Republikid

Real Hope and Change in 2013

2013-03-31T12:53:00.001-04:00

So. Yeah. With this new year I've begun to feel very differently about things. I don't think I'm any less than I was, or that I've decided to hug trees and wear Birkenstock sandals and smoke weed. Sorry, not my scene. But I realized I'm also not opposed to people who do. I'm not opposed to gay marriage, or abortion in some respects. I have disagreements with people over the function and usage of these ideals, but not the basic premise.

All people should have the right to be in a civil union and have the same rights. But I believe that the "sacrament of holy matrimony" or marriage as defined by the church is a valid religious concern and should not be subject to scrutiny by the gay community. I also feel that the Christians need to separate themselves from the secular definition of marriage as defined by the states.

In regards to abortion, I will not deny a woman's right to choose, I do however have a strong disagreement as to why we need abortion and what it is currently used primarily for. only about 1% of all abortions are because of rape, incest, or medical necessity, that leaves 99% of abortions as elective for numerous mundane reasons. This means that in general abortion is being used as a violent form of birth control. As a father of two very unique daughters, and one unique son I know that the moment of their conception is what made them who they are, and it was those unique circumstances that brought them into my life.

Conception can only lead to a human being, and therefore, regardless of whether or not a brain is formed, or the fetus feels pain in those early stages, it is still a human being, and you have chosen to bring it into the world through accident, or carelessness; and have now decided to end it's existence without just as much carelessness. Congratulations you hold the power of life and death over a pea sized pre-born human being who didn't ask to be created, and also has no say in his untimely demise.

So now that you understand my objections to the two most heated topics of the day, let me get back to the reason for this post. A lot of my earlier posts were tinged with a lot of hate and righteous indignation. Since the inception of this blog my mood has been tempered by many factors, and because of this I've decided to make a few changes.

The most significant change will be the general intention of this blog. I no longer support the majority of conservative representatives in office today. I also oppose most liberal congressmen as well. I've decided that to change the system we need a totally new system; and to do that we need a new way of thinking. We need to bring people together to think about how we can live with the maximum amount of freedom, with the least government intrusion, and the most balanced form of government regulation necessary to protect people from large corporate entities that are unscrupulous and whose practices pose a threat the the health of the citizenry.

I will be focusing on human issues, and how the government is either helping or hindering those human issues. I will be looking at ways to effectively change government from without, and arm the people with knowledge to keep them safe from government intrusion. I will not be posting articles specifically on how to keep the cops from finding your weed stash hidden in your car. While I think pot should be legal, right now it isn't so your on your own brothers and sisters. I will however tell you facts related to law and how to best defend yourself against bad doobies in the government and police department.

This will be a big task for me, separating the facts in the law books, from the convoluted nonsense of the 'sovereign' citizen and the 4th amendment card holders who are well intentioned, but sometimes woefully misinformed. I am not a lawyer or a constitutional scholar, but I hope over the coming months I will become as near to both to be able to serve you well and arm you with correct and accurate information.

I have been running this blog for nearly three and a half years now and regardless of where life takes me, I will continue to write in it even if it it only to satisfy my own needs when the rest of the world has stopped reading or caring. This is one of my favorite outlets, and I'm so glad that I have started this particular journey.

I am trying to reconcile my minds deepest conflict, the one where half of my mind is telling me that we are all one energy and can live in harmony with the universe, and the other that tells me that, you can spout all the consciousness you want, but if you try that shit in Iran you'll probably get strung up from a lamppost, and that's not a joke, it's reality. So I'm going to focus on the folks who want to hear a positive message, even if some of them are convinced that they can radiate enough love to make psychopathic dictators give up their evil ways and embrace sustainable farming.

We are all unique and beautiful, but some of us are stupid. My only hope is that I can make a few of you less stupid. Sorry if you think that's harsh, but I was born without a properly working filter in my brain so you will hear only the truth and the world as I see it. It might not be pretty, but we're really living in it, so you should see it for what is while still trying to focus on the beauty of it as well.

Union Terrorists Destroy Quaker Meetinghouse

2013-01-06T22:16:00.000-05:00

Excerpted from Reason: Police say union workers “almost certainly” torched an under-construction Quaker meetinghouse in northwest Philadelphia four days before Christmas. The Chestnut Hill Friends had hired non-union labor for the project, which discommoded several construction unions.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Vandals with an acetylene torch crept onto the project’s muddy construction site in the middle of the night. Working out of view in the meetinghouse’s freshly cemented basement, they sliced off dozens of bolts securing the bare steel columns and set fire to the building crane, causing $500,000 in damage.

Police detectives deemed the attack arson because of a series of confrontational visits from union officials days before the incident. They say the torch could only have been operated by a trained professional, and believe it was almost certainly the work of disgruntled union members. The city has assigned extra investigators to the case and is working with federal forensic experts to track down the vandals, said Michael Resnick, the city’s public safety commissioner.

Keep reading…

Excerpted from Philly.com: It was probably back in 1997, though some think it might have been even earlier, when the Chestnut Hill Friends Meeting concluded that it had outgrown its space and that it was high time to erect a new building. But because it is not the Quaker way to rush into things, the group spent a few more years reflecting on whether it should buy land on Mermaid Lane for the new meetinghouse.

Even after the group sealed the deal in 2003, there was still plenty more talking and thinking and praying to be done about the undertaking. There was a “dialogue session” to articulate the group’s “touchstone values,” then, a year later, a workshop with a facilitator, and, finally – just to be certain – a retreat for members.

As agonizing as the process was, the result is a trim little design, faced in traditional Wissahickon schist, that will visibly reflect the ideals Quakers hold dear, from respect for the environment to plain old good neighborliness. And yet, in one crucial way,

the $5.8 million project now under construction is also a frank acknowledgment of real-world conditions: To afford Philadelphia’s first new Quaker meetinghouse in 80 years, the Chestnut Hill Friends felt their only option was to employ a nonunion contractor.
And now they are paying the price.

Four days before Christmas, the Friends’ world was rocked by the sort of violence they have devoted their lives to stamping out.

Alleged Occupy Organizer and His Pregnant Girlfriend Arrested for Possesion of Bomb Making Materials, Terrorist Books, and Guns

2012-12-31T20:17:00.000-05:00

Happy New Year everyone. The good folks at Occupy decided to ring in the New Year by trying to blow some mother fuckers up with bombs and guns and shit. Wow. I love how sensitive they are. 27 year old Morgan Gliedman, is the daughter of a prominent NYC doctor, and her boyfriend Aaron Green, 31-were arrected today after it was discovered they had guns, bomb making materials and a book entitled the Terrorists Encyclopedia in their Greenwich Village apartment. Aaron Green is an Occupy organizer.

The police went to the couples apartment for Gliedman was was wanted on credit card theft charges. it was then they discovered a substance known as HMTD, which is highly explosive and highly unstable. After her arrest, Gliedman went into labor and was rushed to the hospital. I don't know why this couple had the things they had in their possession, and I certainly don't understand how this girl could sanction explosives and terror manuals in her home when she is 9 months pregnant. Honestly, for the childs sake I hope her boyfriend was hiding this from her and she was not a part of it. That child doesn't deserve to grow up without it's parents. Sad, and no new years eve too.

I do hope, however that they can link this guy to a major Occupy terrorist cell so I can have an awesome laugh at their expense.

Read more at NBC News and at the DailyMail and also the Huffington Post, where they fail to mention even once Aaron Green's ties to Occupy Wall Street. Occupy spokespeople are denying any knowledge of this person and claim that the movement is too large to know everyone, and that it is impossible to say this is related to OWS in any way.

Fiscal Cliff a Repeat of 1937 Roosevelt Economy ?

2012-12-31T19:41:00.002-05:00

With the fiscal cliff looming, and only a few short days to come up with a fix, you would think that congress and the senate would be desperate to let go of the mutual animosity and try and come up with a constructive fix, and fast. I guess Harry Reid never got the memo. He went after John Boehner and congress with a vicious personal attack that really underscores the inhuman demeanor that Democratic party has taken on in the last four years. While Reid and the President are back in Washington, the house doesn't reconvene until Sunday.

Reid couldn't wait that long, and in a fit of brutally insensitive fury unleashed this gem of soulless dribble at the members of the House of Representatives:

"We are here in Washington working while the members of the House of Representatives are out watching movies and watching their kids play soccer and basketball and doing all kinds of things. They should be here," Reid said. "I can't imagine their consciences."

Yes, God forbid they spend some time with their families during Christmas. They should be in Washington sitting on their thumbs, hopelessly waiting on the Democrats to stop trying to suck our wallets dry and tank the economy yet again and come up with a plan that will put America back on the right track. probably not going to happen.

It's good to know that history is totally lost on Barack Obama and his cohorts as they try to ram through the same kind of nonsense that helped the economy nose-dive back in 1937 when Roosevelt decided that a higher tax burden was just what a struggling US economy needed. Despite cutting spending, the revenue brought in from the new taxes only had a temporary effect and as the economy sank, diminishing returns was what they were left with.

New Years is here and still no deal. I wonder if it will all be blamed on the Republicans.

Four More Years Of Obama? We.Are.Doomed.

2012-11-08T01:38:00.001-05:00

Tuesday was a sad day for America. Mitt Romney's fight for the White House came to a sad end, and the defeated Romney gave a quick, but optimistic speech. President Obama took the stage a little while later and spewed forth the same tired lies that he has been vomiting up for the last four years. With the election behind us, what do we have to look forward to in Obama's second term?

Romney, in his concession speech gave an impassioned plea for unity and and an end to partisan bickering, something he proved he could do as governor of Massachusetts. Barack Obama called for civility when things got heated between his party and the Republicans. The Republicans agreed that this was a good idea, and of course Obama just went back to the divisive name calling almost immediately.

The giddy liberal media is now having a field day with Romney's defeat relishing in the pain that half the country feels. The most offensive post-election bile comes from second rate journalists trying to vent their frustration at the supposed actions of the Republicans over the last four years(ignoring their own presidents failings). The most common complaint is the 'NO' mentality of the Republicans, who according to the left were just itching to see the president fail, and were willing to fix it so that he did.

How did the Republicans sabotage the presidents plans, you say? Simple. They made sure that the Republican controlled congress didn't let anything through that was authored by Democrats. In actuality, there were many bipartisan bills offered up in addition to the hundreds of bills put up by Republicans in congress. What is interesting to note is not the amount of bills the congress rejected, but with the speed and violence with which the Senate rejected everything that got through.

