-  1/13/2015.

FEATURE ARTICLES. UNDERSTANDING THE JURY SYSTEM? PART 2.

As we have seen in the News the past Week, Demonstrations have turned violent in the wake of the Grand Jury decisions in Missouri and New York.

Unlike Peaceful and Thoughtful Demonstrations to make the Public aware of Their belief in the Injustice of both failures to Indict either Police Officer, these Actions only served to Polarize more of the U.S., by directing Destruction against those who had done them no Harm.  Further, Demonizing everyone wearing a Badge is Foolish and Counterproductive.

Besides, it accomplishes Nothing.  I don't Understand what possible Good it does to Direct Anger against those who may actually support your point of you. Further, do you Think such Violent Activities are going to persuade Your Opponents to Change Their Mind? 

Even Worse, it ignores the Problem they perceive to be present in the Criminal Justice System, as it Pertains to Minority Groups in the United States.

However, lets get back to the Problem at Hand, and try to Understand the Jury System as it is Currently Applied.

As I pointed out in Part 1, a Jury doesn't have to Issue any Reason for its Decision, be it a Grand Jury, Trail Jury etc.  Yet that Decision is not set in Stone as the Final Word in the Matter, at least not in every case.

This Leads us to Point #3.

Unlike a Criminal Trial by Jury, where a Not Guilty Verdict RESULTS IN THE APPLICATION OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY, A FAILURE TO INDICT IS NOT AN ACQUITTAL.  THE PROSECUTION MAY CONVENE A SECOND GRAND JURY IF, IN ITS OPINION, NEW EVIDENCE WILL BRING ABOUT AN INDICTMENT.

In Fact, even an Acquittal in a Jury Trial may not end the Legal Troubles of the Accused or Defendant.  For the Time Being, let us set aside the Recent Controversies, and take a look at History.

It is a Sad and Disturbing part of American History that Crimes Directed Against Minority Groups, were often Ignored and Given little notice by Officials Charged with protecting All of its Citizens. Racial Discrimination against African- Americans, Native Americans and Immigrants from Japan , China and other parts of Asia often meant little protection from Criminal Activities, especially if the Accusation was against a member of the Privileged Class. (Determined by Skin Color or Physical Characteristics.)

SEE PT 3.

Date-  12/10/2014.

FEATURE ARTICLES. UNDERSTANDING THE JURY SYSTEM? PART 1.

This Article could easily have been included on the CRIME AND PUNISHMENT PAGE, or even in the LOGIC CATEGORY.  

The Latest Decisions not to Indict Two Police Officers, in separate incidents...

-  The Shooting Death in Ferguson, Missouri.

-  The Choking Case in New York City.

...Has again Highlighted the Criminal Justice System in the U.S., and the question of Unequal Treatment before the Law for Minority Groups.  Both resulted in the Deaths of Two Black Males, in connection with actions committed by Police Officers.

As usual, SOME MEDIA MEMBERS, POLITICIANS, AND SOCIAL COMMENTATORS are again ignoring what is important, and FOCUSING ON SOUND BITES.

HOWEVER, lets see if we can actually find some answers by Thinking for Ourselves, and Ignoring what is on TV, RADIO, AND THE INTERNET.

Before making any Judgment about the RESPONSIBILITY OF THOSE INVOLVED IN EITHER CASE, YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF THE JURY SYSTEM. WHY?

BECAUSE THE FAILURE TO:

INDICT OR NOT INDICT 

CONVICT OR ACQUIT. 

HOLD RESPONSIBLE OR FIND BLAMELESS.

IS THE RESULT OF A DECISION MADE ORDINARY AMERICAN CITIZENS, WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE APPLYING THE LAW CORRECTLY.

Point #1-  A Juries Decision need not be justified to anyone sitting outside the Box.

If there are are no Improper Inducements or Illegalities, such as Bribery or Blackmail, a Juries decision is almost always held to be Legally Valid.

Remember, in a Trial Setting, the Jury is instructed by the Presiding Judge, as to Matters of Law.  Their Decision is to apply the Instructions to the Case at Hand.  

A Grand Jury, however , IS NOT DECIDING ON THE GUILT OR INNOCENCE OF ANYONE. THEY MUST DECIDE IF A CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED, AND IF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION COULD RESULT IN A CONVICTION.

HOWEVER, THE JURY, IN EITHER SITUATION, NEED NOT EXPLAIN THEIR REASONING TO ANYONE.  THEY ARE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO DO SO.

This leads us to Point #2-  The Verdict in a Jury Trial, or the Decision to Indict, often will be the result of the LEGAL INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN BY THE JUDGE OR PROSECUTION. HOWEVER, IF THEY ARE FOLLOWED, IGNORED, OR EVEN IMPROPER MAY NEVER BE KNOWN OUTSIDE THE JURY ROOM.

Further, the DECISION OF THE JURY MAY BE BASED ON THE COMPETENCE OR PERFORMANCE OF THOSE PRESENTING EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COURT.

This leads into a Concept that Many just Refuse to Accept:

YOU CANNOT CONCLUDE THAT ANY JURY DECISION IS EITHER RIGHT OR WRONG,  IF YOU FOCUS ON ONLY ONE ELEMENT OF THE PROCESS. DOING THIS MAY EXCLUDE FACTORS THAT HAD INFLUENCE ON THE FINAL RESULT. 

SEE PT 2