“Which one of you is the bigger douche bag?”

This pic was the was the answer given.

Hey, at the least they were being honest for once.

How do the Republicans really think they can beat Obama with the mud slinging they are doing to each other now? Not one leaf has been left un-turned to diminish the public perception of each other. By the time the real elections get here these guys will have already done Obama’s work for him. Congrats gents.

Mitt Romney – Named after a piece of sporting equipment. Romney favors a strong legal immigration policy, and he favors deporting illegal aliens who have not followed the proper procedures for entering the country.  He is against amnesty for illegal aliens, but at the same time, he does not feel we can round up all of the illegal aliens who have entered the country.  He believes that the federal government should cut off funding to sanctuary cities that encourage illegal immigration. He believes that the US Congress does not need to officially declare war to take military action.  He believes that Guantanamo Bay should stay open.  He is opposed to using torture as part of US military interrogation strategies, but he does approve of enhanced interrogation techniques.   He has not specifically indicated whether he believes that waterboarding is torture, but he has stated he would refer to military experts on the subject. He supports the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which gives citizens the right to bear arms.  Despite his views regarding the second amendment, he is in favor of a ban on assault weapons. He supported the Brady Bill in 1994.  In earlier days, Romney did not support the NRA, but in 2008, he stated that he is a member of the NRA. Romney passed a statewide healthcare mandate for the state of Massachusetts when he was the Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007.  He signed the bill in 2006 requires all Massachusetts residents to purchase healthcare coverage.  This bill could complicate matters in his run for the presidency, as many conservatives want ObamaCare to be repealed if Obama is not re-elected in 2012.  Romney has publically stated that he feels ObamaCare is not right for the United States, but he still supports his own state legislation from Massachusetts. (source)

Ron Paul – Guy came in second, twice, and is a doctor. What does he think? Ron Paul is a strong supporter of states’ rights.  He believes that the states should be much more powerful than they are today.  He believes the individual states should be able to make their own decisions regarding any social matters that are not explicitly directed by the constitution.  He thinks the death penalty should be regulated by the states.  He also believes the states should make their own decisions about education and marriage too.  He even believes states should be able to make their own decisions regarding drug use like medical marijuana.

Ron Paul has written six books on Austrian school economics.  Paul always votes against tax increases.  Ron Paul is against raising taxes under any circumstances.  He even feels that the country should abolish the state income tax, and he believes this can be done if we scale back the spending in the Federal government to 2000 levels.  Ron Paul gets a lot of support for his positions on the economy. He believes that the Federal Reserve should be abolished.  He does not believe that the country should return to the gold standard, but he is very concerned about inflation, and he is often known as an inflation hawk. He has been warning about the threats of hyperinflation since 1981. Paul is a pro-life supporter.  He spoke at the National Right to Life Committee Convention in 2007. He pushed for legislation that would give states the right to decide if they want to support or oppose abortion laws.  He opposes gay marriage, but he believes states should have the right to decide how to rule on the issue. He is a strong supporter of national sovereignty.  He opposed the Iraq War Resolution of 2002.  He does not believe the United States should be involved with the North American Free Trade Agreement, and he believes we should withdraw membership from the United Nations.  He believes strong National sovereignty is more important.  He believes that most of our military resources should be used to enforce border security.  He did support military action against terrorists involved in the September 11^th attacks, but he feels the attacks should have been more limited to targeting specific terrorists as opposed to invading Iraq and Afghanistan. (Source)

Rick Perry – Dude is a Texan – period. Perry is strongly pro-life.  He opposes the government policy of funding abortions.  He has also signed a bill in Texas where teenage girls under the age of 18 must get parental consent before deciding to get an abortion.  In 2011, Perry signed the Mandatory Ultrasound Bill.  Governor Rick Perry supports limited central government.  He feels that the current Federal government is bloated and needs to be cut back. Governor Perry believes that there is no substantial evidence of global warming.  He feels that scientists have not concluded that global warming is a real problem in our society today.  He believes that global warming is a lot of media hype, and he is staunchly opposed to passing legislation that supports climate change initiatives. Texas is one of the states that does‘t have a state income tax, and Governor Perry has opposed any attempts to create an income tax for Texas.  He is a fiscal conservative that stands for conservative fiscal values in most cases.  He is very strong on job creation, as Texas leads the nation in new jobs created since 2003.  It has created 73.4 % of the nation’s jobs since 2006. (Source)