It was painfully apparent that the Democrat controlled senate was more than willing to strike down anything that had a Republicans name on it, even if some of their own in the congress approved of it. After two years of using trickery and subterfuge to pass bills while controlling all three houses, they reverted to the ill everything approach to shut down the backlash that they were feeling for their first two years. The American people had spoken, and they were pissed. The Tea Party ignited a fire in the belly of Americans like none we've seen in many, many years.

The newly elected members of congress and the senate got to work doing(for once) the will of the people. They sought to reverse or repeal all of the wrongs that had been perpetrated on them by the unlawful Democrats. Most of those new bloods toiled tirelessly to see that happen, although a few were converted to money hungry republi-bots in short order. Their efforts were easily thwarted by the Democrat controlled Senate.

Now it looks like we can expect four more years of the same tired nonsense. I expect nothing but an enhanced sense of entitlement and an even more perfidious plan of attack than we saw before. With nothing to lose, I think Obama will steam ahead with all of the things he had to remain cautious about in his first term.

The systematic destruction of the private sector, the bleeding of the American economy to pay for so-called Green Energy companies that will fail to line the pockets of his biggest campaign donors, the enslavement of minorities and the middle-class with more hand-outs and the full implementation of Obamacare, and his desire to be a pandering pussy to dictators in the Middle-East which will ultimately lead to more destabilization with larger and possibly lethal trouble for our ally, Israel.

Mitt Romney did make a few mistakes in the early stages of his campaign, that I will admit. But he came back and proved to a lot of Americans that he was a good man, and he was serious about trying to help this country. We need someone who actually cares to take up residence in the White House.

What he have now is a cunning liar, who is trying to manipulate us like little children by offering us candy and warm-fluffy medicine to cure our wounds. It is all a deception. A grand illusion, presented by a master illusionist, and grand puppeteer. Duplicity in the shape of a man.

Make no mistake, Barack Obama is taking us all for a ride(and not in a shiny new Cadillac, in an old beat up Ford with no seats and holes in the floorboards, straight off of a cliff.)

There will be no reaching across the aisle. There will be no bipartisan love-ins on the floor of the house. And more importantly there will be no hope and change left when this administration is finished with us. All of this will sound like baseless drivel to the left, and I will surely be beaten by negative comments for posting it, but I spent four years trying to be fair and nice. To give the benefit of the doubt and to avoid sounding conspiratorial.

I've decided that I can't keep up that charade anymore. I am really angry right now at the thorough brainwashing this president has radiated across this once-great nation of ours. We have four years to wake up and stop our own destruction.

We need to wake-up and realize three things.
1.Barack Obama is an enemy of the United States.
2.Socialism is a failure, and it is now being force fed to us by this same president.
3.Our continued freedom depends on our ability to recognize a threat, to arm our minds against it, and to take action by allowing the peoples vote to change the course of our country.

So please, get with your friends, neighbors, and elected officials and organize now! We have four years to prepare ourselves. In 2016, we will elect a Republican president, we will reclaim the senate, and we will save this country from the clutches of wicked men.

KitchenAid Employee Slams Obama's Dead Grandmother

2012-10-04T11:55:00.001-04:00

During the debates, someone from the KitchenAid twitter team made an incredibly inappropriate comment about President Obama's dead grandmother. The tweet was quickly deleted, but not before the twitter community reposted it hundreds of times.

While I am against using children and dead relatives as the punchline for a joke; even in the often vicious world of politics, I did laugh at this one just a little. I think it struck a chord with me because of a past comment I made about the death of Nirvana singer Kurt Cobain. "Kurt Cobain killed himself because he heard the Hole album."

Mitt Romney Wins First Debate

2012-10-04T01:01:00.001-04:00

Source:NYAltnews

In his first debate with president Barack Obama, Mitt Romney surprised the hell out of me, and apparently most of the ABC news team as was evidenced by the post debate fawning they were doing over Romney's performance. In what was clearly a big win for Romney the Republican candidate pulled out all the stops and delivered an amazing debate that shows Mitt feels right at home on the debate stage.

Romney's comments were clear, concise, and most of all right on target to hit the American people on the issues that matter to them the most. In contrast, Barack Obama looked frustrated, tired and delivered a message that was rambling, off base, and very, very lackluster. Romney's relentless attack of facts and figures pummeled the incumbent and left him with quite a few lumps. I don't think the president had a prayer on this one.
News man Jim Lehrer was absolutely one of the worst debate moderators I have ever seen. He asked clear questions, but couldn't reign in the candidates on their over-time talking and if a candidate pushed to talk, Lehrer just shut down and took it like a sissy boy getting bullied in the schoolyard. I feel sorry for the guy, especially when Romney punched him in the gut with his comment about cutting federal funds to PBS.

Which leads me to a huge highlight of the night. During Mitt Romney's talk about cutting unnecessary programs, he made an incredibly funny comment.

“I’m sorry, Jim, I’m gonna stop the subsidy to PBS…. I like PBS, I love Big Bird -- I actually like you too -- but I am not going to keep spending money on things [we have] to borrow money from China to pay for.”

Within minutes there was a twitter page for very sad Big Bird https://twitter.com/FiredBigBird

The result of the debate seems pretty clear:Romney aced it.
Source:CBS News

By a 2 to 1 margin, uncommitted voters crowned Mitt Romney the winner over President Obama in the first presidential debate in Debate, Colo., on Wednesday night, according to a 500-person instant poll taken by CBS News.

In the moments following the candidates' performances on the University of Denver stage, 46 percent of voters gave the economy-centric debate to Romney, 22 percent said they believed the president was the winner, and 32 percent called it a tie. More good news for the GOP nominee: 56 percent of those polled said they viewed Romney in a better light after watching the debate. Eleven percent said their opinion of him dropped, and 32 percent cited no change in opinion.

Source:Breitbart.com

Even conservatives who predicted that Romney would do well could not have imagined that he would do this well. It was as complete a victory as any presidential challenger has ever scored--and it exceeded even the hopes of Romney’s most fervent supporters.

Obama came across as a politician--a rattled one, grinning and frowning, searching for a way out. Romney came across as a problem-solver, and--amazingly--more in touch with the American people.

Source:CNN

Denver, Colorado (CNN) – Two-thirds of people who watched the first presidential debate think that Republican nominee Mitt Romney won the showdown, according to a nationwide poll conducted Wednesday night.

According to a CNN/ORC International survey conducted right after the debate, 67% of debate watchers questioned said that the Republican nominee won the faceoff, with one in four saying that President Barack Obama was victorious.

Internet Freedom or Net Neutrality Free For All on the World Wide Web or Government Controlled Wasteland

2012-07-22T13:13:00.002-04:00

With the recent announcement by Campaign for Liberty of a ‘manifesto’ for internet freedom, which is supported by Ron and Rand Paul, the internet is now chock-full of internet freedom manifestos. There are quite a few sites dedicated to some form of ‘Internet Freedom’. Some are pretty basic, and others look like full-fledged organizations with a clear focus and some thought behind them. Either way, keeping the internet free from government intrusion seems to be the main focus, with a secondary focus on restricting the reach of ISP's and major corporations to dissuade monopolizing practices from occurring. With threats to the freedom of the World Wide Web like ACTA and SOPA looming on the horizon, it's not surprising that internet freedom is on everyone's mind.

It seems a virtual impossibility that we could keep the government out of the internet and be able to stop corporations from getting a strangle-hold on our data without government regulation. There is one attempt at stopping corporate dominance of the internet floating around congress right now, known as ‘Net Neutrality’. This funny beast was cooked up by Democrats and successfully marketed to at least some Republicans as the solutions to the problem. To quote a very good friend of mine, “The solution is the problem.”

Net Neutrality might seem innocuous enough, but underneath is a scaly hide inhabited by the dragon of domination known as “Telecommunications”. The giants of the telecommunication world are all for this new bill as it would actually pave the way for their eventual total control of the internet. The bill restricts and ISP’s ability to limit or increase bandwidth or access to sites based on their size or for their ability to pay for more of said services. However, it does not restrict them from offering “fast lanes” of traffic for users willing to pay for it.

One of the tenets of this bill is to stop anti-competitive behavior by forcing transparency on the telecoms. They would have to show how they combat data congestion, not allowing them to cap data from competitors in order to maintain their flow. The problem with this idea is that there is no evidence to suggest that it even happening in the first place. So what is the point of all this? Is it about fairness, or is it about creating another back door into our lives. It seems to me that this is about exerting control over the internet from many sides.

With ACTA, SOPA, PIPA, and CISPA poised to shut down thousands of websites with extreme prejudice (The feds have already targeted and shut down various file sharing and torrent sites before any of these bills were up for a vote.), The various pieces of legislation giving some states the power to tax and restrict internet purchases, and now the seemingly innocent Net Neutrality bill that would supposedly allow complete freedom and equality on the internet. But we know the government and we know they would never leave well enough alone. Read carefully the FCC’s Broadband Policy Statement to see what I mean: (From Wikipedia)

In 2005, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Broadband Policy Statement (also known as the Internet Policy Statement), which lists four principles of open Internet,^[16] "To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, consumers are entitled to:"

§ access the lawful Internet content of their choice.

§ run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement.

§ connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network.

§ competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers.

These points are often summarized as "any lawful content, any lawful application, any lawful device, and any provider"

Notice that the words lawful, legal and the phase ‘needs of law enforcement’ are used throughout. All they need to do is define what is lawful anyway they want, and say that Law Enforcement needs you to do whatever they want and voila! The government owns your soul on the internet.

While I can’t say I see any wording like that in the Net Neutrality bill, I wouldn’t put it past the government to be able to reword things any way they want.

Well, what about the alternatives floating around the internet? Let’s take a look at them and see if they measure up. First up: freepress.net and their ‘Declaration of Internet Freedom’.

We stand for a free and open Internet.

We support transparent and participatory processes for making Internet policy and the establishment of five basic principles:

Expression: Don't censor the Internet.

Access: Promote universal access to fast and affordable networks.

Openness: Keep the Internet an open network where everyone is free to connect, communicate, write, read, watch, speak, listen, learn, create and innovate.

Innovation: Protect the freedom to innovate and create without permission. Don’t block new technologies, and don’t punish innovators for their users' actions.

Privacy: Protect privacy and defend everyone’s ability to control how their data and devices are used.

