Youtube comments of silat13 (@silat13).
-
366
-
295
-
221
-
196
-
181
-
178
-
176
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
149
-
122
-
104
-
80
-
74
-
74
-
72
-
72
-
69
-
60
-
57
-
55
-
52
-
51
-
Why Libertarianism is BS
1. It's impossible. Libertarianism is impossible except for survivalist nutters and hermits. Humans need a social structure because we're a social species. Trusting that humans can moderate their own behavior on their own is just a fantasy. If we were as sparsely distributed as wolf packs, we could get along in our small groups without intervention from a higher authority in theory.... but the matriarch or patriarch would be the higher authority so even that isn't strictly libertarian. Anyway, we're long past the point in evolution where we could manage our behavior without a formal structure. Michael Shermer theorizes the optimal size for a human community to manage without any oversight is about 150. Those days are gone.
2. It's naive. It assumes people are basically good. This is a nice thought, and a refreshing break from the Christian belief that all people are sinners who need to be saved, but it's just plain wrong. Just as we differ in our DNA we differ in our personalities. Some of us will go through life making very few decisions that negatively impact others, and some of us are sociopaths. At its best, government protects the truly good from the sociopaths. Without a government, we would be reduced to lynch mobs which can only avenge bad deeds, not prevent them. And we certainly wouldn't have something like the FBI, which can trace the path of a serial killer from one area to the next based on DNA evidence, etc. I think the people who believe that "survival of the fittest ergo libertarianism" probably assume they are the fittest themselves. They don't think that they would be the victims of a sociopath. Bernie Madoff counted on this kind of hubris to make his illegal millions.
3. It's cold-hearted. For example, regulations about safety in cars aren't needed because over time car companies would be forced to make safer cars or they'd go out of business. So the people who died in fires caused by exploding gas tanks in Ford Pintos, or in wrecks caused by the design of their Corvair were just collateral damage in the evolution of better cars. People who died because of unregulated businesses did nothing to deserve that fate, except perhaps not be able to afford better cars. And the pseudo-Darwinism of libertarianism really doesn't care what the strong do to the weak. Rich and powerful people are good and deserve to be rich and powerful. The poor and powerless deserve what they get.
4. It ignores history. We haven't always had a U.S. government. It's only a little more than 200 years old. But we do know earlier forms of society. We've had monarchies. We've had theocracies. We had the ancient Roman & Greek systems that privileged people with money owned. Modern democracy certainly has its failings, but would we really be better off returning to "less" government considering what our previous systems gave us?
5. It's not natural. The underlying assumption of libertarianism is that government is an artificial construct that interferes with natural behavior, which they believe works just fine on its own. There's no evidence that humanity could have survived without some form of social organization. The instinct for survival that causes some to climb to the top of the heap and others to hide from the climbers just doesn't result in a society that works for large numbers. It probably won't work for small numbers, either.
6. It ignores human failings. We no longer live in family groups in tiny villages, and if Libertarianism became the "law" of the land, we would pretty much have to go back to that. In our distant past, we helped each other within our own group and competed against other groups for resources. Surviving without a government would require all of us to gather into small groups for protection and predation. Child abuse and spousal abuse would again be perpetrated with no recourse. Victims of alcoholism or mental illness would have no access to services, and their families would suffer. A small group's only hope of survival when "infected" with a defective member would be to ostracize that member.
7. It ignores human compassion. Libertarianism denies the instinct to help others, which has been shown in other species as well. Government taking a role in "lifting up" the poor is an extension of the instinct we would follow individually in a smaller group. By blaming the victim, libertarians can imagine themselves the agents of their own good luck. There's no place in their worldview for helping the blind, the deaf, the physically impaired, or the children of these people. The mentally ill who are incapable of working for a living due to their illness? shrug At least religions have charities that make a dent in these issues. Secular libertarians leave the powerless to their own devices as if blindness or mental illness were somehow the victim's own fault. There have been hundreds if not thousands of examples of other animals helping each other or even other species, so compassion seems to be instinctual. I have yet to meet a libertarian who has a relative that needs help to survive. If I had the power to curse people, I'd curse libertarians with multiple sclerosis. Let's see how many ways they make use of the ADA law's provisions.
8. It ignores Somalia. Somalia is/was the perfect example of libertarianism in action. There's basically no government in Somalia so we can see what would happen. Without a government, pirates and tribal groups terrorize others. Women and children are mistreated. Disease is rampant. There's no viable business other than crime. It's a chaotic mess. Why would anyone want to copy that model?
9. It's selfish. On the surface, a libertarian saying that he doesn't know what's best for someone else seems humble and charitable. But really, sometimes he would know what's best. He would know that a woman being beaten on a daily basis by an abusive husband would be better off if she could get out of that situation. He would know that someone with asthma would be better off in a world with less air pollution. His pseudo-humility covers up a basic unwillingness to get involved. Or, he's got his head in the sand when it comes to the problems of society and of individuals that are just too big or complicated for a family or small group to help with.
10. It's provincial. It ignores the fact that the economies and societies of all the world's nations are now interconnected. If someone lives in the country with well water, septic tank and a burn pit for their garbage, they can fantasize they are not relying on the government. But then when their four-year-old comes down with cancer, they're only too happy to take him to the big city hospital for chemo that was studied using federal funding.
So... I call BS on libertarianism and Penns attempt to rationalize it. It's a stupid position to take. Even if it could be implemented it couldn't succeed. Its thinly veiled social "Darwinism" but without any of the nuance of true evolutionary theory.
50
-
50
-
49
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
43
-
43
-
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
43
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
38
-
37
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
Ayn L Rand Smith will not change his deluded beliefs one bit after the education Sam just gave him.
Why Libertarianism is BS
1. It's impossible. Libertarianism is impossible except for survivalist nutters and hermits. Humans need a social structure because we're a social species. Trusting that humans can moderate their own behavior on their own is just a fantasy. If we were as sparsely distributed as wolf packs, we could get along in our small groups without intervention from a higher authority in theory.... but the matriarch or patriarch would be the higher authority so even that isn't strictly libertarian. Anyway, we're long past the point in evolution where we could manage our behavior without a formal structure. Michael Shermer theorizes the optimal size for a human community to manage without any oversight is about 150. Those days are gone.
2. It's naive. It assumes people are basically good. This is a nice thought, and a refreshing break from the Christian belief that all people are sinners who need to be saved, but it's just plain wrong. Just as we differ in our DNA we differ in our personalities. Some of us will go through life making very few decisions that negatively impact others, and some of us are sociopaths. At its best, government protects the truly good from the sociopaths. Without a government, we would be reduced to lynch mobs which can only avenge bad deeds, not prevent them. And we certainly wouldn't have something like the FBI, which can trace the path of a serial killer from one area to the next based on DNA evidence, etc. I think the people who believe that "survival of the fittest ergo libertarianism" probably assume they are the fittest themselves. They don't think that they would be the victims of a sociopath. Bernie Madoff counted on this kind of hubris to make his illegal millions.
3. It's cold-hearted. For example, regulations about safety in cars aren't needed because over time car companies would be forced to make safer cars or they'd go out of business. So the people who died in fires caused by exploding gas tanks in Ford Pintos, or in wrecks caused by the design of their Corvair were just collateral damage in the evolution of better cars. People who died because of unregulated businesses did nothing to deserve that fate, except perhaps not be able to afford better cars. And the pseudo-Darwinism of libertarianism really doesn't care what the strong do to the weak. Rich and powerful people are good and deserve to be rich and powerful. The poor and powerless deserve what they get.
4. It ignores history. We haven't always had a U.S. government. It's only a little more than 200 years old. But we do know earlier forms of society. We've had monarchies. We've had theocracies. We had the ancient Roman & Greek systems that privileged people with money. Modern democracy certainly has its failings, but we really be better off returning to "less" government considering what our previous systems gave us?
5. It's not natural. The underlying assumption of libertarianism is that government is an artificial construct that interferes with natural behavior, which they believe works just fine on its own. There's no evidence that humanity could have survived without some form of social organization. The instinct for survival that causes some to climb to the top of the heap and others to hide from the climbers just doesn't result in a society that works for large numbers. It probably won't work for small numbers, either.
6. It ignores human failings. We no longer live in family groups in tiny villages, and if Libertarianism became the "law" of the land, we would pretty much have to go back to that. In our distant past, we helped each other within our own group and competed against other groups for resources. Surviving without a government would require all of us to gather into small groups for protection and predation. Child abuse and spousal abuse would again be perpetrated with no recourse. Victims of alcoholism or mental illness would have no access to services, and their families would suffer. A small group's only hope of survival when "infected" with a defective member would be to ostracize that member.
7. It ignores human compassion. Libertarianism denies the instinct to help others, which has been shown in other species as well. Government taking a role in "lifting up" the poor is an extension of the instinct we would follow individually in a smaller group. By blaming the victim, libertarians can imagine themselves the agents of their own good luck. There's no place in their worldview for helping the blind, the deaf, the physically impaired, or the children of these people. The mentally ill who are incapable of working for a living due to their illness? *shrug* At least religions have charities that make a dent in these issues. Secular libertarians leave the powerless to their own devices as if blindness or mental illness were somehow the victim's own fault. There have been hundreds if not thousands of examples of other animals helping each other or even other species, so compassion seems to be instinctual. I have yet to meet a libertarian who has a relative that needs help to survive. If I had the power to curse people, I'd curse libertarians with multiple sclerosis. Let's see how many ways they make use of the ADA law's provisions.
8. It ignores Somalia. Somalia is the perfect example of libertarianism in action. There's basically no government in Somalia so we can see what would happen. Without a government, pirates and tribal groups terrorize others. Women and children are mistreated. Disease is rampant. There's no viable business other than crime. It's a chaotic mess. Why would anyone want to copy that model?
9. It's selfish. On the surface, a libertarian saying that he doesn't know what's best for someone else seems humble and charitable. But really, sometimes he would know what's best. He would know that a woman being beaten on a daily basis by an abusive husband would be better off if she could get out of that situation. He would know that someone with asthma would be better off in a world with less air pollution. His pseudo-humility covers up a basic unwillingness to get involved. Or, he's got his head in the sand when it comes to the problems of society and of individuals that are just too big or complicated for a family or small group to help with.
10. It's provincial. It ignores the fact that the economies and societies of all the world's nations are now interconnected. If someone lives in the country with well water, septic tank and a burn pit for their garbage, they can fantasize they are not relying on the government. But then when their four-year-old comes down with cancer, they're only too happy to take him to the big city hospital for chemo that was studied using federal funding.
So... I call BS on libertarianism. It's a stupid position to take. Even if it could be implemented it couldn't succeed. Its thinly veiled social "Darwinism" but without any of the nuance of true evolutionary theory.
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
KOCH GAME PLAN
1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. This was and is currently their platform for that year.
It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch and the current conservative movement expects to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Libertarian/fascist/neoconfederate/John Birch Society dogma that they learned from their antiAmerican government bigot father who was a bigwig in the Bircher movement.
Keep this list handy. Pass it on as often as possible.
You're going to need it in the days to come.
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
***** you are a liar or a moron. Maybe both.
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
Dom Trussardi FEDERAL COURT BARS MICHIGAN AUTHOR OF TAX BOOK FROM FILING FALSE TAX RETURNS AND FORMS
Commerce Township Couple Must Repay More Than $20,000 in Erroneous Tax Refunds
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A federal court in Detroit has permanently barred Peter and Doreen Hendrickson of Commerce Township, Mich., from filing tax returns and forms on which they falsely report their income as zero, the Justice Department announced today. The injunction order, signed by U.S. District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds, also requires the couple to repay more than $20,000 in federal income, Social Security and Medicare taxes that they had obtained by filing false tax returns with the IRS.
The order notes that the couple based their improper conduct on a book Peter Hendrickson wrote called Cracking the Code. The book states that federal tax withholding and income taxes on wages are applicable only for a limited class of people, primarily government employees. The court found that position to be “false and frivolous,” and cited an earlier court decision holding the position to be “preposterous.”
Based on advice in Hendrickson’s book, individuals have unlawfully filed tax returns with false substitute W-2 wage statements they prepare reporting little or no wage income. They also fail to submit the correct W-2 wage statement they receive from their employers. Hendrickson’s scheme is number five on the IRS’s 2007 list of the “Dirty Dozen” tax scams, posted at http://apps.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=167983,00.html.
The Justice Department sued the Hendricksons and seven others last year in suits filed in California, Nevada, Michigan, Alabama, Kansas and Florida, seeking to recover erroneous tax refunds that the nine defendants had received as a result of acting on the advice in Hendrickson’s book. The government has now prevailed against all nine defendants. Information on those suits is available at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv06219.htm.
Peter Hendrickson was convicted in 1992 on federal criminal charges for failing to file a federal income tax return and for a conspiracy involving a firebomb placed in a bin at a U.S. Post Office in Royal Oak, Mich. on April 16, 1990, the last day on which tax returns could be postmarked that year. Hendrickson testified at a co-conspirator’s trial that he wrapped a tea bag around the bomb’s tubing as a reference to the Boston Tea Party tax protest.
Since 2001, the Justice Department has obtained injunctions against more than 235 tax fraud promoters and fraudulent return preparers. More information about the Justice Department’s efforts to stop tax scams can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/taxpress2007.htm. Information about the Justice Department’s Tax Division can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/index.html.
Related Documents:
United States v.
Peter Hendrickson, et al.
Order Denying (1) Defendants’ Motion for Relief from Judgment, [26] and (2) Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration [27]
Amended Judgment and Order of Permanent Injunction [23, 24]
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
Dom Trussardi
"The case against Pete was about a civil fraud promoted by Pete Hendrickson who encourages one to file false and fraudulent returns.
Pete has never won anything, only got refunds which everyone who uses his “information” will have to pay back, plus be sued for fraudulently filing false statements.
Read what happened below wherein he testified AGAINST his own friends, in 1992, in his federal criminal trial. Written here http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/30/30.F3d.135.93-2527.html (copied below) and in order to save his own butt, he turned on his friends and cut a deal. The gal Doreen, who is now Pete’s wife, secretly worked with Pete and the government to save themselves, and the two of them secretly taped phone conversations of their friends, and turned them over to the government. Nice folks.
IF Pete’s book had any lawful substance to support his legal claims, he would not have lost his civil litigation, that requires him to pay back in excess of $20,000.
The Golson’s have to pay back $69,760.85 PLUS interest. You can read about them and the rest in the links."
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/Hendrickson_AmendedJudgPermInj.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/Dowling_Complaint.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/Golson_Complaint.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/Gerstenkorn_Complaint.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/Spitzer_Complaint.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/Artman_Complaint.pdf
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
2ndtonone1000
And the Benghazi made up scandal is laughable.
When George Bush was President 3000 Americans were killed on American soil, under Obama 4 Americans were killed in Libya.
You want to discuss gross negligence, show me a PDB titled Al Qaeda determined to kill Libyan Ambassador.
After the Supreme Court appointed bush to the White House, the Clinton Administration TRIED to brief bush about upcoming problems with Bin Laden. bush said he wasn't concerned about foreign policy, he didn't know much about it, and was going to focus on US problems.
After the transfer of power, our intelligence people tried to warn the bush Administration......REPEATEDLY. The PDB was just one of many attempts to warn bush.
After 9/11, the bush Administration tried to block efforts to have an independent Commission established in order to investigate one of the worst cases of foreign attack on US soil. They also helped control what people could and could not testify. They tried to block it, even though finding out what had gone wrong could have prevented another attack.
But after the 9/11 widows forced the issue, there was a commission. And they did come up with things to do differently, and bush didn't implement any that I know of, at least long afterwards, long after the Patriot Act, he still had done just about nothing on the list of recommendations.
Source........the 9/11 Commission Report is online at a .gov site.
And one more thing, after the 1st attack on the Trade Towers, a commission gave a report to Rudy Guiliani . He also ignored a large part of the report. One important part was to move the emergency communications operations out of those buildings. Very few people stood up to him, when he was later running for higher office, to ask why he didn't follow the recommendations, that could have saved lives.
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
Garrett1240 I have concluded that you are too stupid to comment on this forum.
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kiss rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
John Warren The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
Dom Trussardi UNITED STATES SUES NINE IN NATIONWIDE CRACKDOWN ON TAX-REFUND SCAM
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Justice Department announced today that, in a nationwide crackdown against a tax-fraud scheme promoted by Peter Eric Hendrickson of Commerce Township, Mich., it has brought suit against nine people this week. According to the government complaints, filed in seven lawsuits across the country, the nine people—including Hendrickson and his wife Doreen M. Hendrickson—have received a total of nearly $150,000 in erroneous tax refunds by submitting false forms with their federal tax returns to replace W-2 and 1099 forms that correctly reported their income.
In seven suits filed in U.S. district courts in California, Nevada, Michigan, Alabama, Florida and Kansas, the Justice Department seeks to recover the erroneous refunds. In addition, the suit against Hendrickson, filed in the Eastern District of Michigan, asks the court to enjoin him from filing false tax forms and returns. A violation of the injunction would be punishable as contempt of court.
According to the complaint, Hendrickson claims that only government workers are subject to income taxes. Hendrickson tells people to not submit their W-2 and 1099 forms with their tax returns, and in their place submit substitute or corrected W-2 and 1099 forms that they create on which they change their reported income to zero. Under the scheme, people then submit the falsified forms with a tax return falsely reporting no income and request a refund of all taxes withheld from wages. This scheme is number one on the IRS’s 2006 list of the “Dirty Dozen” tax scams, posted at http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=154293,00.html.
“Federal law provides serious penalties for filing false tax forms,” said Eileen J. O’Connor, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Tax Division. “People who engage in tax fraud schemes can expect to pay back taxes, plus interest and penalties, and may face criminal prosecution for evading taxes.”
The suit against Hendrickson alleges that he was convicted in 1992 on federal criminal charges for failing to file a federal income tax return and for a conspiracy involving a firebomb placed in a bin at a U.S. Post Office in Royal Oak, Mich. on April 16, 1990, the last day on which tax returns could be postmarked that year. Hendrickson testified at a co-conspirator’s trial that he wrapped a tea bag around the bomb’s tubing as a reference to the Boston Tea Party tax protest.
The seven people sued in addition to the Hendricksons are Sharon K. Artman of Largo, Fla.; Michael J. Dowling of San Diego; Joy M. Ferguson of Henderson, Nev.; Melvin L. Gerstenkorn of Topeka, Kan.; Larry B. Golson and Debra G. Golson of Montgomery, Ala.; and James A. Spitzer of Winter Park, Fla. Copies of all seven complaints will be posted with this press release today at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/taxpress2006.htm.
This week’s suits are part of the IRS’s and Justice Department’s efforts against tax-fraud schemes. More information about these efforts can be found at www.usdoj.gov/tax/taxpress2006.htm. Information about the Tax Division can be found at www.usdoj.gov/tax/index.html.
« back
30 F.3d 135
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Karen SCARBOROUGH, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 93-2527.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
July 28, 1994.
Before: MARTIN, SUHRHEINRICH, and DAUGHTREY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
1
Defendant Karen Scarborough appeals her conviction on one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice and several counts of making false statements before the grand jury. Defendant challenges her jury conviction on four grounds: (1) that the district court erred in concluding that defendant's false statements to the grand jury were material; (2) that the district court abused its discretion in refusing to allow defendant to cross examine a witness about his polygraph; (3) that the district court abused its discretion in allowing the jury to review transcripts of tapes during deliberation; and (4) that the government failed to introduce sufficient evidence to support defendant's conviction.
2
These arguments lack merit, and we AFFIRM defendant's conviction.
I.
3
This case arises out of a grand jury investigation into a "firebombing" at the Royal Oak Post Office on April 16, 1990, which occurred when an incendiary device, placed among a number of tax returns, erupted into flames. The fire injured Thomas Berlucci, a postal employee, who had collected the smoking package from the mail receptacle.
4
The ensuing investigation focused on the Libertarian Party, members of which were protesting at the post office when the incident occurred. Eventually the investigation focused on two members, Pete Hendrickson and his girlfriend at the time, Doreen Wright.
5
During the grand jury investigation, witnesses testified that prior to April 16, 1990, several members of the party met to discuss the possibility of placing an incendiary device in the mail on income tax day to protest the tax system. Witnesses testified that defendant had attended that meeting.
6
The grand jury subpoenaed defendant, who received immunity prior to testifying.1 Defendant testified that she had attended the meeting described by other witnesses but had no recollection of a discussion about putting a bomb in the mail; that she had no prior knowledge or involvement in the scheme; and that she was with Pete Hendrickson at the post office on April 16, and that he could not have planted the device.
7
After Hendrickson and Wright were charged with conspiracy, Hendrickson entered into a plea agreement and agreed to cooperate with the government. Hendrickson and Wright then surreptitiously taped conversations between Karen Scarborough and her husband. The tapes corroborated Hendrickson's version of the incident: that defendant, her husband and Hendrickson assembled the device; that the three went to the post office on April 16, and that Scott Scarborough planted the device at the post office. Defendant and her husband were indicted and charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice by presenting false testimony before the grand jury and also with several counts of perjury.
II. Materiality
8
Defendant contends that the evidence did not establish that her testimony to the grand jury was material to any matter that the grand jury was investigating at the time she gave the testimony. The issue of materiality is a legal question "not a question of fact." United States v. Giacalone, 587 F.2d 5, 6 (6th Cir.1978), cert denied, 442 U.S. 940 (1979). False testimony is material "if it has the natural effect or tendency to impede, influence or dissuade the grand jury from pursuing its investigation. Merely potential interference with a line of inquiry is sufficient to establish materiality, regardless of whether the perjured testimony actually serves to impede the investigation." United States v. Richardson, 596 F.2d 157, 165 (6th Cir.1979) (quoting United States v. Howard, 560 F.2d 281, 284 (7th Cir.1977)).
9
Defendant argues that the district court incorrectly concluded that false statements made by defendant to the grand jury were material because: (1) no grand jury members were called to testify as to whether defendant's testimony impeded their investigation of Hendrickson; and (2) the grand jury had sufficient evidence from other witnesses to proceed against Hendrickson.
10
These arguments are unpersuasive. First, the test is not concerned with actual interference, only with whether the false testimony could have interfered. Consequently, no member of the grand jury needed to testify that defendant's testimony interfered with their investigation. United States v. Swift, 809 F.2d 320, 324 (6th Cir.1987). Secondly, although the investigation had already targeted Hendrickson and Wright at the time defendant testified, defendant denied all knowledge of the crime and provided a false alibi for Hendrickson. Her statements were intended to persuade the grand jury that Hendrickson was not involved. Truthful answers by defendant probably would have aided the grand jury in its investigation and broadened the scope of the investigation. Accordingly, we hold that the defendant made false statement concerning matters "material" to the investigation.
III. Polygraph
11
Defendant contends that the district court abused its discretion in precluding reference to the fact that Pete Hendrickson had taken a polygraph examination or to the results of that examination on the ground that these matters lacked probative value on the issue of Hendrickson's credibility. The Sixth Circuit has never imposed a per se prohibition on the admission of polygraph evidence. United States v. Betancourt, 838 F.2d 168 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1013 (1988). Admissibility is decided after a two-step analysis. "First, the trial court must determine if the proffered evidence is relevant. Second, if the court concludes that the proffered evidence is relevant, it must balance the probative value of the evidence against the hazard of unfair prejudice and/or confusion which could mislead the jury." Wolfel v. Holbrook, 823 F.2d 970, 972 (6th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1069 (1988).
12
Here, defendant wanted the polygraph results admitted to attack Hendrickson's credibility. Credibility, however, is a matter for the jury to decide based on the testimony and demeanor of the witness as he testifies. Admitting the results of a polygraph could unduly influence this credibility determination. Consequently, admission of polygraph results is the exception, not the rule. United States v. Blakeney, 942 F.2d 1001, 1014 (6th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 881 (1992). The district court decided that the facts in this case did not present circumstances so unusual as to warrant an exception to the general rule. There is no basis to find that the district court abused its discretion in prohibiting the admission of the results.
IV. Transcripts
13
Defendant contends that the trial court erred in allowing the jury to have the transcript of taped conversations during deliberations. We review for abuse of discretion. United States v. Larson, 722 F.2d 139 (5th Cir.1983) (holding no prejudicial error in allowing jury to have transcript not formally admitted as evidence during deliberation where jury read transcript during trial and was instructed to resolve inconsistencies in favor of the tape), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 907 (1984). See also United States v. Puerta Restrepo, 814 F.2d 1236, 1242 (7th Cir.1987) (allowing jury to have transcripts even though identity of one of the speakers named on the transcript was disputed where court instructed jury that tapes, not transcripts, were evidence); United States v. Williford, 764 F.2d 1493, 1503 (11th Cir.1985) (absent showing that transcripts were inaccurate or that specific prejudice occurred, no error in allowing transcripts to go to jury during deliberations).
14
Defendant claims that the transcript omitted exculpatory passages contained on the original tape and concludes that she was prejudiced beca
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
ThatGuyFromMaineThatGuyFromMaine
CONFEDERATES
The Confederate Flag Is a Racist Symbol of a Failed Rebellion. It's Not a Debate.
There are white Southerners who venerate their Confederate ancestors as heroes, even patriots. One of mine was a deserter. I wish he hadn't fought at all.
My great-great grandfather was conscripted into the Confederate Navy and assigned to a ship guarding Mobile Bay, in Alabama. In August 1864, after Union vessels sank his ship in a battle that would close the Confederacy's last port, he swam to shore and walked home -- a distance of about 400 miles, according to research my father did a few years ago.
I don't know much else about him, other than that he owned a small farm and that he did not own any slaves. That he was drafted into the military may suggest he was not eager to fight for the South, but I don't know whether he believed in the cause -- only that when he saw his opportunity, he abandoned it.
The Confederacy was the most vile and harmful political invention in United States history. It was founded on the explicit principle that slavery is the "natural and normal condition" of black people, and that they should be ruthlessly exploited to the benefit of their white masters. More Americans died in the bloodletting that followed than in World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam combined.
Where in that story arc is anything worth celebrating? Yet 150 years after the Civil War ended in utter defeat for the Confederacy, a flag of that failed pseudo-nation still flies on public property. And once again, following the killing of nine black parishioners by an apparent white supremacist inside a church in Charleston, South Carolina, we are talking about whether it should.
This isn't at all a difficult question. There is no place for the flag of a rebellious breakaway region on public property anywhere in the United States.
It certainly does not belong above a memorial steps from the South Carolina statehouse, where apparently it cannot ever be lowered -- under force of law.
White Southerners who support the display of the flag claim it is a symbol of their "heritage," when what they really mean is it reminds them of an imagined past where white people held all the power and minorities were kept properly in their place. They say it honors their ancestors, though most likely know less about theirs than I do about mine.
These are the things they say when they are trying to be polite. On Friday, the website of the Alabama Media Group created an ill-conceived forum for readers to "debate" the Confederate flag issue. Not surprisingly, the nasty side of the Internet showed up in force, with the poor employee assigned to moderate the comment section required to put in a CrossFit-level workout just to keep up.
Pulling down a few Confederate flags isn't going to help families of the victims of the Charleston shootings, nor will it erase the legacy of racism and hate that sadly persists to this day. But at least there will be fewer visible reminders of it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-hallman/confederate-flag-racist-symbol_b_7624566.html
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
BUBBLEGUM GUN is stupid and he proves it daily.
For years, the right wing has been equating nazism, with the left, and socialism. This is standard propaganda for Fox News and the Tea Party which both denounce Obama as a socialist and at the same time portray him visually with a Hitler mustache. Conservatives have also argued that Jared Loughner -- the shooter of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords -- was influenced by leftwing ideology because his reading list included both Das Kapital by Karl Marx and Hitler's Mein Kampf (without mentioning another book on his list, We the Living, by Ayn Rand).
The conflation of nazism and socialism has gone largely unchallenged by the media, and through repetition it is becoming almost "common knowledge" in the US, so I feel compelled to speak against it. I hope that others, especially professors who have occasion to talk about it in and out of class, will also speak against this vile propaganda.
The basis of the conflation of nazism and socialism is the term "National Socialism," a self description of the Nazis. "National Socialism" includes the word "socialism", but it is just a word. Hitler and the Nazis outlawed socialism, and executed socialists and communists en masse, even before they started rounding up Jews. In 1933, the Dachau concentration camp held socialists and leftists exclusively. The Nazis arrested more than 11,000 Germans for "illegal socialist activity" in 1936.
Nazism is a right wing ideology. It is violently racist, anti-socialist, and it targets the political left for extermination.
Now why dont you join your coward friend Alex Spec at stormfront.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
***** CONFEDERATES
The Confederate Flag Is a Racist Symbol of a Failed Rebellion. It's Not a Debate.
There are white Southerners who venerate their Confederate ancestors as heroes, even patriots. One of mine was a deserter. I wish he hadn't fought at all.
My great-great grandfather was conscripted into the Confederate Navy and assigned to a ship guarding Mobile Bay, in Alabama. In August 1864, after Union vessels sank his ship in a battle that would close the Confederacy's last port, he swam to shore and walked home -- a distance of about 400 miles, according to research my father did a few years ago.
I don't know much else about him, other than that he owned a small farm and that he did not own any slaves. That he was drafted into the military may suggest he was not eager to fight for the South, but I don't know whether he believed in the cause -- only that when he saw his opportunity, he abandoned it.
The Confederacy was the most vile and harmful political invention in United States history. It was founded on the explicit principle that slavery is the "natural and normal condition" of black people, and that they should be ruthlessly exploited to the benefit of their white masters. More Americans died in the bloodletting that followed than in World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam combined.
Where in that story arc is anything worth celebrating? Yet 150 years after the Civil War ended in utter defeat for the Confederacy, a flag of that failed pseudo-nation still flies on public property. And once again, following the killing of nine black parishioners by an apparent white supremacist inside a church in Charleston, South Carolina, we are talking about whether it should.
This isn't at all a difficult question. There is no place for the flag of a rebellious breakaway region on public property anywhere in the United States.
It certainly does not belong above a memorial steps from the South Carolina statehouse, where apparently it cannot ever be lowered -- under force of law.
White Southerners who support the display of the flag claim it is a symbol of their "heritage," when what they really mean is it reminds them of an imagined past where white people held all the power and minorities were kept properly in their place. They say it honors their ancestors, though most likely know less about theirs than I do about mine.
These are the things they say when they are trying to be polite. On Friday, the website of the Alabama Media Group created an ill-conceived forum for readers to "debate" the Confederate flag issue. Not surprisingly, the nasty side of the Internet showed up in force, with the poor employee assigned to moderate the comment section required to put in a CrossFit-level workout just to keep up.
Pulling down a few Confederate flags isn't going to help families of the victims of the Charleston shootings, nor will it erase the legacy of racism and hate that sadly persists to this day. But at least there will be fewer visible reminders of it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-hallman/confederate-flag-racist-symbol_b_7624566.html
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
***** Reagan increased the size of govt 191%,, He increased spending to match .. All it takes to dispel the GOP myth of Republicans spending less is to do a little reading , a little history.
Bush's spending lit the fuse on this recession and the debt,,
When Obama took office we were losing 850,000 jobs a month, unemployment was at 11%,
The GDP was at a negative 12% growth, All due to Bushs policies.
And we were in 2 useless never ending wars that had no declared goal .
Now unemployment is at under 8%, A 3% drop,,,
the GDP is at 2% a 13% gain.
1 war has ended .
The other is set to end,..
Are we better off than we were 4 years ago? Hell yes,,
The last thing we need is to put the Party that crashed the economy
and spent like "Drunken Sailors" back in control”
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
ThatGuyFromMaine CIVIL WAR - William Tecumseh Sherman, 1860
You people of the South don't know what you are doing. This country will be drenched in blood, and God only knows how it will end. It is all folly, madness, a crime against civilization! You people speak so lightly of war; you don't know what you're talking about. War is a terrible thing! You mistake, too, the people of the North. They are a peaceable people but an earnest people, and they will fight, too. They are not going to let this country be destroyed without a mighty effort to save it... Besides, where are your men and appliances of war to contend against them? The North can make a steam engine, locomotive, or railway car; hardly a yard of cloth or pair of shoes can you make. You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical, and determined people on Earth—right at your doors. You are bound to fail. Only in your spirit and determination are you prepared for war. In all else you are totally unprepared, with a bad cause to start with. At first you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane. If your people will but stop and think, they must see in the end that you will surely fail. - William Tecumseh Sherman, 1860
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Bernie please pull Hillary further and further to the left.
Thom you need to question Bernie on his support of immunity for the gun manufacturers.
GUNS and BERNIE
Bernie is far from perfect on guns
Sanders’ vote for a different kind of pro-gun bill is more puzzling—and profoundly disturbing. In 2005, a Republican-dominated Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law doesn’t protect gun owners; it protects gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers. The PLCAA was the No. 1 legislative priority of the National Rifle Association for years, because it shields gun makers and dealers from most liability when their firearms are used criminally. It is one of the most noxious pieces of pro-gun legislation ever passed. And Bernie Sanders voted for it. (Sanders’ campaign has not replied to a request for comment.)
Because the PLCAA deals with tort law—not a topic of great interest for most Americans—it didn’t stir much outrage when first passed. But the act’s primary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded. Every state imposes liability on manufacturers who are negligent in their production and sale of products. If I crash my Prius because its accelerator malfunctions, I can sue Toyota for negligently manufacturing a faulty pedal. If my child dismembers himself with a blender at Sears, I can sue Sears for negligently leaving that blender within a child’s reach. If I get stabbed by a teenager with a switchblade, I might be able to sue the pawn shop owner who illegally sold a knife to a minor.
Before the PLCAA, most states imposed some form of tort liability on gun makers and sellers. If a gun manufacturer made an assault rifle that could slaughter dozens of people in a few seconds, for instance, one of its victims might sue the company for negligently making a gun that could foreseeably be used for mass murder. If a gun seller sold a gun to a customer without performing any kind of background check—and then the buyer opened fire on the subway—his victims might sue that seller for negligently providing a gun to a mentally unstable person. The standards in each state differed, but the bottom line remained the same: Victims of gun violence and their families could recover financially from the people and companies who negligently enabled gun violence.
The PLCAA changed all that. Remarkably, the act wiped out gun liability laws in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a handful of narrow exceptions. (So much for states’ rights.) Thanks to the law, victims of mass shootings are barred from suing the companies that produced a wartime weapon that no civilian could ever need. With few exceptions, victims cannot sue a gun seller for negligently providing a semiautomatic weapon to a lunatic who shoots them in a movie theater. Even if a jury decides a gun maker or seller should be liable, the PLCAA invalidates its verdict. The law tramples upon states’ rights, juries’ rights, and fundamental precepts of America’s civil justice system. And it received Bernie Sanders’ support—in both 2003 (when it was first introduced) and 2005 (when it finally passed).
Every few years, the families of mass shooting victims take gun makers to court for creating a weapon seemingly designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. Every time, they run headfirst into the PLCAA. Right now, the families of Sandy Hook victims are searching for a loophole in the law, so they can sue Bushmaster for making the gun that sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds. They will probably fail.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
+Cyruss NP do you have a clue what "theory" means?
FACTS THEORIES ETC
Colloquial Use
To use math expressions, the general use of these words goes in order of importance as: Fact > Law > Theory > Hypothesis.
"Fact" in Everyday Language: A "fact" is something that is true. Whether you like it or not, "facts are stubborn things" (thank you, John Adams … or, "facts are stupid things" courtesy of Ronald Reagan). In general use, a "fact" is the strongest thing that can be said about, well, anything.
"Law" in Everyday Language: In everyday language, a "law" is generally on the same level as a fact. A law is something that is true, that generally explains or answers lots of different things. However, outside of politics, "law" is rarely used unless actually referring to something scientific.
"Theory" in Everyday Language: This is where the supposed insult to scientists comes in when you call something "just a theory." Outside of scientific circles, a "theory" is more of a supposition. "I have a theory that my cat will meow when it hears someone at the door." It may or may not be "true," but it's a supposition I have that is probably supported by at least some sort of observation. But it's really "just a theory" and is just as likely to be shown wrong at any given time as it is to be shown right.
"Hypothesis" in Everyday Language: A "hypothesis" is sort of on the same level as a "theory," if slightly below. To most people, they can be used interchangeably, though most will just resort to "theory" because "hypothesis" is an extra syllable longer and makes you sound like a nerd.
Scientific Use
In science, the order of importance of these is almost reversed: Theory > Law > Hypothesis > Facts. In addition, each term has a specific, well-defined use.
"Fact" in Science: It may surprise you to know that a "fact" is generally used the same way - it is an observation - but it is very specific. For example, if I drop a ball while holding it in the air above a surface, it is a fact that it will fall to the surface. This term is usually not used, however - we resort to "observations." For example, I observe that when the wind blows, a flag will flutter.
"Hypothesis" in Science: This is an "idea" that is formulated to explain observations (or our "facts"). In the above to examples, I might hypothesize that there is a force that pulls on the ball, counteracted when I'm holding it. Or that the wind exerts a force on the flag that causes it to flutter. The purpose of a hypothesis is to explain one or more observations in a cogent way. A good hypothesis must be testable - it must be able to make predictions about what would happen in similar situations - otherwise a hypothesis can never be verified nor refuted … and it remains "just a hypothesis." At present, String "Theory" is really just a hypothesis.
"Law" in Science: Laws are a descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances. For example, Kepler's Three Laws of Planetary Motion are (1) Planets travel in ellipses with one focus being the Sun, (2) planets sweep out equal area in equal time, and (3) a planet's period-squared is proportional to its semi-major-axis-cubed. Laws are generally made from many facts/observations and are effectively an "elevated" level from a hypothesis. Another example are the Laws of Thermodynamics. Because a Law is just a description of how something behaves and it does not explain why it behaves that way, it is usually considered to be below the level of a theory.
"Theory" in Science: A theory is really one of the pinnacles of science - what nearly everyone strives to make out of their hypotheses. A hypothesis is elevated to a theory when it has withstood all attempts to falsify it. Experiment after experiment has shown it sufficient to explain all observations that it encompasses. In other words, a "theory" has never been shown to be false, despite - usually - hundreds if not thousands of separate attempts to break it. It explains the observations with one or more mechanisms and, because it provides that mechanism, it is considered to be above the level of a Law. Examples these days are the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, the Germ Theory of Disease, and yes, the Theory of Evolution.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Libertarianism in the KKK errr the USA is a different animal altogether.
Ga here is the American Libertarian Platform and plan for America.
Senator Bernie Sanders went back in time to 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. He found their platform for that year, and published it again. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
Ryan is a dick and the media has not been doing their job when it comes to telling the people what these Ayn L Randian tards are up to.
KOCH Christian Taliban Libertarian Bircher Bigot GOP GAME PLAN
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
GOP PLATFORM 2016
Some tasty bits.
Below are some of the Republican Platform. Much like the idiot Libertarian platform. ANARCHY is the result of these idiotic anti American platforms.
Here are 50 ... right-wing proposals in the 2016 GOP platform
Each of the following Republican planks can be evaluated using the yard-stick of the “Golden-Rule
“Do NOT do unto others that which you wish not be done unto you”
Tax cuts for the rich: (prime directive)
Deregulate the banks: (let recessions and depressions regulate the economy)
Stop consumer protection: (you don’t matter, only business)
Start repealing environmental laws: (LA was great in the early 70’s)
Start shrinking unions and union labor: (America went downhill since the weekend)
Privatize federal railway service (Amtrak): (taking profit out of the common good)
No change in federal minimum wage: (you don’t matter, only business)
Cut government salaries and benefits: (you don’t need good services; hire the cheapest)
Appoint anti-choice Supreme Court justices: (Republican activist judges are not activists)
Appoint anti-LGBT and anti-Obamacare justices: (see above)
Legalize anti-LGBT discrimination: (What ‘golden rule’?)
Make Christianity a national religion: (Violation of US Constitution)
Loosen campaign finance loopholes and dark money: (Money and guns and oligarchy)
Loosen gun controls nationwide: (Guns and money and dead mommas)
Pass an anti-choice constitutional amendment: (What ‘golden rule’?)
End federal funding for Planned Parenthood: (Women don’t matter)
Allow states to shut down abortion Clinics: (Women don’t matter)
Oppose stem cell scientific research: (Science doesn’t matter)
Oppose executive branch policy making: (Things like Bush’s preemptive war idea)
Oppose efforts to end the electoral college: (Democracy is such a bother, let the rich rule)
Require citizenship documents to register to vote: (Your papers, bitte!)
Ignore undocumented immigrants when drawing congressional districts: (Democracy is such a bother, let the rich rule)
No labeling of GMO ingredients in food products: (Science doesn’t matter, you don’t matter, only business)
Add work requirements to welfare and cut food stamps: (pyramids for porridge)
Open America’s shores to more oil and gas drilling: (Water, water, everywhere-none is fit to drink)
Build the Keystone XL Pipeline: (clean water doesn’t matter)
Expand fracking and burying nuclear waste: (air, water, health… it’s not money)
No tax on carbon products: (prime directive)
Ignore global climate change agreements: (keeping one’s pledge is not a Republican thing)
Privatize Medicare, the health plan for seniors; (taking profit out of the common good)
Turn Medicaid, the poor’s health plan, over to states: (life expectancy by zip code)
No increasing Social Security benefits by taxing the rich: (prime directive)
Repeal Obamacare: (Hey! You were born; dignity of life is for fetuses)
Give internet service providers monopoly control: (taking profit out of the common good)
Make English the official U.S. language: (‘Cuz that’s what Jesus spoke)
No amnesty for undocumented immigrants: (Kick them out; crops rotting in the fields)
Build a border wall to keep immigrants out: (Keep them out; food prices rise and shelves empty)
Require government verification of citizenship of all workers: (Your papers, bitte!)
Penalize cities that give sanctuary to migrants: (Local control is such a bother)
Puerto Rico should be a state but not Washington DC: (Local control is such a bother)
Support traditional marriage but no other families: (favoritism is so American, but you don’t matter)
Privatize government services in the name of fighting poverty: (taking profit out of the common good)
Require bible study in public schools: (Violation of US Constitution)
Replace traditional public schools with privatized options: (taking profit out of the common good)
Replace sex education with abstinence-only approaches: (Science doesn’t matter)
Privatize student loans instead of lowering interest rates: (taking profit out of the common good)
Restore the death penalty: (Daily NRAterrorist death penalties abound in America)
Dramatically increase Pentagon budget: (without violating prime directive)
Cancel Iran nuclear treaty and expand nuclear arsenal: (keeping one’s pledge is not a Republican thing)
and:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/heres-are-50-shockingly-extreme-right-wing-proposals-in-the-2016-gop-platform/
7
-
7
-
Keith Peters
still one of the top brainwashed right wing ideologues on the tube. He has no thoughts of his own. He recycles the talking points that the K0CH funded media sells him. He has not the brain capacity to actually research issues so he just uses his bigotry and hatred to fire himself up. And let us not forget that Keith like so many of his fellow right wing empty heads is one of the moochers that Robme was actually talking about.
So you say the ACA took your healthcare away
http://occupyamerica.crooksandliars.com/diane-sweet/obamacare-horror-story-debunked#sthash.3Flcr67w.dpbs
Deborah Cavallaro got a letter from Anthem Blue Cross which stated, “Because of the requirements of the new laws, we can no longer offer your current Anthem policy.”
Deborah Cavallaro was all over the news on Wednesday as an example of someone who lost her existing health insurance thanks to Obamacare. Except one problem -- the plan she qualifies for is better. Under her current plan, she is limited to two doctor visits a year, pays $293 a month with a yearly deductible of $5,000. Cavallaro says she was told by her insurance broker she would be paying $478 a month -- but she didn’t check the website herself. There, she would have found a better plan, with only a $2,000 deductible and all doctor visits covered by a copay...for only $40 more a month.
Cavallaro told CBS Los Angeles that she received a letter from Anthem Blue Cross which stated, “Because of the requirements of the new laws, we can no longer offer your current Anthem policy.”
“I was infuriated, totally infuriated,” she said. “It’s sort of forcing you to walk the plank.”
CBS:
"The letter also said that Cavallaro is being offered a new policy and her monthly payment will increase from $292 to $484.
“The president kept saying, you know, ‘If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Your premiums will be going down.’ But, in fact, the letter is completely contradictory to that,” said Cavallaro.
Jamie Court, the president of Consumer Watchdog, said major health insurance companies are simply taking advantage of the confusion surrounding the new health care law to engage in price gouging.
“This is not the fault of the Affordable Care Act or President Obama. This is the fault of the insurance company. This is a handful of insurance companies that have convinced a very gullible state agency, Covered California, to allow them to drop plans that could very easily…with a few little tweaks… be compliant under the Affordable Care Act, and people wouldn’t have to leave their plans,” said Court."
Michael Hiltzik at the LA Times talked with Cavallaro, 60, after her CNBC appearance:
"Her current plan, from Anthem Blue Cross, is a catastrophic coverage plan for which she pays $293 a month as an individual policyholder. It requires her to pay a deductible of $5,000 a year and limits her out-of-pocket costs to $8,500 a year. Her plan also limits her to two doctor visits a year, for which she shoulders a copay of $40 each. After that, she pays the whole cost of subsequent visits.
This fits the very definition of a nonconforming plan under Obamacare. The deductible and out-of-pocket maximums are too high, the provisions for doctor visits too skimpy.
As for a replacement plan, she says she was quoted $478 a month by her insurance broker, but that's a lot more than she'll really be paying. Cavallaro told me she hasn't checked the website of Covered California, the state's health plan exchange, herself. I did so while we talked.
Here's what I found. I won't divulge her current income, which is personal, but this year it qualifies her for a hefty federal premium subsidy.
At her age, she's eligible for a good "silver" plan for $333 a month after the subsidy -- $40 a month more than she's paying now. But the plan is much better than her current plan -- the deductible is $2,000, not $5,000. The maximum out-of-pocket expense is $6,350, not $8,500. Her co-pays would be $45 for a primary care visit and $65 for a specialty visit -- but all visits would be covered, not just two.
Is that better than her current plan? Yes, by a mile.
If she wanted to pay less, Cavallaro could opt for lesser coverage in a "bronze" plan. She could buy one from the California exchange for as little as $194 a month. From Anthem, it's $256, or $444 a year less than she's paying now. That buys her a $5,000 deductible (the same as she's paying today) but the out-of-pocket limit is lower, $6,350. Office visits would be $60 for primary care and $70 for specialties, but again with no limit on the number of visits. Factor in the premium savings, and it's hard to deny that she's still ahead."
Hiltzik notes that "The sad truth is that Cavallaro has been very poorly served by the health insurance industry and the news media. It seems that Anthem didn't adequately explain her options for 2014 when it disclosed that her current plan is being canceled. If her insurance brokers told her what she says they did, they failed her. And the reporters who interviewed her without getting all the facts produced inexcusably shoddy work -- from Maria Bartiromo on down. They not only did her a disservice, but failed the rest of us too."
Excellent journalism, Mr. Hiltzik.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Taxpayers Funding Creationism In Schools Across The Country
Politico has found that taxpayers in 14 states are paying a billion dollars this year in school tuition's and hundreds of them are religious which teach that evolution is a fraud while science is a form of hocus-pocus nonsense.
Taxpayers in 14 states will bankroll nearly $1 billion this year in tuition for private schools, including hundreds of religious schools that teach Earth is less than 10,000 years old, Adam and Eve strolled the garden with dinosaurs, and much of modern biology, geology and cosmology is a web of lies.
Now a major push to expand these voucher programs is under way from Alaska to New York, a development that seems certain to sharply increase the investment.
Public debate about science education tends to center on bills like one in Missouri, which would allow public school parents to pull their kids from science class whenever the topic of evolution comes up. But the more striking shift in public policy has flown largely under the radar, as a well-funded political campaign has pushed to open the spigot for tax dollars to flow to private schools. Among them are Bible-based schools that train students to reject and rebut the cornerstones of modern science.
When you're dealing with the religious right, no matter how many times the courts shut them down, they always come back with something new to circumvent the rules. And as much as they attack the government for overreaching, they certainly squeeze out oodles of cash for their own causes.
Decades of litigation have established that public schools cannot teach creationism or intelligent design. But private schools receiving public subsidies can — and do. A POLITICO review of hundreds of pages of course outlines, textbooks and school websites found that many of these faith-based schools go beyond teaching the biblical story of the six days of creation as literal fact.
Their course materials nurture disdain of the secular world, distrust of momentous discoveries and hostility toward mainstream scientists. They often distort basic facts about the scientific method — teaching, for instance, that theories such as evolution are by definition highly speculative because they haven’t been elevated to the status of “scientific law.”And this approach isn’t confined to high school biology class; it is typically threaded through all grades and all subjects.
One set of books popular in Christian schools calls evolution “a wicked and vain philosophy.” Another derides “modern math theorists” who fail to view mathematics as absolute laws ordained by God. The publisher notes that its textbooks shun “modern” breakthroughs — even those, like set theory, developed back in the 19th century. Math teachers often set aside time each week — even in geometry and algebra — to explore numbers in the Bible. Students learn vocabulary with sentences like, “Many scientists today are Creationists."
The lies they tell their children is mind boggling.
If only these people worked half as hard to try and fix the real problems of our country and stop buying into Conservative economic principles that only support the phony "job creators" meme, we'd be so much better off.
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/03/us-taxpayers-funding-creationism-schools
6
-
6
-
***** IRAN CONTRA
First, let's recall the history from the mid-Twentieth Century. It shouldn't surprise anyone that this country suffered for decades due to our intervention when we deposed Mossadegh in 1953, is still viewed as sneaky and suspicious. Never did Iran attack our country, they only reacted to our support of the Shah by staging the 1979 hostage crisis because of our country's interventionist policies. Blowback is a bitch. Here's why they released the hostages the very same day Reagan was sworn in.
Ronald Reagan was sworn into office on January 20, 1981, just as Iran released 52 Americans held hostage at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran for 444 days. The timing was deliberate. The young revolutionary regime did not want the hostages freed until after Jimmy Carter, who had supported the shah and allowed him into the United States, left office. At the same time, Tehran wanted to clear the slate in the face of a new Republican administration that had vowed to take a tougher stand on terrorism and hostage-taking. But Iran also had bigger problems. Four months earlier, on September 20, 1980, Iraq had invaded, and Iran was embroiled in a life-or-death struggle. For the first 18 months of the war, virtually all the fighting took place on Iranian territory.