Rick Santorum – Came up Quick – appears to have smashed into a wall. He is pro-life and vehemently opposes same-sex marriage.  He is a strong proponent of heterosexual relationships and traditional child rearing.  He is concerned that the Supreme Court is making too many decisions about moral issues that the public should be making on their own. Santorum favors strong foreign policy initiatives against our enemies.  He feels the War on Terror started by the Bush administration can be won, and he supported President Bush on his leadership in occupying Iraq and Afghanistan as long as necessary to bring peace to these regions.  Santorum has recognized the threat of Islamic fascism in the Middle East and throughout the world.  He is pro-Israel, and he feels that Israel and Lebanon must be strong to counteract Islamic terrorism in the Middle East.  He strongly opposes having talks with known terrorist harboring nations like Syria and Iraq, as he feels we cannot negotiate with radical Islamic extremists. Santorum is opposed to illegal immigration.  He is vehemently opposed to amnesty for illegal aliens, and he feels that we need to take a stronger stand against illegals entering the country.  He wants the border fence to be built.  He would support National Guard troops being used to protect our borders with Mexico and Canada, and he also wants the United States to re-establish English as the official language in the USA. (Source)

Newt Gingrich – Guy is named after a lizard. He supports public school prayer. He feels that schools should compete for students just like businesses compete for customers. He feels teachers should have to compete with each other too. Gingrich feels education is one of the keys to getting the country back on solid ground. Gingrich feels we should have low taxes. He is opposed to increasing taxes on the rich, and he feels the corporate tax rate in the United States is too high. He wants to do away with the corporate tax rate, and he also wants to eliminate the inheritance tax. Gingrich is all about limited government. He feels that the government intrudes in our lives too much, and he feels that we should get the government out of our lives as much as possible. He used to teach an environmental studies class at West Georgia College. He also co-authored a book with Terry Maple called A Contract With the Earth. He is a strong proponent of green technology and energy conservation. He also feels the government should incentivize people with monetary prizes and tax incentives to come up with new innovative ways to generate alternative energy sources. He is against Obamacare, also known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. He feels Americans should have the right to make their own decisions on their healthcare needs. He believes ObamaCare is unconstitutional and should be repealed by the United States House of Representatives. He feels everyone should have to contribute to the healthcare system in some form.

Yeah, I know right? Each one, to me anyway, has something okay with him, and stuff that is like WHAT!??! Out of that list the one I like the most….. Ron Paul. Chances of him winning? ZERO.

1. The 99% are those that are not in the top 1% of income Americans – meaning most non rich people
2. If you really want a job why are protesting instead of looking for a job?
3. How are the 1% in the 1%? What are they doing that is so wrong?
4. Is anyone really protecting those in the 1%? (Oddly enough this is where we start crossing the line into conspiracy theory – or do we?)
5. Protesting in the USA, peaceful protesting that is, should be protected by the Right to Freedom of Speech. Right? hmmmm
6. Why are people being carted off, arrested, pepper sprayed for sitting somewhere? Many of these cases have reported that those that were mistreated actually did no violence themselves, so what is the deal here really?

Then I stumbled across this article. Basically this guy spells it out, in graphic detail, what people are really protesting (not the crap that MSM is showing you) and what truth there is to the protesting. What this guy illustrates is alarming at best, and borderline Civil War directed. If what he says is true, and at present I have no reason to doubt him given the recent actions of politicians in this country, then the USA has truly been stolen from her citizens.

From my perspective, things are going to get far worse before they get better. Maybe all those rantings by Scanjack over the last two years were closer to mark than most of us wanted to believe. The USA seems to be sliding into a rather dark place with increasing speed. Hold on folks, going to be a dangerously bumpy ride.