That’s pretty straight forward. Now this isn’t legislation, but an online petition. Most of these things are. I think it’s good that these petitions exist, but they don’t do much too actually legislate the government out of our internet.

We need lawmakers who will consciously create legislation designed to keep the government from having authority over the internet. I’m almost upset with myself for saying that, but unless they are compelled by law to do so, they will try and meddle.

President Obama has already shown that existing laws mean nothing as he is willing to ignore congress and just change things to suit him anytime he wants and has done so twice(that I know of) in 2012. First by implementing his own brand of Dream act without congresses consent, and now by rewriting the 1996 Welfare Reform Act signed into law by then President Bill Clinton.

Next we move on to internetdeclaration.org and their identically titled ‘Declaration of Internet Freedom’ Ohh, this is also a site maintained by freepress. Tricky guys…tricky.

Here is a document on Internet Freedom from the Netherlands. This one is a much more detailed document. It can be found on https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/Internet-Freedom-Manifesto1.pdf

INTERNET FREEDOM MANIFESTO

The Netherlands needs an open internet; a platform where everyone can easily share and freely access

information, a place where private communication remains private. Here are eleven items that should not be

missing from any election program.

1. Stringently test any form of

constitutional infringement

Necessity, proportionality, subsidiarity and effectiveness are

preliminary requirements. Any constitutional infringements

should be preceded by an impact assessment, comprising an

identification of a time horizon and evaluation techniques, and

must always be prescribed by law.

2. Privacy should be by design

IT systems of government and private industry should be built

with privacy as a starting point. Principles such as

anonymization, use limitation, data minimization, transparency

and user-centric design are the key to protection. Databases

containing the private information of millions of Dutch citizens

should be optimally protected and scrutinized by regular audits.

Existing systems that fail to implement any of the above, must be

abolished or remodeled.

3. Give citizens control of their data

Citizens should have a better insight into and have more control

over the use of data they enter on web services. Companies

should only be allowed to process this data with explicit consent

and clear policy on its usage. This should be closely monitored

and enforced by the Dutch Data Protection Authority.

4. Guard privacy of communication

The Constitution should be adapted to protect all means of

communication. Only when there is a substantial suspicion, a

necessity for the investigation and confirmation by a judicial

warrant, may the government conduct surveillance. Absolute

transparency is required concerning the methods of

investigation, particularly the use of wiretaps, spyware and any

requests made for personal information. The use of encryption

and the possibility to use the internet anonymously should not be

hindered.

5. Protect freedom of information

All information in accordance with the law must be freely

accessible to all Dutch citizens. Websites can not be forced to

remove information without prior judicial approval. Permanent,

indiscriminate monitoring or filtering of information must be

prohibited. Social networks may only remove information in

accordance with clear and consistent terms of service.

Registration under a pseudonym must remain possible.

6. Do not store private communications

Under current European law, telecommunications companies are

obligated to keep detailed logs of all their clients'

communications along with the according locations for up to two

years. This legislation does not benefit the security of the

Netherlands, but does constitute a breach of privacy and

freedom of communication of millions of Dutch people. The

Dutch government should move to abolish the European data

retention requirement and suspend these rules within the

Netherlands.

7. Draft a balanced cyber security policy

A safe information society is paramount to our economy and

democracy. The policies surrounding cyber security should not

create a false sense of security, but actually protect our digital

world and not infringe on our constitutional rights. Therefore,

policies must be based on realistic and verifiable assessments of

threats and risks. Any call for for new surveillance powers must

have a demonstrable necessity.

8. Modernize copyright legislation

culture. Now - in contrast - outdated measures are victimizing

both artists, as well as non-artists. The Netherlands should seek

out new business models to distribute creative works, such as

films, music and books online. It should refrain from any

measures that undermine the freedom of internet, such as

rendering downloading illegal, blocking web sites, monitoring

online activities or internet disconnection.

9. Protect net neutrality

Internet service providers must not be allowed to limit access to

websites or tier the use of web services such as YouTube and

Skype. Disallowing this will ensure the availability of the internet,

it will lower the costs of communication and stimulate innovation.

OPTA – the independent post and telecommunications authority

– must enforce the recently introduced net neutrality legislation.

10. Oppose ACTA

The drafting process of ACTA has been highly controversial and

the treaty itself presents a clear threat to internet freedom.

Furthermore, ACTA will prevent the Netherlands in its

development of modern policies to protect intellectual property.

The Netherlands should not ratify ACTA and actively oppose any

similar proposals.

11. Mandatory data breach notifications

Leakage of personal data greatly increases the risk of identity

fraud and results in a fading of trust in information.

A public registry of data breaches would hold organizations

accountable and allow them to learn from each other's mistakes.

This bill focuses on privacy for the people, and transparency for the groups that fail them. They focus on modern copyright laws, severely limiting or stopping, without users consent, data mining. The bill also provides for stricter measure limiting the government’s ability to secretly monitor citizens internet communications without proper cause and a standing warrant in place.

The transparency for companies that have data leaks is an interesting concept. They need to, however, go into greater detail as to how posting a public registry of company screw ups would allow them to learn from one another. Perhaps they could communicate and share security ideas?

Finally we come to the latest entry in the burgeoning field of internet freedom, this one from Campaign for Liberty with a hearty endorsement from Ron and Rand Paul.

The Technology Revolution:

A Campaign for Liberty Manifesto

This is what a technology revolution looks like:

New innovators create vast new markets where none existed previously. Individual genius, enabled by the truly free market the Internet represents, routes around obsolete and ineffective government attempts at control. The arrogant attempts of governments to centralize, intervene, subsidize, micromanage, and regulate innovation are scoffed at and ignored.

This revolution is occurring around the world.

It is occurring in the private sector, not the public sector.

It is occurring despite wrongheaded attempts by governments to micromanage markets through disastrous industrial policy.

And it is driven by the Internet, the single greatest catalyst in history for individual liberty and free markets.

The true technology revolutionaries have little need for big government and never have. Microsoft ignored the government for years and changed the world by leading the PC revolution.

Today, companies like Apple - which has created several completely new markets out of whole cloth (iPhone, iPad, iTunes, and iPod) - are changing the world again, successfully adopting visionary new revenue models for movies, songs, and games, and launching an “app economy” responsible for creating almost half a million jobs in the United States since the iPhone was introduced…

All in less than 5 years, and all without government permission, partnerships, subsidies, or regulations!

Technology revolutionaries succeeded not because of some collectivist vision that seeks to regulate “fairness,” “neutrality,” “privacy,” or “competition” through coercive state actions, or that views the Internet and technology as a vast commons that must be freely available to all, but rather because of the same belief as America’s Founders, who understood that private property is the foundation of prosperity and freedom itself.

Technology revolutionaries succeed because of the decentralized nature of the Internet, which defies government control.

As a consequence, decentralization has unlocked individual self-empowerment, entrepreneurialism, creativity, innovation, and the creation of new markets in ways never before imagined in human history.

But, ironically, just as decentralization has unleashed the potential for free markets and individual freedom on a global scale, collectivist special interests and governments worldwide are now tirelessly pushing for more centralized control of the Internet and technology.

Here at home, they are aided and abetted both by an Administration that wholeheartedly believes in the wisdom of government to manage markets and some in the technology industry that cynically use the hammer of government control and regulation to hamstring competitors – the Apples and Microsoft’s of tomorrow.

Internet collectivism takes many forms, all of them pernicious.

Among the most insidious are government attempts to control and regulate competition, infrastructure, privacy, and intellectual property. According to them:

· Successful companies in brand new frontier industries that didn’t even exist as recently as five years ago should be penalized and intimidated with antitrust actions in the name of “fairness” and “competition.”

· Privately owned broadband high-speed infrastructure must be subject to collective rule via public ownership and government regulations that require “sharing” with other competitors.

· Internet infrastructure must be treated as a commons subject to centralized government control through a variety of foolish “public interest” and “fairness” regulations.

· Wireless, the lifeblood of the mobile Internet revolution, must be micromanaged as a government-controlled commons, with limited exclusive property rights.

· Private property rights on the Internet should exist in limited fashion or not at all, and what is considered to be in the public domain should be greatly expanded.

· Private sector data collection practices must be scrutinized and tightly regulated in the name of “protecting consumers,” all while government’s warrantless surveillance and collection of private citizens’ Internet data dramatically increases.

Internet collectivists are clever.

They are masters at hijacking the language of freedom and liberty to disingenuously push for more centralized control.

“Openness” means government control of privately owned infrastructure.

“Net neutrality” means government acting as arbiter and enforcer of what it deems to be "neutral."

“Internet freedom” means the destruction of property rights.

“Competition” means managed competition, with the government acting as judge and jury on what constitutes competition and what does not.

Our “right to privacy” only applies to the data collection activities of the private sector, rarely to government.

The eminent economist Ludwig von Mises wrote that when government seeks to solve one problem, it creates two more.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the realm of Internet collectivists and the centralized control of the Internet they seek.

The body of incremental communications law and regulation that has emerged since the days of Alexander Graham Bell is entirely unsuited to the dynamic and ever-changing Internet for one simple reason: Technology is evolving faster than government’s ability to regulate it.

Ronald Reagan once said, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction." But in the Internet era, true Internet freedom can be lost in far less than one generation.

Around the world, the real threat to Internet freedom comes not from bad people or inefficient markets - we can and will always route around them - but from governments' foolish attempts to manage and control innovation.

And it is not just the tyrannies we must fear. The road away from freedom is paved with good intentions.

Today, the road to tyranny is being paved by a collectivist-Industrial complex - a dangerous brew of wealthy, international NGO's, progressive do-gooders, corporate cronies, and sympathetic political elites.

Their goals are clear: The collectivist-industrial complex seeks to undermine free markets and property rights, replacing them with "benevolent" government control and a vision of "free" that quickly evolves from "free speech" to "free stuff."

We know where this path leads. As Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground."

A benevolent monopoly for "the public interest" is nothing more than a means for the old guard to reassert their power. The role of the government on the Internet is to protect us from force and fraud, not to decide our interests.