Let's give credit where credit's due; Iran needed our military help, so they gave up the hostages in exchange for something that would mire the Reagan Administration with the scandalous reputation it so richly deserved: Iran-Contra. The problem with all this today, however, is the American people have a very, very short memory and have largely forgotten the events that occurred three decades ago. The only thing they remember is that Iran is one of the "Great Satan" countries and we should NEVER do anything to facilitate peace and prosperity in that country. Republicans are very much in favor of either not teaching history at all or simply rewriting it to suit their objectives.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
+Scotto Wd you are living in a world of delusion.
"More guns equal less crime!"
John Lott Jr. wrote a controversial book titled More Guns, Less Crime that has been debunked by peer review. The Harvard Injury Control Research Center discovered a positive correlation between gun ownership and violence. Since the 1970's crime has been declining with gun ownership in the United States. However, recently gun ownership has been increasing and not surprisingly, violent crime.
The south is the most violent region in the country, and has the highest prevalence of gun carrying. The Johns Hopkins Center For Gun Policy and Research found that expanding conceal carry laws increases aggravated assaults. European countries have strikingly more stringent gun restrictions and less gun violence. Comparatively, 15 of the 25 worst mass shootings in the past 50 years have occurred in the US.
"The UK has the highest violent crime rate in the world!"
Based on statistics, the UK's violent crime rate is the highest in Europe and is higher than that of the US. However, gun violence in the UK is substantially lower than in the US. There are several potential reasons for the high violent crime including the rise and fall of lead-based paint and leaded petrol. Researchers have linked lead to violent behavior. Another factor could be the UK's judicial system. Many repeat offenders serve shorter prison terms and find themselves back on the streets. There is no evidence however, to suggest that the high violent crime rate in the UK is due to the lack of guns.
"Australia's gun control caused its murder rate to increase!"
This claim is false. Murder rates in Australia reached record lows in 2009.
"But Chicago is more violent than Houston!"
In the US gun laws are not uniform between or even within states. Chicago has tight gun laws, but the rest of Illinois does not and neither does Indiana. It was found that many of Chicago's guns come from surrounding areas in the state or Indiana. Firearms travel from areas with loose gun laws to those with tight laws. Weak national regulations undermine attempts at gun control everywhere. The number of illegal firearms in circulation is a testament to the inadequacy of national gun laws. Most gun violence occurs with such weapons. There are also other factors that determine gun violence, but the guns themselves cannot be excused.
"But I need my gun for defense! Gun restrictions hurt law abiding citizens!"
John Lott Jr. and professor Gary Kleck, a criminologist, argue that guns are frequently used for self defense. These claims have also been debunked by peer review. A study by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig titled "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," found that Kleck's defensive gun use numbers are "far too high" to the point of suggesting bias, as are numbers by similar studies. The National Institute of Justice found that there is even an overestimation in Cook and Ludwig's study. Another study by the Berkley Media Studies Group found similar discrepancies with Kleck's and Lott's defensive gun use claims. According to the Harvard Injury Control Research Center a gun in the home is more likely to be used to commit suicide or to threaten or kill an intimate than used to deter an attacker. The Stanford Law Review found More Guns, Less Crime to be lacking in statistical support. Lott has also come under scrutiny for ethics violations regarding his research. There has been doubt cast on whether or not Lott actually conducted his study at all.
"But I need a gun because the government might become tyrannical!"
The idea of government corruption is nothing new. The Founders understood that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. They designed the system with checks and balances in order to combat this problem. Constant competition within the bureaucracy and between the three branches would assure no one person or group became too powerful. A testament to the success of this system is the fact that we have seen people like Tom DeLay, Scooter Libby, and Jack Abramoff come and go, and the machinery has kept turning.
There are 456 reported federal agencies in our government. Within each of these there are bureaucracies. What most people do not realize is that the size of government is actually a check on its power rather than a sign of it. It is true that as government grows, so too does the number of regulations, but the more people means more competition, and competition means security.
Still, safeguards against tyranny are not only systemic. America's political culture is one with a deep-rooted, 200 year tradition of democracy. The American people are extremely wary of government infringing on individual liberty which can be traced back to our revolutionary experience. There is no way in our system for one person or party to consolidate power.
This paranoia has increased greatly among right wing groups since the election of President Obama even though he is by no means the first president to support gun control measures. He is different from previous president's in one very superficial way. Given the history of the America's right, promotion for political purposes of fears that Obama is going to take away the guns and become a tyrant is reminiscent of the Southern Strategy.
"But Hitler and Stalin took away the guns and look what happened!"
This argument is historically inaccurate. University of Chicago law professor Bernard Harcourt explained in his 2004 paper, Weimar Germany had tougher gun laws than Nazi Germany. Hitler expanded private gun ownership. It is true that Gypsies and Jews were not permitted to own guns, but there is no basis for the belief that these two groups would have stopped the Holocaust had they been armed. If anything, it would have "hastened their demise" according to Robert Spitzer, Chair of SUNY-Cortland's political science department. Hitler was extremely popular among the German people and throughout the world. To suggest that the only thing keeping Hitler in power was control of guns exonerates the many who supported him. The same is true of the Bolsheviks in Soviet Russia: the idea that an armed populace would have stopped Stalin is a fantasy. Like Hitler, Stalin was extremely popular.
"But cars kill more people than guns!"
Yes, but automobiles have a purpose other than killing people. Moreover, we regulate cars, we require seat belts, restrict speed, and require a license and insurance in order to drive. Police nationwide are cracking down on drunk driving with checkpoints. These actions have cut down on fatalities. Before you get a license you have to demonstrate ability to drive.
"But legal gun owners don't commit crimes!"
We covered the fact that the likelihood of homicide increases with a gun in the home. It is true however that the majority of gun crime occurs with illegal guns, but that number, as established, speaks loudly to our weak national gun laws due to interstate gun trafficking. Guns become illegal when they are bought in an area with lax laws and sold in an area with tight laws on the black market. Even then, as the number of legal guns increases, so too does the likelihood of a gun falling into the wrong hands, as shown by the Sandy Hook shooting.
According to the Cook and Ludwig survey, male gun owners in 1994 were two and a half times as likely to be arrested than non gun owners for non-traffic offenses. A Mother Jones report found that the majority of the guns used in mass shootings have been legally purchased.
"Criminals will not submit to background checks!"
As established, defensive gun use is extremely rare. People disobey speed limits all the time, but does that really mean we shouldn't have them? Do speed limits do no good?
"But the '94 Assault Weapons Ban did not work!"
The ban was riddled with loopholes gauged into the legislation thanks to efforts by the gun lobby. What's more, research on the effects of the ban is lacking due to congressional restrictions.
Aside from assault weapons, large capacity magazines were also outlawed by the ban. While the former only account for a fraction of gun crime, the latter are much more common in murders and mass shootings according to the only formal assessment of the ban. A Mother Jones report revealed that mass shootings have been on the rise, particularly since 2007. A recent study by Johns Hopkins University found that high capacity magazines allow for higher casualties.
It is worth considering that three of the recent mass shootings have involved an AR-15 which was illegal under the ban.
"But the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun!"
This argument is based more on fantasy than practicality. Columbine High School had an armed guard during the shooting in 1999 and Virginia Tech had its own campus police force, and in neither case did these good guys stop the shooter(s). During the mass shooting in Tucson, AZ, an armed man nearly shot the unarmed individual who disarmed Jared Loughner when he was reloading. Now let's apply the good guy argument to Aurora. Shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is the classic example of endangering others, one can only imagine the catastrophe that would have occurred at the Aurora theater had more people had guns.
"But gun laws in general do not work!"
Aside from the information given above, there is something else to consider before making this claim: Automatic weapons. Automatic weapons are used infrequently in crimes and are well regulated.
"But assault weapons aren't frequently used in crimes!"
It is true that most gun violence occurs with handguns, but attacks with assault style weapons have been found to have 54 percent more deaths.
"But violent video games are just as responsible for gun murders!"
Video game consumption is higher in other countries. The US is an outlier due to its high levels of gun violence.
"But the Second Amendment is absolute!"
The Supreme Court has ruled that this is false. Even Justice Antonin Scalia has acknowledged that the Second Amendment has limitations. Every other right Americans have has limitations. These include both speech and privacy. While people were busy defending their guns, the government has slowly been encroaching on the Bill of Rights with laws like the PATRIOT Act.
"But the NRA represents freedom!"
The biggest problem with today's discussion about gun control is that ideology clouds the facts. People seek confirmation bias on the internet as opposed to forming their opinions based on real information. The NRA spends large amounts of money to skew the debate. But why is the NRA so set on opposing all gun legislation? Republican pollster Frank Luntz found that most gun owners, even those who are members of the NRA, favor tighter gun laws. In the past it has supported gun control measures. Today, the NRA represents gun manufacturers on its board of directors' Nominating Committee.
"But...you're wrong. This is a mental health problem, and nothing is going to change!"
Don't shoot the messenger. Guns give people a sense of power and in the wrong hands that is a deadly combination. There is no question that poverty, a poor mental health system, drugs, and gang activity play roles in this issue; the problem of gun control is multifaceted. But, part of the solution must be tighter enforcement and tighter regulation.
The tide is turning in spite of the NRA's efforts. Popular support for gun control will eventually win out. Two-thirds of Americans favor tighter gun laws. If Congress does not act, there is reason to believe that there will be political ramifications. Every day people are killed by guns, legal and illegal.
6
-
6
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Babba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
+canyon report If I was weak willed like you and believed in the fairy tale then Satan would be my hero.
SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
6
-
+sausagemcbean Go figure that Reagan would be blamed, when Reagan started this shit.
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
I cannot tell the difference between the christian taliban and their Islamic cousins.
CHRISTIAN TERROR.
You ever heard of the Bosnian War? It's this little thing that went down back in the early 90s. Bosnian Serbs (Christians) went about on an ethnic cleansing campaign in which tens of thousands of Muslims were systematically raped, tortured, and murdered. They did it in the name of Christianity. Evangelical Christians in several African countries have made headlines in recent years for butchering homosexuals and people who refused to convert to their religion. Don't try to claim that Christians do not commit atrocities in the name of their religion.
Or how about Argentina:
"As many people as is necessary will die in Argentina," Videla told the region's army commanders, gathered in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1975, "to protect the hemisphere from the international communist conspiracy." He was true to his word. Months later, on 24 March 1976, the armed forces overthrew the inept and chaotic government of María Estela Martínez ("Isabelita"), the widow of Juan Domingo Perón.
They installed a ferocious military regime. During the next six years, it murdered up to 30,000 people in the name of "national reorganization" and western, CHRISTIAN civilization.
"Where are Christians beheading people?"
Nagaland, parts of Africa, parts of Asia.
"Where are Christians burning people alive in the name of Christ?"
Nagaland, parts of Africa, parts of Asia.
"Where are Christians slitting throats and screaming 'praise Jesus'?"
Nagaland again, not sure about Africa or Asia on that one.
"Where are Christians harming, murdering, throwing gays from rooftops as ISIS is doing or hanging them from cranes as Iran does?"
Parts of Africa, parts of the US, parts of Asia, parts of Russia and the former USSR. Specifically throwing off roofs, I'm not sure.
Oh and I have much more if you are still going to act stupid.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
GOD THE ABORTIONIST
Dear Forced Birther...
Your God Is Not Pro Life
You might find that statement surprising, but I know this from your own holy book. Despite what you may have been told, the Bible is not a pro-life document. It is, in many parts, pro-death. In one of the first stories in the Bible, God murders millions of people through a global flood — including born and unborn children. Unborn children — the ones you fight for. God only wanted to get rid of them.
Later in your holy book God commands the death of nation after nation because they happen to inhabit the land he plans to give the Israelites
(Josh 7-9). He commands Israel to kill women and children (1 Sam 15).
When he wanted to make a point to the Egyptians, he murdered all the firstborn sons of Egypt. Innocent children. And when King David killed a man and slept with his wife, God punished him by killing his unborn child.
This same God does nothing while billions of people throughout
history have been starved, drowned, raped and murdered. He sits on the sidelines and watches.
That is not a God who is pro-life!
On top of all that, at least 25% of all pregnancies end in “natural” abortion — which you believe your God either designed or actively performed — an act you consider murder.
No, your God is not pro-life. By your own standards, he is a murderer — the most prolific abortionist of all time.
So don’t tell us you base your morality on the Bible or on the character of God. Don’t tell us you’re sent from your God to protect the lives of the innocent. Despite what your pastor says, your God is not pro-life. He has been killing, maiming, and letting people suffer for ages. You’re pro-life because, like most humans, you value human life.
I also value human life, but it has nothing to do with supernatural beings.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2009/07/your-god-isnt-pro-life/
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
Joslyn Kylie
fool extraordinaire.
KOCH GAME PLAN
Senator Bernie Sanders went back in time to 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. He found their platform for that year, and published it again. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
5
-
5
-
Same amount of things that the christian sky fairy says you cannot do.
Who happens to be the same cod that the muslims pray too.
Shortlist:
Eating rabbits, pigs, or camels.
Leviticus 11:4 “Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.”
No shellfish, clams, oysters, urchins, or lobsters.
Leviticus 11:10 “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.”
No eating cats, dogs, and ferrets
Leviticus 11:27 “And whatsoever goeth upon his paws, among all manner of beasts that go on all four, those are unclean unto you: whoso toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until the even.”
No eating snails, moles, weasels, mice, rats, bats, bugs, insects, worms, spiders, roaches, etc.
Leviticus 11:28–29 “These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind, and the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole.”
Don't eat fat or blood
Leviticus 3:17 “It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood"
You cannot eat certain birds.
Leviticus 11:13–20 “These are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the osprey, and the vulture, and the kite after his kind; every raven after his kind; and the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you.”
If you wear ripped jeans, you're going to burn.
Leviticus 10:6 “Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon all the people.”
Oh, yeah. You also can't wear mixed cloth, bitch.
Leviticus 19:19 “Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.”
No short haircuts
Leviticus 19:27 “Ye shall not round the corners of your heads.”
Beard required
Leviticus 19:27 “Neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.”
That tat of a cross isn't getting you extra credit, Johnny.
Leviticus 19:28 “Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.”
Don't put two seeds in the same crop, 'cause it's an abomination...for some reason.
Leviticus 19:19 “Thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed.”
That mixed-breed dog you have? Yeah...that'll grant you a one way ticket to hell, too.
Leviticus 19:19 “Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind.”
No grudge-holding!
Leviticus 19:18 “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people.”
Touch a dirty puppy? BURN!
Leviticus 5:2 “If a soul touch any unclean thing, whether it be a carcase of an unclean beast, or a carcase of unclean cattle, or the carcase of unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him; he also shall be unclean, and guilty.”
Wait...so less church is good?
Leviticus 12:4–5 “And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled. But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.”
No alcohol in church (people probably don't do this anyw- oh wait)
Leviticus 10:9 “Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die.”
No manual labor on Saturdays.
Leviticus 23:3 “Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings.”
No going to church after birth.
Leviticus 12:2 "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean."
No tarrot cards
Leviticus 19:31 "Do not turn to mediums or spiritists..."
Pull out=die
Genesis 38:9-10 "Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother's wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord; so He took his life also."
No divorce
Mark 10:9 "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
No balls=No gawd
Deuteronomy 23:1 "A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord."
No jewelry
Timothy 2:9 "Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments."
If someone's attacking you, you can't grab your attacker's privates.
Deuteronomy 25:11-25:12 "If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity."
Don't fuck your wife's mom
Leviticus 20:14 "'If a man marries both a woman and her mother, it is wicked. Both he and they must be burned in the fire, so that no wickedness will be among you."
Don't go to church if you're Asian.
Leviticus 21:17 “Say to Aaron: ‘For the generations to come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God. 18 No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; nor his nose or eyes be flat."
Kill anyone with a different religion than Christianity
Deuteronomy 17:2-17:7
“If there is found in your midst, in any of your [a]towns, which the Lord your God is giving you, a man or a woman who does what is evil in the sight of the Lord your God, by transgressing His covenant, 3 and has gone and served other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the heavenly host, which I have not commanded, 4 and if it is told you and you have heard of it, then you shall inquire thoroughly. Behold, if it is true and the thing certain that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, 5 then you shall bring out that man or that woman who has done this evil deed to your gates, that is, the man or the woman, and you shall stone them to [b]death. 6 On the [c]evidence of two witnesses or three witnesses, he who is to die shall be put to death; he shall not be put to death on the [d]evidence of one witness. 7 The hand of the witnesses shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. So you shall purge the evil from your midst."
Don't say "Fuck you, mom!" Even if you're a rebellious teen.
"Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death. Because they have cursed their father or mother, their blood will be on their own head."
If you've ever cheated on someone, you're going to Hell.
Leviticus 20:10 "If a man commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, both the man and the woman who have committed adultery must be put to death."
If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their community"
"If a man has sexual relations with a woman during her menstrual period, both of them must be cut off from the community, for together they have exposed the source of her blood flow."
Picking up grapes that have fallen in your vineyard
Leviticus 19:10 "Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God."
God hates honey.
Leviticus 2:11 "Do not use yeast in preparing any of the grain offerings you present to the LORD, because no yeast or honey may be burned as a special gift presented to the LORD."
Buying a house.
Leviticus 25:23 "The land must never be sold on a permanent basis, for the land belongs to me. You are only foreigners and tenant farmers working for me."
Mistreating foreigners
Leviticus 19:33-19:34 “the foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born”
Stand when you talk to grandpa.
Leviticus 19:32 "Stand up in the presence of the elderly, and show respect for the aged. Fear your God. I am the LORD"
Lying
Leviticus 19:11 "Do not steal. "Do not deceive or cheat one another."
Cheating
Leviticus 19:11 "Do not steal. "Do not deceive or cheat one another."
Funny how so many Christians nowadays say homosexuality is an abomination, when they are committing abominations themselves when they say this.
I'm a straight supporter of the LGBT community, and I'm proud of it. Are you, too?
Bonus! The raped person must marry their own rapist!
Deuteronomy 22:28-29
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Part of the K0CH Taliban Platform that deals with this video talk:
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
The rest of the K0CHsucker Taliban platform:
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
DEBT lesson for Armando the Dim...
Unfortunately, Republicans never learn from history. We've had three decades to determine whether or not tax cuts for the rich help our economy. They don't. Even tax cuts for the rest of us only help it marginally. And Republicans think spending cuts help in a recession and will do something for the deficit. This is new for them since Republican administration have always promoted more spending during recessions, especially government hiring. But this is only when there's a Republican in the White House. When there's a Democrat in the White House, all of a sudden deficits are terrible and the debt that they built up during their term is a disaster that's all the Democrats' fault. It's a scam! I just wish their millions of followers could see this.
If tax cuts for the rich helped our economy and created jobs, we would be at full employment by now. In fact, there would be so many jobs, we'd be begging the retired people to come out of retirement and fill them. We'd be begging for more immigration so we could get more people filling all those jobs. Companies would be desperate to get enough workers, and wages would have skyrocketed, not stagnated and even declined as they have on average for the past 33 years.
What does it take for these people to face reality? They just keep marching in lockstep with this strange and selfish ideology without ever seeming to consider that the results of their actions actually hurt people, kicking them off the rolls of the employed and causing them to descend into poverty. This is not promoting the general welfare or insuring domestic tranquility, which "conservatives" tend to ignore even though they're right there at the beginning of the Constitution among the purposes for having a government. Are we a caring government or not? And which party seems to care more than the other about what actually happens to those in need? I think these are important questions to ask. Republican policies are geared towards helping only the rich. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
***** who has an IQ of 23 this is for you:
For years, the right wing has been equating nazism, with the left, and socialism. This is standard propaganda for Fox News and the Tea Party which both denounce Obama as a socialist and at the same time portray him visually with a Hitler mustache. Conservatives have also argued that Jared Loughner -- the shooter of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords -- was influenced by leftwing ideology because his reading list included both Das Kapital by Karl Marx and Hitler's Mein Kampf (without mentioning another book on his list, We the Living, by Ayn Rand). The conflation of nazism and socialism has gone largely unchallenged by the media, and through repetition it is becoming almost "common knowledge" in the US, so I feel compelled to speak against it. I hope that others, especially professors who have occasion to talk about it in and out of class, will also speak against this vile propaganda. The basis of the conflation of nazism and socialism is the term "National Socialism," a self description of the Nazis. "National Socialism" includes the word "socialism", but it is just a word. Hitler and the Nazis outlawed socialism, and executed socialists and communists en masse, even before they started rounding up Jews. In 1933, the Dachau concentration camp held socialists and leftists exclusively. The Nazis arrested more than 11,000 Germans for "illegal socialist activity" in 1936. Nazism is a right wing ideology. It is violently racist, anti-socialist, and it targets the political left for extermination. Now why dont you join your coward friend Alex Spec at stormfront.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
CHRISTIAN TERROR?
Yes it exists even though the Christian apologists deny it.
You ever heard of the Bosnian War? It's this little thing that went down back in the early 90s. Bosnian Serbs (Christians) went about on an ethnic cleansing campaign in which tens of thousands of Muslims were systematically raped, tortured, and murdered. They did it in the name of Christianity. Evangelical Christians in several African countries have made headlines in recent years for butchering homosexuals and people who refused to convert to their religion. Don't try to claim that Christians do not commit atrocities in the name of their religion.
Or how about Argentina:
"As many people as is necessary will die in Argentina," Videla told the region's army commanders, gathered in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1975, "to protect the hemisphere from the international communist conspiracy." He was true to his word. Months later, on 24 March 1976, the armed forces overthrew the inept and chaotic government of María Estela Martínez ("Isabelita"), the widow of Juan Domingo Perón.
They installed a ferocious military regime. During the next six years, it murdered up to 30,000 people in the name of "national reorganization" and western, CHRISTIAN civilization.
That is the short list.
Just ask K0CH Talibanistas about the Kkkristian war in the middle east.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
What is your point? Do you have one? Please tell me.
NOW is funded by many organizations that believe in women's equality.
The short list of funders:
NOW has received funding from the American Express Foundation, the Baker Street Foundation, the California Endowment, the ChevronTexaco Foundation, the Community Foundation of Greater Memphis, the Fannie Mae Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Hilton Foundation, the Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation, the Philadelphia Foundation, the New World Foundation, the New York Community Trust, the New York Times Company Foundation, George Soros's Open Society Institute, the Rockefeller Family Fund, the Shefa Fund, the Target Foundation, and the Vanguard Public Foundation.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
The only known indictment under the Logan Act was one that occurred in 1803 when a grand jury indicted Francis Flournoy, a Kentucky farmer, who had written an article in the Frankfort Guardian of Freedom under the pen name of "A Western American." In the article, Flournoy advocated a separate nation in the western part of the United States that would ally with France.
Guess we can arrest and charge the K0CHers that call for secession. LET'S DO IT NOW.
Logan Act:
Passed under the administration of President John Adams, during tension between the U.S. and France, it was informally named for Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, a state legislator (and later US Senator) and pacifist who in 1798 engaged in semi-negotiations with France during the Quasi-War.
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not. The Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.
5
-
5
-
Dems channeling Reagan is laughable. He was the great Satan. Yes he was good at lying errr messaging but we need to stop using his name.
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central America.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Khrushchev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
5
-
Melissa Vasquez SS data from the Social Security Administration to calculate how much of the shortfall would be eliminated by various options. To illustrate how Social Security's long-term finances have become worse in the past two years, the AP also calculated the share of the shortfall that would have been eliminated, if the options had been adopted in 2010.
_
Taxes
Social Security is financed by a 12.4 percent tax on wages. Workers pay half and their employers pay the other half. The tax is applied to the first $110,100 of a worker's wages, a level that increases each year with inflation. For 2011 and 2012, the tax rate for employees was reduced to 4.2 percent, but is scheduled to return to 6.2 percent in January.
Options:
_Apply the Social Security tax to all wages, including those above $110,100. Workers making $200,000 in wages would get a tax increase of $5,574, an amount their employers would have to match. Their future benefits would increase, too. This option would eliminate 72 percent of the shortfall. Two years ago, it would have wiped out 99 percent.
_Increase the payroll tax by 0.1 percentage point a year, until it reaches 14.4 percent in 20 years. At that point, workers making $50,000 a year would get a tax increase of $500 and employers would have to match it. This option would eliminate 53 percent of the shortfall. Two years ago, it would have wiped out 73 percent.
_
_
Cost-of-living adjustments
Each year, if consumer prices increase, Social Security benefits go up as well. By law, the increases are pegged to an inflation index. This year, benefits went up by 3.6 percent, the first increase since 2009.
Option: Adopt a new inflation index called the Chained CPI, which assumes that people change their buying habits when prices increase to reduce the impact on their pocketbooks. The new index would reduce the annual COLA by 0.3 percentage point, on average. This option would eliminate 19 percent of the shortfall. Two years ago, it would have eliminated 26 percent.
_
Benefits
Initial Social Security benefits are determined by lifetime wages, meaning the more you make, the higher your benefit, to a point. Initial benefits are typically calculated using up to 35 years of wages. Earnings from earlier years, when workers were young, are adjusted to reflect the change in general wage levels that occurred during their years of employment.
Tinkering with the benefit formula can save big money, but cuts to initial benefits mean lower monthly payments for the rest of a retiree's life. The average monthly benefit for a new retiree is $1,264.
Option: Change the calculation for initial benefits, but only for people with lifetime wages above the national average, which is about $42,000 a year. Workers with higher incomes would still get a bigger monthly benefit than lower paid workers but not as big as under current law. It's a cut they would feel throughout their entire retirement. This option would eliminate 34 percent of the shortfall. Two years ago, it would have eliminated almost half.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Rob Mews
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Babba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Defund, defund, and defund some more until the government does not work. Then make the serfs believe government is a failure. Then bring in the privateers to buy up public lands, assets and take over all services.
This is the K0CHservative plan people.
K0CH Taliban Game plan excerpts that have to do with the imbecile that called Thom:
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
The WHOLE KOCH GAME PLAN
In 1980, David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. This is the K0CH platform. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His greedy insane and traitorous sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
4
-
4
-
4
-
Here is the K0CH platform. I see no reason to find common ground with those that want to destroy government and sell America to the highest bidder.
KOCH GAME PLAN
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
4
-
4
-
4
-
skedaddleMLS
No one said just sit back. Are you just making that up? Yep.
How about we get after all those reichwing christian extremists on the right? FuX news incites hatred and violent 24/7 and the K0CH party buries the government assessments as to how dangerous rightwing terror is in the USA.
RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS
A report published by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy on Jan. 15 discusses the potential dangers of “violent far-right” organizations, which has angered some conservatives that believe the military should focus on international threats.
The executive summary of the paper, “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” claims that “since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self- identify with the far-right of American politics.”
Written by Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, the paper asserts that three distinct ideologies exist in the “American violent far right.” Those are “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement,” the last of which “includes mainly Christian Identity groins such as the Aryan Nations.”
“Findings indicate that…it is not only feelings of deprivation that motivate those involved in far right violence, but also the sense of empowerment that emerges when the political system is perceived to be increasingly permissive to far right ideas,” it later reads.
The rise in attacks in the 21st century were significant, as “Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%.”
The study also found that “presidential election years and the preceding year are characterized by an increase of far-right violence,” leading the author to conclude that “in general, far-right groups and individuals are more inclined to engage in violence in a contentious political climate.”
Furthermore, it found that the number of Republicans in the House was positively correlated with an increase in far-right violence, although the causes were not immediately clear. The study posits that it could mean those groups believed those legislators might be “more tolerant of their activities” or possibly that “the high expectations of far-right activists during a conservative legislature” were not “fulfilled.”
Some conservatives object to the report. The Washington Times, The National Review, and World Net Daily all report on critical reactions from the right, according to the Atlantic Wire, with blogger Pamela Geller calling it an “appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat.”
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
"How to Determine if Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions." Just pick "A" or "B" for each question.
1. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to go to a religious service of my own choosing.
B) Others are allowed to go to religious services of their own choosing.
2. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to marry the person I love legally, even though my religious community blesses my marriage.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.
3. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.
4. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to pray privately.
B) I am not allowed to force others to pray the prayers of my faith publicly.
5. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Being a member of my faith means that I can be bullied without legal recourse.
B) I am no longer allowed to use my faith to bully gay kids with impunity.
6. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to purchase, read or possess religious books or material.
B) Others are allowed to have access books, movies and websites that I do not like.
7. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious group is not allowed equal protection under the establishment clause.
B) My religious group is not allowed to use public funds, buildings and resources as we would like, for whatever purposes we might like.
8. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Another religious group has been declared the official faith of my country.
B) My own religious group is not given status as the official faith of my country.
9. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious community is not allowed to build a house of worship in my community.
B) A religious community I do not like wants to build a house of worship in my community.
10. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public school science classes are teaching science.
Scoring key:
If you answered "A" to any question, then perhaps your religious liberty is indeed at stake. You and your faith group have every right to now advocate for equal protection under the law. But just remember this one little, constitutional, concept: this means you can fight for your equality -- not your superiority.
If you answered "B" to any question, then not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others. This is the point where I would invite you to refer back to the tenets of your faith, especially the ones about your neighbors.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Culturebreach MYTH
“Israel discriminates against its Arab citizens.”
FACT
Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights; in fact, it is one of the few places in the Middle East where Arab women may vote. Arabs in 2011 held 14 seats in the 120-seat Knesset. Israeli Arabs have also held various government posts, including one who served as Israel’s ambassador to Finland and the deputy mayor of Tel Aviv. Oscar Abu Razaq was appointed Director General of the Ministry of Interior, the first Arab citizen to become chief executive of a key government ministry. Ariel Sharon’s original cabinet included the first Arab minister, Salah Tarif, a Druze who served as a minister without portfolio. An Arab is also a Supreme Court justice. In October 2005, an Arab professor was named Vice President of Haifa University.
Arabic, like Hebrew, is an official language in Israel. More than 300,000 Arab children attend Israeli schools. At the time of Israel’s founding, there was one Arab high school in the country. Today, there are hundreds of Arab schools. 29
The sole legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that the latter are not required to serve in the Israeli army. This is to spare Arab citizens the need to take up arms against their brethren. Nevertheless, Bedouins have served in paratroop units and other Arabs have volunteered for military duty. Compulsory military service is applied to the Druze and Circassian communities at their own request.
Some economic and social gaps between Israeli Jews and Arabs result from the latter not serving in the military. Veterans qualify for many benefits not available to non-veterans. Moreover, the army aids in the socialization process.
On the other hand, Arabs do have an advantage in obtaining some jobs during the years Israelis are in the military. In addition, industries like construction and trucking have come to be dominated by Israeli Arabs.
Although Israeli Arabs have occasionally been involved in terrorist activities, they have generally behaved as loyal citizens. During the 1967, 1973 and 1982 wars, none engaged in any acts of sabotage or disloyalty. Sometimes, in fact, Arabs volunteered to take over civilian functions for reservists. During the Palestinian War that began in September 2000, Israeli Arabs for the first time engaged in widespread protests.
The United States has been independent for 235 years and still has not integrated all of its diverse communities. Even today, nearly half a century after civil rights legislation was adopted, discrimination has not been eradicated. It should not be surprising that Israel has not solved all of its social problems in only 63 years.
MYTH
“Israeli Arabs are barred from buying land in Israel.”
FACT
In the early part of the century, the Jewish National Fund was established by the World Zionist Congress to purchase land in Palestine for Jewish settlement. This land, and that acquired after Israel’s War of Independence, was taken over by the government. Of the total area of Israel, 92 percent belongs to the State and is managed by the Land Management Authority. It is not for sale to anyone, Jew or Arab. The remaining 8 percent of the territory is privately owned. The Arab Waqf (the Muslim charitable endowment), for example, owns land that is for the express use and benefit of Muslim Arabs. Government land can be leased by anyone, regardless of race, religion or sex. All Arab citizens of Israel are eligible to lease government land.
In 2002, the Israeli Supreme Court also ruled that the government cannot allocate land based on religion or ethnicity, and may not prevent Arab citizens from living wherever they choose. 30
Meanwhile, in 1996, the Palestinian Authority (PA) Mufti, Ikremah Sabri, issued a fatwa (religious decree), banning the sale of Arab and Muslim property to Jews. Anyone who violated the order was to be killed. At least seven land dealers were killed that year. 31
On May 5, 1997, Palestinian Authority Justice Minister Freih Abu Middein announced that the death penalty would be imposed on anyone convicted of ceding “one inch” to Israel. Later that month, two Arab land dealers were killed. A year later, another Palestinian suspected of selling land to Jews was murdered. The PA has also arrested suspected land dealers for violating the Jordanian law (in force in the West Bank), which prohibits the sale of land to foreigners. 32 An Islamic judge renewed the fatwa barring Palestinians from selling property to Jews in 2008 and, as recently as June 2010, a Palestinian was imprisoned for 10 years on charges of selling land to Israel. 33
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Fox News Mouthpiece WELCOME TO THE AMERICAN "christian" TALIBAN.......
These are the fundamental christians trying to create a fundamental theological nation.... Read the website and recognize that the wheels are in motion and have been since the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's...
The conservative "christian" fundamentalists commit domestic terrorism because they use fear, lies, and religious propagand to further their agenda of a white dominated, conservative christian, theological nation-->which goes against our current SECULAR ideology and laws. Some of these include (and I'm sure there's more) .....
*War on women's rights to choose and control over their own bodies = SHARIA LAW
*Voter rights suppression of what they consider "second-class citizens"....ieminorities, pagans (what they consider all other so called religions), LGBT, nonbelievers, poor, homeless, elderly and disabled.
*Worker rights suppression via low/slave wages , distruction of the middle class, and dismantling of unions to oppress worker rebellion
*Religious indoctrination of our public school system to get them converted while they are young, removal of true science for creationism, pushing biblical stories into the curriculum and rewriting history to brainwash future generations.
*Pushing their religious beliefs and agenda into our SECULAR government, laws, justice system and more....
*They have a specific agenda and folks like Bush, Coulter, Santorum, Bachmann, Cruz, Paul, Perry, Abbots, Pat Robertson, and soooo many more are a part of this group. Faux, conservative media, and all the far right organizations that push agenda through lobbying, threats of killing re-elections, and lots of money help them as well.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Wow. So he is for racial profiling. He just said it. To be clear I think it is responsible to profile those that fit the PROFILE. So why are so many of you arguing that he did not say that he supported "racial" profiling.
And I argue that in America it is white right wing Christians that should be profiled as they are purveyors of the vast majority of terrorism in America.
RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS
A report published by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy on Jan. 15 discusses the potential dangers of “violent far-right” organizations, which has angered some conservatives that believe the military should focus on international threats.
The executive summary of the paper, “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” claims that “since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self- identify with the far-right of American politics.”
Written by Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, the paper asserts that three distinct ideologies exist in the “American violent far right.” Those are “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement,” the last of which “includes mainly Christian Identity groins such as the Aryan Nations.”
“Findings indicate that…it is not only feelings of deprivation that motivate those involved in far right violence, but also the sense of empowerment that emerges when the political system is perceived to be increasingly permissive to far right ideas,” it later reads.
The rise in attacks in the 21st century were significant, as “Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%.”
The study also found that “presidential election years and the preceding year are characterized by an increase of far-right violence,” leading the author to conclude that “in general, far-right groups and individuals are more inclined to engage in violence in a contentious political climate.”
Furthermore, it found that the number of Republicans in the House was positively correlated with an increase in far-right violence, although the causes were not immediately clear. The study posits that it could mean those groups believed those legislators might be “more tolerant of their activities” or possibly that “the high expectations of far-right activists during a conservative legislature” were not “fulfilled.”
Some conservatives object to the report. The Washington Times, The National Review, and World Net Daily all report on critical reactions from the right, according to the Atlantic Wire, with blogger Pamela Geller calling it an “appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat.”
4
-
George Montag he is not a left winger. Sad that you buy into that.
His religion and its policies are “brutally repressive. Christianity is a comprehensive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine, especially bad for women, for homosexuals, for Jews, other minority, religious faiths, well, pretty much just about for all human beings, actually.
Back to reality. So why did Bush and the cons give gun manufacturers immunity from law suits? Car manufacturers do not get that immunity.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
BUBBLEGUM GUN For years, the right wing has been equating nazism, with the left, and socialism. This is standard propaganda for Fox News and the Tea Party which both denounce Obama as a socialist and at the same time portray him visually with a Hitler mustache. Conservatives have also argued that Jared Loughner -- the shooter of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords -- was influenced by leftwing ideology because his reading list included both Das Kapital by Karl Marx and Hitler's Mein Kampf (without mentioning another book on his list, We the Living, by Ayn Rand).
The conflation of nazism and socialism has gone largely unchallenged by the media, and through repetition it is becoming almost "common knowledge" in the US, so I feel compelled to speak against it. I hope that others, especially professors who have occasion to talk about it in and out of class, will also speak against this vile propaganda.
The basis of the conflation of nazism and socialism is the term "National Socialism," a self description of the Nazis. "National Socialism" includes the word "socialism", but it is just a word. Hitler and the Nazis outlawed socialism, and executed socialists and communists en masse, even before they started rounding up Jews. In 1933, the Dachau concentration camp held socialists and leftists exclusively. The Nazis arrested more than 11,000 Germans for "illegal socialist activity" in 1936.
Nazism is a right wing ideology. It is violently racist, anti-socialist, and it targets the political left for extermination.
Now why dont you join your coward friend Alex Spec at stormfront.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
***** Hypocrite Cod
Tells you to forgive everyone, but can't even forgive Eve for eating an apple.
Nothing screams "GOD" in this world. Literally not 1 single bit of existence we have found or been able to observe has had any relation to "GOD". However, there have been religious people turning towards science in giving the name "GOD" to a particle, the God Particle.
Everything "GOD", however, actually points to simple science. "GOD" is the name we've given something we can't understand. No more, no less. To preach otherwise is taking a few steps back in our own progression.
What to know another fun tidbit? We are able to recreate all those vivid experiences that lead people to believe in god and a higher purpose at will. Yeah, turns out that a portion of our brain is responsible for all of those profits and messiahs, not some experience with "GOD."
Which leads me to a question. If GOD exists and has rules for us to live by and guidelines for us... Why does He or She or It, hide themselves from us? Why would they only communicate with a single human, and have that sole human spread their word? It's the worst possible thing you can do as a creator. The only purpose in doing that, is specifically to give an excuse for when you decide to act negatively upon your creations. I've never heard God, but I have heard countless humans. If God has demands of me, why can't God confront me?
I'd rather chase theories and ideas in science than follow some failure as you have named. If your God, like all other Gods exist, then they are not Gods worth following.?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
whyamimrpink78 That was some doublespeak bubba.
Hanging your hat on Rudy 911 Grifter is a loser.
FactCheck: NYC crime did drop, but others deserve credit too
Giuliani made a grandiose boast that he “brought down crime more than anyone in this country--maybe in the history of this country--while I was mayor of NYC.”
Crime certainly dropped dramatically during Giuliani’s tenure from 1993 to 2002. In fact, the city is still in the midst of a record-setting trend for consecutive years of declining violent crimes. However, it is a trend that actually started under Giuliani’s predecessor, David Dinkins, in 1990, when a high of 174,542 violent crimes were reported according to the FBI, and has continued under his successor, Mike Bloomberg. In 2006, a new low of 52,086 such crimes were reported.
The FBI itself warns against drawing broad conclusions (one might even say claiming undue credit) based on these statistics. The FBI website warns: “These rough rankings provide no insight into the numerous variables that mold crime in a particular city. Consequently they lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions.”
Source: FactCheck.org on 2007 GOP primary debate in Orlando , Oct 21, 2007
FactCheck: Hired 3,660 new cops, but took credit for 12,000
On his campaign Web site, Giuliani claims to have increased NYC’s police force by 12,000 officers--from 28,000 to 40,000--between 1/1/1994 & 2000.
The number Giuliani uses as his starting point in 1994 includes only NYPD officers. He doesn’t count transit police or housing police. But Giuliani DOES add the housing and transit police to his later tally--that added close to 7,100 officers to the NYPD’s rolls. It’s misleading for Giuliani to leave the transit and housing cops out of the starting count.
Even the figure Giuliani uses for the number of NYPD officers when he took office--28,000--is inaccurate. The NYPD numbered 29,450 when Giuliani took office. So we’re left with an increase of 3,660, or about 10%. That’s perfectly respectable, bu it’s not 12,000. Under the auspices of the Bill Clinton’s COPS program, NYC was given enough money to cover the first $25,000 of the salaries of about 3,500 new officers from 1997 to 2000 [i.e. almost all of the new NYPD hires were paid for federally].
Source: FactCheck.org: AdWatch of 2007 campaign websites , Oct 9, 2007
and
http://www.nber.org/digest/jan03/w9061.html
and
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/19/what_really_cleaned_up_new_york/
Do not you get tired of being the resident dipshit on YouTube?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Seán O'Nilbud What are you going on about? The facts are clear.
Galileo's belief in the Copernican System eventually got him into trouble with the Catholic Church. The Inquisition was a permanent institution in the Catholic Church charged with the eradication of heresies. A committee of consultants declared to the Inquisition that the Copernican proposition that the Sun is the center of the universe was a heresy. Because Galileo supported the Copernican system, he was warned by Cardinal Bellarmine, under order of Pope Paul V, that he should not discuss or defend Copernican theories. In 1624, Galileo was assured by Pope Urban VIII that he could write about Copernican theory as long as he treated it as a mathematical proposition. However, with the printing of Galileo's book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Galileo was called to Rome in 1633 to face the Inquisition again. Galileo was found guilty of heresy for his Dialogue, and was sent to his home near Florence where he was to be under house arrest for the remainder of his life. In 1638, the Inquisition allowed Galileo to move to his home in Florence, so that he could be closer to his doctors. By that time he was totally blind. In 1642, Galileo died at his home outside Florence.
http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node52.html
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Bullshit. Talk about factless false equivalencies.
Drumpf has no healthcare plan other than the one the reich wants.
And that is NO HEALTH CARE UNLESS YOU CAN AFFORD PRIVATE INSURANCE.
Geezus bub.Paul Ryan just announced that as part of repealing Obamacare he plans to phase out Medicare and replace it with private insurance for retirees.
Hope? I "hope" my guillotine is sharp.
The plan in their own words:
RYAN PLAN FOR AMERICA
Ryan, the GOP, the K0CHs and the other libertarian neoconfederate states rights taliban traitors have the same platform.
NO ABORTION EVER
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Ayn L Rand John Birch Society dogma. Paul Ryan is as extremist as any of them.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
capucchan8 LOL talk about uninformed. How did Hillary support every war when she was not in office during every war.
Ill just deal with one of your misinformed mentions.
She did not vote for the Iraq war.
HIllary's Vote On Presidential Authority for Bush
Hillary "voted to invade" is a very simplistic description of her vote.
The things she said on the floor of the Senate matter:
Hillary:"Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first, and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President as his word that he will try hard to pass a U.N. resolution and will seek to avoid war if at all possible.
Because bi-partisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore war less likely, and because a good-faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause.
If we were to defeat this resolution or pass with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those that want to pretend that this problem will go away with delay, will oppose any U.N. resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.
This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard. But I cast it with conviction.
My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of preemption or for unilateralism or for the arrogance of American power or purpose, all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law, and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.
A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war, it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President. And we say to him, use these powers wisely and as a last resort."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clintons-greatest-political-regret-iraq_us_5718ccf0e4b0c9244a7aed6a
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
He had a super majority? NO he did not Cenk. Do your homework. And to be clear I think Obama is a blue dog who will throw progressives under the bus as he has continually.
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
3
-
3
-
3
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Venraef LOL Oh man you liEbertarians are funny. Mises etc are crazy.
I only have to look at the GOP and its even crazier wing the LiEbertarian Party to know what American LiEbertarianism is.
LiEbertarian platform and the GOP/K0CHlibertarian platform is a list of anti American nonsense leading to the destruction of the government. Of course that is what you want traitor.
This is one of the platforms. It is hard to tell who it came from. The GOP or the LiEbertarians as both of their platforms are virtually the same.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Rob Mews Talk about distorting the record of the great satan Reagan.
So half the voting public has been hoodwinked to believe in REAGAN SOCIALISM that has been giving the 1% all our money.
And they want the 1% to have even more.
They believe in ReaganVooDooTrickleDownGoldenShowerPizzOnYou economics 101.
And they do not want someone in the Senate who will fight for the interests of the 99%.
Reagan increased the size of govt 191%,, He increased spending to match .. All it takes to dispell the GOP myth of Republicans spending less is to do a little reading , a little history.
1945-1980 the bottom 90% of US grew our incomes by 75% (adjusted). Next 28 years of Reaganomics? 1%
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
Did I miss anything?
3
-
3
-
tvgator1 You are wasting your time. Idiots like Louis hate the American government. They do not care about successes as they want it to cease functioning. All one has to do is listen to what the reichwing leaders are saying.
Ryan and the K0CHs and the other libertarian neoconfederate states rights taliban traitors have the same platform.
NO ABORTION EVER
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Ayn L Rand John Birch Society dogma. Paul Ryan is as extremist as any of them.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The media is sadly quiet when it comes to what the K0CHs have planned for America.
Why do we not see their families in the news cycle?
KOCH GAME PLAN not from Bernie
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
This is the Paul Ayn L Rand and K0CH plan for America.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Ayn L RandJohn Birch Society dogma.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
KOCH GAME PLAN
In 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket, this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Global Warming Skeptic by the way you remember when you claimed that NASA spent 22 billion on climate change studies? Please do not lie and deny you said it. It is in your laughable phone call to Seder.
Here is the proof that you are a liar:
May 19, 2015 House Republicans unveiled the details of a spending bill on Tuesday that would cut the amount of money NASA spends on earth science and climate-change research.
The push arrives on the heels of a concerted effort by congressional Republicans, including Sen. Ted Cruz, a 2016 presidential hopeful, to steer NASA away from the study of climate change and towards space exploration. It takes place against the backdrop a broader GOP effort to sink President Obama's ambitious agenda to tackle rising greenhouse gases and stave off the worst impacts of global warming.
The House Appropriations Committee is expected to pass the bill Wednesday.
NASA's earth-science program oversees a wide array of research that scientists say is critical to understanding climate change. It includes initiatives to study rising sea levels, melting Arctic ice, and the ways human activity is impacting the planet.
The spending bill currently sets aside $1.68 billion for NASA to spend on earth science. That's a cut from the $1.77 billion the agency currently spends on the program. (It's also less than the $1.95 billion requested by President Obama for 2016.)
For space exploration, the spending bill doles out $4.76 billion, an increase from the current level of $4.36 billion and also above $4.5 billion that Obama requested for next year.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, promised a fight on Monday over the proposed cuts.
"Climate change is damaging MD's shores and the Chesapeake Bay, costing billions billions in tourism and causing farmers heavy losses," the senator from Maryland tweeted, adding: "That's why I'm fighting to put funds in the fed checkbook for NASA's Earth Science program and climate research at NOAA and NSF."
Now do your K0CHspin and explain your lie.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
More lies and distortions from the self-described expert on everything, Okami-fuxsan.
Okami wants to give the K0CHs and their ilk the monies that currently go to public education so that we can all be uninformed serfs like Okami is.
Wisconsin Literacy Facts
Approximately 1 million Wisconsin adults qualify for adult literacy and English language services (U. S. Census 2000 and NALS 1992). Only 75,000 (or less than 10%) of adults in need of services are currently receiving them.
18.93 %, or 785,682, Wisconsin adults, age 16 and older are not enrolled in school and do not have a high school diploma.
7.3%, or 368,712, residents over the age of 5 speak a language other than English at home.
From 1990 to 2000, the Hispanic or Latino population in Wisconsin more than doubled (107% increase) (U.S. Census 2000).
Wisconsin has the worst graduation rate (50th out of 50 states) for African Americans (Center on Wisconsin Strategy 2002).
47% of adult females and adult males incarcerated in Wisconsin lack either a high school diploma or its equivalent. 49% read below the ninth grade level. 74% perform math below the ninth grade level (Wisconsin Department of Corrections 2006).
More than 13,000 basic skills and ESL learners are instructed annually by Wisconsin Literacy member agencies in community, corrections, workplace, family and faith-based literacy settings. (Wisconsin Literacy 2009)
More than 3,000 trained volunteer tutors provide individualized, goal-oriented adult literacy instruction per year at Wisconsin Literacy member agencies throughout the state. (Wisconsin Literacy 2009)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
*****
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/10/29/poll-22-percent-of-americans-lean-libertarian/
This is part of the platform of the OFFICIAL LIBERTARIAN PARTY:
Platform
"The preamble outlines the party's goal: "As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others." Its Statement of Principles begins: "We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual." The platform emphasizes individual liberty in personal and economic affairs, avoidance of "foreign entanglements" and military and economic intervention in other nations' affairs, and free trade and migration. It calls for Constitutional limitations on government as well as the elimination of most state functions."
What I said they are they say they are. I use nothing but their won words to prove my point. The KOCKS are at the top of the libertarian food chain. It is a common excuse for a liebertarian to claim that the other liebertarians are not really true cult members.
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The Moral Crusader Idiot. Immigrants have been coming to the USA since the beginning.
I know you are stupid but illegals do not get their votes counted if they vote which they do not.
The Hart-Celler Act abolished the national origins quota system that was American immigration policy since the 1920s, replacing it with a preference system that focused on immigrants' skills and family relationships with citizens or U.S. residents. Numerical restrictions on visas were set at 170,000 per year, with a per-country-of-origin quota, not including immediate relatives of U.S. citizens or "special immigrants" (including those born in "independent" nations in the Western Hemisphere, former citizens, ministers, and employees of the U.S. government abroad).
NOW THIS FACT WILL MAKE YOUR HEAD EXPLODE:
In total, 74% of Democrats and 85% of Republicans voted for passage of this bill.
The House of Representatives voted 320 to 70 in favor of the act, while the Senate passed the bill by a vote of 76 to 18. In the Senate, 52 Democrats voted yes, 14 no, and 1 abstained. Of the Republicans, 24 voted yes, 3 voted no, and 1 abstained.[8] In the House, 202 Democrats voted yes, 60 voted no and 12 abstained, 117 Republicans voted yes, 10 voted no and 11 abstained. One unknown representative voted yes.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
+NoahAyala PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Defund, defund, and defund some more until the government does not work. Then make the serfs believe government is a failure. Then bring in the privateers to buy up public lands, assets and take over all services.
This is the K0CHservative plan people.