The way of life can be free and beautiful. But we have lost the way.

Greed has poisoned men’s souls, has barricaded the world with hate;
has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed.

We have developed speed but we have shut ourselves in:
machinery that gives abundance has left us in want.
Our knowledge has made us cynical,
our cleverness hard and unkind.
We think too much and feel too little:
More than machinery we need humanity;
More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness.

Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.

The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood for the unity of us all. Even now my voice is reaching millions throughout the world, millions of despairing men, women and little children, victims of a system that makes men torture and imprison innocent people. To those who can hear me I say “Do not despair”.

The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed, the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress: the hate of men will pass and dictators die and the power they took from the people, will return to the people and so long as men die [now] liberty will never perish. . .

Soldiers: don’t give yourselves to brutes, men who despise you and enslave you, who regiment your lives, tell you what to do, what to think and what to feel, who drill you, diet you, treat you as cattle, as cannon fodder.

Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men, machine men, with machine minds and machine hearts. You are not machines. You are not cattle. You are men. You have the love of humanity in your hearts. You don’t hate, only the unloved hate. Only the unloved and the unnatural. Soldiers: don’t fight for slavery, fight for liberty.

In the seventeenth chapter of Saint Luke it is written:
“The kingdom of God is within man”
Not one man, nor a group of men, but in all men; in you, the people.

You the people have the power, the power to create machines, the power to create happiness. You the people have the power to make life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure. Then in the name of democracy let’s use that power, let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world, a decent world that will give men a chance to work, that will give you the future and old age and security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power, but they lie. They do not fulfil their promise, they never will. Dictators free themselves but they enslave the people. Now let us fight to fulfil that promise. Let us fight to free the world, to do away with national barriers, do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness.

Soldiers! In the name of democracy, let us all unite!

. . .

Look up! Look up! The clouds are lifting, the sun is breaking through. We are coming out of the darkness into the light. We are coming into a new world. A kind new world where men will rise above their hate and brutality.

The soul of man has been given wings, and at last he is beginning to fly. He is flying into the rainbow, into the light of hope, into the future, that glorious future that belongs to you, to me and to all of us. Look up. Look up. – Charlie Chaplin (The Great Dictator)

First you must understand that Mit Romney was a very successful business man – with loads of help from other people. Ironically many people would argue that he was a ruthless, evil bastard – maybe – but that is typically the cocktail needed for a successful business dude. Given the successful businessman history one might conclude that he knows a little about economics – maybe.  See this is where a mistake is being made, pushed mostly by Mit’s camp might I add, that because he was good at business he will in turn be good at being President. Amusingly enough this was the same conclusion that Ross Perot presented years back and the Republicans called BS on that campaign strategy – and here they are now using just that. Either way we must state that Mit was a successful business guy and thus is a millionaire of epic proportions.

So successful private sector business guy makes Governor and shoots for Presidential election. One must ask all politicians where they stand on issues right? Therein lies the rub for me with Mit – the dude doesn’t really know. See the odd thing about Mit is that he takes a strong stance on things, and then later undoes said strong stance because people questioned his strong stance. On important issues he often doesn’t take any stance at all, only to later take this awkward high ground about how he was always right to begin with – catch being the guy never made a comment on the matter being discussed at all – except of course “I have no comment at this time.” Well no shit Mit my man, of course you were right – you did have no comment!

I find this perspective on politics to be the new uber Politician. Stance? On abortion? Yes! There is such a thing! The economy in shambles?!?! I know right!? Mr. Romney do you have an opinion at all? Yes! Two, totally opposite opinions about the same topic at the same time! Here is the thing – if that is really the case then do we really want a guy running the country who at times acts like he has multiple personalities?

Or is it that he really isn’t the one answering these questions to begin wtih?