But while the Internet has produced a revolution, it has not, in fact, "changed everything." We do not need to reinvent our principles for the web; we only need apply our core principles to it. When faced with Internet regulation, we should ask these key questions:

1. Is this a core function of the federal government?

2. Does it execute constitutionally defined duties?

3. Does it protect constitutionally defined rights?

4. Does it protect property rights?

5. Does it protect individual rights?

6. If the federal government does not do this, will others?

7. Will this policy or regulation allow the market to decide outcomes, or will it distort the market for political ends?

8. Is this policy or regulation clear and specific, with defined metrics and limitations?

Yes, there will always be problems and challenges that exist in the online universe. These challenges are sometimes significant and important and other times not. Government, however, will never solve them. Markets will.

As a matter of principle, we oppose any attempt by Government to tax, regulate, monitor, or control the Internet, and we oppose the Internet collectivists who collaborate with the government against Internet freedom.

This is our revolution…. Government needs to get out of the way.

This bill takes a slightly different approach than the one from the Netherlands. This one is an indictment of the government’s policies which, as in the past, seek to control the internet by convincing everyone that they are really keeping it free. As it is stated in the article, our government are masters of ‘hijacking’ the language of freedom, and twisting the words to allow for more centralized control.

When crafting ideas like this, it is prudent to keep in mind that you are facing numerous hurdles in an uphill battle against a swirling tide of death. Should you wish to confront the government with contrary legislation, you must bring you’re A game. The document you craft must be succinct and tightly worded to remove loopholes or misinterpreted passages that could hinder the bill’s passage. You should first attempt, as we are seeing happening now to collect signatures of as many Americans as possible to serve as a way of showing at least in part, the will of the people(which is the reason we elect politicians in the first place.)

Once you have established that this is what the people want, and have crafted a clear, concise, and tightly worded bill, you must seek the endorsement and support of as many of your fellow legislators as possible. Now comes the fun part, trying to convince the people in power(you know, the ones who don’t want us to keep control of the internet)that our bill is the better choice for America. Welcome to the wonderful world of Washington.

Considering the previous actions of some high ranking Republicans, and the Obama administration, the will of the people isn’t worth a salty shit on the rotting deck of the U.S.S. constitution. So, where do we go from here? Well, the first thing we need to do is to vote out as many of these pestiferous dung heaps as possible, and install in their place people with morals and values that more closely match our own.

In the meantime, I welcome any and all attempts from the common man to put a wrench in the works of the governments nefarious plans. Even if it must be done Anonymously, and without any glory.

Obama flip flops on India

2012-07-15T21:02:00.000-04:00

In November of 2010 I told you that President Obama thought India created U.S. Jobs Well, now he's saying that investing in India is not a good idea at the moment.

It would be considered hypocritical to urge people to invest in India when the President is also busy convincing people that Mitt Romney was the king of outsourcing jobs when he was head of Bain capital.

I'm sure if Barack Obama gets re-elected, he will think it's O.K. to invest in jobs in India again.

Response to the People who Love Obama and Hate America

2012-05-14T22:05:00.002-04:00

This is a response to an article on Daily KOS on January 9, 2012. Written by Jesse LaGreca a.k.a. MinistryOfTruth.

Text in light blue is Jesse's words. Black text represents my responses. This article is in no way a complete answer. I apologize, by the end I got bored and stopped trying. Sorry, the second half of his article just isn't that good.

I meet you all the time. You hate Obama. You hate gay people. You hate black people, immigrants, Muslims, labor unions, women who want the right to make choices concerning their bodies, you hate em all. You hate being called racist. You hate being called a bigot. Maybe if you talked about creating jobs more than you talk about why you hate gay people we wouldn't call you bigots. Maybe if you talked about black people without automatically assuming they are on food stamps while demanding their birth certificates we wouldn't call you racist. You hate socialism and social justice. You hate regulations and taxes and spending and the Government. You hate.

On Barack Obama:Yes, I hate Barack Obama. He is disingenuous and his policies have not proven effective in restoring our economy, strengthening our position in world affairs, nor has he done anything more than ramming through superfluous legislation and one massive health care bill that amounts to a giant butt-fuck for taxpayers and the elderly. He would still suck if he was white.

On hating blacks: Considering the amount of black conservatives I meet, hating blacks seems like a stretch...oh wait every significant piece of legislation that gave black people rights was written by and passed by..Republicans. Try again.

On Immigration: Only fringe groups claim and outright hatred for immigrants. Trying to pass legislation that stops criminals from crossing the border and promotes legal immigration is not hateful, it's just good sense.

On Muslims: What hatred of Muslims? The non-existent racial profiling that we aren't allowed to use because liberals complain about it all the time, the detention of murderers and religious zealots at Guantanamo Bay because they are murderers and zealots and not because they also happen to be Muslim? When the majority of terrorist attacks come from white Norwegians, I will happily profile white Norwegians at the airport.

On Labor Unions: Labor unions have for a very long time helped to foster better working conditions and fair wages for employees. They also wield an awesome amount of power which they have used to extract excessive amounts of money from governments to fuel their own growth, and used their massive amounts of power and money to intimidate those who oppose their schemes and shut down voices of dissent. Not cool in my opinion, but what do I know, I work to make money and support my family, and while I have never experienced cruel working conditions like miners used to, I have also been able to make ends meet and be happy regardless of the wage or grueling hours I may have to work. I guess having immigrant grandparents taught me something about hard work and character.

On Women: Is everyone in this country bug-fuck bananas? This whole women hating kick that has been permeating this country is just sickening. Let's have the play by play and see if we can make sense of this nonsense. ObamaCare has a provision that would effectively force faith based businesses to provided contraception and birth control to it's employees even though those regulations would go against their beliefs. Let's also not forget that a good portion of the female employees who work for these groups are of that religious persuasion and would themselves oppose the regulation and/or have no need for it.

Somehow this gets turned into "Republicans hate womens reproductive rights" Here's where it gets complicated. A couple of dumb-ass Republican lawmakers try and skirt these regulations by enacting laws that sound even dumber than the one they are trying to circumvent. I disagree with them completely, and hopefully voters will make a better choice next election cycle.

Regardless, the Democrats get Sandra Fluke(pronounced 'fluck'. How ironic.)to get up and testify that despite going to a prestigious law school she is too broke to afford a $2 box of condoms or a $9 a month supply of birth control, and wants the taxpayers to do it for her. Rush Limbaugh counters by rightfully calling her a slut and nearly gets booted off the air and loses a ton of advertisers. Even though there are hours of video showing liberal talk show hosts saying far meaner things about conservative women without any retribution. Even still liberals continue to ramp up their attacks attempting to portray Republicans as women haters.

On the rest of your insinuations about hate in the first paragraph: Yes most people do no like being called names, especially when those names condemn an entire group and not just those who may espouse those beliefs. By painting Republicans with such a broad brush you yourself are showing your own hatred and bigotry.

On Job creation: Most Republicans have been talking until they were blue on job creation, but our beloved president is more interested in Sandra Fluke's vagina, and gay marriage than fixing our economy. His policies are not creating a significant amount of jobs, nor is our economy getting stronger.

On Socialism: Yes, most rational people do hate Socialism. It is an unfair and tyrannical form of government and is an abysmal failure everywhere it is used. Please don't try and talk to me about the success of European socialist governments, they are barely able to hide the shambles they are in right now, and the political landscape is changing to no longer favor those who support the reckless social programs that are bankrupting those countries.

On social justice: Social justice is a keyword used by liberals to allow for a vague, socialist, or racist agenda to be forced on the public and be protected from scrutiny by masking it in a pretty sounding title like "social justice" To accentuate this, while doing research I ran across an article on Social Justice written from a conservative viewpoint. The responses to the article looked like this one:

"Social justice is the complete economic equality of all members of society."Really? Because your rightwingnut blogoid says so?Here's a better definition: achieving some sense of justice in society so that fat old white men don't continue to control our coountry and its economy with an iron fist.

Let's move on shall we.

You like war. You like torture. You like Jesus. I don't know how in the hell any of that is compatible, but no one ever accused you haters of being over-committed to ideological consistency. You like people who look like you or at least hate most of the things that you hate. You hate everything else.

The same could be said for liberals who like to slam conservatives by using derogatory terms to describe them then claim that liberals are kind and loving and not at all bigoted or hateful like Republicans.

Now, I know you profess to love our country and the founding fathers (unless you are reminded that they believed in the separation of church and state), but I need to remind you that America is NOT what Fox News says it is. America is a melting pot, it always has been. We are a multi-cultural amalgamation of all kinds of people, and yet you still demonize everyone who is not a rich, white, heterosexual christian male or his submissive and obedient wife.

This is of course a completely nonsensical fairy tale that runs through your head every night as you masturbate to pictures of Keith Olbermann. Most people understand the separation of church and state, and none of the White, Black Hispanic, and Asian people who work for Fox News would dispute your claim that this country is a melting pot. God, I really love how you stereotype Christians. It's sad and kind of pathetic, but you are entitled to your fantasies.

You hate liberals, moderates, hell, anyone who disagrees with Conservative dogma as espoused by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. You hate em.Well, here are the facts, Jack. If you hate the Government then you are unqualified to manage it. If you hate gay people more than you love America than you should take your own advice and get the hell out. There are several countries that are openly hostile to gay people, but they are full of brown people and you don't like them much either from what I understand. It looks like you are screwed, but that's not what I am here to tell you.

More hate filled bigotry. Telling someone to get out of America for being disagreeable is the equivalent of a white supremacist telling all the 'Negroes' to 'go back to Africa'. Nice job slick......

Now that you have thrown everything and the kitchen sink at President Obama and it still hasn't worked you are panicking. Obama's approval ratings are still near 50% despite your best efforts to undermine the economy and America's recovery at every step you can. You tried to hold the American economy hostage to force America into default on its' debts, debts that YOU rang up under Bush, so you could blame it on Obama and it failed. You've used the filibuster more than any other Congress ever, going so far as to vote against providing health care access to 9/11 first responders. You remember 9/11, don't you, it's that thing you used to lie us into a war in Iraq, and then when Obama killed Bin Laden and ended the war in Iraq you told people that he hates America and wants the troops to fail. You monsters. You hate Obama with a passion, despite the fact that he is a tax cutting, deficit reducing war President who undermines civil rights and delivers corporate friendly watered down reforms that benefit special interests just like a Republican. You call him a Kenyan. You call him a socialist. You dance with your hatred singing it proudly in the rain like it was a 1950's musical.

Our beloved president is the one undermining our economy, and at some point he is going to have to take responsibility for amassing more debt in three years than Bush did in eight. Democrats have been filibustering for years, now that Republicans are learning that trick, Democrats are calling for filibuster reform to limit the Republicans use of the technique.

