Ron Paul Gets Into It With A Foolish Reporter (Laura Ingram)

Yeah he's a nut, but he's right on the money with respect to the war, constitution and Twinkies!

When George Carlin rants....

Another Political Quiz to see which candidate you're more in agreement with

The GlassBooth.com take the quiz and see who is really in alignment with your beliefs. What's interesting is that people don't really vote for who has their same agenda... they vote for a candidate that has a better chance of winning.

Some do this because they don't want to back a loosing horse. They would rather forego their beliefs and vote for someone they don't agree with because it's a lot safer to be a lemming or a member of the flock of sheep brigade.

Others are a little more strategic, knowing that a vote for Ralph Nader is a vote for Bush, way back when. So they intentionally forego voting for their candidate, not being sheepesk, and back a horse that has the best chance of keeping out someone they really, really, really don't like.

Take the quiz.

Mover Mike Keeps Getting It Wrong, This Time About Charlie Wilson

I was going to respond to Mover Mike's little post on Charlie Wilson's War, but gosh darnnit... I've been banned from Mover Mike's little blog, since he really can't handle any real arguments against his little rants, such as "Global Warming is a myth and you hate the troops if you don't support Bush."

1. Dr. Jack Wheeler's blog was rather interesting and provided some valuable information on the Afghan/Russian war and the movie itself. Thank you Mover Mike for bringing this tidbit of info to our attention. Too bad you didn't shut the fuck up after quoting Doc Wheeler. It would have spared me from vomiting after reading your opinion, once again.


2. After making such a stand about how flawed the movie is, Mover Mike ended by stating that "Charlie Wilson who died in 1997" when in fact... Charlie Wilson is actually still alive! Go figure Mover Mike. I just listened to Charlie speak on NPR last month, you can also read about his little biography on biography.com.


3. Mover Mike said, "he fought against the CIA elites who were wrong then as they have been, at least publicly, so many times since. It's a shame that the movie isn't deeper." This is true today as it ever was. It is unfortunate that we do not have enough movies floating around that are capable of exposing the illicit wars and lies that plague the White House while hiding behind excuses that the CIA didn't do it's job good 'nuff!
   
4. Mover Mike quoted Dr. Wheeler as saying, "Charlie Wilson's heroism should be "a deep embarrassment to the party of Pelosi Galore and Lost Harry Reid, the party who apologizes for America's existence and has neither the spine nor will to defend her." Moover Mike, and Wheeler, misconstrue the public’s (democrats) acknowledgment of our government's sins and wrong doings as an unmerited apology to the world. This is not the case. It is called accountability and responsibility. When you have a rogue government engaging in acts that further it’s own agenda at the expense of other people’s lives in other nations… then fuck yeah, that’s well worthy of an apology and maybe… just a little bit of fucking humbleness.
   
   See, that’s something neocons simply don’t have, morals and a “give-a-shit” concern for people of other nations. It’s more, “I got mine, sucks to be you” from the conservative right. Bidness as usual. Yet you touch on a truth, that the democratic party is spineless and does need to be bitch-slapped into acting more accordingly.
   
   The difference is that the real accordance is no more than bringing a real gun to a knife fight where we can finally bury the republican party and their corrupt agenda. With over 700 American bases in over 130 countries… Move Mike and Doc Wheeler see no reason to apologize to anyone, Arab or American, for our foreign policy overt (and especially covert)actions or for the reciprocal and understandable blowback that comes our way in the form of 9/11, etc.
   
   How many more Americans will die from blowback before Mover Mike's POS party decides that maybe... just maybe an apology is called for. An apology for doing the wrong thing to poor people of other nations, to darker skinned people of other nations. In Neoconville... there is no such thing. Imperial Hubris my friends. That's your motto.


5. Mover Mike ends his story by stating, "The final scene is one of Wilson seeking $1 million for schools in Afghanistan, after we spent $500 million on weapons. He was turned down because "no one gives a shit about schools" for Afghanis. That seems to be the Movie's lesson for Americans to the question, "Why do they hate us?" We didn't spend enough money building them back up so the Taliban (Hamas or Palastinians, your choice) marched in." Not only does Mover Mike equate the Taliban with Hamas and Palestinians, he might as well say "Sand Niggers, Rag Heads... take your choice" since they are all the same to neocons of Mover Mike's caliber.
   
   Let me point you to a little page from a little book written in 2000 (pre 9/11 for those who aren't paying attention) by a guy called Chalmers Johnson. The book is called Blowback. On page XIV Johnson said the following, regarding Afghanistan, the CIA and why fanatics like bin Laden BEGAN hating our foreign policy. The section I'm pointing at is highlighted at the bottom of the page.

GOD FORBID if neocons ever questioned the acts of our governments foreign policy.

Oh sure, state that our domestic policy is flawed where the best solution is to immediately initiate a call for a stronger Regressive Tax (for those of you who don't know what that means, it's basically that... the richer you get the lower your percentage of taxes you are expected to pay, i.e. Social Security Tax).