In 2008 members of congress were actually threatened that there would be martial law on the streets of America if they didn’t go along with the T.A.R.P. program, banker bailout, whatever you care to call it, and that doing so would fix the economy. QE1, QE2 printing hundreds, and hundreds of billions of dollars that mostly went out of the country for propping up foreign banks; this is called “hot money” (over $23.7 trillion – old link, but search Bloomberg sometime; it’s gone up).

Like I have said over the past year plus, we have lost millions of jobs, and I don’t care what anyone says, they are NOT coming back. The commonwealth of the United States is faced with decades of this decline. The great depression was nothing compared to what we have entered into now.

Debt Limit, as defined in wikipedia, is :

“The United States public debt is a measure of the obligations of the United States federal government and is presented by the United States Treasury in two components and one total:

• Debt Held by the Public, representing all federal^[1] securities held by institutions or individuals outside the United States Government;
• Intragovernmental Holdings, representing U.S. Treasury securities held in accounts which are administered by the United States Government, such as the OASI Trust fund administered by the Social Security Administration; and
• Total Public Debt Outstanding, which is the sum of the above components.^[2]

As of June 29th, 2011, the Total Public Debt Outstanding of the United States of America was $14.46 trillion and was approximately 98.6% of calendar year 2010’s annualgross domestic product (GDP) of $14.66 trillion.^[2][3][4] Using 2010 figures, the total debt (96.3% of GDP) ranked 12th highest against other nations.”

Note the use of the term PUBLIC  there; again that is you. So the government is being political instead of solution oriented in finding a way to owe even more cash. Read this. It explains quite a bit of what this is all about.

What they are failing to address here is the HOW the Public owes so much. See Congress, in its infinite wisdom, is arguing over what to cut. They do that a lot. The tragedy here is that nobody ever agrees – ever. Why? Because these “representatives” answer to a higher power. No not a celestial entity; a lobbyist! That’s right! These idiots were bought way back when they ran for office by contributors – and thus they can’t piss those folks off – btw this is why Republicans are so against any tax changes for corporations if you haven’t figured that out already.

So HOW do we owe so much, or rather, or do we stop spending so much? You can’t consider cuts, that never works as people find a way to to keep everything. No what you must do is start from zero. We have nothing, and a pile of money. What do we NEED to buy to exist. Sounds stupid I know but think about it. You are standing on the street, your family next to you, your daughter holding your hand. In the your other hand is your check book, balance in bold numbers. What do you need? A roof? Food? What else. You’d be surprised how short that list really is – but it is easier to construct that list than to stand in a full house, one of many you own, and determine what you can get rid of – you can always justify keeping everything.

The vase? Aunt Edna gave you that – sure it is empty, but it has sentimental value. The 7th TV in the bathroom? You do enjoy watching Rapid Fire while doing your business. Etc. But say you had nothing, really nothing, what do you need?

I do know this – Baba knows what people need.

RIP George Carlin – He got it at least.

“A man in the wrong cannot stand against a man in the right who keeps on comin’.”

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The question here is, do you believe that text? The quick answer is “of course!” Doesn’t everybody? The real answer is a tad more.. mmm.. devious? To discover the truth first we must set on the table what “that all men are created equal” actually means. Let us begin:

1. Nit pickers will first point out that nowhere in there does it say anything about women. Realize that writing styles of the time of the Declaration of Independence never really considered gender – so when talking about men exclusively, or talking about everybody together, there was rarely a difference in language used. That aside, also back then women weren’t considered equals and thus there is the chance that many people who wrote this didn’t think that this applied to women. There is a long standing debate on that subject that we won’t go into now.
2. If everything was equal then Men and Women would both be eligible for a draft. In fact, anyone physically able to perform the required duties who was also of age would be eligible.
3. If everything was equal then the concept of specialized institutions wouldn’t be covered. Examples? Colleges for women. Colleges for African Americans. Any institute specialized for anyone that didn’t have what we consider medically to be special needs.
4. If everything was equal then everyone would get paid the same for a job regardless of your gender, race or whatever.
5. If everything was equal then the concept of asking anyone’s race or gender on most forms of application for a job or service requests would not be needed as it would go against equality. People would get a job purely on their education, skills, and experience.
6. If everything was equal then all votes are equal. This is not presently the case in the USA as the USA is not actually a democracy – it is a Federal Republic. You, and many others, are represented by someone else – and they may not represent what you really want.
7. If everything was equal then anyone capable of the physical requirements could serve in the military. This is a topic that has endless argument/discussion value.