Frankly, you disgust me. Your hatred nauseates me. Your bigotry offends me. Your racism revolts me.Dear haters, I am openly questioning your patriotism.I think you hate gays, Obama, black people, poor people, all of us, women, atheists and agnostics, Latinos, Muslims, Liberals, all of us, I think you hate every one who isn't exactly like you, and I think you hate us more than you love your country.I think you hate gay soldiers more than you want America to win its wars.I don't even think you want America to win wars, you just want America to have wars, never ending wars and the war profiteering it generates. You love that kind of spending, you love spending on faith based initiatives and abstinence based sex education (George Carlin would have loved that one), you love spending on subsidies for profitable oil corporations, you spend like drunken sailors when you are in the White House, but if it is a Democrat then suddenly you cheer when America doesn't get the Olympics because it might make the black President look bad. But oooh you love your country, you say, and you want it back. Well listen here skippy, it isn't your country, you don't own it, it is our country, and America is NOT the religiously extremist Foxbots who hate science, elitist professors and having a vibrant and meaningful sex life with someone we love if Rick Santorum doesn't approve of it. Rick Santorum isn't running for America's fucking high school dance chaperone, he should probably just shut the hell up about sex, but he can't because he has nothing else to run on.

Yawn. More parroting of liberal dogma, I'm starting to get bored here.

Republicans can NOT win on the issues. They've got NOTHING. All they have is a divide and conquer class war that pits ignorant racist and bigoted people against the rest of us in a meaningless battle of wedge issues and the already proven to fail George W. Bush agenda again of tax cuts for the rich, deregulation, privatization and war profiteering and nothing else, so all they can do is blame black people, gays the government, anybody and everyone else for their own failings. The party of personal responsibility, my ass.

Did you seriously just accuse Republicans of class warfare? BUAHAHAHAHAHHAH!!!!!!!

But they love multi-national corporations, just ask a gay hating and racist religious extremist if they think Corporations are people and they will gladly agree, but if you ask them if gay people are people they aren't so sure.

Yeah, I know. Because of that decisions, all these stinking Republican Super-PAC's have been cropping up, and Obama has told us so many times how much he hates them...until he got his own.

Dear haters, you are the cruel, heartless misinformed assholes who would sell America out to Haliburton in a heartbeat, you would rather pay ZERO taxes than you would see a newly born baby get access to quality health care, you cheer when we discuss denying health care to young people with preventable diseases, and you boo when we discuss the First Ladies plan to cut back on childhood obesity. You are a cross to carry and a flag to wrap yourself in away from being the people who Sinclair Lewis warned us about, but I guarantee that if Fox News told you to dress that way you would, because you are the same blind, ignorant and closed minded dunces who drove this country into a civil war years ago because you are bound to the notion that some men are more equal than others.

Stop right there bucko. The south and their love of separatism and slavery led to the civil war. Every single one of the southern states that seceded were run by Democrats. Isn't history wonderful?

In short, the reason I proudly wear my union army hat is because of seditious sell outs like you who constantly fuck over working class Americans so a foreign entrepreneur like Rupert Murdoch can get a bigger tax break. If corporations are people, they are neither American patriots nor capable of love. Just like you.

Yeah or that Warren Buffet guy or that George Soros guy...oh wait, they vote Democrat never mind. Their money doesn't count. GE hasn't paid federal taxes in many years....and they donate millions to the Democratic party every year.

So stop wearing your hate with pride. Stop celebrating your anti-science, anti-math ignorance. Stop using code words to mask your bigotry like "family values", especially when you hate my family and when you stand on the same stage as a guy who has had three marriages or if you share a seat in the Senate with a guy who cheated on his wife with hookers while wearing diapers. You should be ashamed. I know that you are just doing this to motivate your misinformed hate cult base because if they actually knew that your ideas will make them poorer than they are now, they would never vote for you. You are doing your best to impoverish your countrymen so rich people can get bigger tax breaks and you can keep on delivering corporate welfare to the special interests who have bribed you, and I am disgusted by the way you gleefully parade your hatred with aplomb. I don't think you do love America. At least, not as much as you hate everyone in America who isn't exactly like you.You should think about that, and maybe get some help.And for the record, I do not hate you. I am embarrassed by you and nauseated by your cruel and thoughtless behavior and your all consuming greed, but I do not hate you. I forgive you and I hope you can change someday, but I don't hate you. You have enough hate in you for the rest of us as it is.

I forgive you too. I don't care about you enough to hate you, and I understand that ignorance is a difficult disease to overcome, so I'll pray for you to Jesus and hope that he sends some heterosexual angels who don't pay taxes and never wear condoms to come and comfort you. Your hypocrisy and lack of any original thought makes you a wonderful zombie. Your Marxist overlords will be proud.

Andrew Cuomo attacks Super-PACs - Even his own.

2012-05-02T13:42:00.000-04:00

Photo by:Patja

Our beloved governor, Andrew Cuomo has come out against Super-PACs, despite the fact that The Committee to Save New York was founded days after Cuomo's election, and has spent millions in advertising that supports Mr. Cuomo's agenda in Albany. While it appears that the group is made up largely of business organizations and local Chambers of Commerce, there isn't any information on who their biggest donors might be. The most disturbing part of their site is the "about us" page which contains a very vague, synopsis of what they are about.

This might be confusing to people. The organization originally filed as a political non-profit, and at one point touted themselves as some sort of charitable organization, but refused to file an annual report with the Charities Registration Bureau. After a lot of criticism and pressure from local watch dog groups they relented and filed as a lobbyist with the state.

This whole affair seems like a convoluted pile of nonsense, but this is New York politics so there's nothing new to see here...move along.

Cuomo, still selling us on his fiscal conservatism and reform minded policies had some words about Super-PAC's recently on the "Capitol Connection" radio program.

Cuomo complained on public radio’s “Capitol Connection” Wednesday that court decisions have allowed Super PACs to bring “unprecedented amounts of money into the political system.” He said the power of money in Albany is “unbelievable.”
The Committee to Save New York was created by CEOs days after Cuomo was elected and has spent $10 million to blanket New York with TV ads supporting Cuomo and his policies. (From the Press and Sun Bulletin)

Sounds like Andy is letting his hypocrisy slip show. While I will freely admit that some of what Andrew Cuomo is doing seems like a step in the right direction, some of his policies seem to under reaching and more symbolic than functional. IF he really wants to impress me, he is going to need to buckle down and throw Albany a curve ball that gets this state thunder-balling in the right direction, as opposed to mouse-ishly scurrying about, appearing to look busy, but only ever finding crumbs of cheese and not the whole block.

Sandra Fluke and the Contraception Debate

2012-03-17T22:38:00.000-04:00

Photo by thecrazyfilmgirl on Flickr

I'd like to apologize for my earlier post about Sandra Fluke. I am not apologizing to her, but to my readers, who may have been expecting something more substantial and less inflammatory. This situation started out many months ago with the Obama Administrations egregious attack on Christianity in the form of unconstitutional health care mandates. The legislation in question, a tendril of the all-destructive dung pile unaffectionately known as ObamaCare. While it has been clear that this legislation was overreaching and convoluted, the length and jargon of the text of this bill is brain melting and incomprehensible to even most lawyers.

We have seen the problems in small doses as parts of the bill slowly go into effect. New legislation is implemented on the foundations of ObamaCare and we now see quite clearly how volatile the Obama administration can be. Under the guise of fair and equal healthcare for all, the imperial federal government of Obamastan has launched an unconstitutional and idiotic attack on Christian institutions across the nation. I have worked quite a few places in my day, and there were some companies that simply didn't offer comprehensive health care. Some didn't offer vision or dental. Suddenly though, we need to force groups to offer services that go against their beliefs, and should anyone disagree than it is clear you are anti-female and a misogynist.

There are some glaring problems with this mandate that should be obvious to anyone with more than a 1st grade education. The first big problem is "separation of church and state" including religious organizations in a health care mandate that contains items the authors of the bill knew would incite a response from theses faith based institutions is infringing on those religious groups protections set forth in the constitution. Let's also not forget that if you attend or work for these very spiritual organizations you are probably yourself a Christian and would share the same beliefs as your employer/professor/etc, in turn you would not require the services demanded you receive in this bill. True, not all of the employees may hold the same beliefs, but it's a good bet that since this wasn't issue before, I doubt it will be an issue now.

The second problem with this is necessity. The administrations argument is that by denying these services, you are denying women essential and potentially life saving medicines/services. There are cases where birth control pills are used to regulate other female conditions, but most people need birth control to prevent pregnancy. Condoms perform a similar task, neither of which are essential health care services. You can choose to not engage in sexual intercourse without the fear that the lack of sex will endanger your health. Let us not forget that birth control is now available for a paltry 9 dollars a month on Wal-Mart's prescription drug discount list, and condoms are still only a few dollars per package. If you can't shell out 10 bucks a month, keep your pants on.

Sandra Fluke is a prime example of the reason this country is slowly going into the shitter. She seems to have big goals, she wants to be a lawyer, but somehow she isn't inventive enough to procure something as basic as a package of condoms and is demanding that the government do it for her. I know, she says law school is expensive, and she doesn't have the money. Go scrounging for return cans, sell some old jewelry, get a part time job as a waitress or some other menial task that pays you a wage. She could try prostitution, but I'm pretty sure most guys aren't looking for a woman with a 1970's Mike Donahue haircut and the face of an alter boy.(Well, I'm sure are a few guys out there with those kinds of fetishes.)

The most obnoxious element of this whole affair is that both Democrats and Republicans are eating it up. They are expending such great amounts of energy to try and solve this stupid issue that any hope of real work in Washington getting done is effectively nil. Unfortunately Miss Fluke you simply can't have your cake and eat it too. Most women want the government out of their uterus as the feminists used to write on signs some years back, but somehow this involves allowing the government to provide these same women birth control so the lucky men who find their way into those uterus's don't get the women attached to them pregnant.

Sandra Fluke Is a Slut

2012-03-03T20:18:00.002-05:00

Dear Sandra Fluke,
I still think you're a slut and a prostitute. I will not apologize. I am not a pussy like Rush Limbaugh.
Your vagina is a cum repository and I hope you get pregnant with a malformed alien lizard baby.