K0CH Taliban Game plan excerpts that have to do with this article:
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
The WHOLE KOCH GAME PLAN
In 1980, David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. This is the K0CH platform. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His greedy insane and traitorous sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
IRAN CONTRA
First, let's recall the history from the mid-Twentieth Century. It shouldn't surprise anyone that this country suffered for decades due to our intervention when we deposed Mossadegh in 1953, is still viewed as sneaky and suspicious. Never did Iran attack our country, they only reacted to our support of the Shah by staging the 1979 hostage crisis because of our country's interventionist policies. Blowback is a bitch. Here's why they released the hostages the very same day Reagan was sworn in.
Ronald Reagan was sworn into office on January 20, 1981, just as Iran released 52 Americans held hostage at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran for 444 days. The timing was deliberate. The young revolutionary regime did not want the hostages freed until after Jimmy Carter, who had supported the shah and allowed him into the United States, left office. At the same time, Tehran wanted to clear the slate in the face of a new Republican administration that had vowed to take a tougher stand on terrorism and hostage-taking. But Iran also had bigger problems. Four months earlier, on September 20, 1980, Iraq had invaded, and Iran was embroiled in a life-or-death struggle. For the first 18 months of the war, virtually all the fighting took place on Iranian territory.
Let's give credit where credit's due; Iran needed our military help, so they gave up the hostages in exchange for something that would mire the Reagan Administration with the scandalous reputation it so richly deserved: Iran-Contra. The problem with all this today, however, is the American people have a very, very short memory and have largely forgotten the events that occurred three decades ago. The only thing they remember is that Iran is one of the "Great Satan" countries and we should NEVER do anything to facilitate peace and prosperity in that country. Republicans are very much in favor of either not teaching history at all or simply rewriting it to suit their objectives.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
3
-
+Tin Foil Hat Lady33 (Lady Fairfax33) 6 cattle were killed. 6!!! Maybe a new tinfoil beanie is needed.
Bundy is a right wing anti American grifter who has been living off the government teat and pretending to be a libertarian sovereign loner.
FACT:
For some time, the Bundy’s have owned cattle that have grazed in the Bunkerville, NV area. Since his cattle grazed on federal land, he paid grazing fees to the federal government. In 1993, the local grazing rules changed when a number of things came together; the Desert tortoise became protected under the species act, and the Fish and Wildlife Service determined that this was one of the areas critical to their long-term survival. Grazing rules were also changed in order to accommodate restoration needed from years of overgrazing and recent fires. These new rules would include Bundy having to reduce his number of cattle. Refusing to comply, he decided to “fire” the BLM, and stop paying grazing fees, while continuing to use federal lands for his cattle to graze. Not only did he not reduce his cattle count, but actually increased them over time.As a result, Cliven Bundy’s cattle have been illegally grazing on federal land for 20 years. Over these 20 years, Cliven Bundy has racked up over $1 million in unpaid grazing fees, and has actually expanded his cattle’s grazing further into federal lands. He has been taken to court (and defeated) both in 1998 and 2013.In Case No. 2:12-cv-0804-LDG-GWF, on July 2013, US District Court – District of Nevada Ruled:IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy is permanently enjoined from trespassing on the New Trespass Lands.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to protect the New Trespass Lands against this trespass, and all future trespasses by Bundy.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy shall remove his livestock from the New Trespass Lands within 45 days of the date hereof, and that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days of the date hereof.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle for any future trespasses, provided the United States has provided notice to Bundy under the governing regulations of the United States Department of the Interior.As a result, the BLM attempted to round up at least some of the 900 cattle illegally grazing on federal land. And because of his implied threats of “armed resistance” (and the fact that an attempted roundup in 2012 was called off due to veiled threats of violence) and previous intimidation of public employees, they came with protection. Because it’s often portrayed as such, it bears mentioning that no one was trying to remove Cliven Bundy from his land/home. No one was trying to “take his land away.” After 20 years of Bundy not paying for his cattle’s grazing fees, the BLM was there to remove cattle that were grazing on federal lands near his ranch.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
***** LOL the old cannard that they are the same.
You will not see a Mullah Scalia from a dem president.
You will not see Christian Sharia from a Dem president.
PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
***** MORON you have to prove your original statement. Show me he said it and if he did show me that he still stands by it.
Here you go troll:
In 2011, Cenk compared denial of the Armenian Genocide to denial of the Holocaust. In fact, on 2007, he directly compared Recep Tayyip Erdogan's denial of the Armenian Genocide with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust.
One of his statements:
"Today, I rescind the statements I made in my Daily Pennsylvanian article from 1991 entitled, “Historical Fact of Falsehood? When I wrote that piece, I was a 21 year-old kid, who had a lot of opinions that I have since changed. Back then I had many political positions that were not well researched. For example, back in those days I held a pro-war rally for the Persian Gulf War. Anyone who knows me now knows that I am a very different person today. I also rescind the statements I made in a letter to the editor I wrote in 1999 on the same issue. Back then I had a very different perspective and there were many things that I did not give due weight. On this issue, I should have been far, far more respectful of so many people who had lost family members. Their pain is heart-wrenching and should be acknowledged by all. My mistake at the time was confusing myself for a scholar of history, which I most certainly am not. I don’t want to make the same mistake again, so I am going to refrain from commenting on the topic of the Armenian Genocide, which I do not know nearly enough about. Thank you for being patient with me on this issue, though I might not have always merited it."
Get over it dipshit.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
bobbytiger
That isnt what happened Daryl.
GOP Doctored Benghazi Emails
http://themoderatevoice.com/181614/cbs-news-republicans-changed-benghazi-emails/
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/19/dem_congressman_slams_gop_for_doctored_benghazi_emails/
The Boy with a Tinfoil Hat Who Cried Wolf.
In act II of the Congressional dog and pony show, known at the box office as "Benghazi," Republicans are again seen scraping the bottom of the barrel. Towards the end of the final scene, Jesus walks onto stage, the lights dim, and Jesus delivers his Tony award winning soliloquy.
"Dear America, dear brothers and sisters, even fraudulent schmucks who call themselves Congressmen as they rape the American public and convince them that the colossal pillaging and privation is MY will (awkward laugh, Jesus lowers and shakes head in sad disapproval). The four people didn't die because of anything Obama did, and there is no credible information to support that argument. The best argument anyone has is that there was not enough transparency after it occurred, and a coverup of the facts. Unfortunately, Benghazi has been an issue championed by the same movement who said Obama was a foreigner, Muslim, and socialist; a closet homosexual who had all of his ex-gay lovers murdered, has an underground Army and death panels. What is more, the politicians who have been after Benghazi, such as McCain didn't do himself any favors by skipping the briefings about Benghazi in order to go on television to complain about the lack of transparency. Do you remember the story about the boy who cried wolf? The far right is not taken seriously by the majority of Americans. They merely have a loud voice and a handful of lunatic politicians who placate to their insanity. Oh, and they don't represent my will or my teachings."
End Scene!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Eric Zetterlund PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
3
-
3
-
Robbie Gohn stop being fearful of a debt that is not a problem.
DEBT WE ARE NOT BROKE
Americans of all political beliefs have been told repeatedly that America is broke, that something must be cut and/or taxes raised or we will drown in debt. While the debt is real, it pales in comparison to the tens of trillions available to us... if we know where to look.
In short, America is not broke!
The following multi-trillion dollar economic reforms would completely turn the American economy around to the positive, forever. The first three have all been implemented to some degree in our history. All are consistent with American values of competition, fair play, economic and ecological sustainability, meritocracy, profiting from one's own labor, and Lincoln's ideal of an America by, for and of the People.
Debt-free Money: Like coins and stamps (for a limited purpose), debt-free United States Notes can be issued by Congress anytime, for any reason, in any amount under the Constitution's Article 1, Sec. 8. Congress did create these original Greenbacks under the first Legal Tender Law (1862) by President Lincoln ($450 million) to fund the Civil War, and they continued through 14 series until 1996. This money would not have to be borrowed, raised in taxes, or backed by gold. It need not cause over-inflation if put toward those sectors that are in deflation. It is a "Public Option for Money." Perhaps $4 trillion, spread over 10 years, could be directed towards infrastructure, or Social Security. Several recent attempts to do this, including Rep. Kucinich's Bill, HR2990, are part of larger reform packages, but we can re-issue U.S. Notes anytime, producing an immediate gain in the government's accounts.
Public Banks like the highly successful State Bank of North Dakota (est. 1919) would force state accounts to be invested in State needs, and not in Wall Street speculative gambles -- money which was raised through taxes but then has to be borrowed back, at interest rates of 4-6 percent! The agency and pension funds of most states are invested in risky, often under-performing asset classes, sometimes below investment grade, by managers who charge millions in fees. The Bank of North Dakota manages $4 billion in loans conservatively and constructively. Public Banks can respond directly to community needs and even occasional emergencies in a way that would decentralize the money power, returning taxpayer money to we the people. Multiplied in all 50 states, and at the community level too, and America could save trillions in unnecessary gambles, bailouts, and interest costs.
Audit the local, state, and national Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs). There are 10s of trillions of dollars in the 184,000 CAFRs nationwide. These funds, many invested outside the country, could be used to pay a citizen's dividend in perpetuity, ensuring a Basic Income Guarantee (BIG) for every American. There is $600 billion in California's pension fund alone, paying out just 4% a year to pensioners, whose "managers" rake in billions for often under-performing the market, while government acts as both regulator and investor in the Mother of All Conflicts of Interest! We need impartial accountants to comb through the CAFRs and to do so every year, for the benefit of the American people.
Repatriate Offshore Accounts -- a new report by the Tax Justice Network shows up to $32 trillion is stored away in offshore accounts, away from tax authorities. These funds are held by the top .001% in private accounts managed by the biggest of the TBTF banks, while their owners live in other places where middle class taxpayers pay for vital services and infrastructure instead. This subsidy for the wealthy is unsustainable and must be ended by repatriating these accounts or taxing them from foreign lands.
These are just five places to look for trillions in savings and relocatable funds. There are others. Pick one or find your own. Find out about it. Learn. Become Active. Join a group to effectuate change. Fight. And remember -
America Is Not Broke!
"America is Not Broke!" by Scott Baker. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-baker/america-is-not-broke_1_b_1904062.html)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
***** SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
In the country I live in (Canada) we do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You are not joking when you ask that?
Call them liars
Stay on point and point out the reich wing plan
Pull no punches
Be on the offensive at all times
Use their own plan against them.
Put as much gusto into fighting them as they put into selling the country to the K0CHS and the other reich wing billionaires.
Koch G.O.P. Ayn L. Rand Paul Ryan Plan for America
From the seventies on, the right and the Koch's have told us what they have planned for America and Dems have appeased and helped them.
The following was the libertarian platform from 1980 when David Koch ran for VP. This platform is nearly identical to current GOP thought as the Koch owned politicians are the current leaders of the party.
Every conservative needs to be asked if they repudiate the platform and every Dem needs to say that they are against the right wing agenda:
No Abortion and no birth control
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
They want to destroy our government.
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Christo Fascist, Ayn L Rand, John Birch Society dogma. Paul Ryan is as extremist as any of them.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/4/10/1291095/-Astounding-Charles-Koch-s-1980-VP-Run-Kill-Medicare-Soc-Sec-Min-Wage-Public-Ed
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
el80ne When I was in High School we read some of her books. That was in the early 60's. They did not make sense to me then or now.
Got a couple funnies for you.
Ayn L Rand Reviews Children’s Movies
“Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs”
An industrious young woman neglects to charge for her housekeeping services and is rightly exploited for her naïveté. She dies without ever having sought her own happiness as the highest moral aim. I did not finish watching this movie, finding it impossible to sympathize with the main character. —No stars.
“Bambi”
The biggest and the strongest are the fittest to rule. This is the way things have always been. —Four stars.
“Old Yeller”
A farm animal ceases to be useful and is disposed of humanely. A valuable lesson for children. —Four stars.
“Lady and the Tramp”
A ridiculous movie. What could a restaurant owner possibly have to gain by giving away a perfectly good meal to dogs, when he could sell it at a reasonable price to human beings? A dog cannot pay for spaghetti, and payment is the only honest way to express appreciation for value. —One star.
“101 Dalmatians”
A wealthy woman attempts to do her impoverished school friend Anita a favor by purchasing some of her many dogs and putting them to sensible use. Her generosity is repulsed at every turn, and Anita foolishly and irresponsibly begins acquiring even more animals, none of which are used to make a practical winter coat. Altruism is pointless. So are dogs. A cat is a far more sensible pet. A cat is objectively valuable. —No stars.
“Mary Poppins”
A woman takes a job with a wealthy family without asking for money in exchange for her services. An absurd premise. Later, her employer leaves a lucrative career in banking in order to play a children’s game. —No stars.
“Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory”
An excellent movie. The obviously unfit individuals are winnowed out through a series of entrepreneurial tests and, in the end, an enterprising young boy receives a factory. I believe more movies should be made about enterprising young boys who are given factories. —Three and a half stars. (Half a star off for the grandparents, who are sponging off the labor of Charlie and his mother. If Grandpa Joe can dance, Grandpa Joe can work.)
“How The Grinch Stole Christmas”
Taxation is also a form of theft. In a truly free society, citizens should pay only as much as they are willing for the services they require. —Three stars.
“Charlotte’s Web”
A farmer allows sentimental drawings by a bug to prevail over economic necessity and refuses to value his prize pig, Wilbur, by processing and selling him on the open market. Presumably, the pig still dies eventually, only without profiting his owners. The farmer’s daughter, Fern, learns nothing except how to become an unsuccessful farmer. There is a rat in this movie. I quite liked the rat. He knew how to extract value from his environment. —Two stars.
“The Muppets Take Manhattan”
This movie was a disappointment. The Muppets do not take Manhattan at all. They merely visit it. —No stars.
“Beauty and the Beast”
A young woman rejects a financially independent hunter in favor of an unemployed nobleman who lives off of the labor of others. Also, there are no trains in this movie. I did like the talking clock, who attempted to take pride in his work despite constant attacks on his dignity by the candlestick. The candlestick did not take his job seriously. —Two stars.
“The Little Mermaid”
A young woman achieves all of her goals. She finds an object of value—in this case, a broad-chested brunet man—and sacrifices as much as she believes necessary (the ocean, talking, etc.) in order to acquire him. —Four stars.
“Babe”
Another pig farmer fails to do his job. —No stars.
“Toy Story”
At last, a full-length feature about the inherent value of possessions. —Four stars.
“Garfield”
I liked this movie. Cats are inherently valuable animals. It makes sense that there should be a movie about a cat. I could demonstrate the objective value of a cat, if I wanted to. —Four stars.
“Up”
A man refuses to sell his home to serve the convenience of others, which is his right as an American citizen. He meets a dog, which neither finds food for him nor protects him from danger. He would have been better off with a cat. There are no cats in this movie. —Two stars.
“Frozen”
An exceptional woman foolishly allows her mooching family members to keep her from ruling a kingdom of ice in perfect solitude. She is forced to use her unique powers to provide free entertainment for peasants, without compensation. I liked the snowman, when he sang. —One star.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Thom please start being more clear when talking about what the K0CH plan is. You are not clear enough now.
1. It is about the wholesale buying of America by the highest bidder.
2. It is about the destruction of all government regulations and agencies.
K0CH GOP END GAME
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Reagan a steaming pile
Ronald Reagan represents all of the worst elements of the American political experience of the last 50 years. All of them. He was, and always will be, nothing but a steaming hot pile of filthy hyena puke.
Intellectually, Reagan gave chimpy a run for his money. He was vacuous. He was shallow. He was incurious. He was a puppet and a door stop for a group of sick ideologues who really ran the country. He was a bad actor and foolish tool.
Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He hated and he hated and he hated. Just ask his own kids. He hated them and himself and his ex-wife. Ronald Reagan was a twisted unrepentant closed-minded waste-bag hate monger. And that's just for starters.
The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of our Bush. Reagan just didn't give a hoot. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way. Let em die. Reagan was a friggen dirtbag.
On Reagan's watch the military budget of the U.S. grew to the proportions of a heaping pile of 10,000 week-old dead and bloated Blue Whales. And it stunk just as bad. The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star-wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays. You name it - that loon would fall for it - and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
And on the domestic front - holy crap the domestic front. Ronald Reagan was a force for the rampaging evil of anti-human destructiveness. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he didn't have a bowel movement directly upon. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth. Genghis Khan could only dream of such depravity and indifference to human suffering. There is so much more, but, hell, if you don't already know about this crap, then go read a book or two.
Then there was Iran-Contra - the infamous orgy of unfettered criminality at the heart of the Reagan legacy. Again, look it up. Rogues, liars, crooks, murderers and ignorant heartless scum surrounded Reagan at all times. Ali Baba would've been shamed. But Ronald Reagan was shameless.
Oh, did I mention The War on Drugs and it's ballooning of the prison/criminal industrial complex and the rise of brainless goon-like authoritarianism? Or the destruction of the modern labor movement including the cowardly firing of the Air Traffic Controllers? Or the beginnings of the current trend of packing the Judiciary with corrupt freakish pseudo-fascist stoolies? Or the repugnant rapes of Lebanon and Grenada? Or the dim-witted goofball junk science that came to known as "Reaganomics?" Or grant rigging at the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Or James Watt and the whole-hearted attempt to destroy the earth and all its inhabitants at the expense of greed mongers and corporate whores? Or the largest white collar theft in the history of planet Earth - the Savings and Loan Bailout? Or his giving the Christian Taliban a foothold? And on and on and on and on.
So let me conclude,
Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered as one of the most idiotic, vile, worthless leaders of any any nation in any era. He presently occupies a special place in Hell beside Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot. And I promise you, they all think he's an idiot too. Screw Ronald Reagan. And then screw him again.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The Libertarians and the GOP are virtually one and the same.
K0CHs, Ryan, Pauls and numerous other GOP leaders are deluded LIBERTARIANS.
This is what they want:
This is just part of their platform to destroy the country.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
whyamimrpink78 Monday, June 11, 2012
5 Myths About Canada’s Health Care System
The truth may surprise you about international health care
By Aaron E. Carroll, M.D., M.S.
AARP Newsletter, April 16, 2012
Myth #1: Canadians are flocking to the United States to get medical care.
How many times have you heard that Canadians, frustrated by long wait times and rationing where they live, come to the United States for medical care?
I don’t deny that some well-off people might come to the United States for medical care. If I needed a heart or lung transplant, there’s no place I’d rather have it done. But for the vast, vast majority of people, that’s not happening.
The most comprehensive study I’ve seen on this topic — it employed three different methodologies, all with solid rationales behind them — was published in the peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs.
Source: “Phantoms in the Snow: Canadians’ Use of Health Care Services in the United States,” Health Affairs, May 2002.
The authors of the study started by surveying 136 ambulatory care facilities near the U.S.-Canada border in Michigan, New York and Washington. It makes sense that Canadians crossing the border for care would favor places close by, right? It turns out, however, that about 80 percent of such facilities saw, on average, fewer than one Canadian per month; about 40 percent had seen none in the preceding year.
Then, the researchers looked at how many Canadians were discharged over a five-year period from acute-care hospitals in the same three states. They found that more than 80 percent of these hospital visits were for emergency or urgent care (that is, tourists who had to go to the emergency room). Only about 20 percent of the visits were for elective procedures or care.
Next, the authors of the study surveyed America’s 20 “best” hospitals — as identified by U.S. News & World Report — on the assumption that if Canadians were going to travel for health care, they would be more likely to go to the best-known and highest-quality facilities. Only one of the 11 hospitals that responded saw more than 60 Canadians in a year. And, again, that included both emergencies and elective care.
Finally, the study’s authors examined data from the 18,000 Canadians who participated in the National Population Health Survey. In the previous year, 90 of those 18,000 Canadians had received care in the United States; only 20 of them, however, reported going to the United States expressively for the purpose of obtaining care.
Myth #2: Doctors in Canada are flocking to the United States to practice.
Every time I talk about health care policy with physicians, one inevitably tells me of the doctor he or she knows who ran away from Canada to practice in the United States. Evidently, there’s a general perception that practicing medicine in the United States is much more satisfying than in Canada.
Problem is, it’s just not so. Consider this chart:
Source: “2009 International Health Policy Survey of Primary Care Physicians in Eleven Countries,” The Commonwealth Fund, November 2009.
The Canadian Institute for Health Information has been tracking doctors’ destinations since 1992. Since then, 60 percent to 70 percent of the physicians who emigrate have headed south of the border. In the mid-1990s, the number of Canadian doctors leaving for the United States spiked at about 400 to 500 a year. But in recent years this number has declined, with only 169 physicians leaving for the States in 2003, 138 in 2004 and 122 both in 2005 and 2006. These numbers represent less than 0.5 percent of all doctors working in Canada.
So when emigration “spiked,” 400 to 500 doctors were leaving Canada for the United States. There are more than 800,000 physicians in the United States right now, so I’m skeptical that every doctor knows one of those émigrés. But look closely at the tan line in the following chart, which represents the net loss of doctors to Canada.
Source: Canadian Institute for Health Information
In 2004, net emigration became net immigration. Let me say that again. More doctors were moving into Canada than were moving out.
Myth #3: Canada rations health care; that’s why hip replacements and cataract surgeries happen faster in the United States.
When people want to demonize Canada’s health care system — and other single-payer systems, for that matter — they always end up going after rationing, and often hip replacements in particular.
Take Republican Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri, for example. A couple of years ago he took to the House floor to tell his colleagues:
“I just hit 62, and I was just reading that in Canada [if] I got a bad hip I wouldn’t be able to get that hip replacement that [Rep. Dan Lungren] got, because I’m too old! I’m an old geezer now and it’s not worth a government bureaucrat to pay me to get my hip fixed.”
Sigh.
This has been debunked so often, it’s tiring. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, for example, concluded: “At least 63 percent of hip replacements performed in Canada last year [2008] ... were on patients age 65 or older.” And more than 1,500 of those, it turned out, were on patients over 85.
The bottom line: Canada doesn’t deny hip replacements to older people.
But there’s more.
Know who gets most of the hip replacements in the United States? Older people.
Know who pays for care for older people in the United States? Medicare.
Know what Medicare is? A single-payer system.
Myth #4: Canada has long wait times because it has a single-payer system.
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course. It’s this:
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
Myth #5: Canada rations health care; the United States doesn’t.
This one’s a little bit tricky. The truth is, Canada may “ration” by making people wait for some things, but here in the United States we also “ration” — by cost.
An 11-country survey carried out in 2010 by the Commonwealth Fund, a Washington-based health policy foundation, found that adults in the United States are by far the most likely to go without care because of cost. In fact, 42 percent of the Americans surveyed did not express confidence that they would be able to afford health care if seriously ill.
Source: “How Health Insurance Design Affects Access to Care and Costs, by Income, in Eleven Countries,” Health Affairs, November 2010.
Further, about a third of the Americans surveyed reported that, in the preceding year, they didn’t go to the doctor when sick, didn’t get recommended care when needed, didn’t fill a prescription or skipped doses of medications because of cost.
Finally, about one in five of the Americans surveyed had struggled to pay or were unable to pay their medical bills in the preceding year. That was more than twice the percentage found in any of the other 10 countries.
And remember: We’re spending way more on health care than any other country, and for all that money we’re getting at best middling results.
So feel free to have a discussion about the relative merits of the U.S. and Canadian health care systems. Just stick to the facts.
Aaron E. Carroll frequently blogs about this topic for The Incidental Economist and is the coauthor of Don’t Swallow Your Gum: Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This is the K0CH Libertarian Bircher Bigot plan.
ReaganVooDooTrickleDownGoldenShowerPizzOnYou economics 101.
Nationalist Reagan Socialism, promoting a fascist aristocracy and disposable human beings.
KOCH GAME PLAN
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma that they learned from their anti American government bigot father.
Keep this list handy. Pass it on as often as possible.
You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
***** Here is what Ryan, k0chs and the libertarians want for us (shortlist):
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Paulbots are the real nihilists (anarchists). That shows I read part of your blog.
I love to tweak them but they are humorless. One of the tweaks I came up with is "Ayn L Rand" but the liEbertarianMisesAustrianSchool lovers do not get it:)
Bad joke: Ayn Rand, Rand Paul, and Paul Ryan walk into a bar. They die after being served tainted drinks because there are no regulations.
Libertarian Delusion
You know why libertarianism is so great to its adherents? It's ideologically pure. Unfettered by reality or example, it floats free in a cloud of its own. Forget the ivory tower. Libertarianism hangs from a skyhook.
Oh let me be a LiEbertarian, where there is no rule of law.
Where we are all free to have our guns, and blow the place to kingdom come.
Oh let me be a LiEbertarian where free markets rule, without pesky regulation, so I can control the land, food and water, and provide you with indentured servitude.
Oh let me be a LiEbertarian where there is no need for a state, we can all stand as islands, while around us civilization fades.
I read about half of the first page of your blog. Will get back to it this weekend.
Speaking of evolution. I do love to argue about race. We are only one race. The human race. :) That really pisses off the white wingers.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
TexastalibanistaKoch boy you haven't clue.
First of all, there are no "Palestinians" (Where is the "Palestinian" nation?) -- The identity is just a construct leftover from British imperialism, and the UN in perpetuating that nonsense.
It accordingly also follows that Israel, like any other nation, should be free to exercise the regulation of the people within its borders as it sees fit.
The objective of both the PLO and especially Hamas is still one prohibited under international law, and a crime, i.e. genocide. Until those Charters have changed, that still stands. It does not help the Palestinian people one bit. International Aid can not continue to prop up such government. It is nice of Qatar to come to the aid of the Muslim family members, and set up a fund to pay Hamas government salaries. That does not create a Palestinian State, an economy, jobs for people, a national conscience as a people. On the contrary. Other aid props up others, such as UNWRA, which has incentives to keep Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan in the camps, with no way up and out. Allowing integration, assimilation, citizenship where they reside, ownership of property, would but UNWRA - that is a 30000 person payroll, out of business. People who are being held captive s so that others may enrich themselves, do not work, are not educated, are not part of the fabric of society and the economy, lose whatever skills and abilities they have, forever., Adding to that a reputation of terrorism and criminality is not helpful.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
LTrotsky 21st Century Here is the actual libertarian platform in the USA:
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Ayn L Rand/John Birch Society dogma.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
spark300c OK dipshit. Provide a link to your assertion that the founders were liEbertarians. Do it or shut the fuck up.
This is the American liEbertarian platform. It is a delusional philosophy that does not see a society for the common good but a selfish, greedy, self centered landscape that is good for the few at the top only. And NO GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma that is anti American government.
And this is the K0CH turds agenda for the USA.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
***** SATAN AS HERO
"God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Revolution NewsUS Yawn. You are the problem if you think both parties are the same.
PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
2
-
Revolution NewsUS PARTIES ARE NOT THE SAME
May 27, 2015 12:35 PM
The Tired Old “Both Sides Getting More Extreme” Meme
By Ed Kilgore
In my recent book and elsewhere, I’ve noted that the meta-narrative Republicans were promoting—and much of the MSM was echoing—during the 2014 midterms was that the Great Big Moderate Adults of the GOP had gotten the crazy extremist Tea People under control, and were ready to govern in a serious way that Serious People could appreciate. An important sub-narrative to the completely phony Republican Shift to the Center was that Democrats were moving to the left so fast that they’d probably start singing the Internationale at party events before long.
A lot of people who don’t completely buy the GOP Shift to the Center are happy to promote the false equivalency classic of Everybody’s Polarizing at Exactly the Same Pace. But there’s one species of observers who are deeply invested in the Democratic Lurch to the Left meme: Republican “moderates” who spend a fair amount of time criticizing their zany brethren and need an excuse to reassume the Party Yoke when elections come around.
Peter Wehner is one such person, and so he pens the classic so’s-your-old-man-and-actually-maybe-your-old-man’s-worse op-ed for the New York Times. Ignoring the fact that most actual lefty Democrats think Barack Obama is too much like Bill Clinton, Wehner’s case almost entirely depends on contrasting the noble centrist Big Dog (who, of course, conservatives denounced as a godless socialist when he was actually in office) with the left-bent Obama.
And it’s a really terrible argument. Exhibit one for Wehner involves Clinton’s support for three-strikes-and-you’re-out and 100,000 cops, as though they are the same thing, with Eric Holder’s de-incarceration commitment. Keep up, Pete: Clinton, along with two-thirds of the Republican presidential field, has called for a reversal of “mass incarceration” policies. It’s not an ideological move in either direction so much as a rare and belated bipartisan recognition of what does and doesn’t work.
Exhibit two is welfare reform, and aside from ignoring everything Clinton did on low-income economic policy other than signing the 1996 welfare law, Wehner blandly accepts the race-drenched lie—and he’s smart enough to know that it is indeed widely interpreted to be a lie—from the 2012 Romney campaign that Obama has “loosened welfare-to-work requirements.” Then he tries to pivot to a contrast of Clinton’s shutdown of the “welfare entitlement” with Obama’s creation of a health care entitlement—without noting that Clinton had a health care proposal that was distinctly more “liberal” than Obama’s. Pretty big omission, I’d say.
It gets worse. Wehner suggests that unlike Clinton Obama wants to boost taxes on the wealthy, which conveniently ignores Clinton’s first budget. Speaking of the budget, Obama’s fiscal record is contrasted with Clinton’s without noting that Obama inherited not only a huge deficit but the worst economy since the 1930s. Wehner makes a fact-free assertion that Obama isn’t as friendly towards U.S. allies as Clinton was. And in a telling maneuver, he suddenly shifts the contrast from Clinton-versus-Obama to Clinton-versus-Clinton in mentioning the dispute over the Trans-Pacific Partnership, where HRC has been “non-committal.” Well, the crazy lefty Barack Obama hasn’t been “non-committal,” has he? Yes, a majority of congressional Democrats oppose him on TPP. But a majority of congressional Democrats also opposed Clinton on NAFTA and GATT, and denied him “fast-track” trade negotiating authority. Plus ca change….
Nonetheless, Wehner stumbles on to his pre-fab conclusion:
The Democratic Party is now a pre-Bill Clinton party, the result of Mr. Obama’s own ideological predilections and the coalition he has built.
In the very next breath he acknowledges that on the one issue where the Democratic Party really has “moved to the left,” same-sex marriage, the country has moved with it (and the “pre-Bill Clinton” Democratic Party had to move as well). And then he leaps to the circular argument that Republicans must be better representing the “center” of public opinion, because they’re doing so well in midterms!
Well, Pete, guess you have to take the position that makes it possible for you to spend so much time calling out the crazy people of your party. But the facts are not friendly to your argument.
Ed Kilgore edits the Political Animal blog and is a contributing writer to the Washington Monthly. He is managing editor for the Democratic Strategist, a weekly columnist at Talking Points Memo, and the author of Election 2014: Why Republicans Swept the Midterms, recently published by the University of Pennsylvania Press
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_05/the_tired_old_both_sides_getti055757.php
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
uvafan173 And I repeat:
GUNS and BERNIE
Bernie is far from perfect on guns
Sanders’ vote for a different kind of pro-gun bill is more puzzling—and profoundly disturbing. In 2005, a Republican-dominated Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law doesn’t protect gun owners; it protects gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers. The PLCAA was the No. 1 legislative priority of the National Rifle Association for years, because it shields gun makers and dealers from most liability when their firearms are used criminally. It is one of the most noxious pieces of pro-gun legislation ever passed. And Bernie Sanders voted for it. (Sanders’ campaign has not replied to a request for comment.)
Because the PLCAA deals with tort law—not a topic of great interest for most Americans—it didn’t stir much outrage when first passed. But the act’s primary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded. Every state imposes liability on manufacturers who are negligent in their production and sale of products. If I crash my Prius because its accelerator malfunctions, I can sue Toyota for negligently manufacturing a faulty pedal. If my child dismembers himself with a blender at Sears, I can sue Sears for negligently leaving that blender within a child’s reach. If I get stabbed by a teenager with a switchblade, I might be able to sue the pawn shop owner who illegally sold a knife to a minor.
Before the PLCAA, most states imposed some form of tort liability on gun makers and sellers. If a gun manufacturer made an assault rifle that could slaughter dozens of people in a few seconds, for instance, one of its victims might sue the company for negligently making a gun that could foreseeably be used for mass murder. If a gun seller sold a gun to a customer without performing any kind of background check—and then the buyer opened fire on the subway—his victims might sue that seller for negligently providing a gun to a mentally unstable person. The standards in each state differed, but the bottom line remained the same: Victims of gun violence and their families could recover financially from the people and companies who negligently enabled gun violence.
The PLCAA changed all that. Remarkably, the act wiped out gun liability laws in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a handful of narrow exceptions. (So much for states’ rights.) Thanks to the law, victims of mass shootings are barred from suing the companies that produced a wartime weapon that no civilian could ever need. With few exceptions, victims cannot sue a gun seller for negligently providing a semiautomatic weapon to a lunatic who shoots them in a movie theater. Even if a jury decides a gun maker or seller should be liable, the PLCAA invalidates its verdict. The law tramples upon states’ rights, juries’ rights, and fundamental precepts of America’s civil justice system. And it received Bernie Sanders’ support—in both 2003 (when it was first introduced) and 2005 (when it finally passed).
Every few years, the families of mass shooting victims take gun makers to court for creating a weapon seemingly designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. Every time, they run headfirst into the PLCAA. Right now, the families of Sandy Hook victims are searching for a loophole in the law, so they can sue Bushmaster for making the gun that sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds. They will probably fail.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
kathy kelly Mises Fanboys Irony
Ever notice how many on the extreme right have started to claim the title Classical Liberal? Von Mises is their hero, in spite of their rabid support for just the positions he theorized caused the collapse of the Roman Empire.
They love to invoke the "dramatic fall of the Roman Empire," these anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-choice, anti-freedom "conservatives." Oddest thing is that their economic heroes, like Ludwig von Mises, theorized the Empire collapsed because its quasi-free-market-based economy couldn't cope with inflation, growing income inequality, and the costs of maintaining a huge army to enforce control. Slippery slope, these little details.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+Emilio Weenink GOP/LiEbertarian/Drumpf/K0CHsucker plan for America and beyond:
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society/LiEbertarian dogma that they learned from their antiAmerican government bigot father who was a bigwig in the Bircher movement.
Keep this list handy. Pass it on as often as possible.
You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
*****
The Confederate Flag Is a Racist Symbol of a Failed Rebellion. It's Not a Debate.
There are white Southerners who venerate their Confederate ancestors as heroes, even patriots. One of mine was a deserter. I wish he hadn't fought at all.
My great-great grandfather was conscripted into the Confederate Navy and assigned to a ship guarding Mobile Bay, in Alabama. In August 1864, after Union vessels sank his ship in a battle that would close the Confederacy's last port, he swam to shore and walked home -- a distance of about 400 miles, according to research my father did a few years ago.
I don't know much else about him, other than that he owned a small farm and that he did not own any slaves. That he was drafted into the military may suggest he was not eager to fight for the South, but I don't know whether he believed in the cause -- only that when he saw his opportunity, he abandoned it.
The Confederacy was the most vile and harmful political invention in United States history. It was founded on the explicit principle that slavery is the "natural and normal condition" of black people, and that they should be ruthlessly exploited to the benefit of their white masters. More Americans died in the bloodletting that followed than in World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam combined.
Where in that story arc is anything worth celebrating? Yet 150 years after the Civil War ended in utter defeat for the Confederacy, a flag of that failed pseudo-nation still flies on public property. And once again, following the killing of nine black parishioners by an apparent white supremacist inside a church in Charleston, South Carolina, we are talking about whether it should.
This isn't at all a difficult question. There is no place for the flag of a rebellious breakaway region on public property anywhere in the United States.
It certainly does not belong above a memorial steps from the South Carolina statehouse, where apparently it cannot ever be lowered -- under force of law.
White Southerners who support the display of the flag claim it is a symbol of their "heritage," when what they really mean is it reminds them of an imagined past where white people held all the power and minorities were kept properly in their place. They say it honors their ancestors, though most likely know less about theirs than I do about mine.
These are the things they say when they are trying to be polite. On Friday, the website of the Alabama Media Group created an ill-conceived forum for readers to "debate" the Confederate flag issue. Not surprisingly, the nasty side of the Internet showed up in force, with the poor employee assigned to moderate the comment section required to put in a CrossFit-level workout just to keep up.
Pulling down a few Confederate flags isn't going to help families of the victims of the Charleston shootings, nor will it erase the legacy of racism and hate that sadly persists to this day. But at least there will be fewer visible reminders of it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-hallman/confederate-flag-racist-symbol_b_7624566.html
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
***** Did you know that CONGRESS was responsible for NAFTA?
Take a civics course.
Did you know that Hillary voted to give the president powers to protect the US with the knowledge that the REICH WING president would not lie to congress?
He lied us into war.
And she is not going to jail. She broke no laws in the email bullshit.
HIllarys Vote On Presidential Authority for Bush
Hillary "voted to invade" is a very simplistic description of her vote.
The things she said on the floor of the Senate matter:
Hillary:"Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first, and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President as his word that he will try hard to pass a U.N. resolution and will seek to avoid war if at all possible.
Because bi-partisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore war less likely, and because a good-faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause.
If we were to defeat this resolution or pass with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those that want to pretend that this problem will go away with delay, will oppose any U.N. resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.
This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard. But I cast it with conviction.
My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption or for unilateralism or for the arrogance of American power or purpose, all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law, and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.
A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war, it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President. And we say to him, use these powers wisely and as a last resort."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clintons-greatest-political-regret-iraq_us_5718ccf0e4b0c9244a7aed6a
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Adam Selene LOL you really are reichwing piece of work. First you accuse me of using term I never used towards you then you just keep posting nonsense.
And sonnyboy you are missing out on critical thinking abilities.
Nazi fascist K0CHsucker Taliban Party bubba. You too stupid to understand the reference? You are 0 for 3 with your assumptions and accusations so far.
And the parties are not the same dipshit denier.
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+Post Impatica Do facts make your tiny penis get even smaller?
RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS
A report published by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy on Jan. 15 discusses the potential dangers of “violent far-right” organizations, which has angered some conservatives that believe the military should focus on international threats.
The executive summary of the paper, “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” claims that “since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self- identify with the far-right of American politics.”
Written by Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, the paper asserts that three distinct ideologies exist in the “American violent far right.” Those are “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement,” the last of which “includes mainly Christian Identity groins such as the Aryan Nations.”
“Findings indicate that…it is not only feelings of deprivation that motivate those involved in far right violence, but also the sense of empowerment that emerges when the political system is perceived to be increasingly permissive to far right ideas,” it later reads.
The rise in attacks in the 21st century were significant, as “Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%.”
The study also found that “presidential election years and the preceding year are characterized by an increase of far-right violence,” leading the author to conclude that “in general, far-right groups and individuals are more inclined to engage in violence in a contentious political climate.”
Furthermore, it found that the number of Republicans in the House was positively correlated with an increase in far-right violence, although the causes were not immediately clear. The study posits that it could mean those groups believed those legislators might be “more tolerant of their activities” or possibly that “the high expectations of far-right activists during a conservative legislature” were not “fulfilled.”
Some conservatives object to the report. The Washington Times, The National Review, and World Net Daily all report on critical reactions from the right, according to the Atlantic Wire, with blogger Pamela Geller calling it an “appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat.”
2
-
+Post Impatica RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS
Right wing is the birth place of most of our domestic terrorism
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-tirman/domestic-terrorism_b_1767433.html
John Tirman:
In the last several days, three events dramatically underscore a hard truth about domestic terrorism: nearly all of it originates with the extremist right wing.
This provocative idea is borne out by stubborn facts, but the question is why this so, and why the national discourse about terrorism remains stuck on the wrong threats.
The three events are the massacre at the Sikh temple in Wisconsin, the fiery destruction of a mosque in Joplin, Missouri, and the reopening of a mosque that had been burned down by terrorist arson in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. The good news story of the reopening of the Tennessee mosque is marred by the ceaseless efforts to keep it from opening by right-wing opponents, including Republicans running for Congress in the district, many of whom insisted that Islam is not a religion and is not protected by the Constitution.
As I wrote in the Boston Globe 17 months ago, the overwhelming numbers of acts of politically motivated violence in this country are committed by the right wing. If I may quote myself at length:
"The START database on terrorism in America, which tracks all incidents of political violence, shows that most attacks in the last two decades have been on black churches, reproductive rights facilities, government offices, and individual minorities. And those have been committed mainly by right-wing extremists. From 1990 to 2009, START identified 275 "homicide events'' that killed 520 people and were committed by right-wing ideologues. There were many more incidents of destruction of property, nonfatal attacks, and other acts of thuggery by white supremacists, private militias, and the like."
Compare that to the threat that so much of the news media and political class focuses on: Muslims. The think tank RAND found that "46 publicly reported cases of domestic radicalization and recruitment to jihadist terrorism occurred in the United States'' since 9/11, and that "most of the would-be jihadists were individuals who recruited themselves.'' Most of the "threats" were never realized, and many of them were absurd fantasies.
The question is, why has the right wing -- so long associated with law enforcement -- become so tolerant of terrorism against minority religious groups, gays, abortion clinics and others they abhor? Why is the right wing the incubator of so much violence?
A lot of old-fashioned xenophobia is at work, of course. New immigrants typically have been embraced by liberals and scorned by conservative nativists. One only needed to hear the diatribes against illegal immigrants by Mitt Romney and his other GOP hopefuls through the Republican primaries -- and the full-throated approval of those diatribes by the listening crowds -- to understand how deep this runs on the right. Right-wing bloggers like Michelle Malkin feed the frenzy or ignore right-wing terror, and Fox News has aggressively used the Muslim terror threat as a standard trope of its commentary for 11 years.
The rest of the news media has been too sanguine about calling a spade a spade, too timid about calling out this epidemic of hate. Even in the recent shootings, as Riddhi Shah points out in a Huffington Post blog post, the news media attention to the Aurora, Colorado murders was way more prominent than the coverage of the Sikh temple massacre. Similarly, when Rep. Peter King (R-NY) held hearings on supposed radicalization of American Muslims last year, very few analysts in the news media pointed out the vastly greater prevalence of right-wing terror in America.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has done yeoman's work on tracking violent groups, notes that "Currently, there are 1,018 known hate groups operating across the country, including neo-Nazis, Klansmen, white nationalists, neo-Confederates, racist skinheads, black separatists, border vigilantes and others. And their numbers are growing." The Center's data show that hate groups have increased by 69 percent in the last decade. And the so-called "Patriot" groups have increased nearly 800 percent since Obama became president.
Their closely observed conclusion for this startling increase:
"This surge has been fueled by anger and fear over the nation's ailing economy, an influx of non-white immigrants, and the diminishing white majority, as symbolized by the election of the nation's first African-American president"
If the news media and political leaders were told there were a thousand violence-prone Muslim groups operating in the United States, can you imagine the reaction? Yet, apart from the glancing attention given incidents like the Sikh temple massacre, the national discourse about terrorism focuses almost exclusively on Muslims.
Scholars call this "framing" -- the predisposition of the news media (and others) to see events in a certain way, using a cognitive frame that then leads to certain perceptions and conclusions. The cognitive frame for understanding domestic political violence in this country is the Muslim threat, reinforced powerfully by the 9/11 attacks, of course, even though that atrocity was not committed by domestic terrorists. (The biggest act of domestically organized violence is the Oklahoma City bombing, a right-wing endeavor.) The "Muslim threat" meme has so overwhelmed the discussion of political violence, however, that the actual topography of terrorist groups in this country is neglected.
Watch carefully the next time an act of political violence is committed against, say, an African-American church or Planned Parenthood or a mosque. You won't hear many condemnations from Sean Hannity or Eric Cantor or indeed Mitt Romney. The burning of the Joplin mosque, which is the second attack this summer on that house of worship, earned no rebuke from the establishment right, including Romney. But then, Missouri is a swing state.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
kathy kelly
IRS and CONSERVATIVE GROUPS
OK- so lets look at exactly what's being said. "These groups claim tax-exempt status under section 501 (c) (4) of the federal tax code, which is for social welfare groups. Unlike other charitable groups, these organizations are allowed to participate in political activities, but their primary activity must be social welfare."
Would anyone deny that tea party groups are not primarily political? In which case, groups applying for 501 c3 status would and should be subject to scrutiny.
"As part of the review, staffers look for signs that groups are participating in political activity. If so, IRS agents take a closer look to make sure that politics isn't the group's primary activity. As part of this process, agents in Cincinnati came up with a list of things to look for in an application. As part of the list, they included the words "tea party" and "patriot," Lerner said.
And again- why is this a big deal? We know such groups are primarily political groups. How many of them have actually engaged in actual social welfare programs? Calling it "targeting" is hyperbole. And out of 300 groups, 25% were tea party of conservative. Liberal groups were also scrutinized. 75% of the groups that applied were not con or TP- 75%.
You know what's political? That anyone made an issue of it. The the IRS (although it may have been overzealous in its questioning) is actually being taken to taks for doing its job- in this case. Because when it comes to religious organizations, they have been giving them a pass on their political activity. But now we'll have months of faux outrage, and clamoring for Obama's head because, of course, he will be blamed. And of all those groups, how many were actually denied that status? To date, according to the article- none.
2
-
2
-
2
-
kathy kelly
IRS Lerner emails
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/louis-lerners-emails-were-lost-due
Republicans will seize on anything at all to perpetrate a faux scandal against the Obama administration and the facts of the Lois Lerner/IRS email scandal backs that up. If you haven't been in Antarctica for the last few months you'll know that Republicans have been going ballistic on the IRS and Lois Lerner, claiming a government conspiracy directed at poor misunderstood conservatives. What has their undies in a bunch at this time is a batch of lost emails from 2011, that the IRS said they lost.
What Republicans aren't really telling you is that Lerner herself reported the computer crash and tried to recover them all.
Over the past week, there have been many headlines about "lost emails" from a key IRS figure. This has fed some fears of a possible cover-up in the scandal over the IRS's treatment of conservative groups.References have been made to Watergate and the infamous gap of 18 and a half minutes in one of President Nixon's tapes.
But right now, this doesn't look like much of a cover-up. Lerner reported the emails lost, and tried to have them recovered, in mid-2011 — two years before the IRS scandal broke. So while the IRS's technical proficiency doesn't come off looking particularly good, the timeline we have suggests that the lost e-mails have little to do with the scandal.
I guess she must have used her lucky eight ball that whispered sweet nothings into her ear.
Last week, the IRS told Congress of its findings — Lerner's computer crashed in mid-2011, and many of her emails appear to be gone. The agency did manage to reconstruct and supply some of them by pulling them from other employees' accounts — and 67,000 emails that Lerner wrote or received were handed over. But Congressional Republicans were unsatisfied, to say the least, as you can see in this angry statement from Rep. Paul Ryan:
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Jesus-Pierre Salgado III are you kidding? With their attempts to destroy the federal governments power and to keep wages low.
Let me show you what their plank is from their own failed presidential campaign:
KOCH GAME PLAN
Senator Bernie Sanders went back in time to 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. He found their platform for that year, and published it again. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
ayo ajaz I explained to you what a theory is. You do not know what a "SCIENTIFIC THEORY" is.
AGAIN FOR YOU:
FACTS THEORIES ETC
Colloquial Use
To use math expressions, the general use of these words goes in order of importance as: Fact > Law > Theory > Hypothesis.
"Fact" in Everyday Language: A "fact" is something that is true. Whether you like it or not, "facts are stubborn things" (thank you, John Adams … or, "facts are stupid things" courtesy of Ronald Reagan). In general use, a "fact" is the strongest thing that can be said about, well, anything.
"Law" in Everyday Language: In everyday language, a "law" is generally on the same level as a fact. A law is something that is true, that generally explains or answers lots of different things. However, outside of politics, "law" is rarely used unless actually referring to something scientific.
"Theory" in Everyday Language: This is where the supposed insult to scientists comes in when you call something "just a theory." Outside of scientific circles, a "theory" is more of a supposition. "I have a theory that my cat will meow when it hears someone at the door." It may or may not be "true," but it's a supposition I have that is probably supported by at least some sort of observation. But it's really "just a theory" and is just as likely to be shown wrong at any given time as it is to be shown right.
"Hypothesis" in Everyday Language: A "hypothesis" is sort of on the same level as a "theory," if slightly below. To most people, they can be used interchangeably, though most will just resort to "theory" because "hypothesis" is an extra syllable longer and makes you sound like a nerd.
Scientific Use
In science, the order of importance of these is almost reversed: Theory > Law > Hypothesis > Facts. In addition, each term has a specific, well-defined use.
"Fact" in Science: It may surprise you to know that a "fact" is generally used the same way - it is an observation - but it is very specific. For example, if I drop a ball while holding it in the air above a surface, it is a fact that it will fall to the surface. This term is usually not used, however - we resort to "observations." For example, I observe that when the wind blows, a flag will flutter.
"Hypothesis" in Science: This is an "idea" that is formulated to explain observations (or our "facts"). In the above to examples, I might hypothesize that there is a force that pulls on the ball, counteracted when I'm holding it. Or that the wind exerts a force on the flag that causes it to flutter. The purpose of a hypothesis is to explain one or more observations in a cogent way. A good hypothesis must be testable - it must be able to make predictions about what would happen in similar situations - otherwise a hypothesis can never be verified nor refuted … and it remains "just a hypothesis." At present, String "Theory" is really just a hypothesis.
"Law" in Science: Laws are a descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances. For example, Kepler's Three Laws of Planetary Motion are (1) Planets travel in ellipses with one focus being the Sun, (2) planets sweep out equal area in equal time, and (3) a planet's period-squared is proportional to its semi-major-axis-cubed. Laws are generally made from many facts/observations and are effectively an "elevated" level from a hypothesis. Another example are the Laws of Thermodynamics. Because a Law is just a description of how something behaves and it does not explain why it behaves that way, it is usually considered to be below the level of a theory.
"Theory" in Science: A theory is really one of the pinnacles of science - what nearly everyone strives to make out of their hypotheses. A hypothesis is elevated to a theory when it has withstood all attempts to falsify it. Experiment after experiment has shown it sufficient to explain all observations that it encompasses. In other words, a "theory" has never been shown to be false, despite - usually - hundreds if not thousands of separate attempts to break it. It explains the observations with one or more mechanisms and, because it provides that mechanism, it is considered to be above the level of a Law. Examples these days are the Theory of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, the Germ Theory of Disease, and yes, the Theory of Evolution.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
*****
Geezus man do you not even know the libertarians who are in charge right now? The K0CKS and their ilk are the leaders of the libertarian movement.