Neocons like Mover Mike have hijacked this country and patriotism to the point that any questioning of our government's actions is tantamount to treason. They hide behind parotted declarations of "Smaller Government! Smaller Government!" Yet they are the first to inflate the hell out of government in order to meet their own wants and ends (especially if you're a fag who's picking out wedding gowns or a woman in need of an abortion. March on Christian soldier Mover Mike.)

Again Mover Mike, thank you for the introduction of Dr. Jack Wheeler. Honestly, Wheeler's words were quite informative and highly enlightening. Good food for thought. But when you use the words of others who are more educated than you to launch into an opinion of your own... somehow... you don't seem quite as astute.

The Highest Rated Political Video on YouTube

You might not remember, but way back in 1994 Cheney was interviewed and opined all the reasons why it would not be a good idea to go into Iraq.

At what point does "quagmire" come up in the discussion instead of "Surge?"

Bush makes fun of himself

Ok, I can't stand the guy... but this is pretty funny.

The most discussed video on YouTube - re: Islam's lack of civilization

It is good to hear criticism of the Muslim beliefs from a Muslim.

David Lynch on iPhones & You Suck At Photoshop

Ok, even though this should be a political blog that bashes neocons... I couldn't help but add these two videos. They're pretty damn funny.

David Lynch on the Iphone


You suck at Photoshop

Abusing Children in the Name of God

God... save me from your followers. And please, please, please stay the hell away from our legislatures and politicians. Ignorance is alive and well in the United States.

Abusing Children in the Name of God
By Shawn F. Peters - Washington Post.com

A hemophilic boy in Pennsylvania bleeds to death over a period of two days from a small cut on his foot. An Indiana girl dies after a malignant tumor sprouts from her skull and grows so enormous that it’s nearly the size of her head. A boy in Massachusetts succumbs to a bowel obstruction. (His cries of pain are so loud that neighbors are forced to shut their windows to block out the sound.)

None of these children benefit from the readily-available medical treatments that might save their lives, or at least mitigate their suffering. Because the tenets of their parents’ religious faiths mandate it, their ailments are treated by prayer rather than medical science. The results are tragic.

It is difficult to determine precisely how many children in the United States lose their lives every year as the result of the phenomenon that has come to be known as religion-based medical neglect. [or how about stupid, inbred darwin candidates]

A landmark study published in the journal Pediatrics uncovered more than 150 reported fatalities over a 10-year period – a tally that one of the study’s authors later said represented only “the tip of the iceberg” of a surprisingly pervasive problem.

Assessing whether forms of religion-related child abuse pose a greater risk to children than more widely publicized threats, such as ritual satanic abuse, a wide-ranging study funded by the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect concluded that “there are more children actually being abused in the name of God than in the name of Satan.”

Since the late nineteenth century, hundreds of such instances of abuse have resulted in tangled criminal litigation. The parents charged in these cases – many of them Christian Scientists or members of small Christian churches that ground their doctrines in narrowly literal interpretations of the Bible – often have argued that the First Amendment safeguards their decision to adhere to their faiths’ religious traditions and treat their ailing children solely by spiritual means.

Prosecutors, meanwhile, have balked at the notion that constitutional protections for religious liberty provide an absolute bar to state regulation of religious conduct, particularly when that behavior puts the safety of children at risk. Their task often has been complicated, however, by murky state manslaughter and abuse statutes that appear to provide exemptions for religious healing practices.

Arguing that they were “Christians first, citizens afterward,” a prominent Christian spiritual healer once urged his followers to disregard secular laws that might compel them to forsake their religious beliefs regarding healing. Such is the dilemma that confronts parents who choose to treat their sick or injured children with prayer instead of medicine.

Not only must they safeguard the health of their sons and daughters; they also must try to reconcile their devotion to God with their duties as citizens in a society that boasts a long and sometimes checkered history of regulating uncommon religious conduct.

Defining these obligations through the enforcement of secular laws – especially ones that are constitutionally fuzzy – can be a complicated business. Moreover, there is no guarantee that it will deter devout and stubborn parents from engaging in religious practices that endanger the health of their children. But the alternative – simply ignoring the suffering of the youngest and most vulnerable members of our nation’s churches – seems unconscionable.

Shawn Francis Peters’ latest book, "When Prayer Fails: Faith Healing, Children, and the Law," was published in October by Oxford University Press. He teaches at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

And killing your brood isn't just for stupid Christians anymore. That's right, Muslims have been able to take this to a WHOLE 'nother level. Remember that Muslim father in Mississaga who beat the hell (literally) out of her 16 year old little daughter for not wearing the traditional Hijab? Yeah... I think he's here legally.


March on Christian soldier and followers of Muhammad. How many more innocents have to die in the name of your disgusting gods?

Take The Electoral Political Compass, See Which Candidate Is In Your Corner

An awesome little test, better than the one I posted before. Take the test, answer about 35 questions about gun control, national security, Mexicans, health care and Chuck Norris.