Love,
The Republikid

Andrew Breitbart Dead At 43

2012-03-02T15:21:00.002-05:00

Photo by: Gage Skidmore

Andrew Breitbart, the conservative blogger and creator of such thought provoking sites as breitbart.com, biggovernment.com, and breitbart.tv has died at the age of 43. On Thursday March 4th, the websites he founded ran a story saying that he had died of natural causes.

It appears Bretibart collapsed shortly after midnight on the pavement near his apartment and could not be revived by paramedics. He was rushed to Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. The unofficial cause of death is a heart attack. Breitbart did have some sort of heart problem a year earlier, but his father-in-law Orson Bean, who is an actor said that the cause of death couldn't be pin-pointed at this time.

Andrew Breitbart was brash, loud, and always in search of the truth. Working tirelessly to expose media and liberal biases, and publishing stories that many main-stream media outlets were afraid to touch or biased against. Breitbart made waves when he published video of James O'Keefe and his accomplice Hannah Giles going undercover into an ACORN office dressed as a pimp and a prostitute to see what kind of help they could get. The results were shocking. O'Keefe continued his undercover investigations which exposed wide-spread corruption inside ACORN.

Anthony Weiner's Weiner was also exposed by Breitbart (pardon the pun) when he revealed photos of the congressman that were sexually explicit first on his website "Big Government" than again during an episode of the Opie and Anthony show.

Breitbart was also a controversial figure. Breitbart published video of USDA official Shirley Sherrod showing a racial bias against white farmers. The video did not show the whole video in which Sherrod apologized and eventually helped the white farmer she spoke about. Breitbart contended that his aim was to show the audience reaction to Sherrod's telling of the story to show that members of the NAACP held racist beliefs.

Breitbart's legacy and his websites missions will continue hopefully into the very distant future. Andrew Breitbart was a voice for the people who was willing to get the truth out there, no matter the cost. He will be sorely missed.

Andrew Breitbart is survived by his wife, Susannah Bean Breitbart, and four children.

Bob Morris Attacks Girls Scouts

2012-03-02T02:27:00.000-05:00

Bob Morris, a Republican lawmaker in Indiana has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that religious ideology and politics do not mix. Morris, a mentally handicapped Christian(He's handicapped because he's Christian, not because he has a brain disorder.)attacked the Girl Scouts of America by claiming that the cookie selling little girls were a 'tactical arm' of Planned Parenthood and promoted a pro-abortion, anti-homosexual agenda.

"Nonetheless, abundant evidence proves that the agenda of Planned Parenthood includes sexualizing young girls through the Girl Scouts, which is quickly becoming a tactical arm of Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood instructional series and pamphlets are part of the core curriculum at GSA training seminars. Denver Auxiliary Bishop James D. Conley of Denver last year warned parents that "membership in the Girl Scouts could carry the danger of making their daughters more receptive to the pro-abortion agenda."

"Many parents are abandoning the Girl Scouts because they promote homosexual lifestyles. In fact, the Girl Scouts education seminar girls are directed to study the example of role models. Of the fifty role models listed, only three have a briefly-mentioned religious background – all the rest are feminists, lesbians, or Communists. World Net Daily, in a May 2009 article, states that Girl Scout Troops are no longer allowed to pray or sing traditional Christmas Carols."

It's clear from his comments that Morris is convinced that the only thing worse than death is the Girls Scouts.
Now I would agree that some of the material I saw that has been distributed to Girl Scouts has graphic descriptions of sex coupled with some inappropriate suggestions on how to "do it". I am also kind of disturbed at the poor choice of "role models" for these young girls. Lesbians are fine in my book, feminists are too radical and if there is a confessed Communist in their literature I will poo-poo on the GSA a little myself.

I think that there are definitely some radical leftist ideals filtering in to youth oriented groups in this country, and I detest such intrusions, but Bob Morris just makes himself look silly by blowing up like a child about this, instead of trying to have a reasoned discussion on the subject. When we add this to the already ridiculous statements from presidential candidates like Rick Santorum, it's clear that in 2012 Republicans are just as unhinged as the Democrats have been since the anointed one took office.

I pray(in a very secular fashion) that Ron Paul pulls a miracle out of his posterior and clinches the nomination, otherwise we are in for another 4 years of mentally deficient politicians fucking this country up the ass.

Obama wants Republicans Email Addresses for Campaign Prank, or Campaign Subterfuge?

2011-12-16T03:31:00.001-05:00

I'm no campaign strategist, but I think this little ploy by the Obama campaign is more sinister as it seems. There is a donation page up that asks you to have a little holiday fun at the expense of one of your Republican friends. When you donate, you input their name and email address and they will send them email saying how you(the recipient)inspired your friend to donate to Barack Obama's campaign for re-election.

Seems like it could be a funny holiday joke to play on your conservative friends. It's also a great way for the Obama campaign to get a hold of a large mailing list of Republican voters that they could later use to commit some campaign subterfuge. How about mass mailers from a fake conservative group begging all good conservatives to vote for Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum. Why would they do that?? Simple, to sabotage Mitt Romney's campaign. The Obama campaign is scared of a Mitt Romney nomination. If Romney gets the Republican nod, he is seen as a real threat to Obama's re-election chances. Maybe they'll be super sneaky and get everyone to vote for Ron Paul. Nah, that might backfire.

This could all be a lighthearted stunt, but with Democrats I refuse to take chances. If you must talk with your liberal friends this holiday season, get a throw-away email address. The only thing I hate more than spam, is welfare loving,big money spending, apologist, race baiting, two-faced, blame the other guy Democrat spam. Please don't send me anymore postcards in the mail, it leads to more Global Warming.

Ron Paul Surging in the Polls

2011-12-14T01:01:00.000-05:00

Photo by:Gage Skidmore

While the race for the Presidency is still too volatile to really make a call on who will get the nomination, it is becoming clear that the American people are getting pretty tired of the same old candidates talking about the same old politics. Herman Cain was a runaway train until he was derailed by a string of sexual harassment
and marital infidelity charges. He was popular because he was an outsider with different ideas and a far different angle on politics than most of his peers in the debates. Despite his effort, the MSM was effective at removing a real threat to the Obama regime.

What came next was predictable and expected. The only person who wasn't Mitt Romney began surging in the polls. Newt Gingrich has name recognition and he is a smooth talker. He kept his comfortable lead despite attack ads and his GOP opponents hurling bombs at him. Despite all of this, he refused to employ the same tactics, giving him the sense of being an honorable man. In some respects I don't doubt that he is. What I do know for sure is, he has repeatedly touted fresh sounding conservative ideals, all the while taking positions with, and publicly supporting bad policy decisions by Democrats and Republicans alike. He's a flip-flopper and a charlatan. I think the American people are starting to realize this.(God knows his ex-wives sure do.)

Something else the American people are starting to realize is that Ron Paul has been saying the things they have wanted a presidential candidate to say, without the sheen of a polished professional politician(that was not intentional, but it was funny.)They have heard him say it before, unfortunately they went with the same tired schtick and got shafted when their choice for POTUS got stomped flat by Barack Obama. The same man who would in three years do more damage and spend more money than the last three presidents combined(The total amount of deficit is far greater than all the presidents combined.) As things continue to sink, people have finally hit rock bottom and are finally opening their eyes.

Ron Paul was in the far back corner of the room looking mopey and sad, unable to reach double digits in the polls. His last couple of showings at the debates have, however had a dramatic effect on his numbers. He is now surging in Iowa, running just one point behind Gingrich in the most recent straw poll there. He has won the Cedar Valley Tea Party Presidential Straw Poll, and in Florida he had an overwhelming victory in Pasco County's first Republican Party straw poll. Drake University's first student straw poll saw Ron Paul winning with 35% of the vote, and Ron Paul won an Oklahoma straw poll a few days ago. I think it's safe to say people are noticing the man, even if the media continues to ignore and marginalize him.

With Paul within a point of Gingrich this close to the Iowa Caucus, and Iowans cooling to the Newtinator, Ron Paul may just pull a rabbit out of his hat and shove upset into the faces to the GOP poster boys. What about New Hampshire? Does he stand a chance, or will it go to the man with perfect hair, Mitt Romney. Perhaps Gingrich will sweep in and knock them both out with his flabby cheeks. Don't worry, that nightmarish image of Newt Gingrich slapping people with his fat guy cheeks will fade with time.

The real question though, is this...even if Ron Paul aces some of these caucuses and primaries, will the GOP still ignore him and go with one of their face first all-stars, or will they grow a pair and actually listen to the American people instead of ignoring their wishes and continually telling them what's best for them with another craptastical candidate who will lose to Barack Obama the same way John"Count Chocula" McCain did in 2008.

Republikid Android App

2011-12-08T21:30:00.001-05:00

The Official Republikid Android App is now available for download. You can get it here:
Republikid Android App

National Defense Authorization Act Controversy

2011-12-06T21:38:00.001-05:00

There has been a lot of controversy over the latest version of the NDAA(National Defense Authorization Act)H.R. 1540/S.1867. Two parts of this bill seem to stick out in many peoples minds, and with good reason. The first is Section(s) 1031 and 1032 which cover the use of military force and the detention of terrorist suspects. The controversy comes over some very vague wordings which could, it seems, be used to detain American Citizens indefinitely in a place like Guantanamo.

The bill is being hailed by many as the suspension of our constitutional rights. I don't think it's as bad as it's being made out to be, but at the same time we have seen to many abuses of power from our government and law enforcement over the last few years,to be at the very least worried that someone might take this out of context and abuse the vague wording.

SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
(a) In General – Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) Covered Persons – A covered person under this section is any person as follow:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(c) Disposition Under Law of War – The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(e) Requirement for Briefings of Congress – The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of the authority described in this section, including the organizations, entities, and individuals considered to be ‘covered persons’ for purposes of subsection (b)(2).

SEC. 1032. REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY.
(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War -
(1) IN GENERAL – Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(2) COVERED PERSONS – The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1031who is determined–
(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and
(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR – For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1031(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1033.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY – The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens -
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS – The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS – The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

The bill also repeals a former military ban on sodomy. There is a problem with this one, the definition of sodomy also includes sex with animals. So now, if you are in the military you can have sex with another man, or that man's dog if you so choose.

"(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. (b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

This part of the bill has been repealed, effectively allowing Gay men to engage in consensual sex(a nice accent to the repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy)But it also allows them to engage in coitus with livestock if they see fit. Kinda creepy if you ask me.

It is also bashed for limiting the Commander in Chief's ability to stop terrorists and will do more harm than good in the long term.