Here is their manifesto:
KOCH GAME PLAN
Senator Bernie Sanders went back in time to 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. He found their platform for that year, and published it again. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society/Libertarian dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+NoahAyala Nonsense. PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Reagan increased the size of govt 191%,, He increased spending to match .. All it takes to dispel the GOP myth of Republicans spending less is to do a little reading , a little history.
Bush's spending lit the fuse on this recession and the debt,,
When Obama took office we were losing 850,000 jobs a month, unemployment was at 11%,
The GDP was at a negative 12% growth, All due to Bushs policies.
And we were in 2 useless never ending wars that had no declared goal .
Now unemployment is at under 8%, A 3% drop,,,
the GDP is at 2% a 13% gain.
1 war has ended .
The other is set to end,..
Are we better off than we were 4 years ago? Hell yes,,
The last thing we need is to put the Party that crashed the economy
and spent like "Drunken Sailors" back in control”
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
KOCH GAME PLAN to destroy America
Senator Bernie Sanders went back in time to 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. He found their platform for that year, and published it again. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Fox News Mouthpiece Christians are “brutally repressive. Christianity is a comprehensive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine, especially bad for women, for homosexuals, for Jews, other minority, religious faiths, well, pretty much just about for all human beings, actually.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Doug Rickles Yeah facts are wonderful when you use them dimwit. Stop listening to the garbage distortion of reality that the K0CHS and their message machine feed you. They count on you being stupid as dirt. And you prove them right.
http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/05/03/476210/rnc-attacks-obama-fundraisers/
Though many on the right have gleefully repeated that President Obama has had more fundraising events than his five predecessors, they ignore something very important: context. President Obama is stuck spending so much time raising money for his re-election campaign for two major reasons.
First, the nation’s public financing system for presidential candidates, which went into effect in 1976 and was used by Presidents Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush for their re-elections, has fallen apart. The maximum $91.2 million available for the major parties’ nominees is insufficient for the costs of a modern national campaign. Neither Obama nor Mitt Romney will participate in the system this year. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who lost his presidential bid after accepting the funds and associated limits, said that “no Republican in his or her right mind is going to agree to public financing. I mean, that’s dead. That is over.” Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), the 2004 loser, strongly discouraged his party’s 2008 nominee from accepting the grants, noting that it was insufficient to “adequately fund the campaigns.”
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Here is an explanation that even a 5 year old can understand. But libertarian neoconfederate seditious traitors may have trouble comprehending.
"Republicanist attorney John Hinderaker of the silly, hyper-partisan, rightwing PowerLine blog has always been more than happy to offer "legal" arguments to support whatever Rightwing nonsense his tribe would like to hear. When he's unable to come up with an actual legal argument, he's also happy to just type words to let the tribe know he's still on their side...even when the law isn't.
Commenting Monday night on the weekend's Bundy Ranch idiocy --- in which a scofflaw Nevada rancher who says he doesn't "recognize [the] United States government as even existing", has refused for the last twenty years to pay grazing fees for the use of public lands, as all other ranchers do --- Hinderaker admits that, "legally, Bundy doesn't have a leg to stand on."
Nonetheless, the Republican lawyer/blogger twists and turns to argue, "you should be sympathetic toward" ranch owner Cliven Bundy anyway. The reason for that sympathy takes some explaining, and some pretty impressive gymnastics to result in Hinderaker's final, rather laughable, argument for it.
Hinderaker must be desperate to get himself onto the non-RINO right flank of the Rightwing "FakeTriots" who rode in to southern NV last week with big manly guns a-blazin', but who, notably, did not ride in to the rescue when actual Big Government tyranny was actually cracking down on the public's right to occupy public spaces --- when the government actually used extraordinary violence to crush peaceful First Amendment-protected protests all around the country.
Neither does he, nor they, seem to give a damn when Big Government intrudes on the Constitutionally protected rights of women to privately take care of their own bodies; nor for the rights of millions of legal voters to freely cast their votes; nor for the rights of homeowners who've gone bankrupt and/or lost their homes thanks to Big Government-abetted crimes of gigantic, lawless, Wall Street corporations.
But what's most amusing about Hinderaker's article, in which he desperately (and transparently) attempts to get on the right side of folks he knows are wrong, but who are on his own political team, is that by the end of his article, he's finally figured out how to blame Big Bad Barack Obama and Harry Reid and, I guess, Liberalism or something for all the woes that Bundy is facing brought on himself. That, instead of calling out the rancher for his lack of personal responsibility in disobeying long-settled law, all while enjoying the Big Government welfare of "free" cattle grazing lands.
To do this, Hinderaker offers a pretend argument that the federal government isn't necessarily against development on public lands --- only certain types of development...
"It is obvious that some activities are favored by the Obama administration's BLM [Bureau of Land Management], and others are disfavored. The favored developments include solar and wind projects," Hinderaker charges with pretty much zero evidence to support his claim.
(The tortured tie to "solar and wind projects" refers to a failed Chinese-backed solar project, supported by Reid, over a 100 miles to the north of Bundy's property and offered up by partisans as a reason for the federal "land grab" that isn't a land grab at all. It's a creation of Alex Jones Productions, of course, and one helped along big time over the weekend with an above-the-fold goose from Matt Drudge.)
Hinderaker is smart enough to reject the alleged federal "land grab" plot out of hand, though he nonetheless works hard to place it back at the center of a nefarious Big Government scheme --- by hook or by crook if he has to.
"Wind and solar energy survive only by virtue of federal subsidies," Hinderaker continues with a straight face, while failing to mention the massive mining and drilling operations allowed by the federal government on the very same public lands in exchange for little or no royalties to the American people, from whom such private corporations take those valuable, finite, publicly-owned resources.
Ranchers, on the other hand, ask nothing of the federal government, he claims, while forgetting to mention the cut-rate government prices that ranchers enjoy for the use of thousands of square miles of grazing land.
Bundy, of course, doesn't think he should have to pay anything to use federal public lands. Yet he, unlike those welfare queens relying on the federal government to avoid things like death and starvation and stuff, should be the recipient of great sympathy, says the twisting Hinderaker at PowerLine.
"So let's have some sympathy for Cliven Bundy and his family," he writes in happy conclusion. "Their way of life is one that, frankly, is on the outs. They don't develop apps. They don't ask for food stamps. It probably has never occurred to them to bribe a politician. They don't subsist by virtue of government subsidies..."
Um, wait. Full stop. What?! They "don't subsist by virtue of government subsidies"?! Other than free access to grazing lands for Bundy's herd that Hinderaker feels we should have sympathy for?! (And which doesn't even take into account the hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage to people and property that his cattle are said to have caused over the years --- all for free?!)
Look. People should be free to carry out whatever legal business they like --- even if its on land stolen centuries ago from Native Americans, as is the case with "Bundy's" land. But to pretend that the millions of dollars of use of federal land (at either the discounted federal rate or for free, as in this instance) is not a government subsidy, is just as disingenuous as, well, pretty much everything I've ever seen written at PowerLine over the past decade. So, I guess, nothing new. Just newly stupid. And newly reaching as far as possible to the Rightward-lurching Rightwing fringe of his own party, in hopes of courting their good favor.
This is only gonna get stupider, I'm afraid, and bloodier, thanks to the tacit encouragement by wingnut tools like Hinderaker who don't have the courage to call out his own fellow wingnuts when they are blatantly wrong."
Brad F.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
From the Hamas Charter: • “Israel will exist...until Islam will obliterate it” (Preamble) • “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them” (Article 7) • “There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad” (Article 13) • “[Peace] initiatives...are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement” (Article 13)
Hamas charter in full:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
A little history for those that have forgotten or do not care to know their history:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/07/18/clifford-d-may-sixty-six-years-later-too-many-arabs-still-dream-of-slaughtering-israels-jews/
The objective of both the PLO and especially Hamas is still one prohibited under international law, and a crime, i.e. genocide. Until those Charters have changed, that still stands. It does not help the Palestinian people one bit. International Aid can not continue to prop up such government. It is nice of Qatar to come to the aid of the Muslim family members, and set up a fund to pay Hamas government salaries. That does not create a Palestinian State, an economy, jobs for people, a national conscience as a people. On the contrary. Other aid props up others, such as UNWRA, which has incentives to keep Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan in the camps, with no way up and out. Allowing integration, assimilation, citizenship where they reside, ownership of property, would but UNWRA - that is a 30000 person payroll, out of business. People who are being held captive s so that others may enrich themselves, do not work, are not educated, are not part of the fabric of society and the economy, lose whatever skills and abilities they have, forever., Adding to that a reputation of terrorism and criminality is not helpful.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Brandon Lyons No I am not. You are spinning some purity nonsense.
Here is the official platform of the Libertarian Party. Their words not mine:
We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
ME: If that isnt destroying government then I do not what is.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
KOCH CHRISTIE
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=10335
Five reasons Christie is not a moderate:
1. He Has Moved To Crush Unions: If one thing marks Christie’s tenure, it is his hostility to organized labor. In 2011, Christie “signed landmark legislation that increases pension and health contributions paid by a half-million teachers, police and other public workers and removes the issue from collective bargaining for four years” — undermining labor rights. During his speech at the Republican National Convention, he derided teachers unions: “[Democrats] believe in pitting unions against teachers, educators against parents, and lobbyists against children. They believe in teachers’ unions. We believe in teachers.”
2. He Killed Marriage Equality: Remember that Christie vetoed a bill that would’ve given gays and lesbians full marriage rights.
3. He Has Rapidly Advanced Education Privatization In The State: In 2010, Chris Christie (R) slashed $820 million in school spending, a cut so extreme that a judge ruled it unconstitutional. At the same time, he has pushed for hundreds of millions of dollars in school vouchers which would transfer taxpayer dollars to private schools.
4. He Ended New Jersey’s Involvement In Battling Global Warming: Despite his strong leadership in the wake of Sandy, Christie undermined the movement to stop these extreme weather events by pulling New Jersey out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which was designed to combat global warming.
5. He Has Bailed Out Irresponsible Corporations: While slashing school spending, Christie bailed out a massive super-mall boondoggle with $400 million. He has also diverted funding to privately run half-way houses where violent inmates have escaped and non-violent inmates have been killed.
Chris Christie’s close cooperation with the federal government to aid the victims of Sandy is certainly laudable. But especially in light of his possible presidential aspirations, Americans should not forget that he is a hardcore right-winger who had undermined the middle class, equal rights, and basic fairness in New Jersey.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
bluesrockfan36 EQUAL PAY DISPARITY PROVED ONCE AGAIN
"Anecdotally, companies that do have a policy of making their pay transparent say it’s helped to create equality. Dane Atkinson, the CEO of SumAll, an analytics company that gives employees access to each other’s pay information, told the Society for Human Resource management that transparency is the “single-best protection” against gender bias.
The federal government -- “where you can Google somebody’s pay” -- is another example of how pay transparency can work in women’s favor, according to Hegewisch. There, women in white-collar jobs make 87.3 percent of what their male colleagues earn. Compare that to other professional jobs, such as financial managers, marketing and sales managers and CEOs, where women all make less than 70 percent of what their male colleagues earn, and you can see how women make more when pay is public."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/12/charlize-theron-equal-pay_n_6456332.html
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
If this crap passes it will be the first big step on the march to realize the K0CH Libertarian dream of feudal America.
KOCH GAME PLAN
1980, David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. This is the K0CHsucker platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The only known indictment under the Logan Act was one that occurred in 1803 when a grand jury indicted Francis Flournoy, a Kentucky farmer, who had written an article in the Frankfort Guardian of Freedom under the pen name of "A Western American." In the article, Flournoy advocated a separate nation in the western part of the United States that would ally with France.
Guess we can arrest and charge the K0CHers that call for secession. LET'S DO IT NOW.
Logan Act:
Passed under the administration of President John Adams, during tension between the U.S. and France, it was informally named for Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, a state legislator (and later US Senator) and pacifist who in 1798 engaged in semi-negotiations with France during the Quasi-War.
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not. The Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Max Atwood I will let Spindell speak for me:
Nuclear Musings
Published 1, October 19, 2013
Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
It has always seemed to me that the use of nuclear energy is a bad idea given the current technology. My opinion is perhaps formed because I was in school during the 1950’s and due to the “Cold War” and the bomb tests, there developed in most of us, a deep fear of nuclear annihilation. I can remember watching in fascinated fear, in 1952, as they exploded a Hydrogen Bomb at Eniwetok, one of the Marshall Islands. The blast was covered on TV as I guess a reassurance to the American People of the power and might of our government and to give us a feeling of safety from those “Commies” in the USSR. Being eight years old at the time this demonstration of US power was not comforting in the slightest. We had “duck and cover” exercises in Elementary School, where we would go under our desks and cover our eyes in case of a nuclear attack. Given the actual nuclear explosions I had witnessed on TV, the idea that “duck and cover” would save me cast a skeptical suspicion in my eight year old mind.
As I grew I learned that beyond the immediate effect of a nuclear blast, the subsequent radiation was even more dangerous. Radiation poisoning could maim you and it could kill you in a slow, lingering death. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings did more than just kill many people. Beyond the maiming of the immediate victims who survived, we learned about the rates of cancer which were off the charts, especially in the infants of pregnant women. As the threat of nuclear destruction faded, the idea of radiation poisoning was nevertheless present as the United States began using nuclear power and a large industry sprang up around it. The industry was fostered by the then named Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), which was soon in thrall of the industry it was supposed to regulate. As with cigarette smoking the stories of rising cancer rates were downplayed by the AEC and the “nuclear industry. The AEC has now become the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) because the AEC had developed the reputation as an industry shill, rather than regulator. This is hardly a surprise because it seems that all government regulation today is in the hands of industry lobbyists and an exchange program where the regulators find jobs with the industry they regulate. The “revolving door”.This Wiki article on nuclear power is rather even handed in its approach, but will supply you with all the background you might need on nuclear power plants: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_plant One item from it sets up my thoughts for today:
“In many countries, plants are often located on the coast, in order to provide a ready source of cooling water for the essential service water system. As a consequence the design needs to take the risk of flooding and tsunamis into account. The World Energy Council (WEC) argues disaster risks are changing and increasing the likelihood of disasters such as earthquakes, cyclones, hurricanes, typhoons, ?ooding.[29] High temperatures, low precipitation levels and severe droughts may lead to fresh water shortages.[29] Seawater is corrosive and so nuclear energy supply is likely to be negatively affected by the fresh water shortage.[29] This generic problem may become increasingly significant over time.[29] Failure to calculate the risk of flooding correctly lead to a Level 2 event on the International Nuclear Event Scale during the 1999 Blayais Nuclear Power Plant flood,[30] while flooding caused by the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami lead to the Fukushima I nuclear accidents.[31]
The design of plants located in seismically active zones also requires the risk of earthquakes and tsunamis to be taken into account. Japan, India, China and the USA are among the countries to have plants in earthquake-prone regions. Damage caused to Japan’s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant during the 2007 Chuetsu offshore earthquake[32][33] underlined concerns expressed by experts in Japan prior to the Fukushima accidents, who have warned of a genpatsu-shinsai (domino-effect nuclear power plant earthquake disaster).[34]”
In this time of global warning worries, with the distinct signs of a rising sea level, nevertheless the economics are such that the optimal way to build nuclear plants is by large bodies of water, preferably the ocean. Which brings me to the disaster at the Fukishima Nuclear Plant in Japan:
“The Fukushima nuclear disaster illustrated the dangers of building multiple nuclear reactor units close to one another. This proximity triggered the parallel, chain-reaction accidents that led to hydrogen explosions damaging reactor buildings and water draining from open-air spent fuel pools — a situation that was potentially more dangerous than the loss of reactor cooling itself. Because of the closeness of the reactors, Plant Director Masao Yoshida “was put in the position of trying to cope simultaneously with core meltdowns at three reactors and exposed fuel pools at three units”.
Some more about Fukushima:
“The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster Fukushima Dai-ichi was an energy accident at the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, initiated primarily by the tsunami of the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami on 11 March 2011.[5] The damage caused by the tsunami produced equipment failures, and without this equipment a Loss of Coolant Accident followed with nuclear meltdowns and releases of radioactive materials beginning on March 12.[6] It is the largest nuclear disaster” since the Chernobyl disaster of 1986 and the second disaster (along with Chernobyl) to measure Level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale,[7] releasing an estimated 10 to 30% of the radiation of the Chernobyl accident.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_disaster
A September 1, 2013 story from the BBC related that the radiation levels around the Fukushima Nuclear Plant are now 18 times higher than was initially thought. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23918882
“The Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) had originally said the radiation emitted by the leaking water was around 100 millisieverts an hour. However, the company said the equipment used to make that recording could only read measurements of up to 100 millisieverts. The new recording, using a more sensitive device, showed a level of 1,800 millisieverts an hour.The new reading will have direct implications for radiation doses received by workers who spent several days trying to stop the leak last week, the BBC’s Rupert Wingfield-Hayes reports from Tokyo.
In addition, Tepco says it has discovered a leak on another pipe emitting radiation levels of 230 millisieverts an hour. The plant has seen a series of water leaks and power failures. The 2011 tsunami knocked out cooling systems to the reactors, three of which melted down. The damage from the tsunami has necessitated the constant pumping of water to cool the reactors. This is believed to be the fourth major leak from storage tanks at Fukushima since 2011 and the worst so far in terms of volume.”
It doesn’t surprise me that these new revelations have come out re-estimating the radiation levels at Fukishima. I am in the camp one could describe as skeptical and/or hostile to the nuclear industry. However, I’ve supplied enough information in the various links above and below for people to come to a different conclusion. Indeed, I realize that nuclear power has many beneficial pluses to it use. My specific worries can be classified as its danger to the surrounding community, the long lasting after effects of nuclear radiation and the fact that industry invariably co-opts its regulators. When these factors are put together with the business imperative, which must always be to continually raise profitability, I worry.
“Nuclear power plants are some of the most sophisticated and complex energy systems ever designed.[13] Any complex system, no matter how well it is designed and engineered, cannot be deemed failure-proof.[14] Veteran anti-nuclear activist and author Stephanie Cooke has argued:
The reactors themselves were enormously complex machines with an incalculable number of things that could go wrong. When that happened at Three Mile Island in 1979, another fault line in the nuclear world was exposed. One malfunction led to another, and then to a series of others, until the core of the reactor itself began to melt, and even the world’s most highly trained nuclear engineers did not know how to respond. The accident revealed serious deficiencies in a system that was meant to protect public health and safety.[15]
The 1979 Three Mile Island accident inspired Perrow’s book Normal Accidents, where a nuclear accident occurs, resulting from an unanticipated interaction of multiple failures in a complex system. TMI was an example of a normal accident because it was “unexpected, incomprehensible, uncontrollable and unavoidable”.[16]
Perrow concluded that the failure at Three Mile Island was a consequence of the system’s immense complexity. Such modern high-risk systems, he realized, were prone to failures however well they were managed. It was inevitable that they would eventually suffer what he termed a ‘normal accident’. Therefore, he suggested, we might do better to contemplate a radical redesign, or if that was not possible, to abandon such technology entirely.[17] .
A fundamental issue contributing to a nuclear power system’s complexity is its extremely long lifetime. The timeframe from the start of construction of a commercial nuclear power station through the safe disposal of its last radioactive waste, may be 100 to 150 years.[13]”
We live in an age where the “Captains of Industry” believe that efficient management is one that lays off workers, cuts wages and looks to cost savings of all kinds in order to increase profitability. Why would we expect that the nuclear industry is immune to the management fashion of the day? These plants are admittedly among the most complex power delivering entities on the planet. There have been innumerable accidents, with disastrous consequences, that have occurred through the years some of which are referenced in the links I’ve supplied. My position is that I could be open to the idea of using nuclear energy for power, providing that I could be certain that safeguards exist. I don’t believe they currently do exist, despite reassurances from the industry and the NRC. Currently, my two children, my grandchildren and my beloved mother-in-law live in close proximity to a nuclear power plant, Indian Point, in New York. A little history of this plant impacts my concerns for their safety:
“According to the New York Times, the Indian Point plant “has encountered a string of accidents and mishaps since its beginnings, and has appeared on the federal list of the nation’s worst nuclear power plants”.[10] A 2003 report commissioned by then Governor George Pataki concluded that the “current radiological response system and capabilities are not adequate to…protect the people from an unacceptable dose of radiation in the event of a release from Indian Point”.[11] On March 10, 2009 the Indian Point Power Plant was awarded the fifth consecutive top safety rating for annual operations by the Federal regulators. According to the Hudson Valley Journal News, the plant had shown substantial improvement in its “safety culture” in the previous two years.[12]”
This is a history of the nuclear incidents at Indian Point, on the important Hudson River, thus far:
• In 1973, five months after Indian Point 2 opened, the plant was shut down when engineers discovered buckling in the steel liner of the concrete dome in which the nuclear reactor is housed.[10]
• On October 17, 1980,[13] 100,000 gallons of Hudson River water leaked into the Indian Point 2 containment building from the fan cooling unit, undetected by a safety device designed to detect hot water. The flooding, covering the first 9 feet of the reactor vessel, was discovered when technicians entered the building. Two pumps which should have removed the water were found to be inoperative. NRC proposed a $2,100,000 fine for the incident.[14]
• There was intense scrutiny of the Indian Point plant between 1993 and 1997, when it was on the Federal list of the nation’s worst nuclear power plants.[15]
• In February 2000, the most serious incident at the plant occurred, when a small radioactive leak from a steam generator tube forced the plant to close for 11 months.[10]
• In 2001, a series of leaks sprung up in non-nuclear parts of the plant.[10]
• In 2005, Entergy workers while digging discovered a small leak in a spent fuel pool. Water containing tritium and strontium-90 was leaking through a crack in the pool building “and then finding its way into the nearby Hudson River.” Workers were able to keep the fuel rods “safely covered” despite the leak.[16] On March 22, 2006 The New York Times also reported finding radioactive nickel-63 and strontium in groundwater on site.[17]
• In 2007 a transformer at Unit 3 caught fire, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission raised its level of inspections, because the plant had experienced many unplanned shutdowns. According to The New York Times, Indian Point “has a history of transformer problems”.[4]
• On April 23, 2007, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission fined the owner of the Indian Point nuclear plant $130,000 for failing to meet a deadline for a new emergency siren plan. The 150 sirens at the plant are meant to alert residents within 10 miles to a plant emergency. Since 2008, a Rockland County based private company has taken over responsibility for the infrastructure used to trigger and maintain the ATI siren system. The sirens, once plagued with failures, have functioned nearly flawlessly ever since.[18]
• On January 7, 2010, NRC inspectors reported that an estimated 600,000 gallons of mildly radioactive steam was intentionally vented to the atmosphere after an automatic shutdown of Unit 2. After the vent, one of the vent valves unintentionally remained slightly open for two days. The levels of tritium in the steam were within the allowable safety limits defined in NRC standards.[19]
• On November 7, 2010, an explosion occurred in the main transformer for Indian Point 2, spilling oil into the Hudson River.[20] The owner of the Indian Point nuclear plant later agreed to pay a $1.2 million penalty for the transformer explosion.[4]
• In the middle of February [2013], employee error caused an accidental shutdown of Reactor Two. This incident released no radiation.
Now these incidents have occurred at a nuclear plant that has a “relatively safe” history, but from my perspective it remains a potential threat to those I love. There are also some who say that nuclear plants contaminate the surrounding area and raise cancer risks. This has devolved in a “he said, she said” argument between environmentalists and the industry, with the NRC siding with industry. There is another Indian Point safety issue to be mulled:
“Indian Point stores used fuel rods in two spent fuel pools at the facility.[16] According to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the Indian Point spent fuel pools, which contain more nuclear material than the reactors, “have no containment structure”.[28] While the spent fuel pools at Indian Point are not stored under a containment dome like the reactor, they are contained within a 40-foot-deep pool and submerged under 27 feet of water. The spent fuel pools at Indian Point are made of concrete walls that are four to six feet wide with a half-inch thick stainless steel inner liner.[29][30] According to Jonathan Alter, the pools are located in bedrock, not above-ground as at many other plants including the Japanese ones.[31]”
And then:
“In 2008 researchers from Columbia University‘s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory have located a previously unknown active seismic zone running from Stamford, Connecticut, to the Hudson Valley town of Peekskill, New York – the intersection of the Stamford-Peekskill line with the well known Ramapo Fault – which passes less than a mile north of the Indian Point nuclear power plant.[35] The Ramapo Fault is the longest fault in the Northeast, but scientists dispute how active this roughly 200 million-year-old fault really is. Many earthquakes in the state’s surprisingly varied seismic history are believed to have occurred on or near it. Visible at ground level, the fault line likely extends as deep as nine miles below the surface.[36]
Indian Point was built to withstand an earthquake of 6.1 on the Richter scale, according to a company spokesman.[37] Entergy executives have also noted “that Indian Point had been designed to withstand an earthquake much stronger than any on record in the region, though not one as powerful as the quake that rocked Japan”.[38]”
So in the end “you pays your money and you takes your choice”, as the old canard goes. My choice is that nuclear power comes at too great a potential cost to be relied on as the power source of the future, given current technology. There are semi valid arguments that it doesn’t pollute the atmosphere and that it helps keep energy costs down. The fact is, that all things considered, these plants are quite costly to build and maintain. The plants are expected to last 100 to 150 years because of both initial cost and the need to clean up the nuclear waste produced. The question also comes about as to the cost both financial an physical of the disposal of nuclear waste. I concede that neither do I have a scientific bent, nor am I an expert. I further concede that there are points to be made that favor nuclear energy used as a power source. Nevertheless, in my opinion the downside exceeds the benefits. Where do you stand?
Submitted By: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eniwetok
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibakusha
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster
2
-
Wordy Birds LOL fission, fusion, thorium , molten salt whatever. SAFE DOSE
The real choice is between deadly energy that is not renewable and life sustaining energy that is renewable.
Using a false statement in a false equivalence is also brazen, like Clapper “telling the least falsehood available” under oath.
First of all, federal regulations allow the daily release of radioactive steam from nuclear power plants:
Many people do not realize that every nuclear power reactor dumps radioactive water, scatters radioactive particles, and disperses radioactive gases as part of its routine, everyday operation. It doesn’t take an accident. Federal regulations permit these radioactive releases.
(Beyond Nuclear, http://www.beyondnuclear.org/pamphlets/ ). That corrupt practice happens even though there is no such thing as a safe dose level:
The U.S. Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations concludes that, despite some evidence of a partial repair mechanism, recent low-dose radiation data “do not contradict the hypothesis, at least with respect to cancer induction and hereditary genetic effects, that the frequency of such effects increases with low-level radiation as a linear, non-threshold function of the dose.” (National Research Council BEIR V 1990)
A panel from the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) charged to investigate the dangers of low-energy, low-dose ionizing radiation has concluded, “that it is unlikely that a threshold exists for the induction of cancers… (BIER VII, 2005)
(No Safe Dose http://www.beyondnuclear.org/storage/radiation-and-health/NO_Safe_Dose1.pdf )
2
-
Ross Miller actually right wingers are the biggest and most dangerous terrorist group in America.
RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS
A report published by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy on Jan. 15 discusses the potential dangers of “violent far-right” organizations, which has angered some conservatives that believe the military should focus on international threats.
The executive summary of the paper, “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” claims that “since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self- identify with the far-right of American politics.”
Written by Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, the paper asserts that three distinct ideologies exist in the “American violent far right.” Those are “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement,” the last of which “includes mainly Christian Identity groins such as the Aryan Nations.”
“Findings indicate that…it is not only feelings of deprivation that motivate those involved in far right violence, but also the sense of empowerment that emerges when the political system is perceived to be increasingly permissive to far right ideas,” it later reads.
The rise in attacks in the 21st century were significant, as “Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%.”
The study also found that “presidential election years and the preceding year are characterized by an increase of far-right violence,” leading the author to conclude that “in general, far-right groups and individuals are more inclined to engage in violence in a contentious political climate.”
Furthermore, it found that the number of Republicans in the House was positively correlated with an increase in far-right violence, although the causes were not immediately clear. The study posits that it could mean those groups believed those legislators might be “more tolerant of their activities” or possibly that “the high expectations of far-right activists during a conservative legislature” were not “fulfilled.”
Some conservatives object to the report. The Washington Times, The National Review, and World Net Daily all report on critical reactions from the right, according to the Atlantic Wire, with blogger Pamela Geller calling it an “appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat.”
2
-
2
-
2
-
bluesrockfan36 No they are about forcing you to be serf bubba.
Here is the libertarian platform in America. This is the K0CH plan if they get enough governors and the presidency. Their words not mine:
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Tubemax68 PARTIES ARE NOT THE SAME
May 27, 2015 12:35 PM
The Tired Old “Both Sides Getting More Extreme” Meme
By Ed Kilgore
In my recent book and elsewhere, I’ve noted that the meta-narrative Republicans were promoting—and much of the MSM was echoing—during the 2014 midterms was that the Great Big Moderate Adults of the GOP had gotten the crazy extremist Tea People under control, and were ready to govern in a serious way that Serious People could appreciate. An important sub-narrative to the completely phony Republican Shift to the Center was that Democrats were moving to the left so fast that they’d probably start singing the Internationale at party events before long.
A lot of people who don’t completely buy the GOP Shift to the Center are happy to promote the false equivalency classic of Everybody’s Polarizing at Exactly the Same Pace. But there’s one species of observers who are deeply invested in the Democratic Lurch to the Left meme: Republican “moderates” who spend a fair amount of time criticizing their zany brethren and need an excuse to reassume the Party Yoke when elections come around.
Peter Wehner is one such person, and so he pens the classic so’s-your-old-man-and-actually-maybe-your-old-man’s-worse op-ed for the New York Times. Ignoring the fact that most actual lefty Democrats think Barack Obama is too much like Bill Clinton, Wehner’s case almost entirely depends on contrasting the noble centrist Big Dog (who, of course, conservatives denounced as a godless socialist when he was actually in office) with the left-bent Obama.
And it’s a really terrible argument. Exhibit one for Wehner involves Clinton’s support for three-strikes-and-you’re-out and 100,000 cops, as though they are the same thing, with Eric Holder’s de-incarceration commitment. Keep up, Pete: Clinton, along with two-thirds of the Republican presidential field, has called for a reversal of “mass incarceration” policies. It’s not an ideological move in either direction so much as a rare and belated bipartisan recognition of what does and doesn’t work.
Exhibit two is welfare reform, and aside from ignoring everything Clinton did on low-income economic policy other than signing the 1996 welfare law, Wehner blandly accepts the race-drenched lie—and he’s smart enough to know that it is indeed widely interpreted to be a lie—from the 2012 Romney campaign that Obama has “loosened welfare-to-work requirements.” Then he tries to pivot to a contrast of Clinton’s shutdown of the “welfare entitlement” with Obama’s creation of a health care entitlement—without noting that Clinton had a health care proposal that was distinctly more “liberal” than Obama’s. Pretty big omission, I’d say.
It gets worse. Wehner suggests that unlike Clinton Obama wants to boost taxes on the wealthy, which conveniently ignores Clinton’s first budget. Speaking of the budget, Obama’s fiscal record is contrasted with Clinton’s without noting that Obama inherited not only a huge deficit but the worst economy since the 1930s. Wehner makes a fact-free assertion that Obama isn’t as friendly towards U.S. allies as Clinton was. And in a telling maneuver, he suddenly shifts the contrast from Clinton-versus-Obama to Clinton-versus-Clinton in mentioning the dispute over the Trans-Pacific Partnership, where HRC has been “non-committal.” Well, the crazy lefty Barack Obama hasn’t been “non-committal,” has he? Yes, a majority of congressional Democrats oppose him on TPP. But a majority of congressional Democrats also opposed Clinton on NAFTA and GATT, and denied him “fast-track” trade negotiating authority. Plus ca change….
Nonetheless, Wehner stumbles on to his pre-fab conclusion:
The Democratic Party is now a pre-Bill Clinton party, the result of Mr. Obama’s own ideological predilections and the coalition he has built.
In the very next breath he acknowledges that on the one issue where the Democratic Party really has “moved to the left,” same-sex marriage, the country has moved with it (and the “pre-Bill Clinton” Democratic Party had to move as well). And then he leaps to the circular argument that Republicans must be better representing the “center” of public opinion, because they’re doing so well in midterms!
Well, Pete, guess you have to take the position that makes it possible for you to spend so much time calling out the crazy people of your party. But the facts are not friendly to your argument.
Ed Kilgore edits the Political Animal blog and is a contributing writer to the Washington Monthly. He is managing editor for the Democratic Strategist, a weekly columnist at Talking Points Memo, and the author of Election 2014: Why Republicans Swept the Midterms, recently published by the University of Pennsylvania Press
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_05/the_tired_old_both_sides_getti055757.php
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
No Way The KoCHs fight any attempts at mass transit or green energy. They have the infrastructure and the money to win for many decades.
The Koch Brothers' Dirty War on Solar Power
All over the country, the Kochs and utilities have been blocking solar initiatives — but nowhere more so than in Florida
"The Smart Solar amendment is financed, nakedly, by the state's top investor-owned utilities, which ponied up $4 million through December, more than half the campaign's total haul. "We are proud of who supports our campaign," says spokeswoman Sarah Bascom. Other supporters include conservative pressure groups funded by fossil-fuel interests. 60 Plus – a seniors group that has received $15 million from the Koch donor network – donated more than $1 million. The National Black Chamber of Commerce (NBCC), a tiny organization with an oversize name, added $100,000. The NBCC is funded by major polluters, including Exxon; its latest convention was sponsored by Koch Industries and Gulf Power. NBCC founder Harry Alford, unabashed, touts the "cozy, productive relationship we have with the fossil-fuel corporations." The Koch grassroots political group, Americans for Prosperity, does not appear on Smart Solar's donor rolls, but did issue a call to arms for its Florida activists to fight solar choice."
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-koch-brothers-dirty-war-on-solar-power-20160211?utm_source=huffpostlive&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=partner
Kochs Killing Electric Cars
http://evworld.com/focus.cfm?cid=313
https://cleantechnica.com/2016/02/22/koch-brothers-cant-stop-trying-to-kill-people/
http://billmoyers.com/2014/10/03/koch-brothers-war-transit/
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
***** GOD THE ABORTIONIST
Dear Forced Birther...
Your God Is Not Pro Life
You might find that statement surprising, but I know this from your own holy book. Despite what you may have been told, the Bible is not a pro-life document. It is, in many parts, pro-death. In one of the first stories in the Bible, God murders millions of people through a global flood — including born and unborn children. Unborn children — the ones you fight for. God only wanted to get rid of them.
Later in your holy book God commands the death of nation after nation because they happen to inhabit the land he plans to give the Israelites
(Josh 7-9). He commands Israel to kill women and children (1 Sam 15).
When he wanted to make a point to the Egyptians, he murdered all the firstborn sons of Egypt. Innocent children. And when King David killed a man and slept with his wife, God punished him by killing his unborn child.
This same God does nothing while billions of people throughout
history have been starved, drowned, raped and murdered. He sits on the sidelines and watches.
That is not a God who is pro-life!
On top of all that, at least 25% of all pregnancies end in “natural” abortion — which you believe your God either designed or actively performed — an act you consider murder.
No, your God is not pro-life. By your own standards, he is a murderer — the most prolific abortionist of all time.
So don’t tell us you base your morality on the Bible or on the character of God. Don’t tell us you’re sent from your God to protect the lives of the innocent. Despite what your pastor says, your God is not pro-life. He has been killing, maiming, and letting people suffer for ages. You’re pro-life because, like most humans, you value human life.
I also value human life, but it has nothing to do with supernatural beings.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2009/07/your-god-isnt-pro-life/
2
-
2
-
***** CHRISTMAS PAGAN HOLIDAY
Jewish angels and Roman gods: The ancient mythological origins of Christmas - Salon.com
That’s a lot of added complications. If the rest of the New Testament doesn’t refer to these stories or need them, then how did we end up with them? Where do they come from?
Nugent: One part of the answer comes from Hellenistic culture. (It is no accident all New Testament books written in Greek.) In this tradition, when a man did something extraordinary there was the assumption that he did this because he was different, either divine or semi-divine. They would make up a story about how he came to be divine. Almost all Greek heroes were said to be born of a human woman and a god–even Alexander the Great, Augustus and Pythagoras.
The father typically was Zeus or Apollo. The god would come and sleep with the woman, pretending to be the husband or as a bolt of lightning, or some such. Greek mythology also shows up in the book of Genesis: the gods lusting after the women and coming down and mating with them.
Why were they added to the Christian story?
Nugent: Jewish Christians, the first Christians, didn’t believe in the virgin birth. They believed that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus. Part of their Christology was “adoptionism”–they thought Jesus was adopted as the unique son of God at some time later in life. There were disagreements about when – Mark suggests the baptism, Paul suggests the resurrection.
Over time, gentile Christianity replaced Jewish Christianity. There were Jewish-Roman Wars. The Jewish Christians were marginalized and oppressed. The Gentile branch became dominant. Eventually we get the gospel of John which pushes the sonship of Jesus back to the beginning of time. This writer is at the other end of the spectrum from the Jewish Christians.
But Matthew and Luke think that the sonship of Jesus began at birth. And they want to tell a story that reinforces this point. Matthew and Luke are the source of the Christmas story as most of us learned it.
Why didn’t the writers do a better job of cleaning the contradictions?
Nugent: They did, some. This is called the “orthodox corruption of scripture.” But it appears that these birth stories were added toward the end, so scripture got frozen before they could get integrated.
I was raised that the bible was the literally perfect, “inerrant” word of God, essentially dictated by God to the writers. What you are saying about the Christmas story sure calls into question this point of view.
Nugent: Which Bible?! There are thousands of manuscript variations. Most biblical stories are probably fiction, not non-fiction. They are mythology in the deepest sense of the word. But we need to get beyond the issue of whether biblical reports happened in the historical, physical sense to understand what they mean spiritually and mythically.
Ok. Back to Christmas. Of all the images from the Christmas story, the one that people fall in love with most is angels. The Christmas story is full of angels, beings of light. Is this because of the solstice tradition?
Nugent: Actually it comes from the Hebrew Bible, the Jewish scriptures that were eventually adopted into the Christian Bible as the Old Testament. It also comes from the Jewish literature written between the Old and New Testaments that didn’t get into the biblical canon. Some of these are even quoted in the New Testament, for example Enoch, from the 2nd Century BC. It’s all about angels.
What are angels in these stories? Who are they?
Nugent: The Bible calls them the sons of God, the Divine Council. The word used for God in parts of the Hebrew Bible, Elohim, is plural implying a family of deities. Angels are the lesser gods of the deposed pantheon of ancient Israel. They are under the rulership of Yahweh. Together with Yahweh they are part of Elohim, a plural word that we translate “God” in the book of Genesis. Elohim/God says “Let us make humans in our image.” Christians understand this to refer to the trinity, but that is a later interpretation. These angels came from the ancient pantheons of Mesopotamia and Egypt. Many of these gods come from stars. There is a strong astral dimension. “Heavenly Hosts” are stars.
The Luke story focuses on one angel specifically: Gabriel. Is he the archangel?
Nugent: Gabriel is the Angel of the Lord. He is one of two angels who are named in the Jewish canon and the Christian canon outside of the apocrypha: Gabriel and Michael. They are the angels of mercy and judgment. Gabriel means “Strong One of El.” He is first named in Daniel.
f you go into an Eastern Orthodox church you have two icons on the north and south. Michael is on the North to fight with Satan who lives there. Gabriel is on the south. He is more like what the angels originally were, which is messengers of the gods. That is what angel means. The idea that God has a special messenger is exactly what we read about in the Middle Eastern mythologies. Each of the earlier gods has his own special messenger. Enki, who becomes Yaweh, has Isimud. The goddess Inana has Ninshubur. Each high god will have an envoy or assistant, who is a lesser god. The angel of the lord is the same thing. The distinction between angels and gods came later.
So Gabriel is a star person? Or one of those semi-divine descendants of gods and women.
Nugent: He is one of the gods who would come down to earth.
Why do you say that?
Nugent: The offspring of the gods mating with women are called Gaborim–from the same root as Gabriel. In the second century, Gabriel appears in the Epistula Apostolorum. It talks about Jesus and these secret teachings that he gave to his apostles after the resurrection. One of the secrets is that he is actually Gabriel. After Gabriel took on flesh and united with Mary, then he becomes Jesus. The idea that Christ was an angel was extremely popular in the early church. Later we find this really strict separation between humans and angels; between gods and angels. (more)
We have time for just one more favorite Christmas story: The Star of Bethlehem and the Magi.
Nugent: The Magi are astrologers. They are Zoroastrian priests. Just to the east of the Roman Empire was the Persian Empire, which was Zoroastrian. They see this star at its rising (the better translations don’t say in the East). The astrologers paid a lot of attention to this. It is likely that what this refers to was a heliacal rising, which is the first time that a star appears over the horizon during the course of a year. They thought this was a sign of the Jewish messiah. Scholars speculate that they would have been living in Babylon, where there were lots of Jewish merchants. The Jews had been there from the time of the Jewish exile from Babylonia. We have cuneiform records from them.
Are you assuming that this story is historical?
Nugent: Think of it as a frog and pond. The pond is real, the frog is not. They are fictional stories in a real setting. They don’t always get the details of the setting right, but they are fictional characters in real places. The Magi follow their star from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. The author has in mind a real star that would be in front of you in this situation. It would have to be a star in the far southern sky. Remember what I said about the Heavenly Host being stars? The star in Matthew and the angel in Luke are two variants of the same mythology.
My former fundamentalist head is spinning. Is there anything else you’d like to say in closing?
Nugent: We need to be able to appreciate these stories as myths, rather than literal histories. When you understand where they come from, then you can understand their spiritual significance for the writers and for us.
This interview first appeared at the Huffington Post, December 25, 2008.
http://www.salon.com/2014/12/12/jewish_angels_and_roman_gods_the_ancient_mythological_origins_of_christmas_partner/
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
*****
You know I explained it perfectly. No need to argue with a deluded FREE MARKET advocate. What could I possible say?
Ok here you go bubba.
We shall start with what is wrong with libertarianism:
A Manifesto for Psychopaths
March 5, 2012
http://www.monbiot.com/2012/03/05/a-manifesto-for-psychopaths/
Ayn Rand’s ideas have become the Marxism of the new right.
By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 6th March 2012.
It has a fair claim to be the ugliest philosophy the post-war world has produced. Selfishness, it contends, is good, altruism evil, empathy and compassion are irrational and destructive. The poor deserve to die; the rich deserve unmediated power. It has already been tested, and has failed spectacularly and catastrophically. Yet the belief system constructed by Ayn Rand, who died 30 years ago today, has never been more popular or influential.
Rand was a Russian from a prosperous family who emigrated to the United States. Through her novels (such as Atlas Shrugged) and her non-fiction (such as The Virtue of Selfishness(1)) she explained a philosophy she called Objectivism. This holds that the only moral course is pure self-interest. We owe nothing, she insists, to anyone, even to members of our own families. She described the poor and weak as “refuse” and “parasites”, and excoriated anyone seeking to assist them. Apart from the police, the courts and the armed forces, there should be no role for government: no social security, no public health or education, no public infrastructure or transport, no fire service, no regulations, no income tax.
Atlas Shrugged, published in 1957, depicts a United States crippled by government intervention, in which heroic millionaires struggle against a nation of spongers. The millionaires, whom she portrays as Atlas holding the world aloft, withdraw their labour, with the result that the nation collapses. It is rescued, through unregulated greed and selfishness, by one of the heroic plutocrats, John Galt.
The poor die like flies as a result of government programmes and their own sloth and fecklessness. Those who try to help them are gassed. In a notorious passage, she argues that all the passengers in a train filled with poisoned fumes deserved their fate. One, for example, was a teacher who taught children to be team players; one was a mother married to a civil servant, who cared for her children; one was a housewife “who believed that she had the right to elect politicians, of whom she knew nothing”.
Rand’s is the philosophy of the psychopath, a misanthropic fantasy of cruelty, revenge and greed. Yet, as Gary Weiss shows in his new book Ayn Rand Nation, she has become to the new right what Karl Marx once was to the left: a demi-god at the head of a chiliastic cult. Almost one-third of Americans, according to a recent poll, have read Atlas Shrugged, and it now sells hundreds of thousands of copies every year.
Ignoring Rand’s evangelical atheism, the Tea Party movement has taken her to its heart. No rally of theirs is complete without placards reading “Who is John Galt?” and “Rand was right”. Ayn Rand, Weiss argues, provides the unifying ideology which has “distilled vague anger and unhappiness into a sense of purpose.” She is energetically promoted by the broadcasters Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Rick Santelli. She is the guiding spirit of the Republicans in Congress.
Like all philosophies, Objectivism is absorbed second-hand by people who have never read it. I believe it is making itself felt on this side of the Atlantic: in the clamorous new demands to remove the 50p tax band for the very rich, for example, or among the sneering, jeering bloggers who write for the Telegraph and the Spectator, mocking compassion and empathy, attacking efforts to make the world a kinder place.
It is not hard to see why Rand appeals to billionaires. She offers them something that is crucial to every successful political movement: a sense of victimhood. She tells them that they are parasitised by the ungrateful poor and oppressed by intrusive, controlling governments.
It is harder to see what it gives the ordinary teabaggers, who would suffer grievously from a withdrawal of government. But such is the degree of misinformation which saturates this movement and so prevalent in the US is Willy Loman Syndrome (the gulf between reality and expectations) that millions blithely volunteer themselves as billionaires’ doormats. I wonder how many would continue to worship at the shrine of Ayn Rand if they knew that towards the end of her life she signed on for both Medicare and Social Security. She had railed furiously against both programmes, as they represented everything she despised about the intrusive state. Her belief system was no match for the realities of age and ill-health.
But they have a still more powerful reason to reject her philosophy: as Adam Curtis’s documentary showed last year, the most devoted member of her inner circle was Alan Greenspan. Among the essays he wrote for Ayn Rand were those published in a book he co-edited with her called Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal. Here, starkly explained, you’ll find the philosophy he brought into government. There is no need for the regulation of business – even builders or Big Pharma – he argued, as “the ‘greed’ of the businessman or, more appropriately, his profit-seeking … is the unexcelled protector of the consumer.”As for bankers, their need to win the trust of their clients guarantees that they will act with honour and integrity. Unregulated capitalism, he maintains, is a “superlatively moral system”.
Once in government, Greenspan applied his guru’s philosophy to the letter, lobbying to cut taxes for the rich and repeal the laws constraining the banks, refusing to regulate the predatory lending and the derivatives trading which eventually brought the system down. Much of this is already documented, but Weiss shows that in the US Greenspan has successfully airbrushed this history.
Despite the many years he spent at her side, despite his previous admission that it was Rand who persuaded him that “capitalism is not only efficient and practical but also moral,”he mentioned her in his memoirs only to suggest that it was a youthful indiscretion, and this, it seems, is now the official version. Weiss presents powerful evidence that even today Greenspan remains her loyal disciple, having renounced his partial admission of failure to Congress.
Saturated in her philosophy, the new right on both sides of the Atlantic continues to demand the rollback of the state, even as the wreckage of that policy lies all around. The poor go down, the ultra-rich survive and prosper. Ayn Rand would have approved.
www.monbiot.com
References:
1. In the spirit of Rand, I suggest you don’t pay for it, but download it here: http://tfasinternational.org/ila/Ayn_Rand-The_Virtue_of_Selfishness.pdf
2. The just desserts are detailed on page 605 of the 2007 Penguin edition.
3. The gassing and subsequent explosion are explained on page 621.
4. Gary Weiss, 2012. Ayn Rand Nation: The Hidden Struggle
for America’s Soul. St. Martin’s Press, New York.
5. This was a Zogby poll, conducted at the end of 2010, cited by Gary Weiss.
6. To give one of many examples, Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, says that “the reason I got involved in public service,
by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be
Ayn Rand.” This is a little ironic, in view of the fact that Rand abhorred the idea of public service. Quoted by Gary Weiss.
7. http://www.monbiot.com/2006/07/07/willy-loman-syndrome/
8. Gary Weiss, pp61-63.
9. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b011lvb9
10. Ayn Rand, Nathaniel Branden, Alan Greenspan and Robert Hessen (Eds), 1967. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. Signet, New York.
11. Alan Greenspan, August 1963. The Assault on Integrity. First published in
The Objectivist Newsletter, later in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.
12. As above.
13. From an article by Soma Golden in the New York Times, July 1974, quoted by Gary Weiss.
Hows that? Think I made any inroads? LOL
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Deluded libertarians and the K0CH party are kissin cousins.
REICH WING LIBERTARIAN PLATFORM
(REICH WING GOP PLATFORM IN THE NEXT POST)
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
2
-
2
-
2
-
KOCH GAME PLAN
In 1980 when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket this was part of their platform. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
This is just part of their platform to destroy the country.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Keep this list handy. Pass it on as often as possible.
2
-
Keith Peters Read it again you fool.
5 Myths About Canada’s Health Care System
The truth may surprise you about international health care
By Aaron E. Carroll, M.D., M.S.
AARP Newsletter, April 16, 2012
Myth #1: Canadians are flocking to the United States to get medical care.
How many times have you heard that Canadians, frustrated by long wait times and rationing where they live, come to the United States for medical care?
I don’t deny that some well-off people might come to the United States for medical care. If I needed a heart or lung transplant, there’s no place I’d rather have it done. But for the vast, vast majority of people, that’s not happening.
The most comprehensive study I’ve seen on this topic — it employed three different methodologies, all with solid rationales behind them — was published in the peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs.
Source: “Phantoms in the Snow: Canadians’ Use of Health Care Services in the United States,” Health Affairs, May 2002.
The authors of the study started by surveying 136 ambulatory care facilities near the U.S.-Canada border in Michigan, New York and Washington. It makes sense that Canadians crossing the border for care would favor places close by, right? It turns out, however, that about 80 percent of such facilities saw, on average, fewer than one Canadian per month; about 40 percent had seen none in the preceding year.
Then, the researchers looked at how many Canadians were discharged over a five-year period from acute-care hospitals in the same three states. They found that more than 80 percent of these hospital visits were for emergency or urgent care (that is, tourists who had to go to the emergency room). Only about 20 percent of the visits were for elective procedures or care.
Next, the authors of the study surveyed America’s 20 “best” hospitals — as identified by U.S. News & World Report — on the assumption that if Canadians were going to travel for health care, they would be more likely to go to the best-known and highest-quality facilities. Only one of the 11 hospitals that responded saw more than 60 Canadians in a year. And, again, that included both emergencies and elective care.