I happen to believe in equality – I don’t like anything done half assed. The catch i of course if you have real equality, and look at the list above, you can see now many things in the USA, land of the free home of the brave and all that, would need to change. I don’t believe that that alteration would go easily.

Here is a post that I felt was somewhat atypical for this blog community. It deals with a subject that causes very strong, polarized reactions. That is to say it deals with the issue of Animal Welfare and Rights. This issue is one that I’ve spent countless hours in internal dialog/debate (read: ongoing mental struggle). I believe I can accurately comprehend the way the world works. And it is a violent, bloody, and short existance on this planet for most living things. However, I cannot shrug the concept that as sentient beings capable of empathy amongst ourselves, should we (as humans) not extend this to all living things? Obviously my conceptual question interweaves principles derived from a plethora of sources… religion(s), philosophy, neuroscience, sociology, anthropology, biology, etc.

Take a look at this site. The movie it touts is currently being considered for an Oscar. I find the subject matter a bit hard to stomach…but blunt reality is required to open minds to consider other possibilities. Upon viewing the trailer, attempt to resist the impulse to follow engrained cultural norms – really stop and think about our lifestyles and impact. Or, as my theory predicts, most of you will utter something under your breath, shrug this off, and stereotype the author of the post.

http://www.earthlings.com/
http://www.earthlings.com/blog/index.php

NPR did a cover story today about how there is a serious amount of tension inside of NATO. The gist of the entire exchange is that America is finally calling out the other members of NATO on spending and shouldering the burden of technology, troops, weapons etc. It turns out that the USA is now covering 75% of the cost of NATO entirely – the amusing part? European countries know that, acknowledge, and don’t really seem to care. This may seem like a negative statement, and in some fashion is, however the retort they are offering is that they have far larger problems that national defense – like bankruptcy.

Let us back up for a moment: WTF is NATO anyway and why does it exist? From wikipedia (tried to get it off the NATO site but their site apparently has issues with copying text):

“The North Atlantic Treaty Organization or NATO ( /ˈneɪtoʊ/ nay-toh; French: Organisation du traité de l’Atlantique Nord(OTAN)), also called the (North) Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4 April 1949. The NATO headquarters are inBrussels, Belgium,^[3] and the organization constitutes a system of collective defencewhereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party.

For its first few years, NATO was not much more than a political association. However, the Korean War galvanized the member states, and an integrated military structure was built up under the direction of two U.S. supreme commanders. The first NATO Secretary General, Lord Ismay, famously stated the organization’s goal was “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down”.^[4] Doubts over the strength of the relationship between the European states and the United States ebbed and flowed, along with doubts over the credibility of the NATO defence against a prospective Soviet invasion—doubts that led to the development of the independent French nuclear deterrent and the withdrawal of the French from NATO’s military structure in 1966.”

Okay! So NATO is an outdated alliance put together to stop those pesky Russians! Wait. Didn’t the USSR fall years ago? Aren’t there now like eleventy godrillion little monster countries roaming free from that after math? If that is the case, that NATO existed purely as a united front against the evil Red Giant, and that Giant is dead, then WTF is NATO for? Furthermore why is there NATO and the United Nations? If NATO is now mostly the USA spending, troops etc, then really isn’t in the USA plus sometimes other people lending a hand? For what purpose?