Only 7 of our elected senators voted against this bill, despite the widespread criticism of it by the general public. Many in the government have opposed this bill as well, including FBI Director Robert Mueller, the CIA, the military, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the head of the Justice Department's National Security Division, the Director of National Intelligence, etc.

Michael Savage Dropped from 910 KNEW

2011-11-23T21:01:00.001-05:00

Earlier today a blog called Patriot Axom(Site now infinitely redirects to nothing, presumably down.)issued a statement saying that Conservative talk-show host Michael Savage had been taken "off the air" from his San Francisco-based flagship station, Talk 910 KNEW. Luckily the crows at Huffpost and Think Progress immediately picked up on the story and made sure to include remarks about how this is another good way to stop the spread of Michael Savage's hate filled rhetoric. Typical, but expected. The left must be elated that a blow to conservative talk-radio has been struck without having to wait for the "Fairness Doctrine" to get passed.

This was the statement issued on KNEW's blog: (Link is no longer working)

I’m going to answer the very first question many of you have.
“Why did you take Michael Savage off the air?”

Here’s your no-spin direct answer; we have decided to go in a different philosophical and ideological direction, featuring more contemporary content and more local information. The Savage Nation does not fit into that vision.

For those of you in the San Fransisco Area, you can still hear Michael Savage on KSTE 650.

Herman Cains Campaign Moves Forward Despite Harassment Scandal

2011-11-11T01:30:00.001-05:00

Photo by:Gage Skidmore

Herman Cain was at the outset of this presidential campaign cycle a long shot outsider, with no experience in holding political office. His straight talk and no-nonsense approach seemed to have a catalyzing effect on voters, they responded by sending him to the top of many national GOP polls and fueling his campaign with $9 million in donations in the fourth quarter of this year. Cain is the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, former CEO of the National Restaurant Association and a board member of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Herman Cain has also served on the boards of Aquila Inc, Nabisco, Whirlpool, Readers Digest, and AGCO Inc. While he has worked on some high-profile political campaigns, and has run for the presidency in 2000, and the senate in 2004, Cain has never served in public office.

Recently, a woman came forward and claimed that Cain had sexually harassed her during his tenure as CEO of the NRA(National Restaurant Association), Cain denied that there was a settlement, but did eventually admit that some sort of 'settlement' had been reached with the woman. Since that incident occurred in October of 2011, 3 more reports of sexual harassment have been publicized. Two of the four women have been identified as Karen Kraushaar, a registered Republican who donated money to the Democrats in 2009. Kraushaar also lodged a complaint of unfair treatment with her next employer. She later dropped her complaint. The second woman identified is Sharon Bialek. Bialek claims that Cain stuck his hand up her skirt and shoved her head towards his crotch after a meeting where she allegedly asked Cain for help finding work.

Herman Cain and his campaign deny that Mr. Cain knows who this woman is, although it was reported by Sharon Bialek that she spoke with Cain recently at a Tea Party event, and the story was corroborated by radio talk show host Amy Jacobson. Here are some interesting facts from the website caintruth.com

The fact is that Ms. Bialek has had a long and troubled history, from the courts to personal finances – which may help explain why she has come forward 14 years after an alleged incident with Mr. Cain, powered by celebrity attorney and long term Democrat donor Gloria Allred.
In the courts, Ms. Bialek has had a lengthy record in the Cook County Court system over various civil lawsuits. The following cases on file in Cook County are:

2000-M1-707461 Defendant against Broadcare Management

2000-M1-714398 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management

2000-M1-701522 Defendant in lawsuit against Broadcare Management

2005-M1-111072 Defendant in lawsuit against Mr. Mark Beatovic.

2007-M1-189176 Defendant in lawsuit against Midland Funding.

2009-M1-158826 Defendant in lawsuit against Illinois Lending.

Ms. Bialek was also sued in 1999 over a paternity matter according to ABC 7 Chicago (WLS-TV). Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011
In personal finances, PACER (Federal Court) records show that Ms. Bialek has filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of Illinois bankruptcy court in 1991 and 2001. The respective case numbers according to the PACER system are 1:01-bk-22664 and 1:91-bk-23273.
Ms. Bialek has worked for nine employers over the last seventeen years. Source: WLS-TV, November 7, 2011
Curiously, if Ms. Bialek had intended to take legal action, the statute of limitations would have passed a decade ago.

I wonder if she hopes to make a quick buck off of this scandal?? The other two women are as of yet still unknown, and their so are the details of their claims against Cain. So, two women, both Republicans(?) suddenly decide they want to dredge up old news about Herman Cain during well over a decade after these events supposedly happened, and two more mystery women are thrown in the mix to thicken the stew, and nobody smells a rat?? I sure do. But let the rat stink, I say, because so far it seems to be helping Herman Cain, not hurting him. His campaign has added 2.25 million dollars to their campaign coffers since the sexual harassment allegations first surfaced, and Cain appears unfazed by the controversy and made a very strong showing at the CNBC Republican debate on November 9th.

At this point in the race, most of the field is doing poorly with only Cain and Mitt Romney showing any chances of garnering the GOP nomination. Early on in the race Texas Governor Rick Perry and Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann were highly favorable candidates, with Bachmann being a Tea Party Favorite. Ron Paul, who seems to have a fervent cult following around him is slipping off the radar as well, that leaves Rick Santorum and John Huntsman to sit in the caboose of the nominee train and weep a little. As politics go, the GOP is likely to pick Mitt Romney as their candidate as he has the political clout and name recognition that they believe is essential to defeating Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election.

However, if the momentum we are seeing behind the Herman Cain campaign continues, the Republicans will have a hard choice to make. Ignore the will of the people and go with the candidate that you feel will get the job done, or go with the new guy that you probably don't care for, but know that if you don't choose the American people will see to it that anyone with an (R) next to their name never gets elected to office again. My personal opinion is that despite his lack of experience, it is doubtful that Herman Cain could do a worse job than Barack Obama, so let the man have his shot. We made history by electing the first "hAlfrican-American" president, now let's really make history, let it be known that the Republican Party will be the ones to elect the first black man to the highest seat of power in the United States. The Democrats will immediately declare that the GOP is racist anyway and claim that Herman Cain is actually a well tanned Frenchman and therefore not really black.

Anthony Weiner Photo - Penis (Uncensored)

2011-06-08T16:26:00.009-04:00

Since this whole controversy began, I have had a million jokes running through my head, all of which have probably been done by now. Anthony Weiner is already a joke just by his surname alone, but add to that the fact that he has been showing his 'wiener' around town and now you have a truly superb and over the top political scandal. Instead of boring you with rehashed dick jokes, I shall instead post the now infamous picture of Weiner's 'wiener' so you can decide for yourself if this scandal is as 'big' as everyone is making it out to be.

My personal opinion on this whole affair is this. If Anthony Weiner took pictures of his junk and posted them to all his girlfriends online from the privacy of his own home, I could care less. Liking to show off his package doesn't mean he's a lousy elected official. However, if he was taking pictures of his 'long' at work, than he should resign, or he should be booted from his position. In the end, this is just another silly scandal, made even bigger by the fact that people are always mesmerized by the actions of their fellow humans-especially the ones in Hollywood and Washington.

Anthony Weiner has made a habit out of showing his junk, everyday the amount of photos of Weiner's cock- pardon the pun, continue to grow. I think we should just give this guy a talk show and let him talk about his penis all day. Let's face it this man is obsessed with his own genitalia.

SEIU to Collapse Economy, Overthrow Government

2011-03-26T10:37:00.004-04:00

It appears the left has decided that the best way to overcome the power of the Tea Party movement is to steal non-existent tactics that the left claim the Tea Party movement employs, and use those fictional tactics to destabilize the economy and overthrow the United States government. During a March 19th forum, members of the SEIU(You know those union people who like to attack and berate black people for fun?)laid out a plan to destabilize the US economy by staging mass strategic defaults on mortgage and student loans, civil disobedience, strikes, disruption of shareholder meetings and large-scale protests.

Wait. Didn't we already have mass defaults on mortgages and student loans, civil disobedience, and strikes? The first was a direct result of Democratic tomfoolery that led to the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the second is what liberals call the third. e.g. I got an education, and now I will not pay off my student loans in an act of civil disobedience. The strikes are what happens when overpaid brats that make outrageous claims like "We're teachers!" and "A labor contract isn't a contract at all, it's a right." The left is horrible at staging large scale protests as evidenced by the "One Nation Rally" and the "Rally to Restore Sanity." They didn't get nearly the numbers similar Tea Party events garnered, but boy could those hippies really throw garbage everywhere.

Now it seems the union thugs have decided the time is right to rally the troops, foment dissent, and have a good old fashioned revolt. Essentially they want to attack financial institutions while trying to make Wall Street tank with mass mortgage defaults. I could go into details about all of their plans, but I want to focus on the basic idea, and not bore you with all of the vile, anti-American lunacy that runs through the minds of socialist moonbats.

What are these Union screwballs trying to accomplish? A complete collapse of the American economy. Than what? Probably overthrow the government and install a socialist dictatorship. Sounds like things we have seen happen in history before, or the plot of a Tom Clancy Novel. It all sounds far fetched and fictional, right? Well not if your in the SEIU. The fact that someone could stand up in front of a crowd of people and nonchalantly explain that destroying the economy of the country you live in to make a point, or gain power is a reasonable course of action, is insane.

The actions of groups like Code Pink and the SEIU are clear indicators that the left is so frustrated with the success and effectiveness of the grassroots conservative movements in this country; and at the failures of their own community organizing efforts, that they are slowly losing their grip on reality, and willing to adopt the tactics that they claim to loathe. This is nothing new, the left enjoy wallowing in their own hypocrisy, and than accusing the right of all the things that they believe in, but refuse to acknowledge, and use subterfuge to hide.

I guess they point I am trying to make here is that the left are having a collective nervous breakdown and the American people, and our way of life are going to suffer greatly unless these malfunctioning units are given a very large dose of Conservative Prozac. I will be more than happy to administer the first dose. Does Prozac come in suppository form???