Finally, the study’s authors examined data from the 18,000 Canadians who participated in the National Population Health Survey. In the previous year, 90 of those 18,000 Canadians had received care in the United States; only 20 of them, however, reported going to the United States expressively for the purpose of obtaining care.
Myth #2: Doctors in Canada are flocking to the United States to practice.
Every time I talk about health care policy with physicians, one inevitably tells me of the doctor he or she knows who ran away from Canada to practice in the United States. Evidently, there’s a general perception that practicing medicine in the United States is much more satisfying than in Canada.
Problem is, it’s just not so. Consider this chart:
Source: “2009 International Health Policy Survey of Primary Care Physicians in Eleven Countries,” The Commonwealth Fund, November 2009.
The Canadian Institute for Health Information has been tracking doctors’ destinations since 1992. Since then, 60 percent to 70 percent of the physicians who emigrate have headed south of the border. In the mid-1990s, the number of Canadian doctors leaving for the United States spiked at about 400 to 500 a year. But in recent years this number has declined, with only 169 physicians leaving for the States in 2003, 138 in 2004 and 122 both in 2005 and 2006. These numbers represent less than 0.5 percent of all doctors working in Canada.
So when emigration “spiked,” 400 to 500 doctors were leaving Canada for the United States. There are more than 800,000 physicians in the United States right now, so I’m skeptical that every doctor knows one of those émigrés. But look closely at the tan line in the following chart, which represents the net loss of doctors to Canada.
Source: Canadian Institute for Health Information
In 2004, net emigration became net immigration. Let me say that again. More doctors were moving into Canada than were moving out.
Myth #3: Canada rations health care; that’s why hip replacements and cataract surgeries happen faster in the United States.
When people want to demonize Canada’s health care system — and other single-payer systems, for that matter — they always end up going after rationing, and often hip replacements in particular.
Take Republican Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri, for example. A couple of years ago he took to the House floor to tell his colleagues:
“I just hit 62, and I was just reading that in Canada [if] I got a bad hip I wouldn’t be able to get that hip replacement that [Rep. Dan Lungren] got, because I’m too old! I’m an old geezer now and it’s not worth a government bureaucrat to pay me to get my hip fixed.”
Sigh.
This has been debunked so often, it’s tiring. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, for example, concluded: “At least 63 percent of hip replacements performed in Canada last year [2008] ... were on patients age 65 or older.” And more than 1,500 of those, it turned out, were on patients over 85.
The bottom line: Canada doesn’t deny hip replacements to older people.
But there’s more.
Know who gets most of the hip replacements in the United States? Older people.
Know who pays for care for older people in the United States? Medicare.
Know what Medicare is? A single-payer system.
Myth #4: Canada has long wait times because it has a single-payer system.
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course. It’s this:
Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
Myth #5: Canada rations health care; the United States doesn’t.
This one’s a little bit tricky. The truth is, Canada may “ration” by making people wait for some things, but here in the United States we also “ration” — by cost.
An 11-country survey carried out in 2010 by the Commonwealth Fund, a Washington-based health policy foundation, found that adults in the United States are by far the most likely to go without care because of cost. In fact, 42 percent of the Americans surveyed did not express confidence that they would be able to afford health care if seriously ill.
Source: “How Health Insurance Design Affects Access to Care and Costs, by Income, in Eleven Countries,” Health Affairs, November 2010.
Further, about a third of the Americans surveyed reported that, in the preceding year, they didn’t go to the doctor when sick, didn’t get recommended care when needed, didn’t fill a prescription or skipped doses of medications because of cost.
Finally, about one in five of the Americans surveyed had struggled to pay or were unable to pay their medical bills in the preceding year. That was more than twice the percentage found in any of the other 10 countries.
And remember: We’re spending way more on health care than any other country, and for all that money we’re getting at best middling results.
So feel free to have a discussion about the relative merits of the U.S. and Canadian health care systems. Just stick to the facts.
Aaron E. Carroll frequently blogs about this topic for The Incidental Economist and is the coauthor of Don’t Swallow Your Gum: Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
GOP/LiEbertarian/Drumpf/K0CHsucker plan for America and beyond:
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society/LiEbertarian dogma that they learned from their antiAmerican government bigot father who was a bigwig in the Bircher movement.
Keep this list handy. Pass it on as often as possible.
You're going to need it in the days to come.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
EAS NJ The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kiss rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kruschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Ambassador of Truth CHRISTIAN TERROR
The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), also known as the Lord's Resistance Movement, is a militant movement which is "Christianist, stated goals include ruling according to the Ten Commandments northern Uganda and South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, and in 2007 it was reported that it was in Central African Republic.
The LRA has been accused of widespread human rights violations, including murder, abduction, mutilation,child-sex slavery, and forcing children to participate in hostilities.
And that's not including things like the neo-nazi movements across Europe who have, for example, attacked 12 mosques in Sweden for their ideology.
There is something fundamentally wrong in the world and it's leading people to ever more extreme dogmas.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Drunk Bastard So you discount Christian terrorism in America?
Christian terror:
A report published by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy on Jan. 15 discusses the potential dangers of “violent far-right” organizations, which has angered some conservatives that believe the military should focus on international threats.
The executive summary of the paper, “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” claims that “since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self- identify with the far-right of American politics.”
Written by Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, the paper asserts that three distinct ideologies exist in the “American violent far right.” Those are “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement,” the last of which “includes mainly Christian Identity groins such as the Aryan Nations.”
“Findings indicate that…it is not only feelings of deprivation that motivate those involved in far right violence, but also the sense of empowerment that emerges when the political system is perceived to be increasingly permissive to far right ideas,” it later reads.
The rise in attacks in the 21st century were significant, as “Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%.”
The study also found that “presidential election years and the preceding year are characterized by an increase of far-right violence,” leading the author to conclude that “in general, far-right groups and individuals are more inclined to engage in violence in a contentious political climate.”
Furthermore, it found that the number of Republicans in the House was positively correlated with an increase in far-right violence, although the causes were not immediately clear. The study posits that it could mean those groups believed those legislators might be “more tolerant of their activities” or possibly that “the high expectations of far-right activists during a conservative legislature” were not “fulfilled.”
Some conservatives object to the report. The Washington Times, The National Review, and World Net Daily all report on critical reactions from the right, according to the Atlantic Wire, with blogger Pamela Geller calling it an “appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat.”
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Davey Dogooder PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
2
-
2
-
2
-
The Grumbler Christian violence? It is easy to show you:
CHRISTIAN TERROR.
You ever heard of the Bosnian War? It's this little thing that went down back in the early 90s. Bosnian Serbs (Christians) went about on an ethnic cleansing campaign in which tens of thousands of Muslims were systematically raped, tortured, and murdered. They did it in the name of Christianity. Evangelical Christians in several African countries have made headlines in recent years for butchering homosexuals and people who refused to convert to their religion. Don't try to claim that Christians do not commit atrocities in the name of their religion.
Or how about Argentina:
"As many people as is necessary will die in Argentina," Videla told the region's army commanders, gathered in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1975, "to protect the hemisphere from the international communist conspiracy." He was true to his word. Months later, on 24 March 1976, the armed forces overthrew the inept and chaotic government of María Estela Martínez ("Isabelita"), the widow of Juan Domingo Perón.
They installed a ferocious military regime. During the next six years, it murdered up to 30,000 people in the name of "national reorganization" and western, CHRISTIAN civilization.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
JUDGE SCHOOLS CHRISTIAN WISCONSIN
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/06/gay-marriage-wisconsin-history_n_5462356.html
WASHINGTON -- The federal judge who struck down Wisconsin's gay marriage ban thinks state officials have a thing or two to learn about the history of marriage as a social institution.
In defending their same-sex marriage ban, state officials claimed that "virtually all cultures through time" have recognized marriage "as the union of an opposite-sex couple."
But as U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Crabb wrote in her 88-page ruling on Friday, that's simply not true.
"As an initial matter, defendants and amici have overstated their argument. Throughout history, the most 'traditional' form of marriage has not been between one man and one woman, but between one man and multiple women, which presumably is not a tradition that defendants and amici would like to continue," Crabb wrote in her opinion.
History alone wasn't enough to justify a ban on same-sex marriage, Crabb said.
"Like moral disapproval, tradition alone proves nothing more than a state's desire to prohibit particular conduct," she wrote, citing Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in a 2003 sodomy case, which stated that "'preserving the traditional institution of marriage' is just a kinder way of describing the State's moral disapproval of same-sex couples."
Crabb pointed out that tradition was used as an argument to keep women from voting.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
joesaiditstrue Sorry but facts matter..
Dems who voted Drumpf, were Bernie whiners or did not vote were the difference.
Donald Drumpf a man who opened his presidential campaign by calling Mexicans “rapists” bested Mitt Romney’s share of the Latino vote by 8 percentage points. He performed better among black voters than his 2012 predecessor, and he swept four Rust Belt states that President Barack Obama carried twice ? Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin under a harsher economy than we face today. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, which should matter, but does not.
The exit polls provide some clarity: A significant chunk of Obama voters flipped to Drumpf. Drumpf won 10 percent of voters who approve of Obama’s presidency and 23 percent of voters who think the next president should “be more liberal,” according to CNN data. Drumpf significantly outperformed Romney among union households. He did 14 points better than Romney among whites without a college degree, according to The New York Times, and 16 points better among households with less than $30,000 in income. The Drumpf Democrat turns out not to be a myth, but a meaningful constituency that just cost Clinton the presidency.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Moses Bullrush It makes every difference.
SCALIA or SOTOMAYER
PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
1
-
Moses Bullrush PARTIES ARE NOT THE SAME
May 27, 2015 12:35 PM
The Tired Old “Both Sides Getting More Extreme” Meme
By Ed Kilgore
In my recent book and elsewhere, I’ve noted that the meta-narrative Republicans were promoting—and much of the MSM was echoing—during the 2014 midterms was that the Great Big Moderate Adults of the GOP had gotten the crazy extremist Tea People under control, and were ready to govern in a serious way that Serious People could appreciate. An important sub-narrative to the completely phony Republican Shift to the Center was that Democrats were moving to the left so fast that they’d probably start singing the Internationale at party events before long.
A lot of people who don’t completely buy the GOP Shift to the Center are happy to promote the false equivalency classic of Everybody’s Polarizing at Exactly the Same Pace. But there’s one species of observers who are deeply invested in the Democratic Lurch to the Left meme: Republican “moderates” who spend a fair amount of time criticizing their zany brethren and need an excuse to reassume the Party Yoke when elections come around.
Peter Wehner is one such person, and so he pens the classic so’s-your-old-man-and-actually-maybe-your-old-man’s-worse op-ed for the New York Times. Ignoring the fact that most actual lefty Democrats think Barack Obama is too much like Bill Clinton, Wehner’s case almost entirely depends on contrasting the noble centrist Big Dog (who, of course, conservatives denounced as a godless socialist when he was actually in office) with the left-bent Obama.
And it’s a really terrible argument. Exhibit one for Wehner involves Clinton’s support for three-strikes-and-you’re-out and 100,000 cops, as though they are the same thing, with Eric Holder’s de-incarceration commitment. Keep up, Pete: Clinton, along with two-thirds of the Republican presidential field, has called for a reversal of “mass incarceration” policies. It’s not an ideological move in either direction so much as a rare and belated bipartisan recognition of what does and doesn’t work.
Exhibit two is welfare reform, and aside from ignoring everything Clinton did on low-income economic policy other than signing the 1996 welfare law, Wehner blandly accepts the race-drenched lie—and he’s smart enough to know that it is indeed widely interpreted to be a lie—from the 2012 Romney campaign that Obama has “loosened welfare-to-work requirements.” Then he tries to pivot to a contrast of Clinton’s shutdown of the “welfare entitlement” with Obama’s creation of a health care entitlement—without noting that Clinton had a health care proposal that was distinctly more “liberal” than Obama’s. Pretty big omission, I’d say.
It gets worse. Wehner suggests that unlike Clinton Obama wants to boost taxes on the wealthy, which conveniently ignores Clinton’s first budget. Speaking of the budget, Obama’s fiscal record is contrasted with Clinton’s without noting that Obama inherited not only a huge deficit but the worst economy since the 1930s. Wehner makes a fact-free assertion that Obama isn’t as friendly towards U.S. allies as Clinton was. And in a telling maneuver, he suddenly shifts the contrast from Clinton-versus-Obama to Clinton-versus-Clinton in mentioning the dispute over the Trans-Pacific Partnership, where HRC has been “non-committal.” Well, the crazy lefty Barack Obama hasn’t been “non-committal,” has he? Yes, a majority of congressional Democrats oppose him on TPP. But a majority of congressional Democrats also opposed Clinton on NAFTA and GATT, and denied him “fast-track” trade negotiating authority. Plus ca change….
Nonetheless, Wehner stumbles on to his pre-fab conclusion:
The Democratic Party is now a pre-Bill Clinton party, the result of Mr. Obama’s own ideological predilections and the coalition he has built.
In the very next breath he acknowledges that on the one issue where the Democratic Party really has “moved to the left,” same-sex marriage, the country has moved with it (and the “pre-Bill Clinton” Democratic Party had to move as well). And then he leaps to the circular argument that Republicans must be better representing the “center” of public opinion, because they’re doing so well in midterms!
Well, Pete, guess you have to take the position that makes it possible for you to spend so much time calling out the crazy people of your party. But the facts are not friendly to your argument.
Ed Kilgore edits the Political Animal blog and is a contributing writer to the Washington Monthly. He is managing editor for the Democratic Strategist, a weekly columnist at Talking Points Memo, and the author of Election 2014: Why Republicans Swept the Midterms, recently published by the University of Pennsylvania Press
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_05/the_tired_old_both_sides_getti055757.php
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I voted for Bernie in the primary.
But I did not whine and cry and let the country go to Hitler and his minions because I my preferred candidate lost.
FACTS count:
Donald Drumpf a man who opened his presidential campaign by calling Mexicans “rapists” bested Mitt Romney’s share of the Latino vote by 8 percentage points. He performed better among black voters than his 2012 predecessor, and he swept four Rust Belt states that President Barack Obama carried twice ? Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin under a harsher economy than we face today. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, which should matter, but does not.
The exit polls provide some clarity: A significant chunk of Obama voters flipped to Drumpf. Drumpf won 10 percent of voters who approve of Obama’s presidency and 23 percent of voters who think the next president should “be more liberal,” according to CNN data. Drumpf significantly outperformed Romney among union households. He did 14 points better than Romney among whites without a college degree, according to The New York Times, and 16 points better among households with less than $30,000 in income. The Drumpf Democrat turns out not to be a myth, but a meaningful constituency that just cost Clinton the presidency.
Bernie whiners, Reagan Dems and the rest who did not vote were enough to give away the election.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
Libertarian: Pot smoking ok
Translation: Except when the overlord of your area says no. And then you have no recourse as Libertarianland wants no federal intervention in civil rights issues unless it is on federal land. Oh and all federal lands will be privatized, so there is that little problem.
Now I will post once again the libertarian agenda per their own platform:
KOCH GAME PLAN
Senator Bernie Sanders went back in time to 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. He found their platform for that year, and published it again. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
TedThomas12 LOL one of us is an idiot and it is not me.
Glyphosate is the active ingredient of some of the most common herbicides used in farming and gardening. These products have been promoted as quickly biodegradable and non toxic. People believe that they are so safe that you can drink a cup of these herbicides without any ill effect.
Consequently, it is sprayed on roadsides while people are driving, on footpaths when people are shopping and in schoolyards and sports fields, exposing children to drift and residues. People buy it from supermarkets or garden shops and use it without any protective clothing because it is deemed 'safe'. It is sprayed in national parks and other environmentally sensitive areas in the belief that it is not toxic and or residual.
I continuously hear Primary Industries officers and other agricultural specialists telling farmers that it is not necessary to wear any protective clothing because it is harmless.
Unfortunately, the facts show that this is not the case. While pure Glyphosate has a low acute toxicity (the amount needed to cause death), when it is sold as a commercial herbicide it is combined with surfactants and other ingredients to make it more effective at killing plants. Studies show that the commercial products, such as Round Up, can be three times more toxic than pure glyphosate.
Health Problems - so safe that you can drink it.
Japanese researchers analysing suicides have found that drinking 3/4 of a cup (200 millilitres) of commercial glyphosate products is fatal.
Survivors (those who consumed less than 3/4 of a cup) suffered a range of severe health problems. These problems included intestinal pain, vomiting, erosion of the gastrointestinal tract, excess fluid in the lungs, pneumonia, lung dysfunction, clouding of consciousness, destruction of red blood cells, abnormal electrocardiograms, low blood pressure, kidney damage and damage to the larynx. It is important to note that damage to the kidneys and the lungs is usually permanent. These body tissues do not repair themselves, instead forming scar tissue that does not function to help filter toxins from the blood or breathe oxygen.
In California, where there is a mandatory system of reporting pesticide poisoning, Glyphosate is the third most common cause of pesticide illness in farm workers. It is the most common form of reported pesticide poisoning in landscape gardeners.
Two separate studies in Sweden have linked exposure to Glyphosate to Hairy Cell Leukemia and Non Hodgkins Lymphoma. These types of cancers were extremely rare, however non-Hodgkins lymphoma is the most rapidly increasing cancer in the Western world. It has risen by 73% in the USA since 1973. Another study has found a higher incidence of Parkinson disease amongst farmers who used herbicides, including glyphosate.
Other studies show that Glyphosate and commercial herbicides containing Glyphosate cause a range of cell mutations and damage to cell DNA. These types of changes are usually regarded as precursors to cancer and birth defects.
Reproductive Effects
Studies show that exposure to Glyphosate is associated with a range of reproductive effects in humans and other species. Research from Ontario, Canada found that a father's exposure to Glyphosate was linked to an increase in miscarriages and premature births in farm families.
Glyphosate caused a decrease in the sperm count of rats and an increase in abnormal and dead sperms in rabbits. Pregnant rabbits exposed to Glyphosate had a decrease in the weight of their babies.
Residual
The proponents of Glyphosate herbicides promote them as environment friendly or benign. They say that they breakdown very quickly in the environment.
The facts show otherwise. A report from The United States Environmental Protection Agency states that Glyphosate is 'extremely persistent under typical application conditions'. It is one of the most residual herbicides, with studies in Sweden showing that one application can last up to 3 years.
In warmer climates, it can take less than a year per application for Glyphosate to degrade. However, when it breaks down it does not disappear into harmless basic elements. It degrades into an even more residual compound called aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA). While AMPA has a low acute toxicity, the studies conducted on this compound show that it damages the livers and bladders of rats. Unfortunately, very few long-term health and environmental studies are conducted on the breakdown products of synthetic chemicals.
Residues of Glyphosate have been found in a variety of fruits and vegetables. This is because it readily moves into all parts of a plant. As it is inside the plant tissues, it cannot be washed off.
Residues can be detected long after glyphosate treatments have been made. One study showed that lettuces contained residues five months after the field was treated with glyphosate. The disturbing thing about this research is that the lettuce seedlings were planted four months after the field was sprayed for weeds. The seedlings absorbed the glyphosate from the soil residues.
A World Health Organisation study revealed significant Glyphosate residues in wheat after harvest. Milling did not remove it, as it moves into the plant and the wheat seed. The study showed that cooking does not break down Glyphosate.
Environmental Effects
Glyphosate based herbicides have been shown to cause a significant decline of beneficial insect species in farms. Studies by the International Organization for Biological Control and other researchers have found that between 50 to 80 percent of beneficial insects are killed from exposure to residues of a Glyphosate herbicide.
Glyphosate is very toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms. Concentrations as low as 10 parts per million can kill fish. Daphnia, a very important part of the aquatic food chain, especially for fish, can be killed by as little as three parts per million. This is an important reason why it should not be used near waterways or in drains.
Glyphosate is extremely toxic to the soil life. One application can cause a dramatic plunge in the number of beneficial soil micro-organisms and arthropods. Studies show a reduction in the species that build humus, thus it contributes to the decline in soil organic matter.
Glyphosate significantly reduces the activity of nitrogen-fixing bacteria. These bacteria transform soil nitrogen into forms that plants can use. Studies of Soybeans grown for nitrogen fixation showed a reduction in the number of rhizobium bacteria and the nitrogen they produce when Glyphosate was used for weed control.
Other studies show that Glyphosate herbicides increase the susceptibility of plants to diseases. This is partly because it reduces the growth of mycorrhizal fungi and other beneficial fungi that help plants absorb nutrients and help fight disease. However, plants suffer more disease, as there is an increase in the soil pathogens and a decrease beneficial species that control diseases after an application of Glyphosate.
Glyphosate exposure damages or reduces the populations of earthworms. A New Zealand study showed that 5% of the usual application rate caused delayed development and increased death in earthworms.
Glyphosate reduces populations of small mammals and birds by damaging the vegetation that provides food and shelter for these animals. The populations of all of these living organisms can take years to recover due to Glyphosate's persistence in the soil.
Spray Drift
Glyphosate spray drift from both ground and aerial applications has been measured from 400 to 800 meters from the target site. Studies have shown that Glyphosate drift will cause more severe and extensive damage than many other herbicides. This is because it is a broad spectrum, non-selective herbicide and it is transported throughout the plant causing damage to the unexposed parts. This damage, when it does not kill the plants, can last for many years.
Drift that is one thousand times less than the usual application rates has been shown to damage surrounding vegetation, including the killing of wild plants. This is an important reason why it should not be used in national parks and environmentally sensitive areas for weed control.
Genetic Engineering
The use of glyphosate is expected to increase substantially in the next few years because several genetically engineered crops are "Roundup Ready" and will be grown by many farmers.
This expected increase in use has resulted in an application for the MRL (residue level) for glyphosate to be increased by 200 percent. This need to increase the permitted residue levels is due to genetically engineered herbicide tolerant crops using more chemicals, not less as the proponents of GMO's claim. These crops cannot be legally sold in Australia under the present residue levels, as the increased number of sprays will mean higher residue levels.
This need for a dramatic increase in residues demonstrates that this herbicide is residual. If it is rapidly degraded and leaves no residues as is commonly claimed, why is there a need for such a large increase on residues on the crop?
The persistent nature of these residues in genetically engineered food crops such as Soybeans, Corn and Canola is another reason why we need mandatory labelling of all GMO's. We need to have the freedom of choice to avoid foods that we believe will contain residues of toxic chemicals.
This is a very good reason for eating organic foods.
Conclusion
Glyphosate is widely used in the mistaken belief that it is harmless, safe and readily breaks down leaving no residues. Consequently, it is sprayed in public areas while people are present and by operators without protective clothing. These people are exposed to the drift of this herbicide. The facts show that Glyphosate causes a range of health problems to humans, plants and animals, it causes environmental problems and that it is highly persistent. It is time that the widespread use of this toxic chemical on roadsides, footpaths, parks, gardens, schools, farms, forestry, national parks etc was stopped or highly restricted.
Acknowledgments and References
Most of the information for this article came from an excellent paper authored by Caroline Cox in the JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM, Fall 1998, Vol.18, No. 3.
Updated 01-02, Northwest Coalition Against Pesticides, Eugene, Oregon.
Lehmann V. and Pengue W. (2000), Herbicide Tolerant Soybean: Just another step in a technology treadmill? Biotechnology and Development Monitor. September 2000.
Nordstrom M. et al, (1998), "Occupational exposures, animal exposure, and smoking as risk factors for hairy cell leukaemia evaluated in a case-control study," BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER Vol. 77 (1998), pp 2048-2052.
Hardell L. and Eriksson M. (1999), "A Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and exposure to Pesticides," CANCER Vol.85, No. 6 (March 15, 1999).
Organic Producers Association of Queensland
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/monsantos-toxic-herbicide-glyphosate-review-its-health-and-environmental-effects
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The only thing she did wrong was apologize.
Abortion Super Parks
It's way too easy to get sidetracked into a discussion about exemptions for rape, incest, and the life or health of the woman, or into quibbling about Planned Parenthood's functions, and that's exactly how the anti-choicers want it. When we get swept into harping about the worst-case scenarios, we miss the point that abortion is a fundamental right for EVERY woman, regardless of the circumstances.
ABORTION SUPER PARK
I don't care if Planned Parenthood provides nothing BUT abortion services. I don't care if it's a million-story abortion superpark with abortion waterslides and an abortion electrical parade.
Abortion is legal.
ABORTION IS LEGAL.
If I read one more 'defense' of Planned Parenthood that says "it's not JUST abortions!" or "only 5% of what they do is abortion! And abortions aren't federally funded!" I'm going to abort myself.
Abortion is legal, culturally necessary, and good for humanity. It has been and will be practiced for millennia.
It is essential. It is a fact. By minimizing, denying or apologizing for this fact, you are allowing these venal anti-woman Nazis to frame this debate and continue to chip away at this essential right.
It is a fact. It is a right.
Demand it, fight for it, and for the sake of the women who have given their lives to defend it, stop apologizing for it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RTR TRUTH MEDIA™ tomlacovara The Myth of the Black-on-Black Crime Epidemic
It’s great to see people (like those here, here, and here), many of whom advocate cuts to institutions and policies proven to curb crime like community groups, education, and job training, finally noticing that crime in Black communities is a problem that should be addressed. However, they are 20 years late. While they slept, African-American community leaders, parents, churches, and activists having already noticed the problem have been tirelessly working to make the communities they love safer. Jamelle Bouie recently wrote poignantly how Black-on-Black crime is being falsely framed as a distinctly African American pathology rather than a component of poverty, opportunity, & proximity. If America is to have this much touted ‘conversation’ on race, it is important the dialogue itself adhere to the guiding principal of being rooted in facts.
For many years, countless poor African Americans across the country tried to draw attention to high crime rates, guns, gang activity, and drug abuse that pervaded their neighborhoods. The Black urban poor, through community institutions, churches, and individual efforts were most often met with neglect, divestment of private and public resources, and outright disdain. I witnessed firsthand, growing up in Camden, New Jersey in the 1980’s, how the surrounding suburbs, state, and federal governments ignored Black victims of crime and dismissed whole urban areas as havens of pathologically violent criminals. Residents suffered as the ‘War on Poverty’ became the ‘War on Drugs’ and incarceration rates skyrocketed while social services, education, and urban infrastructure funds were slashed.
It is within this context that I’ve marveled and cringed at recent dialogue about crime, discrimination, and inequality in the criminal justice system. From conservatives opining President Obama acted too ‘black’ by speaking of his experiences to progressives arguing he was not being ‘black’ enough by having insufficiently explicit rhetoric and policies targeting the problems of African Americans. The most amusingly bewildering aspect of this rhetoric is how assertions of racial inequalities in the American criminal justice system have immediately are rebutted by pointing to the ‘genocide’ of Black-on-Black urban crime. This focus, from many of the same political quarters who ignored the problem at its peak, belies the facts of both the causes and trends of Black-on-Black crimes.
Black on Black Crime Facts
Black-on-Black homicides have decreased by 67% in 20 years, a sharper rate of decrease than white on white homicide.
According to FBI statistics 7361 Blacks were killed by fellow African-Americans in 1991. In 2011, it dropped dramatically to 2447 African-Americans.
Among Black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are the lowest in more than 40 years.
Racial Inequality in the Criminal Justice System Facts
African Americans were two times as likely to be arrested and almost four times as likely to experience the use of force during encounters with the police.
In the federal system Black offenders receive sentences that are 10% longer than white offenders for the same crime.
Five times as many Whites are using drugs as African Americans, yet African Americans are sent to prison for drug offenses at 10 times the rate of Whites.
African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of Whites.
African American juvenile youth are about 16% of the youth population, 37% of their cases are moved to criminal court & 58% of convicted African American youth are sent to adult prisons.
Controlling for other factors, including severity of the offense and prior criminal history, white men aged 18-29 were 38% less likely to be sentenced to prison than their Black male peers.
African American women are three times more likely than white women to be incarcerated.
African American defendants are 21% more likely to receive mandatory-minimum sentences than Whites and are 20% more like to be sentenced to prison.
While it is essential that we address the high levels of violence and incarceration in America compared to other industrialized countries, we cannot accurately do so by perpetuating the myth of a uniquely African American pathology toward violence and crime. Instead of denying the downward trends in crime in the Black community, we must applaud it and reward it with a serious examination of racial inequality in the American criminal justice system. Although, I am not sure whether our new found defenders of the Black community would agree.
http://www.demos.org/blog/7/29/13/myth-black-black-crime-epidemic
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
bohemianwriter1 ReaganVooDooTrickleDownGoldenShowerPizzOnYou economics 101. Nationalist Reagan Socialism, promoting a fascist aristocracy and disposable human beings.
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan the Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Study: KXL Pipeline Would Raise U.S. Gas Prices |
Consumer Watchdog, a nationally recognized nonprofit consumer group, has reviewed corporate, industry and government data and found that pipeline developers and the Canadian government intend to use the controversial Keystone XL pipeline to raise the price of Canadian tar sands oil on the global market by shipping oil directly to the Gulf. This would raise U.S. gas prices in the Midwest by up to 40 cents a gallon.
“Keystone XL is not an economic benefit to Americans who will see higher gas prices and bear all the risks of the pipeline,” said report author Judy Dugan. “The pipeline is being built through America, but not for Americans.”
Key findings from the report:
- Drivers, especially in the Midwest, would pay 20 cents to 40 cents more at the pump if the disputed pipeline were built, as the current discount of up to $30 a barrel for Canadian oil disappears.
- The true goal of multinational oil companies and Canadian politicians backing the pipeline is to reach export outlets outside the U.S. for tar sands oil and refined fuels, which would drive up the oil’s price.
- With U.S. oil production rising fast, any “energy security” benefit for the U.S. would vanish as American oil output exceeds that of Saudi Arabia in about 2020, according to the International Energy Agency.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Question: What does SPF mean? Does a higher SPF mean better sun protection?
Answer: SPF stands for Sun Protection Factor and refers to the theoretical amount of time you can stay in the sun without getting sunburned. For example, an SPF of 15 would allow you to stay in the sun 15 times longer than you could without protection. So, if your skin starts to redden in 20 minutes without sun block, applying a product with SPF 15 increases that time by a factor of 15, meaning you could stay in the sun for 300 minutes. In addition, a higher SPF blocks out more rays—a product with an SPF of 15 will filter out approximately 93 percent of UVB rays; SPF 30 filters out about 97 percent.
To determine a sunscreen's SPF, testers round up 20 sun-sensitive people and measure the amount of UV rays it takes them to burn without sunscreen. Then they redo the test with sunscreen. The "with sunscreen" number is divided by the "without sunscreen" number, and the result is rounded down to the nearest five. This is the SPF.
SPF numbers start at 2 and have just recently reached 70. To figure out how long you can stay in the sun with a given SPF, use this equation:
Minutes to burn without sunscreen x SPF number = maximum sun exposure time
For example, if you burn after 10 minutes of sun exposure, an SPF of 15 will allow you to be in the sun for up to 150 minutes without burning. But before you grab your calculator and head for the beach, you should know that this equation is not always accurate. People usually use far less sunscreen than the amount used in testing. In the real world, the average sun worshipper uses half the amount of sunscreen used in the laboratory, which could result in a sunburn in half the time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
GOD THE ABORTIONIST
This is for all you Christian Talibanista's
Dear Forced Birther...
Your God Is Not Pro Life
You might find that statement surprising, but I know this from your own holy book. Despite what you may have been told, the Bible is not a pro-life document. It is, in many parts, pro-death. In one of the first stories in the Bible, God murders millions of people through a global flood — including born and unborn children. Unborn children — the ones you fight for. God only wanted to get rid of them.
Later in your holy book God commands the death of nation after nation
because they happen to inhabit the land he plans to give the Israelites
(Josh 7-9). He commands Israel to kill women and children (1 Sam 15).
When he wanted to make a point to the Egyptians, he murdered all the
firstborn sons of Egypt. Innocent children. And when King David killed a man and slept with his wife, God punished him by killing his unborn child.
This same God does nothing while billions of people throughout
history have been starved, drowned, raped and murdered. He sits on the sidelines and watches.
That is not a God who is pro-life!
On top of all that, at least 25% of all pregnancies end in “natural” abortion — which you believe your God either designed or actively performed — an act you consider murder.
No, your God is not pro-life. By your own standards, he is a murderer — the most prolific abortionist of all time.
So don’t tell us you base your morality on the Bible or on the character of God. Don’t tell us you’re sent from your God to protect the lives of the innocent. Despite what your pastor says, your God is not pro-life. He has been killing, maiming, and letting people suffer for ages. You’re pro-life because, like most humans, you value human life.
I also value human life, but it has nothing to do with supernatural beings.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2009/07/your-god-isnt-pro-life/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Shan Oakley I like Bernie but lets be factual.
Bernie is far from perfect on guns
Sanders’ vote for a different kind of pro-gun bill is more puzzling—and profoundly disturbing. In 2005, a Republican-dominated Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law doesn’t protect gun owners; it protects gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers. The PLCAA was the No. 1 legislative priority of the National Rifle Association for years, because it shields gun makers and dealers from most liability when their firearms are used criminally. It is one of the most noxious pieces of pro-gun legislation ever passed. And Bernie Sanders voted for it. (Sanders’ campaign has not replied to a request for comment.)
Because the PLCAA deals with tort law—not a topic of great interest for most Americans—it didn’t stir much outrage when first passed. But the act’s primary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded. Every state imposes liability on manufacturers who are negligent in their production and sale of products. If I crash my Prius because its accelerator malfunctions, I can sue Toyota for negligently manufacturing a faulty pedal. If my child dismembers himself with a blender at Sears, I can sue Sears for negligently leaving that blender within a child’s reach. If I get stabbed by a teenager with a switchblade, I might be able to sue the pawn shop owner who illegally sold a knife to a minor.
Before the PLCAA, most states imposed some form of tort liability on gun makers and sellers. If a gun manufacturer made an assault rifle that could slaughter dozens of people in a few seconds, for instance, one of its victims might sue the company for negligently making a gun that could foreseeably be used for mass murder. If a gun seller sold a gun to a customer without performing any kind of background check—and then the buyer opened fire on the subway—his victims might sue that seller for negligently providing a gun to a mentally unstable person. The standards in each state differed, but the bottom line remained the same: Victims of gun violence and their families could recover financially from the people and companies who negligently enabled gun violence.
The PLCAA changed all that. Remarkably, the act wiped out gun liability laws in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a handful of narrow exceptions. (So much for states’ rights.) Thanks to the law, victims of mass shootings are barred from suing the companies that produced a wartime weapon that no civilian could ever need. With few exceptions, victims cannot sue a gun seller for negligently providing a semiautomatic weapon to a lunatic who shoots them in a movie theater. Even if a jury decides a gun maker or seller should be liable, the PLCAA invalidates its verdict. The law tramples upon states’ rights, juries’ rights, and fundamental precepts of America’s civil justice system. And it received Bernie Sanders’ support—in both 2003 (when it was first introduced) and 2005 (when it finally passed).
Every few years, the families of mass shooting victims take gun makers to court for creating a weapon seemingly designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. Every time, they run headfirst into the PLCAA. Right now, the families of Sandy Hook victims are searching for a loophole in the law, so they can sue Bushmaster for making the gun that sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds. They will probably fail.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html
1
-
1
-
***** There is no exaggeration. He voted for a bill that gave the gun manufacturers immunity. Those are the facts.
GUNS and BERNIE
Bernie is far from perfect on guns
Sanders’ vote for a different kind of pro-gun bill is more puzzling—and profoundly disturbing. In 2005, a Republican-dominated Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law doesn’t protect gun owners; it protects gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers. The PLCAA was the No. 1 legislative priority of the National Rifle Association for years, because it shields gun makers and dealers from most liability when their firearms are used criminally. It is one of the most noxious pieces of pro-gun legislation ever passed. And Bernie Sanders voted for it. (Sanders’ campaign has not replied to a request for comment.)
Because the PLCAA deals with tort law—not a topic of great interest for most Americans—it didn’t stir much outrage when first passed. But the act’s primary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded. Every state imposes liability on manufacturers who are negligent in their production and sale of products. If I crash my Prius because its accelerator malfunctions, I can sue Toyota for negligently manufacturing a faulty pedal. If my child dismembers himself with a blender at Sears, I can sue Sears for negligently leaving that blender within a child’s reach. If I get stabbed by a teenager with a switchblade, I might be able to sue the pawn shop owner who illegally sold a knife to a minor.
Before the PLCAA, most states imposed some form of tort liability on gun makers and sellers. If a gun manufacturer made an assault rifle that could slaughter dozens of people in a few seconds, for instance, one of its victims might sue the company for negligently making a gun that could foreseeably be used for mass murder. If a gun seller sold a gun to a customer without performing any kind of background check—and then the buyer opened fire on the subway—his victims might sue that seller for negligently providing a gun to a mentally unstable person. The standards in each state differed, but the bottom line remained the same: Victims of gun violence and their families could recover financially from the people and companies who negligently enabled gun violence.
The PLCAA changed all that. Remarkably, the act wiped out gun liability laws in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a handful of narrow exceptions. (So much for states’ rights.) Thanks to the law, victims of mass shootings are barred from suing the companies that produced a wartime weapon that no civilian could ever need. With few exceptions, victims cannot sue a gun seller for negligently providing a semiautomatic weapon to a lunatic who shoots them in a movie theater. Even if a jury decides a gun maker or seller should be liable, the PLCAA invalidates its verdict. The law tramples upon states’ rights, juries’ rights, and fundamental precepts of America’s civil justice system. And it received Bernie Sanders’ support—in both 2003 (when it was first introduced) and 2005 (when it finally passed).
Every few years, the families of mass shooting victims take gun makers to court for creating a weapon seemingly designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. Every time, they run headfirst into the PLCAA. Right now, the families of Sandy Hook victims are searching for a loophole in the law, so they can sue Bushmaster for making the gun that sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds. They will probably fail.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Universities consist of both undergraduate and graduate level schools. For example, Harvard University has Harvard College (undergrad), Harvard Law School, Harvard Medical School, Harvard Business School, and so on, like all big universities.
Liberal arts colleges are simply undergrad schools that offer majors in the arts, humanities, and sciences. (Versus technical schools that only offer certain disciplines.) Harvard "College" technically is a liberal arts college, but it's part of the university and not a stand-alone. When people speak of liberal arts colleges in general, they mean the smaller, stand-alone institutions like Williams College that is only for undergrads (the school does offer two graduate degrees, but these departments are very small compared to those of universities).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
May we please see your heterosexual gene?
What, you cannot produce it? Well then, your heterosexuality is not genetic and thus must be a choice, too.
So, by your own perverse logic, your genetic argument is a fail and, thus, you cannot stand up for your own equality. Thus, continuing with your logic, you are therefore to be denied access to marriage.
And you are mistaken about your "lifestyle choices" not being protected by civil rights. They most certainly are. See Supreme Court cases Lawrence v Texas and Romer v Evans for examples.
You need to understand the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, too -- which demands that all citizens must be provided equal protections of the law. Denying legal marriage to gays directly contravenes that Amendment, and there are numerous federal court cases that back me up on this -- and completely refute you.
Finally, I must insist that you produce evidence that being gay is a choice.
When can we expect to see your irrefutable proof to support your claim?
Until then, we'll consider your claim to be a lie.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Shan Oakley Mullah Dung does not like it when he is shown that his cult handbook is full of the same things that are in the Islamic cult handbook.
DEATH TO NON-CHRISTIANS
Facts that come from Mullah Dungs cult handbook.
Death to Followers of Other Religions
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)
Kill Nonbelievers
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)
Kill False Prophets
If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)
Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)
Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night
But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)
Kill Followers of Other Religions.
1) If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)
2) Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)
Death for Blasphemy
One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD's name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother's name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD's will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, "Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD's name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD's name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)
Kill False Prophets
1) Suppose there are prophets among you, or those who have dreams about the future, and they promise you signs or miracles, and the predicted signs or miracles take place. If the prophets then say, 'Come, let us worship the gods of foreign nations,' do not listen to them. The LORD your God is testing you to see if you love him with all your heart and soul. Serve only the LORD your God and fear him alone. Obey his commands, listen to his voice, and cling to him. The false prophets or dreamers who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of slavery in the land of Egypt. Since they try to keep you from following the LORD your God, you must execute them to remove the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 NLT)
2) But any prophet who claims to give a message from another god or who falsely claims to speak for me must die.' You may wonder, 'How will we know whether the prophecy is from the LORD or not?' If the prophet predicts something in the LORD's name and it does not happen, the LORD did not give the message. That prophet has spoken on his own and need not be feared. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22 NLT)
Infidels and Gays Should Die
So God let them go ahead and do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other's bodies. Instead of believing what they knew was the truth about God, they deliberately chose to believe lies. So they worshiped the things God made but not the Creator himself, who is to be praised forever. Amen. That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relationships with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men and, as a result, suffered within themselves the penalty they so richly deserved. When they refused to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their evil minds and let them do things that should never be done. Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, fighting, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They are forever inventing new ways of sinning and are disobedient to their parents. They refuse to understand, break their promises, and are heartless and unforgiving. They are fully aware of God's death penalty for those who do these things, yet they go right ahead and do them anyway. And, worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too. (Romans 1:24-32 NLT)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The reichwing traitors committed a felony at the least.
Logan Act
The only known indictment under the Logan Act was one that occurred in 1803 when a grand jury indicted Francis Flournoy, a Kentucky farmer, who had written an article in the Frankfort Guardian of Freedom under the pen name of "A Western American." In the article, Flournoy advocated a separate nation in the western part of the United States that would ally with France.
Guess we can arrest and charge the K0CHers that call for secession. LET'S DO IT NOW.
Logan Act:
Passed under the administration of President John Adams, during tension between the U.S. and France, it was informally named for Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, a state legislator (and later US Senator) and pacifist who in 1798 engaged in semi-negotiations with France during the Quasi-War.
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not. The Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/senator-tom-cottons-letter-iran-direct-violation-logan-act-and-should-be-prosecuted/Wfxgp789
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If you vote K0CH then you want the following:
This is a manifesto (The K0CHs wrote this for the Libertarian party platform) of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
“We Are Wisconsin New Jersey?”
By now you’re probably wondering whether it’s time to grab your picket signs, pack a sleeping bag and get on the next bus to Trenton to start occupying the New Jersey State Capitol. The answer is: It’s complicated.
Christie is up for reelection this November. It will be tough to defeat him, even as he richly deserves to go down. The media like him, and some Democrats in the state Legislature have on occasion made it too easy for him to look effective and far-sighted. If we tell the truth to ourselves, the truth is, right now, Christie is popular. The latest polling has him ahead of his likely Democratic opponent by 35 points. And he has a huge financial advantage.
Still more alarmingly, Christie has somehow secured support from some segments of organized labor, notably the laborers and plumbers unions. No doubt the leaders of these unions see themselves faced with a difficult choice. With Christie so far ahead in polls, it’s tempting to play the percentages and bet on the likely winner in the hopes of securing some small advantage for your members. Pragmatism has its place in politics. We get it.
But in this case, it’s deeply troubling.
Sometimes, even when the odds are bad, you have to fight. The alternative is simply making an enemy stronger.
This isn’t the first time labor has made this mistake. There are many famous examples of letting short-term pragmatism blind you to a longer-term reality. The Air Traffic Controllers backed Ronald Reagan for president in 1980, and he turned around and crushed them. Richard Nixon was backed by many construction unions in 1968 and 1972, and he then worked to undermine them. And of course in Wisconsin, the police and firefighters unions endorsed Walker in his first campaign, and have to know what a gigantic mistake that was.
Christie’s record speaks for itself, and his kind words for Scott Walker should erase any doubt: Christie is no moderate. His worldview should be anathema to progressives everywhere. He’s also dangerous, because he’s popular and is a strong contender for the Republican nomination in 2016.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Yet another setback for Benghazi conspiracy theorists
The Benghazi news you may have missed
Posted: August 4, 2014 at 12:06 pm
As the House Select Committee gears up to spend up to more than $ 3 million on another investigation into the tragedy in Benghazi, the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee just completed and is about to release an exhaustive, nearly two year investigation that found no deliberate wrongdoing by the Administration.
This report exonerating the Administration of wrongdoing is one of many investigations into the tragedy. There have already been seven investigations, 13 hearings, 50 briefings, and 25,000 pages of documents have been released.
But that won’t stop Republicans from re-re-re investigating Benghazi as a part of a crass partisan ploy to turn out the far-right base in November.
Below please find select clips on the House Select Committee’s report:
House panel: No administration wrongdoing in Benghazi attack
San Francisco Chronicle// Carolyn Lockhead
The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. The panel voted Thursday to declassify the report, the result of two years of investigation by the committee. U.S. intelligence agencies will have to approve making the report public. Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.” That conflicts with accusations of administration wrongdoing voiced by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista (San Diego County), whose House Government Oversight and Reform Committee has held hearings on the Benghazi attack.
Move To Declassify Latest Benghazi Report Undercuts Conspiracy Claims Yet Again
Huffington Post/ Michael McAuliff
The House Intelligence Committee voted Thursday to declassify its investigative Benghazi report, a move that likely further undercuts the premise behind the House’s $3.3 million Benghazi select committee. When it is released, the report will mark the fourth major probe of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the American consulate in eastern Libya, all of which have identified flaws in the responses, the intelligence and the security surrounding the incident that left four Americans dead, including Ambassador Chris Stephens. But none of the reports have found any wrongdoing or hints of conspiracy that the recently created House Benghazi select committee is tasked with unmasking.
Yet another setback for Benghazi conspiracy theorists
MSNBC// Steve Benen
The committee agreed Thursday to declassify its report, nearly two years in the making, and the findings will reportedly be available to the public once it’s cleared by intelligence agencies. Just so we’re clear, this is a Republican-led committee, with GOP members outnumbering Democrats, 12 to 9. And according to the Chronicle’s report, the committee’s findings are consistent with everything reality has told us all along: “There was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, no illegal activity or illegal arms transfers occurring by U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and no American was left behind.” What’s more, the Obama administration’s process for developing “talking points” was “flawed, but the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.”
House Intel Committee Reveals Benghazi Findings
The Fiscal Times// Rob Garver
report unanimously adopted by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee last week flatly contradicts a number of criticisms of the Obama administration’s response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The report denies several allegations that have been made against the administration, including the inflammatory claim that military assets available to assist the beleaguered U.S. compound were ordered to “stand down” during the attack, which left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead. The members of the committee also voted to declassify the report so that the details of the lengthy investigation can be made public.
House Report: Benghazi Is Just Benghazi
Mother Jones// Kevin Drum
The Republican-led House Intelligence Committee—officially now just a bunch of RINO traitors, I guess—is about to release a report saying that what happened in Benghazi is pretty much what the entire non-insane world has figured all along: The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee.
House Intel Committee Finds No Benghazi Scandal; Will Boehner Ignore Its Findings?
The American Prospect// Ari Rabin-Havt
Late last week, before Congress headed out of Washington for August recess, the body voted to declassify the document. After nearly two years of investigations, millions of dollars spent, tens of thousands of pages of documents handed over by the administration, a Republican-led committee is about to release a report stating that there is no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the Obama White House. In fact, nearly all of the accusations levied against the White House over the past year by conservatives in Congress, and amplified by the media, have now been determined to be false—by a Republican jury. House Speaker John Boehner is now left with a choice. Will he allow Rep. Trey Gowdy’s kangaroo court, formulated in the guise of a select committee, proceed with its Benghazi investigation, covering ground already delved into not only by the House Intelligence Committee, but by the House Armed Services Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Accountability Review Board and numerous other investigatory panels?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Alex Spec Nazi boy try some facts:
It is often believed that the Bible gives absolute religious freedom to everyone. Most of the Christians in the United States and in the West think that the freedom of choice and speech that they have comes originally from the Bible. Let’s just see how accurate this myth really is.
In the Old Testament:
Let us look at Deuteronomy 13:6-9 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people.”
Also let us look at Deuteronomy 17:3-5 “And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, …..and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die.”
2 Chronicles 15:13 “All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman.”
In the New Testament by Jesus and Paul:
Jesus:
Note: Please pay close attention to my red emphasis below.
Let us look at what Jesus said in the New Testament in context:
Matthew 15:1-9
1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.‘
5 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’
6he is not to ‘honor his father’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.
7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8 ” ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'”
There are few points to notice here:
1- Notice in verse 3, Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for breaking the Commands of GOD Almighty.
2- In verse 4, he used the cursing of parents’ punishment as an example. The context, however, is not limited to just this example!
3- In verses 7,8 and 9, he used a quote from the book of Isaiah in the Old Testament, to further prove that they are not following the Commands of GOD Almighty.
4- Jesus clearly had a problem with them not following the punishment of death for cursing the parents or any punishment of death that is commanded in the OT for this matter! In fact, Jesus himself said:
“Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)”
“Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: ‘The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.‘ (Matthew 23:1-3)”
This clearly means:
1- Jesus absolutely approved and commanded the following of the OT’s Laws regarding apostates!
2- The fact he commanded death penalty for cursing the parents clearly proves that he also approves of killing apostates as clearly shown in the OT verses above!
1
-
Alex Spec How about that Kkkristian violence?
CHRISTIAN TERROR.
You ever heard of the Bosnian War? It's this little thing that went down back in the early 90s. Bosnian Serbs (Christians) went about on an ethnic cleansing campaign in which tens of thousands of Muslims were systematically raped, tortured, and murdered. They did it in the name of Christianity. Evangelical Christians in several African countries have made headlines in recent years for butchering homosexuals and people who refused to convert to their religion. Don't try to claim that Christians do not commit atrocities in the name of their religion.
Or how about Argentina:
"As many people as is necessary will die in Argentina," Videla told the region's army commanders, gathered in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1975, "to protect the hemisphere from the international communist conspiracy." He was true to his word. Months later, on 24 March 1976, the armed forces overthrew the inept and chaotic government of María Estela Martínez ("Isabelita"), the widow of Juan Domingo Perón.
They installed a ferocious military regime. During the next six years, it murdered up to 30,000 people in the name of "national reorganization" and western, CHRISTIAN civilization.
"Where are Christians beheading people?"
Nagaland, parts of Africa, parts of Asia.
"Where are Christians burning people alive in the name of Christ?"
Nagaland, parts of Africa, parts of Asia.
"Where are Christians slitting throats and screaming 'praise Jesus'?"
Nagaland again, not sure about Africa or Asia on that one.