Last time I took a similar test I was in Bill Richards camp. Looks like I'm scheduled to meet the Obama Girl some time soon!

Iowa Caucus Results - Obama and Huckabee win

You can see the graphic results here.

Obama beat Hillary and Edwards at 37.54% with Hillary and Edwards coming in at 29.43% and 29.71% respectively.

Democrats

• 
  Obama at 27.54%



• Edwards at 29.71%



• 
  Clinton 29.43%

Republicans

• Mike Huckabee 34.29%



• Mitt Romney 25.32%



• Fred Thompson 13.37%



• Chuck Norris 13.24%

Bill Richardson pulled a 2.12% while Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich both came in with 0%. Ron Paul, the YouTube sweetheart, rallied up 9.99% While Giuliani scrapped up a whopping 3.46%.

Get the full details here.

Nice to see that the United States goes for popularity over quality. Reminds me of high school all over again.

And for those of you who don't live in Iowa, who are on the West Coast, who have no friggin idea what a Caucus is or why the hell it's important or why it matters... try Wikipedia. It's rather enlightening.

"The Iowa caucus is an electoral event in which residents of the U.S. state of Iowa elect delegates to the county convention to which their precinct belongs in a caucus. There are 99 counties in Iowa and thus 99 conventions.

These county conventions then select delegates for both Iowa's Congressional District Convention and the State Convention, which eventually choose the delegates for the presidential nominating conventions (the national conventions).

The Iowa caucus is noteworthy for the amount of media attention it receives during U.S. presidential election years: Since 1972, the Iowa caucus has been the first major electoral event of the nominating process for President of the United States. Although only about one percent of the nation's delegates are chosen by the Iowa state convention, the initial caucus has served as an early indication of which candidates for President might win the nomination of their political party at that party's national convention. ..

The Iowa caucus is commonly recognized as the first step in the U.S. presidential nomination process for both the Democratic and the Republican Parties. It came to national attention in 1972, with a series of articles in the New York Times on how non-primary states would choose their delegates for the national conventions. "

Problems with the Iowa Caucus
There is a debate over the effectiveness and usefulness of caucuses in Iowa.

One criticism is that the caucuses, especially the Democratic caucus, are a step backwards from the right to a secret ballot. Democratic caucus participants (though not Republicans, whose caucuses vote by secret ballot) must publicly state their opinion and vote, leading to natural problems such as peer pressure from fellow neighbors and embarrassment over who his/her real pick might be.

Another criticism involves the sheer amount of participants' time these events consume. The Iowa caucus lasts two hours, preventing people who must work, who are sick, or must take care of their children from casting their vote. What this means is that, if you don't show to scratch your name, you don't vote. Adios amigo.

Absentee voting is also barred, so soldiers who come from Iowa, but must serve in the military lose their vote.

The final criticism is the complexity of the rules in terms of how one's vote counts, as it is not a simple popular vote. Each precinct's vote may be weighed differently due to its past voting record. Ties can be solved by picking a name out of a hat or a simple coin toss, leading to anger over the true democratic nature of these caucuses. Additionally, the representation of the caucus has been questioned due to traditionally low turnout. Others question the permanent feature of having caucuses in certain states, while perpetually ignoring the rest of the country.

There you have it. One nation, under God... and a Presidential candidate via a coin toss. Thank you democracy... no wait, we're not a democracy are we, we're a republic. Damnit. I keep forgetting that.

Shock Doctrine - "Economic Shock Treatment"

Naomi Klein is an award-winning journalist, syndicated columnist and author of the New York Times and international bestseller, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.

The basic concept is that an individual, or society, after receiving a "shock" to the system is more open to suggestion and far more likely to comply than just before receiving the shock.

Such shocks, or disasters, come in the form of 9/11, Katrina and the tsunami in India. A terrorist attack or a natural disaster, puts us all into a state of shock, making us all susceptible to suggestion and direction. The idea is to prevent the individual, or society, from relaxing and recovering from the shock.

Milton Freedman, the most famous economist during the Reagan era, understood this concept and implemented it since he and his disciples were unable to implement his profit agenda democratically.




At the most chaotic juncture in Iraq's civil war, a new law is unveiled that would allow Shell and BP to claim the country's vast oil reserves. Immediately following September 11, the Bush Administration quietly out-sources the running of the "War on Terror" to Halliburton and Blackwater. After a powerful tsunami devastates the coasts of Southeast Asia, the pristine beaches are auctioned off to tourist resorts. New Orleans's residents, still scattered from Hurricane Katrina, discover that their public housing, hospitals and schools will never be reopened.

The concept of "Beware the Military Industrial Complex" is no longer applicable. The new concept that has surpassed Ike's message is the "Disaster Capitalism Complex." This platform works. It works towards the profiting of global corporations at the expense of the masses.

Pick up the book and read it.

Naomi Klein speaks on the Shock Doctrine – Part I


Shock Doctrine – Part 2


Shock Doctrine – Part 3



Shock Doctrine – Part 4


Shock Doctrine – Part 5


Shock Doctrine – Part 6