I say get rid of it. What is the point? Isn’t the USA tired of being the world’s police force yet? First there was the USSR. Gone. Terrorism – wait.. Osama Bin Laden? Dead. Lots and lots of “evil” regimes in the Middle East? Wait – fallen or falling. WTF are we doing people? Why are we continuing to spend resources, money, and lives on situations that other countries don’t want us sticking our noses into to begin with? America has her own issues to contend with. The United Nations is now the “governing body” of the planet – it is the objective of that governing body to protect everyone and hold the overall peace – not just the job of the USA.

In a nutshell  - USA pack up your stuff and go home. Let the European Union do what they said they would do – be united. That is their continent – let them have it back.

Time Magazine is now covering the Bilderberg Group. For years borderline nut jobs like Alex Jones have been talking about the Bilderberg group, hell he even went so far as to go to one of the “secret” meetings and protest it (reportedly he was detained there), and they have been constantly dismissed as Conspiracy Theorist Nutbags – the real problem with Jones is that his delivery mechanism borders on psychopathic madman. So, what do we say to those say nutjobs when a major publication is now covering the same story? Granted one can easily see that Time Magazine isn’t covering it in the same direct, borderline crazy way as an Alex Jones, but they are covering it nonetheless – and that is an important thing in its own right.

Time Magazine is telling you that the Bilderberg Group and their yearly meetings are real. Think about that. They aren’t saying that they know what happens inside of a meeting, but they have supplied what some people who have gone to those meetings have said about it. As there is no way to confirm or deny those stories we have to leave them in the category of conjecture. But again – Time Magazine is telling you that the Bilderberg Group and their yearly meetings are real. Wait a second – this group and its meetings have been dismissed by many for years as Conspiracy Theory right?

I think people need to look at the term Conspiracy Theory as a Conspiracy Theory. If a person quickly denounces something, without any proof to the contrary, as a Conspiracy Theory then I suggest you consider their statement as one. Why would someone so quickly dismiss anything with no actual information?

Me? I believe in all possibilities, regardless of how silly. Remember all those years ago, when the world was flat? The people that said it was round? Dismissed as crazies that would fly off the edge. I believe that anything is possible but question everything. You say there is a Bilderberg Group? They meet once a year? Who are they? Show me proof. Notice I have not dismissed the theory, just asked for proof. Of course, the long standing debate here is what do you define as proof enough to believe in something?

Billions of people have believed in many religions with no proof – just faith. Remember that. Hell – just a few weeks ago there were loads of folks that were convinced that the world was going to end precisely at 6pm, in each time zone, and they believed that without proof – just some dude telling them, for the second time, that he was really really right this time.

Why is this story so compelling? Enough so that every news station in the USA has covered it to death? NPR for example mentioned this story three times, playing the same crap clips over and over again, over the span of 90 minutes yesterday. For shame NPR, for shame. The reason this story is not just some smut based lunacy originating once again from the bowels of the United States Political Machine is that the congressman in question – one Anthony Weiner (seriously, I know right?) lied about what happened –  several times. Then yesterday he decides, seemingly at random, that his story holds less water than the air in Arizona right now (bad taste?) and that he now must come clean to save face. Why? Allow me to illuminate you, the die hard Blinkinblogs reader – there is no saving face from a series of lies all said on national television – unless of course you are the President and had weird cigar based sex with an intern – still applauding Clinton on pulling that series of BS off.

What did the big dick say? Weiner had a list of smart wild ass lies.

1. “I was hacked! ” – This one cracks me up.
2. “I am not sure if the person in that photo is me!” “Photos can be manipulated,” he told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “Photos can be of one thing and changed to something else. We’re going to try to get to the bottom of what happened,” he said. – Wait – you aren’t sure if it is you in that photo? How is that even possible? Either you did take a shot of yourself, or you did not.

What have we learned children? Being dumb is bad. Being a dumb Congressman is worse – and should be expected. Being a dumb lying Congressman is hilarity – and, we hope, spells certain doom for the career of said moron.

In the end he said “To be clear, the picture is of me and I sent it.” We know dumb ass, we know.

And now for something completely different! A smart politician! ok, I lied. It’s Sarah Palin – being.. um.. Sarah Palin. I apologize ahead of time for getting even more stupid all over you.