"Where are Christians harming, murdering, throwing gays from rooftops as ISIS is doing or hanging them from cranes as Iran does?"
Parts of Africa, parts of the US, parts of Asia, parts of Russia. Specifically throwing off roofs, I'm not sure.
1
-
1
-
Alex Spec CHRISTIAN TERROR
The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), also known as the Lord's Resistance Movement, is a militant movement which is "Christianist, stated goals include ruling according to the Ten Commandments northern Uganda and South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, and in 2007 it was reported that it was in Central African Republic.
The LRA has been accused of widespread human rights violations, including murder, abduction, mutilation,child-sex slavery, and forcing children to participate in hostilities.
And that's not including things like the neo-nazi movements across Europe who have, for example, attacked 12 mosques in Sweden for their ideology.
There is something fundamentaly wrong in the world and it's leading people to ever more extreme dogmas.?
1
-
Alex Spec Christians are “brutally repressive. Christianity is a comprehensive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine, especially bad for women, for homosexuals, for Jews, other minority, religious faiths, well, pretty much just about for all human beings, actually.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
DarthCipient It is not so simple.
Greece - Piketty
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-06/piketty-germany-has-never-repaid-its-debts-it-has-no-standing-lecture-other-nations
Piketty: "Germany Has Never Repaid Its Debts; It Has No Standing To Lecture Other Nations"
One year after Tomas Piketty sold a record number of economic textbook paperweights which virtually nobody read past page 26, once again showing the power of constant media hype, the French economist and wealth redistributor is out and about, this time pouring more gasoline on the fire started by the IMF last week when it released the Greek debt sustainability analysis showing Greece needs a 30% haircut, only to be met with stern resistance by, who else, Germany who know very well that should Greece get a debt haircut it will unleash the European dominoes which not even all the bluster and rhetoric of the ECB can halt.
And while Piketty's book may have sold out in socialist France, it seems Germany did not leave a pleasant taste in the celebrity economist's mouth, and in an interview with Germany's Zeit magazine, translated into English, the Frenchman just made sure he will never sell another book east of the Rhine. Here is the reason why:
When I hear the Germans say that they maintain a very moral stance about debt and strongly believe that debts must be repaid, then I think: what a huge joke! Germany is the country that has never repaid its debts. It has no standing to lecture other nations.
... Germany is really the single best example of a country that, throughout its history, has never repaid its external debt. Neither after the First nor the Second World War. However, it has frequently made other nations pay up, such as after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, when it demanded massive reparations from France and indeed received them. The French state suffered for decades under this debt. The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.
What he said is perfectly factual and accurate, but in the new normal, truth is not a welcome commodity, especially when it pulls the scab on the single biggest problem with the modern economy, namely the gargantuan debt overhang (see Greece) which nobody can possibly default on without triggering massive contagion around the globe and thus leaving (hyper)inflation as the only possible way out.
A good question is whether this philosophical contrast exposed by Piketty is also indicative of the fundamental schism that is appearing not only within the Troika, where the IMF effectively won Tsipras' referendum for him, but also within the Eurogroup, where Germany may soon find itself increasingly isolated as not only peripheral countries but soon France start clamoring for debt haircuts not only abroad but also back at home...
Full interview:
Thomas Piketty: “Germany has never repaid.”
In a forceful interview with German newspaper Die Zeit, the star economist Thomas Piketty calls for a major conference on debt. Germany, in particular, should not withhold help from Greece. This interview has been translated from the original German.
Since his successful book, “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” the Frenchman Thomas Piketty has been considered one of the most influential economists in the world. His argument for the redistribution of income and wealth launched a worldwide discussion. In a interview with Georg Blume of DIE ZEIT, he gives his clear opinions on the European debt debate.
DIE ZEIT: Should we Germans be happy that even the French government is aligned with the German dogma of austerity?
Thomas Piketty: Absolutely not. This is neither a reason for France, nor Germany, and especially not for Europe, to be happy. I am much more afraid that the conservatives, especially in Germany, are about to destroy Europe and the European idea, all because of their shocking ignorance of history.
ZEIT: But we Germans have already reckoned with our own history.
Piketty: But not when it comes to repaying debts! Germany’s past, in this respect, should be of great significance to today’s Germans. Look at the history of national debt: Great Britain, Germany, and France were all once in the situation of today’s Greece, and in fact had been far more indebted. The first lesson that we can take from the history of government debt is that we are not facing a brand new problem. There have been many ways to repay debts, and not just one, which is what Berlin and Paris would have the Greeks believe.
ZEIT: But shouldn’t they repay their debts?
Piketty: My book recounts the history of income and wealth, including that of nations. What struck me while I was writing is that Germany is really the single best example of a country that, throughout its history, has never repaid its external debt. Neither after the First nor the Second World War. However, it has frequently made other nations pay up, such as after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, when it demanded massive reparations from France and indeed received them. The French state suffered for decades under this debt. The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.
ZEIT: But surely we can’t draw the conclusion that we can do no better today?
Piketty: When I hear the Germans say that they maintain a very moral stance about debt and strongly believe that debts must be repaid, then I think: what a huge joke! Germany is the country that has never repaid its debts. It has no standing to lecture other nations.
ZEIT: Are you trying to depict states that don’t pay back their debts as winners?
Piketty: Germany is just such a state. But wait: history shows us two ways for an indebted state to leave delinquency. One was demonstrated by the British Empire in the 19th century after its expensive wars with Napoleon. It is the slow method that is now being recommended to Greece. The Empire repaid its debts through strict budgetary discipline. This worked, but it took an extremely long time. For over 100 years, the British gave up two to three percent of their economy to repay its debts, which was more than they spent on schools and education. That didn’t have to happen, and it shouldn’t happen today. The second method is much faster. Germany proved it in the 20th century. Essentially, it consists of three components: inflation, a special tax on private wealth, and debt relief.
ZEIT: So you’re telling us that the German Wirtschaftswunder [“economic miracle”] was based on the same kind of debt relief that we deny Greece today?
Piketty: Exactly. After the war ended in 1945, Germany’s debt amounted to over 200% of its GDP. Ten years later, little of that remained: public debt was less than 20% of GDP. Around the same time, France managed a similarly artful turnaround. We never would have managed this unbelievably fast reduction in debt through the fiscal discipline that we today recommend to Greece. Instead, both of our states employed the second method with the three components that I mentioned, including debt relief. Think about the London Debt Agreement of 1953, where 60% of German foreign debt was cancelled and its internal debts were restructured.
ZEIT: That happened because people recognized that the high reparations demanded of Germany after World War I were one of the causes of the Second World War. People wanted to forgive Germany’s sins this time!
Piketty: Nonsense! This had nothing to do with moral clarity; it was a rational political and economic decision. They correctly recognized that, after large crises that created huge debt loads, at some point people need to look toward the future. We cannot demand that new generations must pay for decades for the mistakes of their parents. The Greeks have, without a doubt, made big mistakes. Until 2009, the government in Athens forged its books. But despite this, the younger generation of Greeks carries no more responsibility for the mistakes of its elders than the younger generation of Germans did in the 1950s and 1960s. We need to look ahead. Europe was founded on debt forgiveness and investment in the future. Not on the idea of endless penance. We need to remember this.
ZEIT: The end of the Second World War was a breakdown of civilization. Europe was a killing field. Today is different.
Piketty: To deny the historical parallels to the postwar period would be wrong. Let’s think about the financial crisis of 2008/2009. This wasn’t just any crisis. It was the biggest financial crisis since 1929. So the comparison is quite valid. This is equally true for the Greek economy: between 2009 and 2015, its GDP has fallen by 25%. This is comparable to the recessions in Germany and France between 1929 and 1935.
ZEIT: Many Germans believe that the Greeks still have not recognized their mistakes and want to continue their free-spending ways.
Piketty: If we had told you Germans in the 1950s that you have not properly recognized your failures, you would still be repaying your debts. Luckily, we were more intelligent than that.
ZEIT: The German Minister of Finance, on the other hand, seems to believe that a Greek exit from the Eurozone could foster greater unity within Europe.
Piketty: If we start kicking states out, then the crisis of confidence in which the Eurozone finds itself today will only worsen. Financial markets will immediately turn on the next country. This would be the beginning of a long, drawn-out period of agony, in whose grasp we risk sacrificing Europe’s social model, its democracy, indeed its civilization on the altar of a conservative, irrational austerity policy.
ZEIT: Do you believe that we Germans aren’t generous enough?
Piketty: What are you talking about? Generous? Currently, Germany is profiting from Greece as it extends loans at comparatively high interest rates.
ZEIT: What solution would you suggest for this crisis?
Piketty: We need a conference on all of Europe’s debts, just like after World War II. A restructuring of all debt, not just in Greece but in several European countries, is inevitable. Just now, we’ve lost six months in the completely intransparent negotiations with Athens. The Eurogroup’s notion that Greece will reach a budgetary surplus of 4% of GDP and will pay back its debts within 30 to 40 years is still on the table. Allegedly, they will reach one percent surplus in 2015, then two percent in 2016, and three and a half percent in 2017. Completely ridiculous! This will never happen. Yet we keep postponing the necessary debate until the cows come home.
ZEIT: And what would happen after the major debt cuts?
Piketty: A new European institution would be required to determine the maximum allowable budget deficit in order to prevent the regrowth of debt. For example, this could be a commmittee in the European Parliament consisting of legislators from national parliaments. Budgetary decisions should not be off-limits to legislatures. To undermine European democracy, which is what Germany is doing today by insisting that states remain in penury under mechanisms that Berlin itself is muscling through, is a grievous mistake.
ZEIT: Your president, François Hollande, recently failed to criticize the fiscal pact.
Piketty: This does not improve anything. If, in past years, decisions in Europe had been reached in more democratic ways, the current austerity policy in Europe would be less strict.
ZEIT: But no political party in France is participating. National sovereignty is considered holy.
Piketty: Indeed, in Germany many more people are entertaining thoughts of reestablishing European democracy, in contrast to France with its countless believers in sovereignty. What’s more, our president still portrays himself as a prisoner of the failed 2005 referendum on a European Constitution, which failed in France. François Hollande does not understand that a lot has changed because of the financial crisis. We have to overcome our own national egoism.
ZEIT: What sort of national egoism do you see in Germany?
Piketty: I think that Germany was greatly shaped by its reunification. It was long feared that it would lead to economic stagnation. But then reunification turned out to be a great success thanks to a functioning social safety net and an intact industrial sector. Meanwhile, Germany has become so proud of its success that it dispenses lectures to all other countries. This is a little infantile. Of course, I understand how important the successful reunification was to the personal history of Chancellor Angela Merkel. But now Germany has to rethink things. Otherwise, its position on the debt crisis will be a grave danger to Europe.
ZEIT: What advice do you have for the Chancellor?
Piketty: Those who want to chase Greece out of the Eurozone today will end up on the trash heap of history. If the Chancellor wants to secure her place in the history books, just like [Helmut] Kohl did during reunification, then she must forge a solution to the Greek question, including a debt conference where we can start with a clean slate. But with renewed, much stronger fiscal discipline.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
robinsss No libertarians have proposed the end of government? Well that is a bit of a stretch. By definition libertarians believe in a defanged and basically useless government.
So you are the liar here.
All one has to do is read the Libertarian Party platform to see that you do not know what you are talking about.
1980 platform. and the 2016 follows the same lead.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
David Wood Yes I use facts as I posted your chance to see them. You have posted nothing to dispute the FACTS.
This is my last post on this subject.
Obama supports the following.
More facts:
His charter school support and vouchers are detrimental tot he public system, That is just fact.
Charter School Power Broker Turns Public Education Into Private Profits
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/10/charter-school-power-broker-turns-public
Charter School Evil NYC
Success Academy
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/12/evil-we-must-fight-0
CHARTERS
Federal Half-a-Billion Handout
http://drip.www.alternet.org/education/web-secrecy-surrounding-federal-half-billion-handout-charter-schools
Because the federal charter schools program is designed to foster charter school growth, which in turn means that money will be diverted from traditional public schools to an industry that resists government enforcement of basic standards for financial controls, accountability, and democratic oversight, the public has a big stake in this and a right to know more, before their money disappears down black holes.
Rightwing Destruction of the Public Education System
"In the USA, Jeb Bush and George W. Bush led the privatization of public schools (K-12). They did this by (a) enabling "charter" (private) schools (including church schools) and sending them taxpayer monies which used to support public schools, (b) imposing extra tests on public schools, and (c) not imposing such tests on "charter" schools.
Many parents moved their kids to "charter" schools because (1) they already wanted to get their kids away from "dangerous" dark-skinned kids, and "charter" schools provided a way to do it, (2) their kids preferred to go to "charter" schools anyway, to avoid the burdensome and insulting testing.
At the same time, testing imposed a huge paperwork burden on public school teachers. The burden is so large that public schools drafted school counselors to spend most of their time on testing paperwork, leaving them little time to actually counsel children. This MAY BE a contributing factor in the outbreak of school shootings, as there Is no one left to counsel troubled children.
Many elected Republicans went to private school anyway, and therefore care not about the public schools. But they do care about the public school budgets, which, in many USA counties, are 3 times as large as the budgets of the counties (utilities, etc.) proper. That's a lot of money which Republicans could, by further privatizing public schools, redirect toward their golf club and yacht club buddies.
Follow the money."
"I hope to live to see the day when, as in the early days of our
country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken
them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day
that will be!" --Jerry Falwell
1
-
1
-
***** Mullah Dung "IF" I were not an atheist then most certainly Satan would be my hero.
Comprendo dipshit?
IF I WERE A TRUE BELIEVER LIKE YOU:
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The history of Ronald Reagan should be written that he was nothing more than a tool to harm the nation. He tripled our debt, he sold weapons to enemies and he started the war against the nation by bringing in trickle down. The man is a disgrace.
Since Reagan Americans have suffered.
Republicans and those who vote Republicans are nothing more than tories, red coats, the buffoons and suckers who kissess rich man's ass and exist for no other reason than to kiss rich man's ass. It's obscene and it's worse than pornography.
Dispel the Reagan myth. Multiple tax increases, a balloted budget, giant increase to government and deficits. Reagan beyond being a failure as a President was someone that should have been arrested for crimes against humanity for what he did in central america.
Reagan was the first president to politicize the CIA. He told the CIA to lie to Congress by telling Congress that the Soviet Union was a very wealthy country, so he can con money out of Congress.
The Soviet Union was on it's way to a collapse long before Reagan took office. Kurschev already told Nixon the model in the Soviet Union was not working.
Mikhail Gorbachev spoke in a US community, one of only two communities he gave a speech at in the United States. At the speech, Gorbachev blew the Reagan myth out of the waters. Gorbachev blamed himself for not acting quick enough to transform the former Soviet Union into a new model.
The Cold War was long gone and over before Reagan came onto the scene. The Soviet Union knew it was a matter of time. It was Reagan who lied, nothing new there, lied about the economic conditions in the former Soviet Union.
I have heard many Russians say it was the Beatles that taught them about freedom and kept the ideas alive until they could throw off the regime.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** And you support criminals and antiAmerican wackjobs.
The law dictates the way you behave towards legal authorities. Bundy and his idiot anti American friends threatened lawful agents, pointed weapons at them , set up sniper nests, manned illegal road blocks to stop citizens from their right to travel the hiways and roads, and Bundy is one of those K0CH libertarian grifter moochers who feels he can mooch off the USA.
And he is a hateful cowardly bigot much like most right wingers.
Actor Wesley Snipes spent three years in jail for failing to file tax returns from 1999 to 2001. Rancher Cliven Bundy hasn’t paid the federal government its due in more 20 years. But this lawbreaker is not in jail; he’s grabbing headlines while ripping off American taxpayers.
Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy was all over the national media this past week when federal Bureau of Land Management agents seized his cattle to settle the more than $1 million in unpaid fines he’d racked up since 1993. Armed militants flocked to Bundy’s side, prompting the bureau to back off for fear of human safety.
The fines are a result of Bundy grazing his 900 cattle on 600,000 acres of bureau-managed public lands since 1993 without a permit. He’s ignored his fees, fines, permits and multiple court orders.
Plenty of other ranchers pay their grazing fees; in fact, the Bureau of Land Management issues 18,000 permits for grazing on 160 million acres of public lands. The U.S. Forest Service allows grazing on an additional 81 million acres of public lands.
Bureau of Land Management Director Neil Kornze was right when he said, “Mr. Bundy owes the American taxpayers in excess of $1 million.” Public lands belong to the American public. Regardless of his convoluted read of the Nevada Constitution, Bundy owes all of us that tidy sum. And he should us owe much, much more.
Supposedly, the Bureau of Land Management takes livestock prices, cost of cattle production and private grazing fees into account when setting the fee per head of cattle for grazing on public lands. Government data pegs private grazing fees at roughly $18 per animal unit month (which represents the amount of forage (e.g. grass) a cow and her calf need for a month) throughout the West over the past two years. In Nevada, the average private land grazing fee was $15 per animal unit month. Yet this year, the fee for grazing on public land in Nevada and elsewhere is set at $1.35 per animal unit month.
Certainly there are differences between private land and public land in quality, but there are also a variety of federal range management programs (such as killing wolves and other predators) that also benefit ranchers.
Moreover, 50 percent of grazing fees collected by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service (or $10 million, whichever is greater) go to a range betterment fund in the Treasury. According to the bureau, these so-called “Range Improvement Funds” are used “solely for labor, materials, and final survey and design of projects,” presumably benefiting ranchers.
Taxpayers should get fair market value from private enterprises using public resources. Ranchers already graze cattle on public lands for a steal. Bundy is a crook, but the way the federal grazing system treats taxpayers is criminal as well.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Detroit (Krugman)- Workers pensions are not the real problem.
Overall pension contributions this year will be about $25 billion less than they should be. But in a $16 trillion economy, that’s just not a big deal — and even if you make more pessimistic assumptions, as some but not all accountants say you should, it still isn’t a big deal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/krugman-detroit-the-new-greece.html?_r=3&
Detroit (Reich) - Cons do not want to pay taxes.
In other words, much in modern America depends on where you draw boundaries, and who's inside and who's outside. Who is included in the social contract? If "Detroit" is defined as the larger metropolitan area that includes its suburbs, "Detroit" has enough money to provide all its residents with adequate if not good public services, without falling into bankruptcy. Politically, it would come down to a question of whether the more affluent areas of this "Detroit" were willing to subsidize the poor inner-city through their tax dollars, and help it rebound. That's an awkward question that the more affluent areas would probably rather not have to face.
In drawing the relevant boundary to include just the poor inner city, and requiring those within that boundary to take care of their compounded problems by themselves, the whiter and more affluent suburbs are off the hook. "Their" city isn't in trouble. It's that other one -- called "Detroit."
It's roughly analogous to a Wall Street bank drawing a boundary around its bad assets, selling them off at a fire-sale price, and writing off the loss. Only here we're dealing with human beings rather than financial capital. And the upcoming fire sale will likely result in even worse municipal services, lousier schools, and more crime for those left behind in the city of Detroit. In an era of widening inequality, this is how wealthier Americans are quietly writing off the poor.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/detroit-bankruptcy_b_3629782.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Umm the old testament is the word of the christian skyfairy and their pretend messiah told them to follow it.
You think that christianity is not violent in the modern age?
CHRISTIAN TERROR.
You ever heard of the Bosnian War? It's this little thing that went down back in the early 90s. Bosnian Serbs (Christians) went about on an ethnic cleansing campaign in which tens of thousands of Muslims were systematically raped, tortured, and murdered. They did it in the name of Christianity. Evangelical Christians in several African countries have made headlines in recent years for butchering homosexuals and people who refused to convert to their religion. Don't try to claim that Christians do not commit atrocities in the name of their religion.
Or how about Argentina:
"As many people as is necessary will die in Argentina," Videla told the region's army commanders, gathered in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1975, "to protect the hemisphere from the international communist conspiracy." He was true to his word. Months later, on 24 March 1976, the armed forces overthrew the inept and chaotic government of María Estela Martínez ("Isabelita"), the widow of Juan Domingo Perón.
They installed a ferocious military regime. During the next six years, it murdered up to 30,000 people in the name of "national reorganization" and western, CHRISTIAN civilization.
"Where are Christians beheading people?"
Nagaland, parts of Africa, parts of Asia.
"Where are Christians burning people alive in the name of Christ?"
Nagaland, parts of Africa, parts of Asia.
"Where are Christians slitting throats and screaming 'praise Jesus'?"
Nagaland again
"Where are Christians harming, murdering, throwing gays from rooftops as ISIS is doing or hanging them from cranes as Iran does?"
Parts of Africa, parts of the US, parts of Asia, parts of Russia.
1
-
1
-
***** CHRISTIAN TERROR
The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), also known as the Lord's Resistance Movement, is a militant movement which is "Christianist, stated goals include ruling according to the Ten Commandments northern Uganda and South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, and in 2007 it was reported that it was in Central African Republic.
The LRA has been accused of widespread human rights violations, including murder, abduction, mutilation,child-sex slavery, and forcing children to participate in hostilities.
And that's not including things like the neo-nazi movements across Europe who have, for example, attacked 12 mosques in Sweden for their ideology.
There is something fundamentally wrong in the world and it's leading people to ever more extreme dogmas.
I can do this all day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+djole94hns Miscarriage? That is Cods fault right?
Dear Forced Birther...
Your Cod Is Not Pro Life
You might find that statement surprising, but I know this from your own holy book. Despite what you may have been told, the Bible is not a pro-life document. It is, in many parts, pro-death. In one of the first stories in the Bible, God murders millions of people through a global flood — including born and unborn children. Unborn children — the ones you fight for. God only wanted to get rid of them.
Later in your holy book God commands the death of nation after nation because they happen to inhabit the land he plans to give the Israelites (Josh 7-9). He commands Israel to kill women and children (1 Sam 15).
When he wanted to make a point to the Egyptians, he murdered all the firstborn sons of Egypt. Innocent children. And when King David killed a man and slept with his wife, God punished him by killing his unborn child.
This same God does nothing while billions of people throughout history have been starved, drowned, raped and murdered. He sits on the sidelines and watches.
That is not a God who is pro-life!
On top of all that, at least 25% of all pregnancies end in “natural” abortion — which you believe your God either designed or actively performed — an act you consider murder.
No, your God is not pro-life. By your own standards, he is a murderer — the most prolific abortionist of all time.
So don’t tell us you base your morality on the Bible or on the character of God. Don’t tell us you’re sent from your God to protect the lives of the innocent. Despite what your pastor says, your God is not pro-life. He has been killing, maiming, and letting people suffer for ages.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Cooked Vegan Fitness No babies are killed during an abortion MULLAH.
GOD THE ABORTIONIST
Dear Forced Birther...
Your God Is Not Pro Life
You might find that statement surprising, but I know this from your own holy book. Despite what you may have been told, the Bible is not a pro-life document. It is, in many parts, pro-death. In one of the first stories in the Bible, God murders millions of people through a global flood — including born and unborn children. Unborn children — the ones you fight for. God only wanted to get rid of them.
Later in your holy book God commands the death of nation after nation because they happen to inhabit the land he plans to give the Israelites (Josh 7-9). He commands Israel to kill women and children (1 Sam 15).
When he wanted to make a point to the Egyptians, he murdered all the firstborn sons of Egypt. Innocent children. And when King David killed a man and slept with his wife, God punished him by killing his unborn child.
This same God does nothing while billions of people throughout history have been starved, drowned, raped and murdered. He sits on the sidelines and watches.
That is not a God who is pro-life!
On top of all that, at least 25% of all pregnancies end in “natural” abortion — which you believe your God either designed or actively performed — an act you consider murder.
No, your God is not pro-life. By your own standards, he is a murderer — the most prolific abortionist of all time.
So don’t tell us you base your morality on the Bible or on the character of God. Don’t tell us you’re sent from your God to protect the lives of the innocent. Despite what your pastor says, your God is not pro-life. He has been killing, maiming, and letting people suffer for ages.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Here is their plan. I have been posting it for years...
KOCH/DeVos/Mercer/Bannon/RYAN/NAZI GOP/CHRISTO FASCIST PLAN FOR AMERICA
From the 70's on they have been saying they wanted this and more.
WHY WEREN'T YOU LISTENING?
Ryan, the K0CHs and the other libertarian neoconfederate states rights taliban traitors have the same platform.
THESE ARE THEIR WORDS NOT MINE
STOP IGNORING THEM WHEN THEY TELL YOU THEIR PLAN
NO ABORTION EVER IS CHRISTIAN SHARIA
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Ayn L Rand John Birch Society dogma. Paul Ryan is as extremist as any of them.
STOP BEING NICE.
STOP APPEASING.
STOP BEING POLITICALLY CORRECT.
They are nazis, bigots, fascists, traitors, woman haters, minority haters, haters of the poor, haters of an educated populace, haters of the truth and science etc.
Call them out by calling them what they are. Do it over and over again until it becomes the truth.
That is how the reich does it and they are winning.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
*****
LOL
A Manifesto for Psychopaths
March 5, 2012
http://www.monbiot.com/2012/03/05/a-manifesto-for-psychopaths/
Ayn Rand’s ideas have become the Marxism of the new right.
By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 6th March 2012.
It has a fair claim to be the ugliest philosophy the post-war world has produced. Selfishness, it contends, is good, altruism evil, empathy and compassion are irrational and destructive. The poor deserve to die; the rich deserve unmediated power. It has already been tested, and has failed spectacularly and catastrophically. Yet the belief system constructed by Ayn Rand, who died 30 years ago today, has never been more popular or influential.
Rand was a Russian from a prosperous family who emigrated to the United States. Through her novels (such as Atlas Shrugged) and her non-fiction (such as The Virtue of Selfishness(1)) she explained a philosophy she called Objectivism. This holds that the only moral course is pure self-interest. We owe nothing, she insists, to anyone, even to members of our own families. She described the poor and weak as “refuse” and “parasites”, and excoriated anyone seeking to assist them. Apart from the police, the courts and the armed forces, there should be no role for government: no social security, no public health or education, no public infrastructure or transport, no fire service, no regulations, no income tax.
Atlas Shrugged, published in 1957, depicts a United States crippled by government intervention, in which heroic millionaires struggle against a nation of spongers. The millionaires, whom she portrays as Atlas holding the world aloft, withdraw their labour, with the result that the nation collapses. It is rescued, through unregulated greed and selfishness, by one of the heroic plutocrats, John Galt.
The poor die like flies as a result of government programmes and their own sloth and fecklessness. Those who try to help them are gassed. In a notorious passage, she argues that all the passengers in a train filled with poisoned fumes deserved their fate. One, for example, was a teacher who taught children to be team players; one was a mother married to a civil servant, who cared for her children; one was a housewife “who believed that she had the right to elect politicians, of whom she knew nothing”.
Rand’s is the philosophy of the psychopath, a misanthropic fantasy of cruelty, revenge and greed. Yet, as Gary Weiss shows in his new book Ayn Rand Nation, she has become to the new right what Karl Marx once was to the left: a demi-god at the head of a chiliastic cult. Almost one-third of Americans, according to a recent poll, have read Atlas Shrugged, and it now sells hundreds of thousands of copies every year.
Ignoring Rand’s evangelical atheism, the Tea Party movement has taken her to its heart. No rally of theirs is complete without placards reading “Who is John Galt?” and “Rand was right”. Ayn Rand, Weiss argues, provides the unifying ideology which has “distilled vague anger and unhappiness into a sense of purpose.” She is energetically promoted by the broadcasters Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Rick Santelli. She is the guiding spirit of the Republicans in Congress.
Like all philosophies, Objectivism is absorbed second-hand by people who have never read it. I believe it is making itself felt on this side of the Atlantic: in the clamorous new demands to remove the 50p tax band for the very rich, for example, or among the sneering, jeering bloggers who write for the Telegraph and the Spectator, mocking compassion and empathy, attacking efforts to make the world a kinder place.
It is not hard to see why Rand appeals to billionaires. She offers them something that is crucial to every successful political movement: a sense of victimhood. She tells them that they are parasitised by the ungrateful poor and oppressed by intrusive, controlling governments.
It is harder to see what it gives the ordinary teabaggers, who would suffer grievously from a withdrawal of government. But such is the degree of misinformation which saturates this movement and so prevalent in the US is Willy Loman Syndrome (the gulf between reality and expectations) that millions blithely volunteer themselves as billionaires’ doormats. I wonder how many would continue to worship at the shrine of Ayn Rand if they knew that towards the end of her life she signed on for both Medicare and Social Security. She had railed furiously against both programmes, as they represented everything she despised about the intrusive state. Her belief system was no match for the realities of age and ill-health.
But they have a still more powerful reason to reject her philosophy: as Adam Curtis’s documentary showed last year, the most devoted member of her inner circle was Alan Greenspan. Among the essays he wrote for Ayn Rand were those published in a book he co-edited with her called Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal. Here, starkly explained, you’ll find the philosophy he brought into government. There is no need for the regulation of business – even builders or Big Pharma – he argued, as “the ‘greed’ of the businessman or, more appropriately, his profit-seeking … is the unexcelled protector of the consumer.”As for bankers, their need to win the trust of their clients guarantees that they will act with honour and integrity. Unregulated capitalism, he maintains, is a “superlatively moral system”.
Once in government, Greenspan applied his guru’s philosophy to the letter, lobbying to cut taxes for the rich and repeal the laws constraining the banks, refusing to regulate the predatory lending and the derivatives trading which eventually brought the system down. Much of this is already documented, but Weiss shows that in the US Greenspan has successfully airbrushed this history.
Despite the many years he spent at her side, despite his previous admission that it was Rand who persuaded him that “capitalism is not only efficient and practical but also moral,”he mentioned her in his memoirs only to suggest that it was a youthful indiscretion, and this, it seems, is now the official version. Weiss presents powerful evidence that even today Greenspan remains her loyal disciple, having renounced his partial admission of failure to Congress.
Saturated in her philosophy, the new right on both sides of the Atlantic continues to demand the rollback of the state, even as the wreckage of that policy lies all around. The poor go down, the ultra-rich survive and prosper. Ayn Rand would have approved.
www.monbiot.com
References:
1. In the spirit of Rand, I suggest you don’t pay for it, but download it here: http://tfasinternational.org/ila/Ayn_Rand-The_Virtue_of_Selfishness.pdf
2. The just desserts are detailed on page 605 of the 2007 Penguin edition.
3. The gassing and subsequent explosion are explained on page 621.
4. Gary Weiss, 2012. Ayn Rand Nation: The Hidden Struggle
for America’s Soul. St. Martin’s Press, New York.
5. This was a Zogby poll, conducted at the end of 2010, cited by Gary Weiss.
6. To give one of many examples, Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, says that “the reason I got involved in public service,
by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be
Ayn Rand.” This is a little ironic, in view of the fact that Rand abhorred the idea of public service. Quoted by Gary Weiss.
7. http://www.monbiot.com/2006/07/07/willy-loman-syndrome/
8. Gary Weiss, pp61-63.
9. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b011lvb9
10. Ayn Rand, Nathaniel Branden, Alan Greenspan and Robert Hessen (Eds), 1967. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. Signet, New York.
11. Alan Greenspan, August 1963. The Assault on Integrity. First published in
The Objectivist Newsletter, later in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.
12. As above.
13. From an article by Soma Golden in the New York Times, July 1974, quoted by Gary Weiss.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The Koch/Ryan/GOP/Libertarian/Bircher platform
KOCH GAME PLAN
In 1980 when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket this was part of their platform. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
This is just part of their platform to destroy the country. The GOP plan which is quite similar except for a few areas like Christian Sharia, follows in the next post.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
1
-
GOP PLATFORM 2016
Some tasty bits.
Below are some of the Republican Platform.
Here are 50 ... right-wing proposals in the 2016 GOP platform
Each of the following Republican planks can be evaluated using the yard-stick of the “Golden-Rule
“Do NOT do unto others that which you wish not be done unto you”
GOP PLATFORM 2016
Some tasty bits.
Below are some of the Republican Platform.
Here are 50 ... right-wing proposals in the 2016 GOP platform
Each of the following Republican planks can be evaluated using the yard-stick of the “Golden-Rule
“Do NOT do unto others that which you wish not be done unto you”
Tax cuts for the rich: (prime directive)
Deregulate the banks: (let recessions and depressions regulate the economy)
Stop consumer protection: (you don’t matter, only business)
Start repealing environmental laws: (LA was great in the early 70’s)
Start shrinking unions and union labor: (America went downhill since the weekend)
Privatize federal railway service (Amtrak): (taking profit out of the common good)
No change in federal minimum wage: (you don’t matter, only business)
Cut government salaries and benefits: (you don’t need good services; hire the cheapest)
Appoint anti-choice Supreme Court justices: (Republican activist judges are not activists)
Appoint anti-LGBT and anti-Obamacare justices: (see above)
Legalize anti-LGBT discrimination: (What ‘golden rule’?)
Make Christianity a national religion: (Violation of US Constitution)
Loosen campaign finance loopholes and dark money: (Money and guns and oligarchy)
Loosen gun controls nationwide: (Guns and money and dead mommas)
Pass an anti-choice constitutional amendment: (What ‘golden rule’?)
End federal funding for Planned Parenthood: (Women don’t matter)
Allow states to shut down abortion Clinics: (Women don’t matter)
Oppose stem cell scientific research: (Science doesn’t matter)
Oppose executive branch policy making: (Things like Bush’s preemptive war idea)
Oppose efforts to end the electoral college: (Democracy is such a bother, let the rich rule)
Require citizenship documents to register to vote: (Your papers, bitte!)
Ignore undocumented immigrants when drawing congressional districts: (Democracy is such a bother, let the rich rule)
No labeling of GMO ingredients in food products: (Science doesn’t matter, you don’t matter, only business)
Add work requirements to welfare and cut food stamps: (pyramids for porridge)
Open America’s shores to more oil and gas drilling: (Water, water, everywhere-none is fit to drink)
Build the Keystone XL Pipeline: (clean water doesn’t matter)
Expand fracking and burying nuclear waste: (air, water, health… it’s not money)
No tax on carbon products: (prime directive)
Ignore global climate change agreements: (keeping one’s pledge is not a Republican thing)
Privatize Medicare, the health plan for seniors; (taking profit out of the common good)
Turn Medicaid, the poor’s health plan, over to states: (life expectancy by zip code)
No increasing Social Security benefits by taxing the rich: (prime directive)
Repeal Obamacare: (Hey! You were born; dignity of life is for fetuses)
Give internet service providers monopoly control: (taking profit out of the common good)
Make English the official U.S. language: (‘Cuz that’s what Jesus spoke)
No amnesty for undocumented immigrants: (Kick them out; crops rotting in the fields)
Build a border wall to keep immigrants out: (Keep them out; food prices rise and shelves empty)
Require government verification of citizenship of all workers: (Your papers, bitte!)
Penalize cities that give sanctuary to migrants: (Local control is such a bother)
Puerto Rico should be a state but not Washington DC: (Local control is such a bother)
Support traditional marriage but no other families: (favoritism is so American, but you don’t matter)
Privatize government services in the name of fighting poverty: (taking profit out of the common good)
Require bible study in public schools: (Violation of US Constitution)
Replace traditional public schools with privatized options: (taking profit out of the common good)
Replace sex education with abstinence-only approaches: (Science doesn’t matter)
Privatize student loans instead of lowering interest rates: (taking profit out of the common good)
Restore the death penalty: (Daily NRAterrorist death penalties abound in America)
Dramatically increase Pentagon budget: (without violating prime directive)
Cancel Iran nuclear treaty and expand nuclear arsenal: (keeping one’s pledge is not a Republican thing)
and:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/heres-are-50-shockingly-extreme-right-wing-proposals-in-the-2016-gop-platform/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ted Nugent a real man and a real patriot
LOL
"High Times" Interviews the man cons want for president.
From the October 1977 issue:
“High Times:How did you get out of the draft?
Ted Nugent: Ted was a young boy, appearing to be a hippie but quite opposite in fact, working hard and playing hard, playing rock and roll like a deviant. People would question my sanity, I played so much. So I got my notice to be in the draft. Do you think I was gonna lay down my guitar and go play army? Give me a break! I was busy doin’ it to it. I had a career Jack. If I was walkin’ around, hippying down, getting’ loaded and pickin’ my ass like your common curs, I’d say “Hey yeah, go in the army. Beats the poop out of scuffin’ around in the gutters.” But I wasn’t a gutter dog. I was a hard workin’, motherfuckin’ rock and roll musician.
I got my physical notice 30 days prior to. Well, on that day I ceased cleansing my body. No more brushing my teeth, no more washing my hair, no baths, no soap, no water. Thirty days of debris build. I stopped shavin’ and I was 18, had a little scraggly beard, really looked like a hippie. I had long hair, and it started gettin’ kinky, matted up. Then two weeks before, I stopped eating any food with nutritional value. I just had chips, Pepsi, beer-stuff I never touched-buttered poop, little jars of Polish sausages, and I’d drink the syrup, I was this side of death, Then a week before, I stopped going to the bathroom. I did it in my pants. poop, piss the whole shot. My pants got crusted up.
See, I approached the whole thing like, Ted Nugent, cool hard-workin’ dude, is gonna wreak havoc on these imbeciles in the armed forces. I’m gonna play their own game, and I’m gonna destroy ‘em. Now my whole body is crusted in poop and piss. I was ill. And three or four days before, I started stayin’ awake. I was close to death, but I was in control. I was extremely antidrug as I’ve always been, but I snorted some crystal methedrine. Talk about one wounded motherf*cker. A guy put up four lines, and it was for all four of us, but I didn’t know and I’m vacuuming that poop right up. I was a walking, talking hunk of human poop. I was six-foot-three of sin. So the guys took me down to the physical, and my nerves, my emotions were distraught. I was not a good person. I was wounded. But as painful and nauseous as it was – ‘cause I was really into bein’ clean and on the ball – I made gutter swine hippies look like football players. I was deviano.
So I went in, and those guys in uniform couldn’t believe the smell. They were ridiculin’ me and pushin’ me around and I was cryin’, but all the time I was laughin’ to myself. When they stuck the needle in my arm for the blood test I passed out, and when I came to they were kicking me into the wall. Then they made everybody take off their pants, and I did, and this sergeant says, “Oh my God, put those back on! You f*cking swine you!” Then they had a urine test and I couldn’t piss, But my poop was just like ooze, man, so I poop in the cup and put it on the counter. I had poop on my hand and my arm. The guy almost puked. I was so proud. I knew I had these chumps beat. The last thing I remember was wakin’ up in the ear test booth and they were sweepin’ up. So I went home and cleaned up.
They took a putty knife to me. I got the street rats out of my hair, ate some good steaks, beans, potatoes, cottage cheese, milk. A couple of days and I was ready to kick ass. And in the mail I got this big juicy 4-F. They’d call dead people before they’d call my ass. But you know the funny thing about it? I’d make an incredible army man. I’d be a colonel before you knew what hit you, and I’d have the baddest bunch of motherf*ckin’ killers you’d ever seen in my platoon. But I just wasn’t into it. I was too busy doin’ my own thing, you know?
I've sanitized the swear words. They are there in their profane glory in the original text.
This is the guy Mitt Romney chased down with a phone call to a gun store and asked for his endorsement.
This is the guy that Tagg Romney tweeted about how cool it was that Ted Nugent was endorsing his dad.
http://on.aol.com/video/dickipedia--ted-nugent--sfw--518758342
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Chad K I deal in deal in facts.
Here is their agenda in their own words. I disagree with it:
KOCH GAME PLAN
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma that they learned from their anti American government bigot father.
They hate the American government.
If you support them, then you are a traitor too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Thom please ask him about guns. GUNS and BERNIE
Bernie is far from perfect on guns
Sanders’ vote for a different kind of pro-gun bill is more puzzling—and profoundly disturbing. In 2005, a Republican-dominated Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law doesn’t protect gun owners; it protects gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers. The PLCAA was the No. 1 legislative priority of the National Rifle Association for years, because it shields gun makers and dealers from most liability when their firearms are used criminally. It is one of the most noxious pieces of pro-gun legislation ever passed. And Bernie Sanders voted for it. (Sanders’ campaign has not replied to a request for comment.)
Because the PLCAA deals with tort law—not a topic of great interest for most Americans—it didn’t stir much outrage when first passed. But the act’s primary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded. Every state imposes liability on manufacturers who are negligent in their production and sale of products. If I crash my Prius because its accelerator malfunctions, I can sue Toyota for negligently manufacturing a faulty pedal. If my child dismembers himself with a blender at Sears, I can sue Sears for negligently leaving that blender within a child’s reach. If I get stabbed by a teenager with a switchblade, I might be able to sue the pawn shop owner who illegally sold a knife to a minor.
Before the PLCAA, most states imposed some form of tort liability on gun makers and sellers. If a gun manufacturer made an assault rifle that could slaughter dozens of people in a few seconds, for instance, one of its victims might sue the company for negligently making a gun that could foreseeably be used for mass murder. If a gun seller sold a gun to a customer without performing any kind of background check—and then the buyer opened fire on the subway—his victims might sue that seller for negligently providing a gun to a mentally unstable person. The standards in each state differed, but the bottom line remained the same: Victims of gun violence and their families could recover financially from the people and companies who negligently enabled gun violence.
The PLCAA changed all that. Remarkably, the act wiped out gun liability laws in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a handful of narrow exceptions. (So much for states’ rights.) Thanks to the law, victims of mass shootings are barred from suing the companies that produced a wartime weapon that no civilian could ever need. With few exceptions, victims cannot sue a gun seller for negligently providing a semiautomatic weapon to a lunatic who shoots them in a movie theater. Even if a jury decides a gun maker or seller should be liable, the PLCAA invalidates its verdict. The law tramples upon states’ rights, juries’ rights, and fundamental precepts of America’s civil justice system. And it received Bernie Sanders’ support—in both 2003 (when it was first introduced) and 2005 (when it finally passed).
Every few years, the families of mass shooting victims take gun makers to court for creating a weapon seemingly designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. Every time, they run headfirst into the PLCAA. Right now, the families of Sandy Hook victims are searching for a loophole in the law, so they can sue Bushmaster for making the gun that sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds. They will probably fail.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Me The People Perspectives Nope that is not the reason. The K0CH plan is the reason. The K0CHservatives hate government. They do not believe that gov should be involved in anything except security forces and the military.
They believe all of America should be sold to the highest bidder.
KOCH GAME PLAN
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics. It is a manifesto on privatization.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Logan Act:
Passed under the administration of President John Adams, during tension between the U.S. and France, it was informally named for Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, a state legislator (and later US Senator) and pacifist who in 1798 engaged in semi-negotiations with France during the Quasi-War.
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not. The Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MultiFisherofmen your god is the number 1 abortionist of all time.
Your God Is Not Pro Life
You might find that statement surprising, but I know this from your own holy book. Despite what you may have been told, the Bible is not a pro-life document. It is, in many parts, pro-death. In one of the first stories in the Bible, God murders millions of people through a global flood — including born and unborn children. Unborn children — the ones you fight for. God only wanted to get rid of them.
Later in your holy book God commands the death of nation after nation because they happen to inhabit the land he plans to give the Israelites
(Josh 7-9). He commands Israel to kill women and children (1 Sam 15).
When he wanted to make a point to the Egyptians, he murdered all the firstborn sons of Egypt. Innocent children. And when King David killed a man and slept with his wife, God punished him by killing his unborn child.
This same God does nothing while billions of people throughout
history have been starved, drowned, raped and murdered. He sits on the sidelines and watches.
That is not a God who is pro-life!
On top of all that, at least 25% of all pregnancies end in “natural” abortion — which you believe your God either designed or actively performed — an act you consider murder.
No, your God is not pro-life. By your own standards, he is a murderer — the most prolific abortionist of all time.
So don’t tell us you base your morality on the Bible or on the character of God. Don’t tell us you’re sent from your God to protect the lives of the innocent. Despite what your pastor says, your God is not pro-life. He has been killing, maiming, and letting people suffer for ages. You’re pro-life because, like most humans, you value human life.
1
-
1
-
cooper wilcox SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
In the country I live in (Canada) we do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
John Hood How about you read your own cult handbook with some comprehension.
Here you go:
Murder, rape, and pillage at Jabesh-gilead (Judges 21:10-24 NLT)
So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. "This is what you are to do," they said. "Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin." Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan.
The Israelite assembly sent a peace delegation to the little remnant of Benjamin who were living at the rock of Rimmon. Then the men of Benjamin returned to their homes, and the four hundred women of Jabesh-gilead who were spared were given to them as wives. But there were not enough women for all of them. The people felt sorry for Benjamin because the LORD had left this gap in the tribes of Israel. So the Israelite leaders asked, "How can we find wives for the few who remain, since all the women of the tribe of Benjamin are dead? There must be heirs for the survivors so that an entire tribe of Israel will not be lost forever. But we cannot give them our own daughters in marriage because we have sworn with a solemn oath that anyone who does this will fall under God's curse."
Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem. They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, "Go and hide in the vineyards. When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife! And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, 'Please be understanding. Let them have your daughters, for we didn't find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'" So the men of Benjamin did as they were told. They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance. Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them. So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes.
Obviously these women were repeatedly raped. These sick bastards killed and raped an entire town and then wanted more virgins, so they hid beside the road to kidnap and rape some more. How can anyone see this as anything but evil?
2) Murder, rape and pillage of the Midianites (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)
They attacked Midian just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men. All five of the Midianite kings – Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba – died in the battle. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder. They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived. After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, across from Jericho.
Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. "Why have you let all the women live?" he demanded. "These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.
Clearly Moses and God approves of rape of virgins.
3) More Murder Rape and Pillage (Deuteronomy 20:10-14)
As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.
What kind of God approves of murder, rape, and slavery?
4) Laws of Rape (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
What kind of lunatic would make a rape victim marry her attacker? Answer: God.
5) Death to the Rape Victim (Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB)
If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.
It is clear that God doesn't give a damn about the rape victim. He is only concerned about the violation of another mans "property".
6) David's Punishment - Polygamy, Rape, Baby Killing, and God's "Forgiveness" (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB)
Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'
Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die." [The child dies seven days later.]
This has got to be one of the sickest quotes of the Bible. God himself brings the completely innocent rape victims to the rapist. What kind of pathetic loser would do something so evil? And then he kills a child! This is sick, really sick!
7) Rape of Female Captives (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)
"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."
Once again God approves of forcible rape.
8) Rape and the Spoils of War (Judges 5:30 NAB)
They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil. (Judges 5:30 NAB)
9) Sex Slaves (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
10) God Assists Rape and Plunder (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)
Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Space Ghost You made the charge against BLM and now have nothing? Wow.
You keep making unsubstantiated charges about issues.
QUOTE on the Henderson issue:"BLM officials say they understand local residents’ concerns. But, referencing a series of court opinions, the agency says the land in question belongs neither to Texas nor Oklahoma, regardless of who has used it. The lands "were at no time held in private ownership," said Paul McGuire, an agency spokesman. He noted that the agency was not a party in any of the past litigation. Henderson, who does not stand to lose any acreage under the BLM’s plan, plans to give a tour Monday of the boundary to a group of local lawmakers and officials, including Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst.
The officials will hear a story that starts with the Louisiana Purchase, which gave the U.S. a huge swath of land including parts of North Texas. In the 1819 Adams-Onís Treaty between the U.S. and Spain, the U.S. gained all lands north of what the Spanish called the Rio Roxo."
http://www.texastribune.org/2014/04/28/blurred-lines-texas-blm-spat-has-complicated-histo/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** PARTIES ARE NOT THE SAME
May 27, 2015 12:35 PM
The Tired Old “Both Sides Getting More Extreme” Meme
By Ed Kilgore
In my recent book and elsewhere, I’ve noted that the meta-narrative Republicans were promoting—and much of the MSM was echoing—during the 2014 midterms was that the Great Big Moderate Adults of the GOP had gotten the crazy extremist Tea People under control, and were ready to govern in a serious way that Serious People could appreciate. An important sub-narrative to the completely phony Republican Shift to the Center was that Democrats were moving to the left so fast that they’d probably start singing the Internationale at party events before long.
A lot of people who don’t completely buy the GOP Shift to the Center are happy to promote the false equivalency classic of Everybody’s Polarizing at Exactly the Same Pace. But there’s one species of observers who are deeply invested in the Democratic Lurch to the Left meme: Republican “moderates” who spend a fair amount of time criticizing their zany brethren and need an excuse to reassume the Party Yoke when elections come around.
Peter Wehner is one such person, and so he pens the classic so’s-your-old-man-and-actually-maybe-your-old-man’s-worse op-ed for the New York Times. Ignoring the fact that most actual lefty Democrats think Barack Obama is too much like Bill Clinton, Wehner’s case almost entirely depends on contrasting the noble centrist Big Dog (who, of course, conservatives denounced as a godless socialist when he was actually in office) with the left-bent Obama.
And it’s a really terrible argument. Exhibit one for Wehner involves Clinton’s support for three-strikes-and-you’re-out and 100,000 cops, as though they are the same thing, with Eric Holder’s de-incarceration commitment. Keep up, Pete: Clinton, along with two-thirds of the Republican presidential field, has called for a reversal of “mass incarceration” policies. It’s not an ideological move in either direction so much as a rare and belated bipartisan recognition of what does and doesn’t work.
Exhibit two is welfare reform, and aside from ignoring everything Clinton did on low-income economic policy other than signing the 1996 welfare law, Wehner blandly accepts the race-drenched lie—and he’s smart enough to know that it is indeed widely interpreted to be a lie—from the 2012 Romney campaign that Obama has “loosened welfare-to-work requirements.” Then he tries to pivot to a contrast of Clinton’s shutdown of the “welfare entitlement” with Obama’s creation of a health care entitlement—without noting that Clinton had a health care proposal that was distinctly more “liberal” than Obama’s. Pretty big omission, I’d say.
It gets worse. Wehner suggests that unlike Clinton Obama wants to boost taxes on the wealthy, which conveniently ignores Clinton’s first budget. Speaking of the budget, Obama’s fiscal record is contrasted with Clinton’s without noting that Obama inherited not only a huge deficit but the worst economy since the 1930s. Wehner makes a fact-free assertion that Obama isn’t as friendly towards U.S. allies as Clinton was. And in a telling maneuver, he suddenly shifts the contrast from Clinton-versus-Obama to Clinton-versus-Clinton in mentioning the dispute over the Trans-Pacific Partnership, where HRC has been “non-committal.” Well, the crazy lefty Barack Obama hasn’t been “non-committal,” has he? Yes, a majority of congressional Democrats oppose him on TPP. But a majority of congressional Democrats also opposed Clinton on NAFTA and GATT, and denied him “fast-track” trade negotiating authority. Plus ca change….