Paladino Memo to Dean Skelos

2011-03-20T17:40:00.000-04:00

PALADINO FOR TAX PAYER RELIEF

Tax Payers – Fight for Tax Relief

The Tax Payers Of New York Have Had Enough

The NYS politicians are once again preparing to pass a budget that maintains the status quo. The Tax Payers can’t let that happen – we must present our own proposal for tax payer relief

As you know, Carl Paladino has been relentless in his views on New York’s budget process. Below is his memo to Skelos – the senate majority leader. It is telling the republicans not to fold under Cuomo’s pressure. Cuomo’s Budget is the usual smoke and mirrors – it will NOT give NY tax payers ANY tax relief. In fact, it will result in higher taxes through “NEW” local and county taxes. (Read Carl’s full Press Release & Memo below)

We are preparing for a march to Albany – the New York Tax Payers will be presenting a Tax Payers budget proposal that includes Carl’s recommendations. This time the New York Tax Payers will be heard.

Please read the memo and pass this along to every New York Tax Payer you can.

Note: the media and hypocrites lie and slander Carl at every turn of the road. Carl is a no nonsense guy that tells it like it is. They fear the truth. Carl’s selfless courage to keep talking and continuing to take the bullets with nothing in it for himself proves it was, and is, Paladino For The People – pure and simple. Don’t believe the propaganda – Carl is a genuine all around good man and his ideas are the real deal for the taxpaying public. Please read below and support Carl’s hard working efforts to help US. Please get the facts straight and defend Carl and join us.

“Citizens 4 a Better New York”:

For future info as released get on the "budget info list" drop an email to: wethepeopleofny@yahoo.com

Also; Send one of the two messages below:

Message; I am interested in knowing what this movement is about and what the plans are. Please send info as released to my email address. To; glprespecta@yahoo.com

Message; I am interested in joining and I am willing to participate in a nonpartisan effort to return NYS to the grand state it use to be. I am ready willing and able to do my part. Please forward info on what I can do to help to my email address (include your Phone number in your response if YOU can). To; ngatlin46@yahoo.com

Please pass this message on to all New Yorkers

PRESS RELEASE:
FROM CARL P. PALADINO
MARCH 18, 2011 REV #3
RE: OPEN MEMO TO DEAN SKELOS

Dean, you are no longer just the Senate Majority Leader. You are the taxpayer’s “opposition” to the Cuomo/Silver cabal charged, as an experienced warrior negotiating from power, to attack the status quo. Below is a link to your interview with Liz Benjamin last week. It was not inspiring.

The taxpayers want jobs and big cuts in spending and taxes, which will help job retention and growth. They don’t care about getting a budget by April 1. The people struggled to give you a Senate majority. If the Senate doesn't change the status quo now, it won’t get another chance and we will lose it in 2012.

The $10 billion concocted deficit was actually more like $3 billion. With the bar on expected achievements [devoid of real tax cuts] set so low by the press and without any significant or organized opposition coming from any source and especially the Senate, Cuomo has created the perfect setting where he can’t lose. With a little smoke and mirrors and an easy buy in by the Senate he will resolve the deficit and be a hero for not raising taxes. The taxpayer will get the status quo and more agony. The tail is wagging the dog. You said to Liz that the Senate budget knocked a few bucks off of Cuomo's budget and you appear to want to call it a day.

New York taxpayers are fed up with being the highest spending and taxed State in the nation by almost 100% over the national average. Reducing spending and taxes and removing debilitating regulation creates jobs. A few months ago to win the election Cuomo said he was the only true agent of change, would upset the status quo, downsize government and confront the unions that have mortgages on our future generations. We knew it was all hollow rhetoric and he was the ultimate conman. If he were to change the status quo he would alienate the entitlement and union cabal that he needs to get elected president.

You have the unique opportunity at the perfect time to expose the fraud of the Cuomo/Silver culture, which nips around the edges of the salient issues. Your conference can expose his vague and phony budget and solve many of the other issues addressed below. By showing support for the executive budget when announced it appeared you were dancing the Albany 2 step with Cuomo but the taxpayer waited in patient but heightened anticipation for the Republican Conference's budget which they expected to severely attack the status quo and many of the essential issues described below.

When your conference finally presented its budget it was sickening. They are throwing the taxpayers under the bus. Nothing has changed. Secret and suspect “three men in a room” meetings are not the transparency the people expect. Staging debate and acrimony while cutting deals and piecing off members in the back room is theater. The Senate has the awesome responsibility to confront the demons and protect the taxpayers’ interests but appears ready to throw in the towel.

You told Liz that both Cuomo and Silver are opposed to withdrawing the Triborough Amendment and it would be a waste of time going through the motions. Not true. Binding arbitration expires this year and it is the hammer you need to rescind Triborough and reform pensions.

I gave you a roadmap for reform in the attached "TURN ALBANY UPSIDE DOWN" memo. You have the power to implement many of the reforms addressed therein. Cuomo/Silver can’t do anything without the Senate. The Senate must use all of its powers to the fullest to implement change. If Cuomo/Silver don't agree to reasonable change the taxpayers say let the government shut down except for critical services. It's that bad.

You have the once in a lifetime opportunity to use the power that the people gave to the Senate Republican Conference to fulfill dreams, keep promises, protect the family fabric, rid the state of the parasitic culture that has overcome Albany and stop the feeding frenzy at the public trough.

Remember those dreams you had as a younger man that you could leave a lasting mark and legacy. You can lead New York State to a better day. Do not forget that it is only in the budget process that you have the leverage to affect real change. Cuomo/Silver will tell you that they will deal with the important issues after the budget because then you will have no leverage to force change. The taxpayers don’t particularly care how long it takes to get a budget. This is your opportunity to show real leadership and get the job you are paid to do done.

I am sending a copy of this memo to all members of the Senate Republican Conference, Republican and Conservative County and State Chairs, the Assembly Republican Conference and key Tea Party coordinators throughout the state among others. I suggest you and your conference consider the organization of a rally in Albany at the kickoff announcement of the Senate Republican revised budget which we would need to circulate in advance.

Here are a few particulars the Senate should adopt in a revised Republican Senate Conference Budget:

1.] demand full transparency and disclosure. No three men in a room secret meeting between principals or staff. Insist that the taxpayer be able to look in the window at all deal making sessions.

2.] bring focus on issues that directly affect job retention and growth.

3.] address:

a. the financial and mandate burdens your budget places on local governments and school districts

b. the rescission of the MTA payroll tax.

c. Medicaid optional benefit cuts, the $10 billion/year of fraud, waste and abuse, withdrawal of the delegation of authority to the executive branch to implement rules for application or administration of benefits without specific legislation.

d. cuts in State agency and authority personnel not only to save cost but to actually become efficient and productive and do away with political and unnecessary jobs.

e. school and school services consolidation, downsizing the bloated and unnecessary State Education Department, restoring curriculum mandated to the local districts, rescission of 3020 a] of the education law and rescission of the Taylor Law for teachers. Who cares in the 21st century if they strike? We can put National Guard or other monitors in schools during strikes to alleviate the burdens on parents.

f. freezing all hiring for newly created positions and wages in State governments including state agencies and authorities and all local governments and school districts.

g. immediate reform of pensions to defined contribution plans for all exempt employees in local and State governments as proposed by Assemblyman Mike Fitzpatrick.

h. extension of binding arbitration for only critical including first responder State and local government employees after they agree to the rescission of Triborough and conversion of pension plans to defined contribution.

I. repeal of the taxpayer punishing Wick's Law.

j. the sale of unneeded prisons to private operators to give surplus corrections officers a job.

k. significant reduction or elimination of business taxes on manufacturing, creative and high tech industries including the New York State Corporation Franchise Tax and the minimum tax on small businesses.

l. eliminating green and other such general and selective subsidies.

m. merging the Thruway Authority and other bridge and transportation authorities including the MTA with DOT.

n. raising non-resident tuitions at SUNY to the actual cost of the education and enacting strict residency requirements.

o. implementation of the Lundine report recommendations for consolidation of local governments and districts.

p. consolidation of State government its agencies and authorities.

q. implementation of tort, workers comp and malpractice reform.

http://www.capitaltonight.com/2011/03/skelos-is-focused-on-a-3-way-budget-deal/

NPR Scandal. Two Schillers Resign. Media Ignores the Truth.

2011-03-15T01:10:00.003-04:00

James O'Keefe, I'm sure you remember him. He went undercover inside Planned Parenthood and got evidence that employees were willing to help underage girls falsify documents so they can get abortions, and accept donations from racist organizations to fund the genocide of minorities.

He made big waves when he broke wide open the corruption of ACORN in an undercover video sting operation that gave America a first hand look at how liberals look at child prostitution and tax evasion. O'Keefe and his colleague Hannah Giles, dressed as a pimp and a prostitute secretly filmed ACORN employees giving them some pretty bad advice about how to scam the IRS while keeping your house full of underage, illegal immigrant prostitutes a secret so as not to hurt your political future.

O'Keefe made the news again when he and three other men weaseled their way into the offices of Senator Mary Landrieu, and tried to wire-tap her phone lines. He walked away with probation and community service for that affair.

He kept busy by getting a temporary job with the U.S. Census Bureau. His employers didn't seem to care when he told them he was getting overpaid for three and a half hours worth of work that he did not even do.

O'Keefe also made a failed attempt to lure CNN correspondent Abbie Boudreau onto a boat supposedly containing "sexually explicit props", he than planned to make suggestive comments and pretend to try and seduce her while recording the incident with hidden cameras.(Oh, well they all can't be winners.)

Now he's making some big waves again, this time two of O'Keefe's cohorts, Simon Templar(his pen name) and Shaughn Adeleye posed as Arab businessmen with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood(a known terror sponsoring group that fronts as a civil organization.)who wanted to donate 5 million dollars to NPR.

In a private meeting with then-senior vice president for fund-raising,Ron Schiller and one of his associates, Schiller is given some very leading questions. His responses are laced with anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, and anti-Tea Party statements. Most of it is the usual liberal parrot speak "Bwawk! Tea baggers are racists." "Bwawk! Tea baggers are all bible-toting Jesus Nazi's." Schiller then started to tell his two new Muslim friends how the "Jews control the media, but not at NPR."

Since this scandal broke both Ron Schiller and CEO Vivian Schiller have resigned their positions with NPR. Ron Schiller planned on taking a job with the Aspen Institute, but has ceded his position in the wake of this scandal. As usual, the main stream media has tried to spin this story, ignoring the context and focusing instead on the fact that NPR didn't take the fake 5 million dollars. I'm starting to think we should defund NPR. Let's give that money instead to James O'Keefe, and any other brave souls, few though they may be, who still have the desire to bring you the real news.