Nonetheless, Wehner stumbles on to his pre-fab conclusion:
The Democratic Party is now a pre-Bill Clinton party, the result of Mr. Obama’s own ideological predilections and the coalition he has built.
In the very next breath he acknowledges that on the one issue where the Democratic Party really has “moved to the left,” same-sex marriage, the country has moved with it (and the “pre-Bill Clinton” Democratic Party had to move as well). And then he leaps to the circular argument that Republicans must be better representing the “center” of public opinion, because they’re doing so well in midterms!
Well, Pete, guess you have to take the position that makes it possible for you to spend so much time calling out the crazy people of your party. But the facts are not friendly to your argument.
Ed Kilgore edits the Political Animal blog and is a contributing writer to the Washington Monthly. He is managing editor for the Democratic Strategist, a weekly columnist at Talking Points Memo, and the author of Election 2014: Why Republicans Swept the Midterms, recently published by the University of Pennsylvania Press
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_05/the_tired_old_both_sides_getti055757.php
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
caleb mclarty
Crazy Rand Paul.
http://www.politicalruminations.com/rand-paul-quotes/
and:
1. Government shouldn't require private businesses to serve customers of all races
"I don’t like the idea of telling private business owners — I abhor racism. I think it’s a bad business decision to exclude anybody from your restaurant — but, at the same time, I do believe in private ownership."
—Interview with Louisville Courier-Journal, April 25, 2010
2. The U.S. is secretly planning a European Union-style merger with Mexico and Canada
"I saw the YouTube of [former Mexican president] Vincente Fox talking about [the single North American currency] the Amero. So, it's not a secret. Now it may not be [here] tomorrow, but it took 'em 20 or 30 years to get the Euro, and they had to push people kicking and screaming.... But I guarantee you it's one of their long term goals to have one sort of borderless, mass continent."
—Ron Paul campaign event, Bozeman, MT, 2008
3. A nuclear Iran isn't necessarily a threat
"Our national security is not threatened by Iran having one nuclear weapon."
—Ron Paul rally, Burlington, VT, October 2007
4. Rein in Medicare — but not Medicare's payments to doctors (presumably including Rand Paul, a practicing optometrist who says half his patients are on Medicare)
"Medicare is socialized medicine," and one way to control medical costs would be to impose a $2,000 deductible in the program. "But try selling that one in an election."
—Comments in Lexington, KY, June 2009
5. Mountaintop coal mining is good for real estate values
"I think whoever owns the property can do with the property as they wish, and if the coal company buys it from a private property owner and they want to do it, fine. The other thing is that I think coal gets a bad name, because apparently a lot of the land is desirable once it gets flattened out... I don’t think anyone’s going to be missing a hill or two here and there. Some people like the flat land, and some of it apparently has become rather valuable when it’s become flattened."
—TV interview, October 2009
and:
"What I don't like from the president's administration is this sort of, 'I'll put my boot heel on the throat of BP.' I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. I've heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think it's part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it's always got to be someone's fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen." —Kentucky GOP Senate candidate Rand Paul, May 21, 2010
"I don't want to be associated with those people, but I also don't want to limit their speech in any way in the sense that we tolerate boorish and uncivilized behavior because that’s one of the things freedom requires is that we allow people to be boorish and uncivilized, but that doesn't mean we approve of it." —Rand Paul, taking issue with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 while arguing that government should not prevent private businesses from discriminating on the basis of race, interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, May 21, 2010
I know bagger talibanista it is so hard when the gotcha liberal media quotes a mans own statements.
And we know from your previous comments that you do not have time to actually know what the crazy Paul says.
On the other hand you may be a traitorous idiot just like him and agree with his antiAmerican idiocy.
1
-
1
-
Robbie Hill Wow. You really are more uninformed than I thought.
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
WrongAsAShit CHRISTIAN TERROR
The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), also known as the Lord's Resistance Movement, is a militant movement which is "Christianist, stated goals include ruling according to the Ten Commandments northern Uganda and South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, and in 2007 it was reported that it was in Central African Republic.
The LRA has been accused of widespread human rights violations, including murder, abduction, mutilation,child-sex slavery, and forcing children to participate in hostilities.
And that's not including things like the neo-nazi movements across Europe who have, for example, attacked 12 mosques in Sweden for their ideology.
There is something fundamentaly wrong in the world and it's leading people to ever more extreme dogmas.?
1
-
WrongAsAShit Christians are “brutally repressive. Christianity is a comprehensive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine, especially bad for women, for homosexuals, for Jews, other minority, religious faiths, well, pretty much just about for all human beings, actually.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Brandon Lyons Nonsense Ayn,
Why Libertarianism is BS
1. It's impossible. Libertarianism is impossible except for survivalist nutters and hermits. Humans need a social structure because we're a social species. Trusting that humans can moderate their own behavior on their own is just a fantasy. If we were as sparsely distributed as wolf packs, we could get along in our small groups without intervention from a higher authority in theory.... but the matriarch or patriarch would be the higher authority so even that isn't strictly libertarian. Anyway, we're long past the point in evolution where we could manage our behavior without a formal structure. Michael Shermer theorizes the optimal size for a human community to manage without any oversight is about 150. Those days are gone.
2. It's naive. It assumes people are basically good. This is a nice thought, and a refreshing break from the Christian belief that all people are sinners who need to be saved, but it's just plain wrong. Just as we differ in our DNA we differ in our personalities. Some of us will go through life making very few decisions that negatively impact others, and some of us are sociopaths. At its best, government protects the truly good from the sociopaths. Without a government, we would be reduced to lynch mobs which can only avenge bad deeds, not prevent them. And we certainly wouldn't have something like the FBI, which can trace the path of a serial killer from one area to the next based on DNA evidence, etc. I think the people who believe that "survival of the fittest ergo libertarianism" probably assume they are the fittest themselves. They don't think that they would be the victims of a sociopath. Bernie Madoff counted on this kind of hubris to make his illegal millions.
3. It's cold-hearted. For example, regulations about safety in cars aren't needed because over time car companies would be forced to make safer cars or they'd go out of business. So the people who died in fires caused by exploding gas tanks in Ford Pintos, or in wrecks caused by the design of their Corvair were just collateral damage in the evolution of better cars. People who died because of unregulated businesses did nothing to deserve that fate, except perhaps not be able to afford better cars. And the pseudo-Darwinism of libertarianism really doesn't care what the strong do to the weak. Rich and powerful people are good and deserve to be rich and powerful. The poor and powerless deserve what they get.
4. It ignores history. We haven't always had a U.S. government. It's only a little more than 200 years old. But we do know earlier forms of society. We've had monarchies. We've had theocracies. We had the ancient Roman & Greek systems that privileged people with money. Modern democracy certainly has its failings, but we really be better off returning to "less" government considering what our previous systems gave us?
5. It's not natural. The underlying assumption of libertarianism is that government is an artificial construct that interferes with natural behavior, which they believe works just fine on its own. There's no evidence that humanity could have survived without some form of social organization. The instinct for survival that causes some to climb to the top of the heap and others to hide from the climbers just doesn't result in a society that works for large numbers. It probably won't work for small numbers, either.
6. It ignores human failings. We no longer live in family groups in tiny villages, and if Libertarianism became the "law" of the land, we would pretty much have to go back to that. In our distant past, we helped each other within our own group and competed against other groups for resources. Surviving without a government would require all of us to gather into small groups for protection and predation. Child abuse and spousal abuse would again be perpetrated with no recourse. Victims of alcoholism or mental illness would have no access to services, and their families would suffer. A small group's only hope of survival when "infected" with a defective member would be to ostracize that member.
7. It ignores human compassion. Libertarianism denies the instinct to help others, which has been shown in other species as well. Government taking a role in "lifting up" the poor is an extension of the instinct we would follow individually in a smaller group. By blaming the victim, libertarians can imagine themselves the agents of their own good luck. There's no place in their worldview for helping the blind, the deaf, the physically impaired, or the children of these people. The mentally ill who are incapable of working for a living due to their illness? *shrug* At least religions have charities that make a dent in these issues. Secular libertarians leave the powerless to their own devices as if blindness or mental illness were somehow the victim's own fault. There have been hundreds if not thousands of examples of other animals helping each other or even other species, so compassion seems to be instinctual. I have yet to meet a libertarian who has a relative that needs help to survive. If I had the power to curse people, I'd curse libertarians with multiple sclerosis. Let's see how many ways they make use of the ADA law's provisions.
8. It ignores Somalia. Somalia is the perfect example of libertarianism in action. There's basically no government in Somalia so we can see what would happen. Without a government, pirates and tribal groups terrorize others. Women and children are mistreated. Disease is rampant. There's no viable business other than crime. It's a chaotic mess. Why would anyone want to copy that model?
9. It's selfish. On the surface, a libertarian saying that he doesn't know what's best for someone else seems humble and charitable. But really, sometimes he would know what's best. He would know that a woman being beaten on a daily basis by an abusive husband would be better off if she could get out of that situation. He would know that someone with asthma would be better off in a world with less air pollution. His pseudo-humility covers up a basic unwillingness to get involved. Or, he's got his head in the sand when it comes to the problems of society and of individuals that are just too big or complicated for a family or small group to help with.
10. It's provincial. It ignores the fact that the economies and societies of all the world's nations are now interconnected. If someone lives in the country with well water, septic tank and a burn pit for their garbage, they can fantasize they are not relying on the government. But then when their four-year-old comes down with cancer, they're only too happy to take him to the big city hospital for chemo that was studied using federal funding.
So... I call BS on libertarianism. It's a stupid position to take. Even if it could be implemented it couldn't succeed. Its thinly veiled social "Darwinism" but without any of the nuance of true evolutionary theory.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
yaniczka
Well you have bought the propaganda hook line and sinker.
Here are 2 examples of the wonderful world of christianity:
CHRISTIAN TERROR.
You ever heard of the Bosnian War? It's this little thing that went down back in the early 90s. Bosnian Serbs (Christians) went about on an ethnic cleansing campaign in which tens of thousands of Muslims were systematically raped, tortured, and murdered. They did it in the name of Christianity. Evangelical Christians in several African countries have made headlines in recent years for butchering homosexuals and people who refused to convert to their religion. Don't try to claim that Christians do not commit atrocities in the name of their religion.
Or how about Argentina:
"As many people as is necessary will die in Argentina," Videla told the region's army commanders, gathered in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1975, "to protect the hemisphere from the international communist conspiracy." He was true to his word. Months later, on 24 March 1976, the armed forces overthrew the inept and chaotic government of María Estela Martínez ("Isabelita"), the widow of Juan Domingo Perón.
They installed a ferocious military regime. During the next six years, it murdered up to 30,000 people in the name of "national reorganization" and western, CHRISTIAN civilization.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter
Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 to answer a letter from them, asking why he would not proclaim national days of fasting and thanksiving, as had been done by Washington and Adams before him. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which lead to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state."
The letter was the subject of intense scrutiny by Jefferson, and he consulted a couple of New England politicians to assure that his words would not offend while still conveying his message: it was not the place of the Congress or the Executive to do anything that might be misconstrued as the establishment of religion.
Note: The bracketed section in the second paragraph had been blocked off for deletion, though it was not actually deleted in his draft of the letter. It is included here for completeness. Reflecting upon Jefferson's knowledge that his letter was far from a mere personal correspondence, he deleted the block, he says in the margin, to avoid offending members of his party in the eastern states.
This letter is also presented online at Library of Congress, and reflects Jefferson's spelling and punctuation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem & approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful & zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more & more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.
(signed)
Th Jefferson
Jan.1.1802
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
modelmajorpita I disagree.
Try this instead of sending people to a site that promotes giving money to the private schools and sucking public education dry.
I have to wonder if that is your intent since you are still calling it a useful link.
This:
Taxpayers Funding Creationism In Schools Across The Country
Politico has found that taxpayers in 14 states are paying a billion dollars this year in school tuition's and hundreds of them are religious which teach that evolution is a fraud while science is a form of hocus-pocus nonsense.
Taxpayers in 14 states will bankroll nearly $1 billion this year in tuition for private schools, including hundreds of religious schools that teach Earth is less than 10,000 years old, Adam and Eve strolled the garden with dinosaurs, and much of modern biology, geology and cosmology is a web of lies.
Now a major push to expand these voucher programs is under way from Alaska to New York, a development that seems certain to sharply increase the investment.
Public debate about science education tends to center on bills like one in Missouri, which would allow public school parents to pull their kids from science class whenever the topic of evolution comes up. But the more striking shift in public policy has flown largely under the radar, as a well-funded political campaign has pushed to open the spigot for tax dollars to flow to private schools. Among them are Bible-based schools that train students to reject and rebut the cornerstones of modern science.
When you're dealing with the religious right, no matter how many times the courts shut them down, they always come back with something new to circumvent the rules. And as much as they attack the government for overreaching, they certainly squeeze out oodles of cash for their own causes.
Decades of litigation have established that public schools cannot teach creationism or intelligent design. But private schools receiving public subsidies can — and do. A POLITICO review of hundreds of pages of course outlines, textbooks and school websites found that many of these faith-based schools go beyond teaching the biblical story of the six days of creation as literal fact.
Their course materials nurture disdain of the secular world, distrust of momentous discoveries and hostility toward mainstream scientists. They often distort basic facts about the scientific method — teaching, for instance, that theories such as evolution are by definition highly speculative because they haven’t been elevated to the status of “scientific law.”And this approach isn’t confined to high school biology class; it is typically threaded through all grades and all subjects.
One set of books popular in Christian schools calls evolution “a wicked and vain philosophy.” Another derides “modern math theorists” who fail to view mathematics as absolute laws ordained by God. The publisher notes that its textbooks shun “modern” breakthroughs — even those, like set theory, developed back in the 19th century. Math teachers often set aside time each week — even in geometry and algebra — to explore numbers in the Bible. Students learn vocabulary with sentences like, “Many scientists today are Creationists."
The lies they tell their children is mind boggling.
If only these people worked half as hard to try and fix the real problems of our country and stop buying into Conservative economic principles that only support the phony "job creators" meme, we'd be so much better off.
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/03/us-taxpayers-funding-creationism-schools
1
-
modelmajorpita
Or this:
Privatization Voucher ripoff for Taliban
Taxpayers are helping to pay for courses and textbooks that encourage students to mistrust science, mathematics, and the secular world itself – and those efforts seem likely to expand into other states.
Currently, taxpayers in 14 states funnel nearly $1 billion in private school tuition through voucher programs, paying those schools to teach children that Adam and Eve lived alongside dinosaurs less than 10,000 years ago in the Garden of Eden.
Politico reviewed hundreds of pages of course outlines, textbooks, and school website and reported Monday that many of these taxpayer-funded, faith-based schools portray science and mathematics as a web of lies.
Textbooks popular in Christian schools describe evolution as “a wicked and vain philosophy,” while students practice vocabulary lessons that claim “many scientists today are creationists.”
According to the report, schools often distort basic facts about the scientific method, set aside time during math lessons to explore numbers in the Bible, or teach that mathematics laws were ordained by God.
The schools make clear that religious instruction is a higher priority than academic learning, which students are taught to mistrust.
“Our understanding is not complete until we filter it through God’s Word,” one school assures parents.
Lawmakers in 26 states are considering new voucher programs or expanding existing ones, and eight states are looking at establishing individual bank accounts funded by taxpayers that parents could spend on tuition, tutors, and textbooks.
About 250,000 students use vouchers and tax-credit scholarships, up about 30 percent since 2010.
Voucher proponents see a tipping point approaching, when so many students receive publicly financed private education that all states will demand that option.
But critics say the growth of anti-science education, especially as scientists have made recent advances in our understanding of the universe and its origins, is preparing students “for the turn of the 19th Century.”
Not all religious schools teach creationism, but science education activists have identified 300 such schools that also receive public subsidies.
But that’s likely a significant undercount, because the database does not include Pennsylvania or Iowa, and many church-based schools don’t have websites that advertise their curriculum.
Voucher programs also undermine the bipartisan push for uniformly high academic standards through Common Core, which has been the target of Tea Party ire in states across the country, and Next Generation Science Standards, opponents say.
Voucher supporters have knocked out anti-voucher candidates from primary races and funded local advocacy groups, often with backing from the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity.
The conservative advocacy group promoted private school subsidies in 10 states – including Maine, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin – in the last year alone and has spent $18 million on such campaigns since 2007.
With sympathetic lawmakers in place, school voucher funding looks to expand in states such as Arizona, Florida, and New York – and at the federal level.
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) proposed the consolidation of dozens of federal education programs into one $24 billion fund that states could allocate as vouchers for low-income students, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) has promoted vouchers and other so-called school choice measures.
The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld voucher programs, even when they subsidize religious education, as long as parents who accept vouchers can choose where to spend them.
But some state constitutions are more restrictive, and the American Civil Liberties Union is suing to block them in New Hampshire and Colorado, and litigation is also under way in Alabama.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/03/24/report-1-billion-in-taxpayer-money-went-to-anti-science-private-schools-last-year/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Melissa Vasquez LIES OF STATE SOVEREIGNTY
Far from Libertarian assertions that the Founders wanted a weak central government, the Founders – at least those at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia – understood that a great danger came from having a national authority that was too weak, what they had experienced under the Articles of Confederation, which governed the nation from 1777 to 1787.
The Articles of Confederation embraced the concept of state “sovereignty” and called the United States not a government or even a nation, but “a firm league of friendship” among the states. The Confederation’s Article II declared: “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated.” And very few powers were delegated to the federal government.
The result had been severe problems for the young country, ranging from the failure of states to make voluntary contributions in support of the Continental Army to opening regional divisions that foreign rivals could exploit.
So, in 1787, the framers of the Constitution – led by Gen. George Washington, James Madison and others in the Virginia delegation – scrapped the Articles and put forward a very different plan, eliminating state sovereignty and creating a strong central government with broad powers, including control over “interstate commerce.”
The Commerce Clause wasn’t some afterthought, either. It was part of the original proposal outlined on the Constitutional Convention’s first day of substantive business on May 29, 1787. The Virginia delegation had one of its members, Edmund Randolph, include it in his opening presentation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
+Barbara B
PARTIES NOT THE SAME
Another MYTH.. Both parties are the same... Never have they been more different in my 60+ years nor have they been the same historically, from support for unions, safe working conditions, min wage, overtime, equal pay, child labor laws, weekends, civil rights, anti-monopoly/trust laws, Medicare, Soc. Sec., progressive taxes favored by DEMs/founding fathers, zero tax rates for the rich favored by repubs=>permanent aristocracy, unemployment compensation, education, voter suppression vs. voting rights laws, infrastructure, HS rail, green energy, clean air and water acts, regulating Wall street or fixing our failed healthcare system..
Repubs are clearly for 1/3 of one percent, that are sociopaths with their SERF wantabe's.
DEMs may not make big enough changes, but then they like the rest of the country have an anchor around their neck..Republicans and the 59% who dont bother to vote.
DEMs were against the "corporations are people" ruling, for gay rights, NOT REPUBS.
DEMs Pro Choice, not repubs.
Repubs are against facts, science and history!
Heck, Repubs are now for a theocracy!
REPUBES are for Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas
DEMS are not.
Can you imagine a Supreme court packed with more Repub judges?
Anyone saying that they are the same, speaks in complete ignorance.
THEY are NOT THE SAME!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Roger Diogo No idiot Nazis were not left wing. Nice try moron.
Did Hitler and the Nazis really take away Germans' guns, making the Holocaust unavoidable? This argument is superficially true at best, as University of Chicago law professor Bernard Harcourt explained in a 2004 paper (PDF http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/67-harcourt.pdf ) on Nazi Germany's impact on the American culture wars. As World War I drew to a close, the new Weimar Republic government banned nearly all private gun ownership to comply with the Treaty of Versailles and mandated that all guns and ammunition "be surrendered immediately." The law was loosened in 1928, and gun permits were granted to citizens "of undoubted reliability" (in the law's words) but not "persons who are itinerant like Gypsies." In 1938, under Nazi rule, gun laws became significantly more relaxed. Rifle and shotgun possession were deregulated, and gun access for hunters, Nazi Party members, and government officials was expanded. The legal age to own a gun was lowered. Jews, however, were prohibited from owning firearms and other dangerous weapons.
"But guns didn't play a particularly important part in any event," says Robert Spitzer, who chairs SUNY-Cortland's political science department and has extensively researched gun control politics. Gun ownership in Germany after World War I, even among Nazi Party members, was never widespread enough for a serious civilian resistance to the Nazis to have been anything more than a Tarantino revenge fantasy. If Jews had been better armed, Spitzer says, it would only have hastened their demise. Gun policy "wasn't the defining moment that marked the beginning of the end for Jewish people in Germany. It was because they were persecuted, were deprived of all of their rights, and they were a minority group."
Gun enthusiasts often mention that the Soviet Union restricted access to guns in 1929 after Joseph Stalin rose to power. But to suggest that a better armed Russian populace would have overthrown the Bolsheviks is also too simplistic, says Spitzer. "To answer the question of the relationship between guns and the revolutions in those nations is to study the comparative politics and comparative history of those nations," he explains. "It takes some analysis to break this down and explain it, and that's often not amenable to a sound bite or a headline."
(Ironically, pro-gun white nationalists have tried to stand the "Hitler took the guns" idea on its head by arguing that he was in fact a staunch supporter of the right to bear arms—for Aryans. William Pierce, author of the race war fantasy The Turner Diaries, made this claim in his book Gun Control in Germany, 1928-1945. So who's behind the effort to paint Hitler as anti-gun? The Jews, of course.)
Even if President Obama suddenly unleashes his inner totalitarian, there's no chance he could successfully round up all of America's 300 million-plus firearms. Such an idea is practically and politically impossible. A tough assault weapons ban like one Democrats are currently proposing would affect just a fraction of the total privately owned firearms in the country. Yet by invoking the historical threat of disarmament, Spitzer says, "the gun lobby has worked to throw a scare into gun owners in order to rally them to the side of the NRA."
1
-
Roger Diogo
Hitler Gun Control Lie
People were shocked when the Drudge Report posted a giant picture of Hitler over a headline speculating that the White House will proceed with executive orders to limit access to firearms. The proposed orders are exceedingly tame, but Drudge’s reaction is actually a common conservative response to any invocation of gun control.
The NRA, Fox News, Fox News (again), Alex Jones, email chains, Joe “the Plumber” Wurzelbacher, Gun Owners of America, etc., all agree that gun control was critical to Hitler’s rise to power. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (“America’s most aggressive defender of firearms ownership”) is built almost exclusively around this notion, popularizing posters of Hitler giving the Nazi salute next to the text: “All in favor of ‘gun control’ raise your right hand.”
In his 1994 book, NRA head Wayne LaPierre dwelled on the Hitler meme at length, writing: “In Germany, Jewish extermination began with the Nazi Weapon Law of 1938, signed by Adolf Hitler.”
And it makes a certain amount of intuitive sense: If you’re going to impose a brutal authoritarian regime on your populace, better to disarm them first so they can’t fight back.
Unfortunately for LaPierre et al., the notion that Hitler confiscated everyone’s guns is mostly bogus. And the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute.
University of Chicago law professor Bernard Harcourt explored this myth in depth in a 2004 article published in the Fordham Law Review. As it turns out, the Weimar Republic, the German government that immediately preceded Hitler’s, actually had tougher gun laws than the Nazi regime. After its defeat in World War I, and agreeing to the harsh surrender terms laid out in the Treaty of Versailles, the German legislature in 1919 passed a law that effectively banned all private firearm possession, leading the government to confiscate guns already in circulation. In 1928, the Reichstag relaxed the regulation a bit, but put in place a strict registration regime that required citizens to acquire separate permits to own guns, sell them or carry them.
The 1938 law signed by Hitler that LaPierre mentions in his book basically does the opposite of what he says it did. “The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition,” Harcourt wrote. Meanwhile, many more categories of people, including Nazi party members, were exempted from gun ownership regulations altogether, while the legal age of purchase was lowered from 20 to 18, and permit lengths were extended from one year to three years.
The law did prohibit Jews and other persecuted classes from owning guns, but this should not be an indictment of gun control in general. Does the fact that Nazis forced Jews into horrendous ghettos indict urban planning? Should we eliminate all police officers because the Nazis used police officers to oppress and kill the Jews? What about public works — Hitler loved public works projects? Of course not. These are merely implements that can be used for good or ill, much as gun advocates like to argue about guns themselves. If guns don’t kill people, then neither does gun control cause genocide (genocidal regimes cause genocide).
Besides, Omer Bartov, a historian at Brown University who studies the Third Reich, notes that the Jews probably wouldn’t have had much success fighting back. “Just imagine the Jews of Germany exercising the right to bear arms and fighting the SA, SS and the Wehrmacht. The [Russian] Red Army lost 7 million men fighting the Wehrmacht, despite its tanks and planes and artillery. The Jews with pistols and shotguns would have done better?” he told Salon.
Proponents of the theory sometimes point to the 1943 Warsaw Ghetto Uprising as evidence that, as Fox News’ Judge Andrew Napolitano put it, “those able to hold onto their arms and their basic right to self-defense were much more successful in resisting the Nazi genocide.” But as the Tablet’s Michael Moynihan points out, Napolitano’s history (curiously based on a citation of work by French Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson) is a bit off. In reality, only about 20 Germans were killed, while some 13,000 Jews were massacred. The remaining 50,000 who survived were promptly sent off to concentration camps.
Robert Spitzer, a political scientist who studies gun politics and chairs the political science department at SUNY Cortland, told Mother Jones’ Gavin Aronsen that the prohibition on Jewish gun ownership was merely a symptom, not the problem itself. “[It] wasn’t the defining moment that marked the beginning of the end for Jewish people in Germany. It was because they were persecuted, were deprived of all of their rights, and they were a minority group,” he explained.
Meanwhile, much of the Hitler myth is based on an infamous quote falsely attributed to the Fuhrer, which extols the virtue of gun control:
This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!
The quote has been widely reproduced in blog posts and opinion columns about gun control, but it’s “probably a fraud and was likely never uttered,” according to Harcourt. “This quotation, often seen without any date or citation at all, suffers from several credibility problems, the most significant of which is that the date often given [1935] has no correlation with any legislative effort by the Nazis for gun registration, nor would there have been any need for the Nazis to pass such a law, since gun registration laws passed by the Weimar government were already in effect,” researchers at the useful website GunCite note.
“As for Stalin,” Bartov continued, “the very idea of either gun control or the freedom to bear arms would have been absurd to him. His regime used violence on a vast scale, provided arms to thugs of all descriptions, and stripped not guns but any human image from those it declared to be its enemies. And then, when it needed them, as in WWII, it took millions of men out of the Gulags, trained and armed them and sent them to fight Hitler, only to send back the few survivors into the camps if they uttered any criticism of the regime.”
Bartov added that this misreading of history is not only intellectually dishonest, but also dangerous. “I happen to have been a combat soldier and officer in the Israeli Defense Forces and I know what these assault rifles can do,” he said in an email.
He continued: “Their assertion that they need these guns to protect themselves from the government — as supposedly the Jews would have done against the Hitler regime — means not only that they are innocent of any knowledge and understanding of the past, but also that they are consciously or not imbued with the type of fascist or Bolshevik thinking that they can turn against a democratically elected government, indeed turn their guns on it, just because they don’t like its policies, its ideology, or the color, race and origin of its leaders.”
Alex Seitz-Wald
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
PREEST P LOL moron. The figures include 9/11. White right wing christians are the real threat to America.
RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS
A report published by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy on Jan. 15 discusses the potential dangers of “violent far-right” organizations, which has angered some conservatives that believe the military should focus on international threats.
The executive summary of the paper, “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” claims that “since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self- identify with the far-right of American politics.”
Written by Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, the paper asserts that three distinct ideologies exist in the “American violent far right.” Those are “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement,” the last of which “includes mainly Christian Identity groins such as the Aryan Nations.”
“Findings indicate that…it is not only feelings of deprivation that motivate those involved in far right violence, but also the sense of empowerment that emerges when the political system is perceived to be increasingly permissive to far right ideas,” it later reads.
The rise in attacks in the 21st century were significant, as “Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%.”
The study also found that “presidential election years and the preceding year are characterized by an increase of far-right violence,” leading the author to conclude that “in general, far-right groups and individuals are more inclined to engage in violence in a contentious political climate.”
Furthermore, it found that the number of Republicans in the House was positively correlated with an increase in far-right violence, although the causes were not immediately clear. The study posits that it could mean those groups believed those legislators might be “more tolerant of their activities” or possibly that “the high expectations of far-right activists during a conservative legislature” were not “fulfilled.”
Some conservatives object to the report. The Washington Times, The National Review, and World Net Daily all report on critical reactions from the right, according to the Atlantic Wire, with blogger Pamela Geller calling it an “appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat.”
1
-
MrToby9999 CHRISTIAN TERROR.
You ever heard of the Bosnian War? It's this little thing that went down back in the early 90s. Bosnian Serbs (Christians) went about on an ethnic cleansing campaign in which tens of thousands of Muslims were systematically raped, tortured, and murdered. They did it in the name of Christianity. Evangelical Christians in several African countries have made headlines in recent years for butchering homosexuals and people who refused to convert to their religion. Don't try to claim that Christians do not commit atrocities in the name of their religion.
Or how about Argentina:
"As many people as is necessary will die in Argentina," Videla told the region's army commanders, gathered in Montevideo, Uruguay, in 1975, "to protect the hemisphere from the international communist conspiracy." He was true to his word. Months later, on 24 March 1976, the armed forces overthrew the inept and chaotic government of María Estela Martínez ("Isabelita"), the widow of Juan Domingo Perón.
They installed a ferocious military regime. During the next six years, it murdered up to 30,000 people in the name of "national reorganization" and western, CHRISTIAN civilization.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Utter bullshit. We progressives are only 30% of the Dem party. We never had the votes.
Bernie lost for many reasons.
1/ started campaign late
2/ LOST THE PRIMARY DUE TO LACK OF VOTES
Donald Drumpf a man who opened his presidential campaign by calling Mexicans “rapists” bested Mitt Romney’s share of the Latino vote by 8 percentage points. He performed better among black voters than his 2012 predecessor, and he swept four Rust Belt states that President Barack Obama carried twice ? Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin under a harsher economy than we face today. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, which should matter, but does not.
FACTS MIGHT MAKE YOU MAD:
The exit polls provide some clarity: A significant chunk of Obama voters flipped to Drumpf. Drumpf won 10 percent of voters who approve of Obama’s presidency and 23 percent of voters who think the next president should “be more liberal,” according to CNN data. Drumpf significantly outperformed Romney among union households. He did 14 points better than Romney among whites without a college degree, according to The New York Times, and 16 points better among households with less than $30,000 in income. The Drumpf Democrat turns out not to be a myth, but a meaningful constituency that just cost Clinton the presidency.
THANKS BERNIE WHINERS, white women, white men, THE FAILED 4TH ESTATE, reagan type Dems, voter suppression and the lack of a 50 state strategy for the Dems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** Not subscribing to your delusion is not bigoted. LOL
SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
That is all made up just like the religious extremist sheepherders made up the skyfairy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Rubio, Ryan, and every other K0CHsucker right wing freedumb loving libertarian government hating moron wants this for the USA:
KOCHsucker GAME PLAN
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma that they learned from their anti American government bigot father.
Keep this list handy. Pass it on as often as possible.
You're going to need it in the days to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"How to Determine if Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions." Just pick "A" or "B" for each question.
1. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to go to a religious service of my own choosing.
B) Others are allowed to go to religious services of their own choosing.
2. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to marry the person I love legally, even though my religious community blesses my marriage.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.
3. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.
4. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to pray privately.
B) I am not allowed to force others to pray the prayers of my faith publicly.
5. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Being a member of my faith means that I can be bullied without legal recourse.
B) I am no longer allowed to use my faith to bully gay kids with impunity.
6. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to purchase, read or possess religious books or material.
B) Others are allowed to have access books, movies and websites that I do not like.
7. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious group is not allowed equal protection under the establishment clause.
B) My religious group is not allowed to use public funds, buildings and resources as we would like, for whatever purposes we might like.
8. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) Another religious group has been declared the official faith of my country.
B) My own religious group is not given status as the official faith of my country.
9. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) My religious community is not allowed to build a house of worship in my community.
B) A religious community I do not like wants to build a house of worship in my community.
10. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public school science classes are teaching science.
Scoring key:
If you answered "A" to any question, then perhaps your religious liberty is indeed at stake. You and your faith group have every right to now advocate for equal protection under the law. But just remember this one little, constitutional, concept: this means you can fight for your equality -- not your superiority.
If you answered "B" to any question, then not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others. This is the point where I would invite you to refer back to the tenets of your faith, especially the ones about your neighbors.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
redandblackrevolutionary I did. It was short and to the point. The delusion you subscribe to leads to serfdom for everyone but those at the top.
Stefan Molyneux has an interview with Noam Chomsky, where Chomsky clearly defined Anarchism and the problem with Libertarians (American Anarchists). He actually talks about the difference between European style anarchists and American style. He actually says something along the lines... "Libertarians want to abolish the state, which is fine and good but they want the market to dictate things. They're just serving a different master." ...and in my view, Chomsky is right. They're literally trading a state "master" for a plutocratic "master".A Manifesto for Psychopaths
March 5, 2012
http://www.monbiot.com/2012/03/05/a-manifesto-for-psychopaths/
Ayn Rand’s ideas have become the Marxism of the new right.
By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 6th March 2012.
It has a fair claim to be the ugliest philosophy the post-war world has produced. Selfishness, it contends, is good, altruism evil, empathy and compassion are irrational and destructive. The poor deserve to die; the rich deserve unmediated power. It has already been tested, and has failed spectacularly and catastrophically. Yet the belief system constructed by Ayn Rand, who died 30 years ago today, has never been more popular or influential.
Rand was a Russian from a prosperous family who emigrated to the United States. Through her novels (such as Atlas Shrugged) and her non-fiction (such as The Virtue of Selfishness(1)) she explained a philosophy she called Objectivism. This holds that the only moral course is pure self-interest. We owe nothing, she insists, to anyone, even to members of our own families. She described the poor and weak as “refuse” and “parasites”, and excoriated anyone seeking to assist them. Apart from the police, the courts and the armed forces, there should be no role for government: no social security, no public health or education, no public infrastructure or transport, no fire service, no regulations, no income tax.
Atlas Shrugged, published in 1957, depicts a United States crippled by government intervention, in which heroic millionaires struggle against a nation of spongers. The millionaires, whom she portrays as Atlas holding the world aloft, withdraw their labour, with the result that the nation collapses. It is rescued, through unregulated greed and selfishness, by one of the heroic plutocrats, John Galt.
The poor die like flies as a result of government programs and their own sloth and fecklessness. Those who try to help them are gassed. In a notorious passage, she argues that all the passengers in a train filled with poisoned fumes deserved their fate. One, for example, was a teacher who taught children to be team players; one was a mother married to a civil servant, who cared for her children; one was a housewife “who believed that she had the right to elect politicians, of whom she knew nothing”.
Rand’s is the philosophy of the psychopath, a misanthropic fantasy of cruelty, revenge and greed. Yet, as Gary Weiss shows in his new book Ayn Rand Nation, she has become to the new right what Karl Marx once was to the left: a demi-god at the head of a chiliastic cult. Almost one-third of Americans, according to a recent poll, have read Atlas Shrugged, and it now sells hundreds of thousands of copies every year.
Ignoring Rand’s evangelical atheism, the Tea Party movement has taken her to its heart. No rally of theirs is complete without placards reading “Who is John Galt?” and “Rand was right”. Ayn Rand, Weiss argues, provides the unifying ideology which has “distilled vague anger and unhappiness into a sense of purpose.” She is energetically promoted by the broadcasters Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Rick Santelli. She is the guiding spirit of the Republicans in Congress.
Like all philosophies, Objectivism is absorbed second-hand by people who have never read it. I believe it is making itself felt on this side of the Atlantic: in the clamorous new demands to remove the 50p tax band for the very rich, for example, or among the sneering, jeering bloggers who write for the Telegraph and the Spectator, mocking compassion and empathy, attacking efforts to make the world a kinder place.
It is not hard to see why Rand appeals to billionaires. She offers them something that is crucial to every successful political movement: a sense of victimhood. She tells them that they are parasitised by the ungrateful poor and oppressed by intrusive, controlling governments.
It is harder to see what it gives the ordinary teabaggers, who would suffer grievously from a withdrawal of government. But such is the degree of misinformation which saturates this movement and so prevalent in the US is Willy Loman Syndrome (the gulf between reality and expectations) that millions blithely volunteer themselves as billionaires’ doormats. I wonder how many would continue to worship at the shrine of Ayn Rand if they knew that towards the end of her life she signed on for both Medicare and Social Security. She had railed furiously against both programmes, as they represented everything she despised about the intrusive state. Her belief system was no match for the realities of age and ill-health.
But they have a still more powerful reason to reject her philosophy: as Adam Curtis’s documentary showed last year, the most devoted member of her inner circle was Alan Greenspan. Among the essays he wrote for Ayn Rand were those published in a book he co-edited with her called Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal. Here, starkly explained, you’ll find the philosophy he brought into government. There is no need for the regulation of business – even builders or Big Pharma – he argued, as “the ‘greed’ of the businessman or, more appropriately, his profit-seeking … is the unexcelled protector of the consumer.”As for bankers, their need to win the trust of their clients guarantees that they will act with honour and integrity. Unregulated capitalism, he maintains, is a “superlatively moral system”.
Once in government, Greenspan applied his guru’s philosophy to the letter, lobbying to cut taxes for the rich and repeal the laws constraining the banks, refusing to regulate the predatory lending and the derivatives trading which eventually brought the system down. Much of this is already documented, but Weiss shows that in the US Greenspan has successfully airbrushed this history.
Despite the many years he spent at her side, despite his previous admission that it was Rand who persuaded him that “capitalism is not only efficient and practical but also moral,”he mentioned her in his memoirs only to suggest that it was a youthful indiscretion, and this, it seems, is now the official version. Weiss presents powerful evidence that even today Greenspan remains her loyal disciple, having renounced his partial admission of failure to Congress.
Saturated in her philosophy, the new right on both sides of the Atlantic continues to demand the rollback of the state, even as the wreckage of that policy lies all around. The poor go down, the ultra-rich survive and prosper. Ayn Rand would have approved.
www.monbiot.com
References:
1. In the spirit of Rand, I suggest you don’t pay for it, but download it here: http://tfasinternational.org/ila/Ayn_Rand-The_Virtue_of_Selfishness.pdf
2. The just desserts are detailed on page 605 of the 2007 Penguin edition.
3. The gassing and subsequent explosion are explained on page 621.
4. Gary Weiss, 2012. Ayn Rand Nation: The Hidden Struggle
for America’s Soul. St. Martin’s Press, New York.
5. This was a Zogby poll, conducted at the end of 2010, cited by Gary Weiss.
6. To give one of many examples, Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, says that “the reason I got involved in public service,
by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be
Ayn Rand.” This is a little ironic, in view of the fact that Rand abhorred the idea of public service. Quoted by Gary Weiss.
7. http://www.monbiot.com/2006/07/07/willy-loman-syndrome/
8. Gary Weiss, pp61-63.
9. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b011lvb9
10. Ayn Rand, Nathaniel Branden, Alan Greenspan and Robert Hessen (Eds), 1967. Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. Signet, New York.
11. Alan Greenspan, August 1963. The Assault on Integrity. First published in
The Objectivist Newsletter, later in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.
12. As above.
13. From an article by Soma Golden in the New York Times, July 1974, quoted by Gary Weiss.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
karl john Are you saying the word of Cod is not valid?
The 2 books go together.
Karl I am just going to deal with you calling me a liar on the homosexual issue in cult handbook #2.
Here:
Matthew 19:1-8 — Did Jesus say anything about homosexuality? Of course, when asked about marriage, Jesus issued a sweeping condemnation of all sexual relationships outside of the male/female model established in Gen 1:27, which he specifically cited.
Romans 1:18-32 —Though most of the passages deal with the male perspective, for the first time there is a specific mention of female homosexuality. And as the verdict comes in, we discover it too is a depraved condition brought on by a sinful nature.
1Cor 6:9-11—The only passage of scripture that clearly acknowledges former (ex) homosexuals in the church. They are listed along with other ex-sinners who have been changed by the power of Christ. It is certain that Pastor Paul knew there were former homosexuals in his local church and he celebrated their freedom in Christ Jesus. With a completely different tone in comparison to the volume of harsh, negative reaction to the unrepentant homosexuality, scripture here ends with the tremendous hope and goodness of God.
Galatians 5:19 — Many areas that the apostle traveled to take the gospel indeed were very accepting of homosexual practices, yet he did not back away from communicating the sinfulness of such practice. Corinth, Ephesus and Rome as well as other major cities of the ancient world, were all too often cesspools of all forms of sexual immorality. Undeterred, Paul drew from sources familiar to him and forged them with New testament teachings of God’s grace to forgive and cleanse. In the letter to the Galatians, he teaches that the “works [not plurality] of the flesh are manifest. The flesh or sinful human nature is always considered and enemy to God.
Ephesians 5:3-7— Paul repeats his warnings against “uncleaness” to the church at Ephesus.
Colossians 3:5-7 — Paul issues his third warning against “uncleaness” to the church at Colosse. This time he adds instructions on overcoming/controlling the sin. Believers are to mortify or deaden themselves and exercise self control (a fruit of the Spirit) over such actions. Homosexuals claim that denying the free expression of homosexuality is "suppressing one's true self", but scripture clearly instructs that we are hold our bodies in check and refuse it participation in sexual immorality. This passage further emphasizes that no one should expect to escape the “wrath of God” except they repent.
1 Tim 1:10 — the law was not made for the righteous, but for the “lawless and disobedient.” The law (of Moses) encompassed the ceremonial, judicial and moral components of human interaction. Christ neutralized the ceremonial aspects but upheld the judicial and moral aspects, tendered with grace and mercy. Hence, homosexuality remains a sin "worthy of death" but yet qualified for forgiveness through repentance. The phrase Paul uses “defiling themselves with mankind” is another link of homosexual behavior to disobedience and uncompatible to sound or acceptable Christian doctrine.
Titus 1:16 — This is an aggressive attack and exposure of the psychosis of those who are “defiled” and commit “abominations". Again, let us identify the source of the Apostle Paul’s strong condemnation. When one accepts what God has pronounced abominable (by God’s own definition) and rejects the created model which God has pronounced good, a process of hardening and mental perversion begins to take root in the mind. Such is the danger of justifying sin. Sin corrupts the mind and conscience (the seat of individual integrity and morality) rendering it incapable of making spiritually sound decisions.
Jude 1:4,7,19 — Jude forcefully revealed that like the Sodomites, certain men in the church had gone after “strange flesh.” I believed Jude was describing contemporary "gay christians". His choice of phraseology is a combination of two words: heteros and sarx meaning “another flesh with the same quality.” His inclusion of the word flesh pointed to the homosexuality (not the inhospitality) of the Sodomites. Similar to the Apostle Paul, Jude selected strong language to convey the serious of the charge facing the church. Allowing unrepentant homosexuals into Christian fellowship without applying the same standards of admission applied to other sinners would be a spiritual death nell for the church. Repentance is the major action a sinner must take to be accepted into the family of God.
Rev 21:27—The final book of the Bible, finalizing a complete picture stunning denouncements of all forms of homosexual conduct. From Genesis to Revelation, the Word of God firmly establishes once and for all the sinfulness of homosexuality, but also provides a wide opportunity for repentance and redemption through Jesus Christ. Homosexuality, as seen through the eyes of scripture is a spiritual aberration, a result of the fallen nature of man, a disease of the soul. It produces nothing life giving, in essence opposite of the nature of God who is life. Therefore it “worketh” or produces abomination which is death.
I can produce more if you cannot accept the above.
Also you seem to think that the new cult handbook supersedes cult handbook #1.
From my favorite site "EvilBible.com"
“Thou Shall Not Ignore the Old Testament!”
New Testament Verses Which Demand Following the Old Testament :
I hear so many Christians now a days claim that the Old Testament is defunct for Jesus was the “lamb” to clear away its rules and regulations. This is just another bullshit scapegoat that Christians use to ignore the atrocities and bizarre laws commanded by their god. Their preachers spoon feed them that the Old Testament is no longer binding so that they can excuse the majority of evil that the bible promotes. I am so tired of Christians manipulating the scriptures so that they can assign a kinder nature to their God, that I have assembled a BRIEF list of verses which clearly show that the Old Testament is not to be ignored. Its laws should indeed be adhered to, for the New Testament demands it!
1) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself. None other then Jesus said so.
2) All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever. "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)
3) Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)
3b) "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)
3c) "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)
4) Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 "Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)
5) Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” (Matthew 15:4-7)
6) Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole. The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell. (Matthew 5:27)
7) Peter says that all slaves should “be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the “good and gentle.” This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18
8) “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,..." (John 1:17).
9) “...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35
And the law contradictions:
Law Contradictions of the Bible:
10) Shall we obey the law? Romans 13:1-7 says quite clearly that Christians are to submit to the law and regard it as the institution of God. 1 Peter 2:13-14 “Submit your self to every ordinance of man ... to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors.” Matthew 22:21 “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s.” Also see Titus 3:1. Matthew 23:2-3 & Ecclesiastes 8:2 This leads one to assume that Christians must and should obey the law, yet look at these verses which contradicts what I just sited. Acts 5:29 “We ought to obey God rather then men.” Exodus 1:17-20 shows God punishing the midwives for following their rulers instead of God. Also see Daniel 3:16-18, 6:7-10, Acts 4:26 & 27, Mark 12:38-40, Luke 23:11, 24 & 33-35 which all say the law should be ignored. Now we know why Christians get away with their selective morality so often.
11) Should we steal? (Exodus 20:15 & Leviticus 19:13) Stealing is absolutely forbidden. Yet, Exodus 3:21-22, 12:35-36 & Luke 19:29-34 all promote stealing.
12) Should we judge? Jesus is quoted in Matthew 7:1-2: “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged.” Also see Luke 6:37 & 1 Corinthians 5:12. Now take a look at “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Also note 1 Corinthians 5:12 & 6:2-4.
1 3) Should we covet? Exodus 20:17 says, “Thou shalt not covet . . . anything that is thy neighbor’s,” while 1 Corinthians 12:31 says, “Covet earnestly the best gifts.” So, are we or are we not to covet?
14) Is lying okay? Exodus 20:16. Proverbs 12:22 & Revelations 21:8 all say lying is forbidden. Joshua 2:4-6, Exodus 1:18-20 & 1 Kings 22:21-22 all support lying.
15) Can we kill? Exodus 20:13 says “thou shalt not kill”. Exodus 32:27, Numbers 31, and THOUSANDS of other verses show God commanding us to kill.
16) Can we own slaves? Leviticus 25:45 “Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy … and they shall be your possession… they shall be your bondmen forever.” Genesis 9:25 “And he [Noah] said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” Exodus 21:2 & 7 “If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing… And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.” Joel 3:8 “And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it.” Luke 12:47-48 [Jesus speaking] “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.” Colossians 3:22
“Servants, obey in all things your masters.” So obviously the Biblical God thinks slavery is right, right? Just look at these: Isaiah 58:6 “Undo the heavy burdens... let the oppressed go free, ... break every yoke.” Matthew 23:10 “Neither be ye called Masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.” (Also see Exodus 22:21 & 21:16) Let it be known here that pro-slavery Bible verses were cited by many churches in the South during the Civil War, and were used by some theologians in the Dutch Reformed Church to justify apartheid in South Africa. There are more pro-slavery verses than cited here. I simply do not have the room to post all of them.
17) What about Improvidence? Improvidence is enjoined in Luke 12:3 “Sell that ye have and give alms.” also in Luke 6:30 & 35 “Give to every man that asketh of thee, and of him that taketh away thy goods, ask them not again ... And lend, hoping for nothing again, and your reward shall be great.” Also note Matthew 6:28, 31 & 34. Improvidence is condemned in I Timothy 5:8 “But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. “ Also see Proverbs 13:22.
18) What does the law say about anger? Ephesians 4:26 says “Be ye angry and sin not not.” Anger is disapproved in Ecciesiastes 7:9 “Be not hasty in thy spirit to be angry; for anger resteth in the bosom of fools.” Proverbs 22:24 “Make no friendship with an angry man.” Also see James 1:20.
19) Are we to let our good works be seen? Matthew 5:16 “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works.” This contradicts verse Matthew 6:1 , “Take heed that you do not your alms before men, to be seen of them.”
20) Should we pray in public? 1 Kings 2:22, 54 & 9:3 shows the Lord is joyed by public prayer and listens intently. Matthew 6:5-6 condemn public prayer and command people keep it a secret.
21) Can we wear long hair? Judges 13:5 & Numbers 6:5 encourages people to grow their hair and insists it is a source of strength. 1 Corinthians 11:14 calls long hair a “shame”.
22) Should we circumcise males? Genesis 17:10 “This is my covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee: Every man and child among you shall be circumcised. Clearly this demands circumcision, yet Galatians 5:2 says “Behold, I Paul, say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.”
23) Are there certain kinds of foods we should not eat? Deuteronomy 14:2-8 lists several animals that we are NOT to eat because they are “unclean”, “chew the cud” and “divide the hoof”. Yet Genesis 9:3 & 1 Corinthians 10:25 insists there is nothing we can’t eat. Romans 14:14 says: “There is nothing unclean of itself.”
24) Can we take oaths? Numbers 30:2, Genesis 21:23-24, 31, 31:53 & Hebrews 6:13 says that we can take oaths and encourages it. Matthew 5:34 says “swear (make an oath) not at all.”
25) Can we get married? Genesis 2:18, 1:28, Matthew 19:5 & Hebrews 13:4 all insist marriage is honorable. Marriage is disapproved and scorned in 1 Corinthians 7:1 & 7:7-8.
26) Can we commit adultery? Exodus 20: 14 “thou shalt not commit adultery.” Also see Hebrews 13:4. Now look at Numbers 31:18, Hosea 1:2 & 2:1-3 where adultery is advocated by God.
27) Can we drink alcohol? Proverbs 31:6-7, 1 Timothy 5:23 & Psalms 104:15 all encourage drinking and intoxication. Proverbs 20:1 & 23:31-32 discourage drinking and intoxication.
28) Do women have rights? Genesis 3:16 “And thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” 1 Timothy 2:12 says a woman must not teach, remain silent and must be subjugated to her man. 1 Corinthians 14:34 & 1 Peter 3:6 both say that women have limited rights and are under control of their men. Judges 4:4, 14-15, 5:7, Acts 2:18 & 21:9 all tell of powerful women who were not subjugated by men and were not punished for their authority of men.
29) Should we obey our masters with usurped authority? Colossians 3:22-23 & 1 Peter 2:18 says we should. 1 Corinthians 7:23 “Be not ye the servants of men.” Also see Matthew 4:10 & 23:10 which say we should not submit usurped to our masters.
30) Was the law of the Old Testament destroyed by Christ’s crucification? Luke16:16, Ephesians 2:15 & Romans 7:6 says that the old law is no longer binding. Yet Matthew 5:17-19 and MANY other verses say that the old law is forever binding. If you want to see the many verses that command we follow the old law please consult the upper portion of this page.
31) Should we swear an oath? Numbers 30:2 “If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath…he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.” Genesis 21:22-24 & 31 “…swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me…And Abraham said, I will swear…Wherefore he called that place Beersheba [“Well of the oath”]; because there they sware both of them.” Hebrews 6:13-17 “For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself…for men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability ofhis counsel, confirmed it by an oath.” See also Genesis 22:15- 19, Genesis 31 :53, & Judges I 1 :30-39. So apparently it is okay to swear an oath, we even do this on the Bible in American courts. Just try and forget these verses: Matthew 5:34-37 “But I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by heaven…nor by the earth…Neither shalt thou swear by thy head…But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.”
James 5:12 “…swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.”
32) Do we keep the Sabbath? Exodus 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” Exodus 31:15 “Whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.” Numbers 15:32-36 “And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day…And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.” Each of these contradict Isaiah 1:13 “The new moons and Sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity.“ John 5:16 “And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the Sabbath day. “Colossians 2:16 “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days.”
33) Should we make graven images? Exodus 20:4 “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven…earth ... water.” Leviticus 26:1 “Ye shall make ye no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone.” Deuteronomy 27:15 “Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image.” Okay, I got it I shouldn’t produce a thing in fear of making a graven image, but wait: Exodus 25:18 “And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them.” I Kings 7:15-16 & 23-25 “For he [Solomon] cast two pillars of brass…and two chapiters of molten brass…And he made a molten sea…it stood upon twelve oxen ... [and so on]”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ryooken I posted the facts dipshit. There is no HISTORICAL record of a cod man child walking the earth. NONE.
I often wonder if religious folks understand the entire meaning and reason behind "faith". By definition it's not "fact", because if it were, then one's free will would be eliminated. The whole point of faith is to have faith despite the lack of concrete proof - i.e., despite the fact that the point in issue is not a "fact".
"Faith is the surrender of the mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals," Hitchens said. "It's our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated."
Christians are “brutally repressive. Christianity is a comprehensive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine, especially bad for women, for homosexuals, for Jews, other minority, religious faiths, well, pretty much just about for all human beings, actually.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ash Satan the cartoon character made up by religious extremists is a hero.
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
upinsmoke2897 No, The United States Will Not Go Into A Debt Crisis, Not Now, Not Ever - Forbes
AUGUST 11 2012 Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry
If there’s one article of faith in Washington (and elsewhere), it’s the idea that the United States might get into a debt crisis if it doesn’t get its fiscal house in order.
This is not true.
The reason why it’s not true is because we live in a fiat currency system, where the United States government can create an infinite number of dollars at no cost to meet its obligations. A Treasury bill is a promise that the government will give you US dollars–something that the United States government can produce infinitely and at no cost.
That’s the reason why interest rates on United States debt have only gone down even as the debt has ballooned. That’s the reason why Great Britain has very low rates on its debt despite having very high debt-to-GDP. That’s the reason why Japan has an astounding debt-to-GDP ratio and still enjoys some of the lowest rates ever. Investors have bet for so long that there would be a run on Japanese debt and have ended up so ruined that in financial circles that trade is called “the Widowmaker”. (Here’s a more detailed analysis by my former colleague Joe Weisenthal at Business Insider.)
Well, what about Argentina? Argentina had to default on its debt because it had pegged its currency to the US dollar. It wasn’t sovereign with regard to its currency since it had to maintain its currency’s peg. It wasn’t Argentina’s debt that caused it to default, it was its currency peg.
What about Greece? Same thing. Greece hasn’t used its own currency for ten years. Of course it’s going bankrupt.
Does it seem that strange that governments can’t run out of money?
You don’t have to take my word for it. How about Alan Greenspan? He said (PDF): ”[A] government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency. A fiat money system, like the ones we have today, can produce such claims without limit.”
But waaaaaaait, you shout, what about inflation? If the government prints money like crazy, won’t that create inflation?
Well, in theory, yes. But probably not. Why is that? Because the US has an even bigger advantage than just being sovereign in its own currency (hi Greece), it also holds the reserve currency. The US dollar is the main currency that is used in most international transactions, it is held by all of the world’s central banks, and so forth.
Why is this important? Well, another way to define inflation is to say that the supply of a currency gets out of whack with its demand: too much currency chasing too few people who want to hold it, and so its value drops. Well, when you have the reserve currency, the demand for your currency is always going to be extremely strong. There’s always going to be tons of people, all around the world, who want to use US dollars, because their transactions are conducted in US dollars. (And it’s highly unlikely that this will change soon–being the reserve currency has a network effect, meaning everyone uses the dollar as the reserve currency because everyone else uses it, creating a self-reinforcing cycle that’s extremely hard to break.)
In other words, while in theory printing tons of money could create inflation, in practice demand for the dollar is so high–and for structural reasons that have very little to do with how the US economy is doing at a particular point in time–that it’s hard to imagine a circumstance under which the US government would have to print so much that it would cause significant inflation.
And even if it did–well, for all the bad memories we have about it, the Stagflation of the 1970s was many things, but it was not Greece. Life in the 1970s was still relatively okay, despite the stagflation. That is to say, even in the extremely unlikely event that the government had to print so much money to get out of its debt that it caused moderate inflation, it still would not be a debt crisis of the kind that Greece and Spain are under right now. (Hyperinflation, meanwhile, is even less of a danger, since in recorded history it only happens in cases of not just reckless money printing, but also extremely serious exogenous shocks such as war, regime change, etc.)
Why am I writing this?
After all it’s already common knowledge among economists, Fed officials, and an increasing number of sophisticated investors.
Maybe so, but it’s still not common knowledge among politicians and among the general public. A lot of people still think that the US is under some risk of one day becoming like Greece, and it’s distorting our public debate.
It’s especially distorting it on the Right, where hysteria about deficits, and debt, and becoming like Greece has reached a fever pitch. Paul Ryan, especially, has framed his entire message on entitlement-cutting on the flawed premise that the US needs to cut its entitlement or it will suffer a debt crisis. This message, in turn, has infected broad swathes of the conservative movement (including very smart people in it), a movement that I consider myself a member of and want to see in strong intellectual health. But very few liberals–certainly no Democratic elected officials that I’m aware of, certainly not the President and the Vice President–are disputing the premise that the US is in any danger of a debt crisis.
1
-
upinsmoke2897 A little fact for you. The debt to GDP ratio was higher at the end of WWII than it is now. You know what we did? We raised taxes for the rich. During Ike's presidency the top marginal tax rate was something like 90%. Yes, loopholes and all, the top effective tax rate was lower, more like 50% but that's a far goddamn cry from the 14% or so that Rmoney actually paid on his income (classed differently than yours or mine, so as to make his potential tax burden less than, say, a lottery winner's or a Hollywood actor's). Corporate taxes on profits were also high.
Both of these high tax rates had the effect of an incentive to long term investment. From the corporate side, it made more sense to buy new equipment, or new training, or disburse profits through stock devices or shareholder payouts as dividends than to take the profits on the balance sheet. This is one of many reasons for the huge boom in American business during the 50's 60's and early 70's.
Likewise the investor class preferred to keep their money tied up in long term investments rather than show capital gains.
Despite these kinds of maneuvers, the taxes paid by the rich and by corporations made up a far larger percentage of the total revenue stream of the US in the 50's than it does now. There have been literally dozens of good charts showing this trend created by various authors.
We don't have a spending problem outside of DoD. We have a taxing problem. It is a very intentional strategy proffered by the likes of Grover Norquist. The intent is to sabotage the ability of the Federal government to pay its bills. That's why all the anti-tax rhetoric.
Add to this mix the fact that the dollar is a fiat currency, and things are much more complex than the "unsustainable debt burden" story.
And don't even get me started on Social Security, where the top cut hasn't changed since the 80's despite inflation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
KEYSTONE K0CH PIPELINE TRUTH
The KS pipeline (25% Koch owned) will bring oil from the Koch owned tar sands ( 2,000,000 acres Koch owned representing approx 65%) to two Koch owned Corpus Christi refineries for processing and shipment to Latin America, Europe, and China.
The benefit to the US?
Not a single drop of this oil will be used in the US
The processing will remove capacity for domestic refining and could lead to an increase in US gas prices.
It will pass over one of the largest aquifers , the Ogallala Aquifer, which is responsible for irrigating 30% of american agriculture.
2000 short term jobs, 200 long term jobs and untold thousands of jobs cleaning up spills of the dirtiest oil ,diluted with poison and heated to make it flow through our country. (the existing part of the KS pipe has already had over 12 spills)
The main benefit, the Koch brothers add $50,000,000,000 to their already $72,000,000,000 fortune.
1
-
Because it did change the election.
Bernie whiners etc., have a played a big part in the loss.
Donald Drumpf a man who opened his presidential campaign by calling Mexicans “rapists” bested Mitt Romney’s share of the Latino vote by 8 percentage points. He performed better among black voters than his 2012 predecessor, and he swept four Rust Belt states that President Barack Obama carried twice Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin under a harsher economy than we face today. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, which should matter, but does not.
The exit polls provide some clarity: A significant chunk of Obama voters flipped to Drumpf. Drumpf won 10 percent of voters who approve of Obama’s presidency and 23 percent of voters who think the next president should “be more liberal,” according to CNN data. Drumpf significantly outperformed Romney among union households. He did 14 points better than Romney among whites without a college degree, according to The New York Times, and 16 points better among households with less than $30,000 in income. The Drumpf Democrat turns out not to be a myth, but a meaningful constituency that just cost Clinton the presidency.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Brick Tamland LOL still to cowardly to admit that they agree 90%+ of the time?
Every point? There you go again writing checks your body cannot cash.
And I was a Bernie supporter during the primary.
GUNS and BERNIE
Bernie is far from perfect on guns
Sanders’ vote for a different kind of pro-gun bill is more puzzling—and profoundly disturbing. In 2005, a Republican-dominated Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law doesn’t protect gun owners; it protects gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers. The PLCAA was the No. 1 legislative priority of the National Rifle Association for years, because it shields gun makers and dealers from most liability when their firearms are used criminally. It is one of the most noxious pieces of pro-gun legislation ever passed. And Bernie Sanders voted for it. (Sanders’ campaign has not replied to a request for comment.)
Because the PLCAA deals with tort law—not a topic of great interest for most Americans—it didn’t stir much outrage when first passed. But the act’s primary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded. Every state imposes liability on manufacturers who are negligent in their production and sale of products. If I crash my Prius because its accelerator malfunctions, I can sue Toyota for negligently manufacturing a faulty pedal. If my child dismembers himself with a blender at Sears, I can sue Sears for negligently leaving that blender within a child’s reach. If I get stabbed by a teenager with a switchblade, I might be able to sue the pawn shop owner who illegally sold a knife to a minor.
Before the PLCAA, most states imposed some form of tort liability on gun makers and sellers. If a gun manufacturer made an assault rifle that could slaughter dozens of people in a few seconds, for instance, one of its victims might sue the company for negligently making a gun that could foreseeably be used for mass murder. If a gun seller sold a gun to a customer without performing any kind of background check—and then the buyer opened fire on the subway—his victims might sue that seller for negligently providing a gun to a mentally unstable person. The standards in each state differed, but the bottom line remained the same: Victims of gun violence and their families could recover financially from the people and companies who negligently enabled gun violence.
The PLCAA changed all that. Remarkably, the act wiped out gun liability laws in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a handful of narrow exceptions. (So much for states’ rights.) Thanks to the law, victims of mass shootings are barred from suing the companies that produced a wartime weapon that no civilian could ever need. With few exceptions, victims cannot sue a gun seller for negligently providing a semiautomatic weapon to a lunatic who shoots them in a movie theater. Even if a jury decides a gun maker or seller should be liable, the PLCAA invalidates its verdict. The law tramples upon states’ rights, juries’ rights, and fundamental precepts of America’s civil justice system. And it received Bernie Sanders’ support—in both 2003 (when it was first introduced) and 2005 (when it finally passed).
Every few years, the families of mass shooting victims take gun makers to court for creating a weapon seemingly designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. Every time, they run headfirst into the PLCAA. Right now, the families of Sandy Hook victims are searching for a loophole in the law, so they can sue Bushmaster for making the gun that sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds. They will probably fail.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
ChristianMission Mullah KKKristian here is more from the Cod Heyjuice crowd:
10. State Sen. Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield)
March 03, 2010
This story just broke last week, and is the perfect way to start this list. Ashburn is a “Traditional Family Values” conservative who has made a lot of headway organizing anti-gay marriage rallies. He was recently stopped by the Sacramento Police and given a DUI after leaving…you know it…a gay bar. A couple days later, the true extent of his homophobic hypocrisy was revealed when he admitted he was gay.
9. Sen. John Ensign (R-NV)
July 09, 2009
Ensign fought for a federal constitutional amendment to prohibit same sex marriage, is a member of the Pentecostal International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, resides at the tax exempt C-Street religious house in Washington, D.C., and is a proud member of the Promise Keepers, an evangelical group. Thus it should have been no surprise when he caught with his pants down, not only having an affair with a campaign staffer, but bribing her and her husband to keep it quiet.
8. Rep. David Vitter (R-LA)
July 2007
Vitter is a staunch conservative. Despite his vocal outrage of the recent Acorn scandal, he was identified as a client of “D.C. Madam” Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s prostitution service in Washington, D.C.
7. Former State Rep. Roland Corning (R-SC)
Oct 28, 2009
Roland was the assistant Attorney General in South Carolina, when the married man was caught with a stripper, sex toys, and viagra in a cemetery. The wife of the officer who detained him worked for the same office, and Roland was released without charge. To his credit, at least he wasn’t caught having sex with a horse (another SC tradition).
6. State Rep. Bob Allen (R-FL)
July 11, 2007
Allen was the Florida Chairman of John McCain’s Presidential Campaign and “one of 21 Florida legislators to sign Gov. Jeb Bush’s friend-of-the-court brief supporting the state’s ban on gays adopting children, and he co-sponsored an unsuccessful bill that would have enhanced penalties for “offenses involving unnatural and lascivious acts” such as indecent exposure.” What happened next? Allen was busted trying to buy oral sex from an undercover cop in the restroom of a public park.
5. Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID)
June 11, 2007
Craig was a Senate liason for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and fought against adding hate crimes against LGBT folks into law. Again demonstrating conservative hypocrisy, Craig was busted and plead guilty for soliciting sex from an undercover cop in a Minneapolis airport bathroom.
4. Glenn Murphy Jr.
July 28, 2007
Murphy was the Natl. Chair of the Young Republicans and a GOP political consultant who urged conservative candidates to use gay marriage as a wedge issue in order to tout their “traditional values”.
I guess traditional values for Murphy meant giving a passed out Republican friend “mouth-to-penis resuscitation”, and he was charged with sexual battery.
3. Ted Haggard
November 2006
Pastor Ted was the founder of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs and Association of Life-Giving Churches. He was also a leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, a conservative christian organization. A powerful force in the evangelical movement, Haggard participated in weekly meetings with President George Bush (R-Merica) and top advisors where he gave spiritual advice. He taught that homosexuality was an abomination and actively lobbied against gay rights. Quite hypocritical when it was revealed that he was having a repeated gay affair with a male prostitute while using methamphetamine.
2. Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC)
June 18, 2009
A rising star in the conservative movement and possible 2012 Republican candidate, Sanford suddenly disappeared from his post for nearly a week. Despite persistent rumors that he was actually on the annual Nudists Hike on the Appalachian Trail, turns out he was in Argentina, on the taxpayers dime to visit his girlfriend. His wife was not happy.
1. Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL)
September 28, 2006
Mark Foley was the Chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children and one of the biggest social conservatives against child pornography in the Senate. His crusade hid a dark secret however when it was revealed that he had been sending sexual emails and instant messages to teenage boys in the Congressional page program for more than 10 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
04mzwach Christians are “brutally repressive. Christianity is a comprehensive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine, especially bad for women, for homosexuals, for Jews, other minorities, religious faiths, well, pretty much just about for all human beings, actually.
1
-
1
-
1
-
***** You are really stupid. You answered Mullah. Therefore I am not talking to myself.
Christians are “brutally repressive. Christianity is a comprehensive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine, especially bad for women, for homosexuals, for Jews, other minority, religious faiths, well, pretty much just about for all human beings, actually.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist Christian
10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.
9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.
8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.
7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!
6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."
3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.
2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
With BUDGET reconciliation Ryan will be able to effectively destroy government agencies. VOTE AND GIVE THE DEMS THE SENATE.
This is (shortlist) what the Libertarian leadership of the GOP will do:
KOCH GAME PLAN
In 1980 when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket this was part of their platform. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
This is just part of their platform to destroy the country.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
1
-
The only known indictment under the Logan Act was one that occurred in 1803 when a grand jury indicted Francis Flournoy, a Kentucky farmer, who had written an article in the Frankfort Guardian of Freedom under the pen name of "A Western American." In the article, Flournoy advocated a separate nation in the western part of the United States that would ally with France.
Guess we can arrest and charge the K0CHers that call for secession. LET'S DO IT NOW.
Logan Act:
Passed under the administration of President John Adams, during tension between the U.S. and France, it was informally named for Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, a state legislator (and later US Senator) and pacifist who in 1798 engaged in semi-negotiations with France during the Quasi-War.
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.” The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not. The Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS
A report published by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy on Jan. 15 discusses the potential dangers of “violent far-right” organizations, which has angered some conservatives that believe the military should focus on international threats.
The executive summary of the paper, “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” claims that “since 2007, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of attacks and violent plots originating from individuals and groups who self- identify with the far-right of American politics.”
Written by Arie Perliger, Director of Terrorism Studies at the Combating Terrorism Center and an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, the paper asserts that three distinct ideologies exist in the “American violent far right.” Those are “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement,” the last of which “includes mainly Christian Identity groins such as the Aryan Nations.”
“Findings indicate that…it is not only feelings of deprivation that motivate those involved in far right violence, but also the sense of empowerment that emerges when the political system is perceived to be increasingly permissive to far right ideas,” it later reads.
The rise in attacks in the 21st century were significant, as “Although in the 1990s the average number of attacks per year was 70.1, the average number of attacks per year in the first 11 years of the twenty-first century was 307.5, a rise of more than 400%.”
The study also found that “presidential election years and the preceding year are characterized by an increase of far-right violence,” leading the author to conclude that “in general, far-right groups and individuals are more inclined to engage in violence in a contentious political climate.”
Furthermore, it found that the number of Republicans in the House was positively correlated with an increase in far-right violence, although the causes were not immediately clear. The study posits that it could mean those groups believed those legislators might be “more tolerant of their activities” or possibly that “the high expectations of far-right activists during a conservative legislature” were not “fulfilled.”
Some conservatives object to the report. The Washington Times, The National Review, and World Net Daily all report on critical reactions from the right, according to the Atlantic Wire, with blogger Pamela Geller calling it an “appalling attempt to demonize loyal Americans and whitewash the Islamic threat.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I am a left handed soldier for satan. No not the Great Satan Reagan. The fallen angel satan.
Satan was a freethinker. Beaten and banned from heaven by Cod as a warning against all who would follow in his footsteps and actually use their own mind.
I always wondered how Satan gets blamed for all the bad in the world, when Cod is the all powerful, all knowing creator of all. Shouldn't the one who has the power and knowledge be the one to blame, not the one who was powerless and beaten down. Just wondering.
SATAN AS HERO
"Well, it's all fiction. But I do enjoy good fiction, (although the bible is not anywhere close to what I'd consider quality reading) so I'll answer this question in the way I review all such fictional characters.
God is clearly a tyrant. He has committed many acts of evil, and somehow managed to amass an incredible following. That means God must be the ultimate deceiver. He has painted Satan as the deceiver to disguise his own faults and gain worshipers in a classic manner.
If the tyrannical dictator can condemn the good guy and convince enough people, he can get away with much evil. This is a ploy commonly used by skillful politicians and anyone who seeks personal gain at the expense of others.
Furthermore, Satan purportedly rebelled against this evil tyrant, even though he was greatly outnumbered and faced an omnipotent being. That, according to our common beliefs, (as we praise military heroes who sacrifice themselves for the good of their nation) is not only admirable, but makes Satan a martyr.
Satan is the only deity who truly stands for free will. God threatens us with punishments for not adhering to his wishes. But Satan tells us that we should enjoy our lives and be happy and free to do what we think is right.
Satan stands for justice, according to the biblical story, if you read it objectively. If only the story were true, he would be one of the greatest heroes in history, fighting what he surely knew would be a losing battle, but doing so for the sake of the greater good and to provide an example to the rest of us.
Just as the United States rebelled against British rule and gained their own freedom, Satan fought for freedom for all angels. Unfortunately, he lost the battle, which is a real tragedy.
If I believed in any kind of deity, I would most certainly worship Satan, become his devout follower and take up his noble fight against tyranny.
I do not look favourably upon cruel dictators.
All hail Satan! The true savior."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
EAS NJ Ronald Reagan LIAR
The lies modern-day Republicans tell about Ronald Reagan are legion. To today’s GOP, Reagan was beloved and his presidency resided over a “shining city on a hill,” as his campaign commercials portrayed America. The truth was more shaded, to say the least. Welfare cuts pushed half a million people, mostly children, into poverty; tax cuts helped the rich but not the rest of us; and unemployment during his first term hit a post-war high. Terrorists killed 220 marines in Beirut on Reagan’s watch, which Reagan responded to, not with resolve, but by cutting and running. Despite claims to the contrary, JFK, Eisenhower and even LBJ were more popular overall than Reagan (although his ratings at the very end of his second term were higher).
Reagan’s administration was filled with little lies, claims about trees being major air polluters and apartheid-era South Africa eliminating segregation. Never mind the larger distractions, like the eight senior members of his administration who were indicted. But his biggest lie came to be known as the Iran-Contra affair. Reagan came to office in 1980 in large part due to the failure of the Carter administration to successfully free hostages in Iran who had been held for over a year. The hostages were finally released the day of Reagan’s inauguration—thanks to Carter’s persistent diplomacy.
In 1985, during Reagan’s second term, Iran, which had taken additional hostages in the intervening years, offered to free the hostages in exchange for missiles. A plan was hatched in which Israel would ship missiles to Iran, the U.S. would resupply Israel with the missiles, and the U.S. would receive the cash that had been paid for the missiles. That cash would then go to Nicaragua, to fund the contras, the rebels Reagan portrayed as, “the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers,” who were fighting to take down the elected Sandinista government.
When details of the exchange leaked in 1986, Reagan was forced to explain why America was selling missiles to a sworn enemy, while intervening in Nicaragua, which Congress had forbade. Reagan’s response was to deny that arms had been traded for hostages. “We did not, I repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else [to Iran] for hostages, nor will we.” A few months later he admitted, “A few months ago, I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that’s true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not.” A disingenuous way of saying, “I lied.”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Drunk Bastard Right wing is the birth place of most of our domestic terrorism
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-tirman/domestic-terrorism_b_1767433.html
John Tirman:
In the last several days, three events dramatically underscore a hard truth about domestic terrorism: nearly all of it originates with the extremist right wing.
This provocative idea is borne out by stubborn facts, but the question is why this so, and why the national discourse about terrorism remains stuck on the wrong threats.
The three events are the massacre at the Sikh temple in Wisconsin, the fiery destruction of a mosque in Joplin, Missouri, and the reopening of a mosque that had been burned down by terrorist arson in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. The good news story of the reopening of the Tennessee mosque is marred by the ceaseless efforts to keep it from opening by right-wing opponents, including Republicans running for Congress in the district, many of whom insisted that Islam is not a religion and is not protected by the Constitution.
As I wrote in the Boston Globe 17 months ago, the overwhelming numbers of acts of politically motivated violence in this country are committed by the right wing. If I may quote myself at length:
"The START database on terrorism in America, which tracks all incidents of political violence, shows that most attacks in the last two decades have been on black churches, reproductive rights facilities, government offices, and individual minorities. And those have been committed mainly by right-wing extremists. From 1990 to 2009, START identified 275 "homicide events'' that killed 520 people and were committed by right-wing ideologues. There were many more incidents of destruction of property, nonfatal attacks, and other acts of thuggery by white supremacists, private militias, and the like."
Compare that to the threat that so much of the news media and political class focuses on: Muslims. The think tank RAND found that "46 publicly reported cases of domestic radicalization and recruitment to jihadist terrorism occurred in the United States'' since 9/11, and that "most of the would-be jihadists were individuals who recruited themselves.'' Most of the "threats" were never realized, and many of them were absurd fantasies.
The question is, why has the right wing -- so long associated with law enforcement -- become so tolerant of terrorism against minority religious groups, gays, abortion clinics and others they abhor? Why is the right wing the incubator of so much violence?
A lot of old-fashioned xenophobia is at work, of course. New immigrants typically have been embraced by liberals and scorned by conservative nativists. One only needed to hear the diatribes against illegal immigrants by Mitt Romney and his other GOP hopefuls through the Republican primaries -- and the full-throated approval of those diatribes by the listening crowds -- to understand how deep this runs on the right. Right-wing bloggers like Michelle Malkin feed the frenzy or ignore right-wing terror, and Fox News has aggressively used the Muslim terror threat as a standard trope of its commentary for 11 years.
The rest of the news media has been too sanguine about calling a spade a spade, too timid about calling out this epidemic of hate. Even in the recent shootings, as Riddhi Shah points out in a Huffington Post blog post, the news media attention to the Aurora, Colorado murders was way more prominent than the coverage of the Sikh temple massacre. Similarly, when Rep. Peter King (R-NY) held hearings on supposed radicalization of American Muslims last year, very few analysts in the news media pointed out the vastly greater prevalence of right-wing terror in America.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which has done yeoman's work on tracking violent groups, notes that "Currently, there are 1,018 known hate groups operating across the country, including neo-Nazis, Klansmen, white nationalists, neo-Confederates, racist skinheads, black separatists, border vigilantes and others. And their numbers are growing." The Center's data show that hate groups have increased by 69 percent in the last decade. And the so-called "Patriot" groups have increased nearly 800 percent since Obama became president.
Their closely observed conclusion for this startling increase:
"This surge has been fueled by anger and fear over the nation's ailing economy, an influx of non-white immigrants, and the diminishing white majority, as symbolized by the election of the nation's first African-American president"
If the news media and political leaders were told there were a thousand violence-prone Muslim groups operating in the United States, can you imagine the reaction? Yet, apart from the glancing attention given incidents like the Sikh temple massacre, the national discourse about terrorism focuses almost exclusively on Muslims.
Scholars call this "framing" -- the predisposition of the news media (and others) to see events in a certain way, using a cognitive frame that then leads to certain perceptions and conclusions. The cognitive frame for understanding domestic political violence in this country is the Muslim threat, reinforced powerfully by the 9/11 attacks, of course, even though that atrocity was not committed by domestic terrorists. (The biggest act of domestically organized violence is the Oklahoma City bombing, a right-wing endeavor.) The "Muslim threat" meme has so overwhelmed the discussion of political violence, however, that the actual topography of terrorist groups in this country is neglected.
Watch carefully the next time an act of political violence is committed against, say, an African-American church or Planned Parenthood or a mosque. You won't hear many condemnations from Sean Hannity or Eric Cantor or indeed Mitt Romney. The burning of the Joplin mosque, which is the second attack this summer on that house of worship, earned no rebuke from the establishment right, including Romney. But then, Missouri is a swing state.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The KoCHS are enemies of the state. They want to privatize America with them as the owners.
KOCH GAME PLAN
Senator Bernie Sanders went back in time to 1980, when David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. He found their platform for that year, and published it again. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
modelmajorpita No it is not the only way to get the money. It is part of the plan.
Privatize SS and Medicare.
Spending billions on Homeland Security then telling the rubes that we need to kill all of FDR's programs in order to pay for security.
Defunding the IRS and other agencies in order to stop enforcement and regulation.
Did you notice how many trillions the middle east has cost us so far? 3 trillion and counting and that is just the tip of the iceberg. Did you notice that they started cutting everything else?
When David Koch ran as the Vice Presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket in 1980 this was their platform for that year. It is a manifesto of what David and Charles Koch expect to receive in return for their large investment in American politics.
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in John Birch Society dogma. His sons are just expanding capacity for them now, not abandoning their principles.
Keep this list handy. You're going to need it in the days to come.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
el80ne Racism, theocracy and libertarianism go hand in hand, when from a philosophical point of view they should have little to do with one another. The negative effects of the lack of a central government are so obvious in developing countries that wherever the social order fails as in Somalia, it must have been due to bad religion, or the defect of having been born to an inferior race.
Ron Paul fans must reassure themselves that such things would never happen to white, Christian folk. They're immune from the Somali problem by virtue being of different stock and different values, you see.
The "Somalia" argument is a sore spot for libertarians. They either fall back on the old line of race and religious prejudice I outlined, or they claim that it isn't true Libertarianism, you see: it's anarchy. True Libertarians believe in just enough government to protect private property and personal safety; without those protections, they argue, anarchy ensues.
The only problem for libertarians is that they cannot point to even a single current or historical example of a government that functions as they imagine it should. They have no concrete, real world examples, so they ply their arguments in a theoretical construct.
Each and every example of places with little centralized government is dismissed by libertarians as an anarchistic situation, not a "true" Libertarianism. It's the "no true Scotman" fallacy, Ron Paul edition. The hellish situation in Afghanistan is blamed on 30 years of war and tribal anarchy, rather than the lack of a central government. The case of Somalia is blamed again on war, on American intervention, and again on tribal anarchy. Historical examples of feudalism arising in the absence of a centralized state, or the repeated Dark Ages that arise after civilization collapses, are dismissed as either irrelevant to the modern world or invalid because of war and anarchy. The fact that corruption and the Mafia are more prevalent in southern Italy where tax collection and central government are weaker than in the North, is again dismissed as a cultural or anarchistic issue. It's always the same argument.
Libertarianism, in other words, is infallible. Wherever it fails, it does so because the people weren't ready for it, or there was too much violence to allow it to work, or because the government wasn't powerful enough to protect people from harm.
Libertarians fail to realize that there has never been--and never will be--a government that functions according to their principles because it runs entirely contrary to human nature.
As any libertarian understands when it comes to statist authoritarians, power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. When you decentralize and remove the modern welfare state, leaving only essentially a glorified police force in charge to protect private property and personal safety, one of two things happens:
1) The central police force turns into a right-wing military dictatorship invested in stamping out all leftist thinking, then appropriating the country's wealth for themselves and their friends (e.g., Chile under Pinochet);
or
2) All central authority and protection break down completely as power localizes into the hands of local criminals and feudal/tribal warlords with little compunction about abusing and terrorizing the local population (e.g., feudal France, Afghanistan, Somalia, western Pakistan, etc.) As I said before:
Feudalism is the inevitable historical consequence of the decline of a centralized cosmopolitan state. That's because the exercise of power by those in a position to wield it does not end with the elimination of federal authority: rather, it simply shifts to those of a more localized, more tyrannical, and less democratically accountable bent.
Urban street gangs in under-policed neighborhoods, mafias in under-taxed countries, and groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon invariably step in to fill the void where government fails. When the Japanese government wasn't able to adequately help the population after the earthquake and tsunami, the yakuza helpfully stepped in to do it for them. The devolution of local authority and taxation into the hands of criminal groups willing to provide a safety net in exchange for their cut of the action is the invariable pre-feudal result of the breakdown of the government-backed safety net. It happens every single time. The people will want a safety net where utter chaos doesn't prevent it: they'll either get it from an accountable governmental authority, or from a non-governmental authority of shadowy legality. Both kinds of authority will levy their own form of taxation, be it legal and official, or part of an illegal protection scheme.
In its own way, the "No True Libertarianism" argument is very similar to the "No True Communism" of those on the far left, who argue that the fault of Communism lies not with the idea, but with the practice--despite the fact that no successful large-scale Communism has ever been implemented in the world. Neither ideology can fail its adherents. They can only be failed by imperfect practitioners.
Both ideologies run counter to human nature for the same reason: power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The people with the money and guns will always abuse the people who don't have the money and guns, unless there are multiple levels of checks, balances, and legal and economic protections to ensure the existence of a middle-class tax base with a stake in maintaining a stable society. The modern welfare state didn't arise by accident or conspiracy: it evolved as a means of avoiding the failures of other models.
Libertarianism is a philosophical game played by those without either enough real-world experience of localized, non-state-actor tyranny, or enough awareness of history to understand the immaturity of their political worldview. Unfortunately, the harm they do to the social safety net and to governmental checks and balances is all too real, and all too damaging.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/29/1049619/-Why-Libertarianism-Doesn-t-Work
1
-
1
-
el80ne Civil Rights and Libertarians
Opposition to the Civil Rights Act is supposedly based on how libertarians believe that the Non-Aggression-Principle is sacred (except of course when defending property rights). The problem is that libertarian precepts sometimes look good on paper (depending on how gullible you are), but they are simply unrealistic. The libertarian take on the Civil Rights Act tends to either ignore or dismiss outright issue like history, prevailing social attitudes (regarding certain groups that rightfully ought to be protected if one consults history), the brutal & unethical consequences and implications of not having protected groups, and the accumulation of quantifiable injustice that occurs when masses of people are allowed to act on their own prejudices. That is the problem with libertarian unreasonable adherence to fundamentally unrealistic principles.
Are you "infringing" on a person's "right" to freely discriminate? Yes, but history has demonstrated before that the good of doing such a thing greatly outweighs the "bad" of infringing on bigots' rights.
Besides, this country offers bigots ample leeway to act on their attitudes even currently in the private sector-- certainly much more so than in other developed/Western/Industrialized nations . If you don't like a job applicant's ethnic background, all your company has to say is that the individual did not fit into your company's workplace environment/culture. Private businesses always reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. Even with the Civil Rights Act in place, housing discrimination (e.g., redlining) was still allowed to go on. Imagine how much worse things would be today with OUT it in place, with all the "libertarians" having their way on the issue.
None of this, of curse, gets into how, if one does happen to harbor bigoted attitudes, this libertarian position does offer people a very convenient refuge.
To be a libertarian-pusher, you'd either have to be naive enough to really believe in such a thing, or a wealthy cynic who just wants to promote ideas that obfuscate the terms of discussion and/or policies that you know will end-up hurting people in the long run while you benefit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Cod Dems are stupid.
The reich has been outspoken on their plans for at the last 45 years.
But Dems kept appeasing. Dems kept telling me I was over reacting.
Dems told me I was a fool for believing what they said they were going to do.
Here is part of their plan which dates back to 1973 all the way today.
WAKE UP
Time to learn from the enemy that is defeating us.
KOCH/RYAN/GOP PLAN FOR AMERICA
Ryan, the K0CHs and the other libertarian neoconfederate states rights taliban traitors have the same platform.
THESE ARE THEIR WORDS NOT MINE
STOP IGNORING THEM WHEN THEY TELL YOU THEIR PLAN
NO ABORTION EVER
• We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
• “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
• “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
• “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
• “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
• “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
• “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
• “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
• “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
• “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
• “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
• “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
• “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
• “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
• “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
• “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
• “We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
• “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
• “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
• “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
• “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
• “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
• “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
• “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
• “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”
Every single one of these ideas is rooted in Ayn L Rand John Birch Society dogma. Paul Ryan is as extremist as any of them.
STOP BEING NICE.
STOP APPEASING.
STOP BEING POLITICALLY CORRECT.
They are nazis, bigots, fascists, traitors, woman haters, minority haters, haters of the poor, haters of an educated populace, haters of the truth and science etc.
Call them out by calling them what they are. Do it over and over again until it becomes the truth.
That is how the reich does it and they are winning.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well you just named a handful of progressives. And the Reagan Democrat establishment Center hates progressives. They continue to do everything they can to destroy them.
Here's an example from not so far back:
The war on progressives, waged by Centrist establishment Democrats, continues.
The War on the Progressive Wing of the Democratic Party
Corporate interests are coming for the millions of progressive voters who joined with the center left to elect Joe Biden and a Democratic Congress.
By Jeff Weaver
MAY 16, 2022
EXCERPT :
My friends, war has been openly declared on the growing progressive wing of the Democratic Party—on the millions who rallied to the agenda of economic and social equality that Bernie Sanders and progressive candidates across the country are advancing.
As reported, a corporatist coup within
the Democrat Party, which started
during the 2021 special elections, has
been launched by a wide array of allied
groups including cryptospeculators,
the oil industry, pharmaceuticals,
finance, and even Republicans.
Make no mistake, the goal of the war is
to make elected progressives extinct
and to extinguish the agenda of higher
wages, affordable health care, criminal
justice reform, addressing climate
change, and putting more economic
and political power in the hands of
everyday people of all races.
Tragically, this assault by the
corporatists appears to be aided by
organs of our own Party. In the open
seat in Oregon's Fifth Congressional
district, cryptospeculator Sam
Bankman-Fried put some $10 million
on the table to propel an unknown
adherent of his cultish Effective
Altruism movement against three
women of color. A week later, House
Majority PAC, the official House
Democratic Caucus super PAC, put in
$1 million to back him as well.
(Prompting sharp criticism from
Senator Jeff Merkely and national
Latino leaders.) Coincidence or quid
pro quo? Nancy Pelosi can't coordinate
with this super PAC behind the scenes,
but she can make public statements
about their conduct. Something tells me they would listen if she spoke up. [But she is a Centrist establishment Democrat.]
And at a time when the right to an abortion is about to be eviscerated by the Supreme Court, House Democratic leaders are frantically fundraising, arguing that they will protect reproductive rights. Simultaneously, they are rushing to defend anti-choice, corporate-friendly Representative Henry Cuellar against progressive Jessica Cisneros.
The White House political shop (which is now not-so-jokingly called the Committee for Assisted Democratic Suicide in some circles) has not only botched the politics around Biden’s legislative agenda but is now taking a sledgehammer to Biden’s electoral coalition. This year, they’ve had the president make endorsements in just two House primaries.
The first was for Representative Kurt Schrader. Schrader not only worked to gut Biden’s Build, Back, Better bill, but also voted against the initial House version of the Covid relief bill. (Not to mention that his reelection is opposed by local Democratic organizations that represent 90 percent of the Democratic voters in the district.)
[ thankfully my fellow Oregon progressives voted him out in favor of a real for the people Democrat]
The rest of the story:
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/democratic-party-primaries/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Can you handle the truth?
The Myth of the Filibuster-Proof Democratic Senate
SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 BY ANDY COHEN
Republicans have magically, mystically turned 72 days into two full years.
We’ve heard it over and over and over again. Mitch McConnell has gleefully used it as a cudgel. Congressional Republicans typically can’t wait to get their mugs on camera to tell America just how inept Congressional Democrats are in order to aid their case that they should be put back in power. After all, Democrats couldn’t get anything done even with a 60 vote, filibuster-proof majority in the United States Senate during the first two years of the Obama administration. Democrats had almost complete control of the Congress to go with the newly inaugurated Democrat to take up residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and they couldn’t manage to address the major issues of the day.
Democrats are just plain horrible at their jobs. To hear the Republicans tell it, absolutely nothing got done between January 2009 and the 2010 midterm elections. And they blame the Democrats, because after all, the Democrats were in control.
Don’t believe it.
It sounds good and it surely gets the far right wing base riled up. But it has very little basis in reality. That hasn’t stopped Republicans and their official media apparatus, Fox News, from repeating the nonsense.
As recently as September 2nd, less than two weeks ago, Fox News’ Chris Wallace, conducting an interview with Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, stated matter of factly in response to Villaraigosa’s comment on the deliberate Republican obstructionism that Obama and the Democrats had almost complete control of the Congress. “But in fairness,” Wallace pointed out, “the first two years, he had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a big majority in the House.”
Illinois Republican Congressman Aaron Schock earlier in 2012 went on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and perpetuated the lie. “For two years,” he told the “Morning Joe” crew, “he (Obama) had complete, unadulterated control of the federal government, a 60 seat majority in the Senate, an 60 plus seat majority in the House. He got every—literally every—piece of legislation he wanted to try and quote turn around the economy…”
That’s right folks, for the first two full years of his presidency, Barack Obama had the benefit of a large majority in the House of Representatives and a filibuster-proof majority in the United States Senate to work with in order to get whatever legislation passed that he wanted. Whatever his whimsy, he could get it passed at any time during the first two years of his first term. Full and complete, total control for two full years, if by two full years you mean 72 days.
Here’s what really happened: Yes, in the 2008 election, Democrats managed to widen their majorities in both houses of Congress. In the 110th Congress that served from January 2007 through January 2009, Democrats held a 35 seat majority in the House and a single seat advantage in the Senate, which included “independent” Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, both of whom caucused with the Democrats. The 2008 election saw that majority swell to 78 seats in the House and nine seats in the Senate.
How is that possible, you ask? Everybody says that the Democrats had a full filibuster-proof majority? The math doesn’t add up, you say. If there are 100 seats in the Senate, and Republicans, as of January 2009 had only 40 of them (technically the Republicans had 41 of them initially, but we’ll get to that), doesn’t that mean that the Democrats had the remaining 60, giving them the supermajority in the Senate?
No, not necessarily, because it was a very odd year in Congressional politics.
Remember that Minnesota Senatorial election in 2008? The one that pitted former SNL writer/cast member and Air America Radio host Al Franken against Republican incumbent Norm Coleman? That race dragged on forever, resulting in several challenges and recounts until the Minnesota Supreme Court finally concluded on June 30th, 2009, that Franken was indeed the winner. Franken wasn’t sworn into office until July 7th, 2009, a full six months after the 111th Congress had taken charge.
And it wasn’t even that easy. Even had Franken been seated at the beginning of the legislative session, the Democrats still would only have had a 59-41 seat edge. It wasn’t until late April of 2009 that Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter defected from the Republican Party to caucus with the Democrats. Without Franken, the Dems only had 58 votes.
But even that’s not entirely accurate, and the Dems didn’t have a consistent, reliable 58 votes. Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy was terminally ill with a brain tumor, and could only muster up the energy to vote on selected legislation. His presence could not be counted on, and thus his vote in the Senate could not be counted on. During the first year of the Obama presidency, due to his illness Kennedy missed 261 out of a possible 270 votes in the Senate, denying the Democrats the 60th vote necessary to break a filibuster. In March of 2009, he stopped voting altogether. It wasn’t until Kennedy passed away in late August, 2009, and an interim successor was named on September 24th, 2009, that the Democrats actually had 60 votes.
And even then the 60 vote supermajority was tenuous at best. At the time, then 91 year old Robert Byrd from West Virginia was in frail health. During the last 6 months of 2009, Byrd missed 128 of a possible 183 votes in the Senate. Byrd passed away on June 28, 2010 at the age of 92.
In all, Democrats had a shaky 60 vote supermajority for all of four months and one week; from the time Kennedy’s interim successor Paul Kirk was sworn in on September 24th until the time Republican Scott Brown was sworn in as Kennedy’s “permanent” replacement after his special election victory over Democratic disappointment, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley. In a state that is heavily Democratic, it seems that Coakley figured she didn’t have to actually campaign for the Senate seat; that Massachusetts voters would automatically elect the Democrat to replace the legendary Kennedy. No way Massachusetts would send a Republican to replace Ted Kennedy. Brown took the election seriously, Coakley did not, and Brown won (he will, however, lose this November to Elizabeth Warren, and all will be right with the world again).
During those four months and one week, Congress was in session for a total of 72 days. So for 72 days the Democrats held a 60 seat, filibuster-proof supermajority in the United States Senate. But wait! There’s more! As Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn points out, even that was unreliable. “Even in this window Obama’s ‘control’ of the Senate was incomplete and highly adulterated due to the balkiness of the so-called Blue Dog conservative and moderate Democratic Senators such as Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Evan Bayh of Indiana, and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas.”
Zorn continues:
The claim that Obama ruled like a monarch over Congress for two years — endlessly intoned as a talking point by Republicans — is more than just a misremembering of recent history or excited overstatement. It’s a lie.
It’s meant to represent that Obama’s had his chance to try out his ideas, and to obscure and deny the relentless GOP obstructionism and Democratic factionalism he’s encountered since Day One.
They seem to figure if they repeat this often enough, you’ll believe it.
Seventy-two days. That’s it. That’s the entirety of absolute Democratic control of the United States Senate in 2009 and 2010. And yet Republicans want America to believe that Obama and the Democrats ruled with a tyrannical zeal to pass every piece of frivolous legislation they could conjure up. They think that the voters are dumb enough to believe it.
Given the mendacity of the Republican presidential ticket this year, it appears that they think very little of the intelligence of the American electorate, and are merely perpetuating a disturbing pattern of behavior on the part of Republican lawmakers, who have a very loose relationship with truth and the real world. And that includes their official PR apparatus, Fox News. We’ll find out on November 6th if they’re right.
All of this and we didn’t even talk about the unprecedented, deliberate, methodical obstructionism on the part of Republicans via the filibuster. Tsk, tsk, tsk….
https://sandiegofreepress.org/2012/09/the-myth-of-the-filibuster-proof-democratic-senate/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
[Fake Rube] attended Vanderbilt University, where his interdepartmental major was in political science, philosophy and economics. He graduated magna cum laude.
At Vanderbilt, Kennedy was elected president of his senior class and named to Phi Beta Kappa. He received a Juris Doctor in 1977 from the University of Virginia School of Law, where he was an executive editor of the Virginia Law Review and elected to the Order of the Coif.
In 1979, he earned a Bachelor of Civil Law degree with first class honours from Oxford University, where he was a member of Magdalen College and studied under Rupert Cross and John H.C. Morris.
Kennedy earned the highest honors at Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes scholar, and he was executive editor of the Virginia Law Review at the not-too-shabby University of Virginia law school.
Born in Centreville, Mississippi, Kennedy graduated from Vanderbilt University and the University of Virginia School of Law before attending Oxford University. In 1988, Governor Buddy Roemer (R) selected Kennedy to serve as special legal counsel and later appointed him Secretary of the Cabinet.[2] He left Roemer's staff in 1991 to unsuccessfully run for state attorney general as a Democrat. In 1999, he was elected state treasurer; he was reelected to that position in 2003, 2007, 2011, and 2015. Kennedy was an unsuccessful candidate for U.S. Senate in 2004 and 2008. In 2007, he switched parties and became a Republican.
In 2016, when U.S. Senator David Vitter opted not to seek reelection, Kennedy ran for Senate again. He finished first in the November nonpartisan blanket primary and defeated Democrat Foster Campbell 61%–39% in the December runoff. He was sworn in on January 3, 2017. Kennedy was one of six Republican senators to object to the certification of Arizona's electors in the 2020 presidential election. In 2022, Kennedy was reelected to the U.S. Senate,[3] defeating 12 opponents with 62% of the vote in the first round.[4] Kennedy won every parish except Orleans Parish in his 2022 reelection.[5]
Kennedy was one of six Republican senators to object to the certification of Arizona's electors in the 2020 presidential election.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kennedy_(Louisiana_politician)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dismal: a Republican specialty. They don’t “turn” a dismal state of affairs to their political advantage—they create dismal. The Republican agenda is entirely Dismal. A sampling:
Deficit panic, dismantle social programs, fake budgets, fraud, drown government in a bathtub, trickle-down economics, disinform voters with Orwellian, load the Supreme Court with right-wing appointees, deregulation policies that can ruin our economy, blame unemployment on lazy moochers, support Wall Street criminals,
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
.. Hope Hicks diary entries;
Monday: Today the President wanted me to "steam his pants" TWICE! Ugh!
Tuesday: This morning the President told me he "wanted a little trim". I thought he wanted a haircut. No such luck. I hate my job!
Wednesday: Last night the president wanted me to model some lingerie he bought. Okay, no big deal. Take off clothes, put clothes on, take clothes off, put clothes on. I'm used to it now. When we were done I had to "steam his pants" again and then deliver the underwear to Ivanka, as usual.
Thursday: At lunch the President told me that tonight we were going "around the world". Goody! I love to travel.
Friday: There was no traveling last night. I hate myself!
Saturday: I'm going to meet the President tonight to see some of his special water sports movies. Goody! I love the ocean!
Sunday: I FUCKING QUIT! Ugh!
_____________________
Hope Hicks diary entry:
Every time Donald comes to my office he starts singing Queen.
"Bicycle, bicycle, bicycle
I want to ride my
Bicycle, bicycle, bicycle
I want to ride my bicycle
I want to ride my bike
I want to ride my bicycle
I want to ride it where I like"
I was better off getting beat by Corey Lewandowski.
I hate myself.
H. H. 🇧🇬
___________________________
"Today i steamed his pants again. I think i saw him get an erection. its hard to know for sure. I did brush up high on his zipper and smiled at him hoping he would take a hint. He complimented me on my even darker eyebrow makeup. Note to self, he likes it dark so go by lowes and get Kingsford charcoal briquettes to make my brows black. He is so dreamy. I am jealous of his sex life with Ivanka. They do make a cute couple. I got mad when i saw them giggling as they left the 'Lewinski Closet' as its become known as. I am prettier than Ivanka, why dont he see it? Must get even darker eye brow makeup. Wonder if motor oil will make them darker?" - Hope Hicks Diary 2/3/2017
_________________________
Sunday: The President made me play the Rusty Trombone Trumpet . . . what a shit-eating job this is . .
1
-
, global warming is a hoax, block President Obama’s common sense agenda, devolve our republic to a plutarchy,…
Republicans could amplify dismal, too. They already control the U.S. House, and they're perilously close to controlling the U.S. Senate. They control most state congresses, and Wisconsin is a dismal example. Plus, right-wing Republicans need only gain control in 15 more marginally Democrat states, and they’ll be able,
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1