Friday, August 31, 2012
Gary Johnson, Ron Paul, and others like them are probably the last of the statesmen. They actually defend liberty and are unwilling to use the force of the state to inflict any majority or minority view on the population as a whole. There are too few men and women in politics today with this view. If not for the corruption in the media and within the politician parties themselves, the public might know more about these candidates who are attracting more than a small fringe of supporters. I hear arguments that a vote for Johnson or Paul is a vote for Obama, as it takes votes away from Romney. Others compel me to abandon my principles and vote for the lesser evil. I will not apologize, nor will I submit. If I vote, it will be with my conscience. If I vote...
The voting process itself legitimizes the political system by which those career politicians undermine the social governance they had sworn to defend. They break their oaths, presenting and enacting legislation that infringes upon the Constitution itself. This is nothing new, as this has been the way to entrench themselves for a century or more. They stand up and tout themselves as the alternative to the failures that have come before them, yet every president leaves many of us yearning for their predecessor, who only violated our liberties marginally compared with the one we have now. Voting is immoral, as most citizens see it as a way to promote a candidate who will defend their beliefs by infringing upon the rights of some other group of society. And the vicious cycle repeats every election season. What is it they say about insanity? It's doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting different results.
Like Spooner, I signed no social contract, nor am I bound by one that was signed by others centuries before my birth. This is why I support Libertarian candidates, though discount the political process itself. Without voluntary acceptance and interaction, the system of governance which relies on the state's monopoly on force to inflict it's will invalidates itself. Voting is a mockery of a voluntary society.
Left and Right are both wrong. It's time for something truly different. And people like Gary Johnson or Ron Paul are a good start. Or we could just keep doing the same thing that consistently leads to failure...
Interesting happenings up in Massachusetts (originally from Patriot Ledger)
(Mediaite) A few homemade billboard signs in Hanson, Mass., have generated considerable controversy for their inflammatory anti-Obama messages.
Sitting on the property of motorcycle accessories distributor Sullivans Inc., one large sign shows President Barack Obama with a caption that reads: "Somewhere in Kenya, a village is missing its idiot."
"Obama One Big Ass Mistake America, Vote Mitt Romney for 2012!" it reads below the main headline. The communist symbolic images of the hammer and sickle are on the president's shirt collar.
Several feet away, another sign shows a pouting young girl giving the middle-finger to the president. "Thanks, Obama," begins the caption in bold red letters, and then continues in child-like penmanship: "You've spent my lunch money, my allowance, my inheritance, 35 years of future paychecks and my retirement. You jerk."
Personally, I think the billboards are a bit over the top. The first one would have worked better if it had said Illinois instead of Kenya (don't forget, Obama claimed he was from Kenya in a biography). The one with the little girl could have done without the middle finger, and possibly the "you jerk." Though, Lefties have no room to complain considering the way they treated George W. Bush. And other Republicans.
Others say the signs go too far. "That type of statement is real real redneck," one resident said. "It's regressive and not progressive."
Oh, good, answering with an inappropriate slur. And, what's "progressive" done to this country? Pure misery. Over to the Patriot Ledger
Sullivan's attorney, Roger S. Davis of Quincy, cited free speech when asked about the signs Wednesday.
"First amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It's called freedom of speech," Davis said.
Robert Sullivan is the business owner who put the signs up. The city is attempting to get him to take them down, saying that he didn't have the proper permits (to put them up on his own property, no less) and that they create a driving hazard. Many people think the signs are funny, some don't. And, of course
Brown, who saw the signs while riding his bike through Hanson on Sunday, said he thinks the sign calling Obama an "idiot" from a Kenyan village is racist.
Or, it could be that Obama is an idiot as a president, and listed himself as being from Kenya. Bummer.
Thursday, August 30, 2012
As of August 1st, young girls in Oregon are now set to receive free sterilizations without any parental consent thanks to a regulation contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare).
After being finalized by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius earlier this year, the mandate allows for girls as young as 15 years old to go against parental wishes (or just not tell them) and receive sterilizations covered by their health care plan.
In fact, the teenage girls can still receive the procedure even if the parents openly object.
The bill states more specifically that all health care plans throughout the United States must provide 100% full coverage, without any cost-sharing, for not only all forms of sterilizations but all forms of contraceptives approved by the FDA for women “with reproductive capacity.” In other words, any woman with the ability to reproduce. Considering the rate puberty is rapidly accelerating in the United States, this age is very much up for debate. Girls as young as 8 are now giving birth, meaning that this law could apply to these young women who are literally “fit” to reproduce.
On average, however, the term would apply to girls around the age of 12, which is now the generally accepted age as to when girls begin to menstruate.
The consent form even allows for the possibility of a third party signer acting as an ‘interpreter’ for those who are impaired or cannot speak English. The form, which the 15 year old girls are given to sign before receiving their sterilizations, reads:Wait, wasn't this what Texas governor Rick Perry got into hot water over, along with the conflict of interest between him and the drug manufacturer? Further evidence that there is little difference between liberal and conservative career politicians today...
I understand that the sterilization must be considered permanent and not reversible, says this consent form. I have decided that I do not want to become pregnant, bear children or father children.The regulation is highly similar to previous legislation mandates such as the California bill that allowed girls as young as 12 to receive the Gardasil shot without any parental consent. It also is in the same vein as the ruthless Eugenics campaigns of the 20th century that are openly admitted. In what started out as voluntary sterilizations, the U.S. government forcibly sterilized over 60,000 people between 1929 and 1974. States like North Carolina have considered paying the families of victims in monetary compensation to ‘make up’ for the government-enforced sterilization program.
Obamacare Mandate: 15 Year Old Girls Receive Free Sterilizations Without Parental Consent | One Radio Network
I am not sure if I am more surprised at the people of the UK for tolerating a monarchy in a 21st century first world nation, or that they seem more concerned with the welfare of the royalty over that of the peasants...
It's been a massive year for Queen Elizabeth. She's experienced the highs of her Diamond Jubilee celebrations and watched her country bask in the glory of the Olympic Games. But behind the scenes, it's believed there's only one thing on her mind – the deteriorating health of her husband, Prince Philip. As he was rushed to hospital for the third time in eight months, it's believed murmurings have begun behind Palace walls for a succession plan – one that is likely to sensationally see Prince William take the throne over his father, Prince Charles.
"The Queen is a tremendously strong-willed woman but she is not keen to face public life without Prince Philip beside her," royal expert Bill Coles tells Woman's Day. "Now that he's been in hospital for another extended stay, she recognises that, at the age of 91, he can't keep up with her. The Queen is determined to be there for Prince Philip. He's the love of her life."
Our sources have revealed that when British Prime Minister David Cameron was informed the Queen, 86, was considering stepping down, he addressed the matter in their weekly meeting. "He hopes to convince the Queen to appoint William as her successor," says our exclusive source from inside the British Conservative Party. "The Prime Minister offered his opinion that were Prince William to succeed the Queen he would be 'a vibrant monarch and one that would unite his country behind him'.
"There is considerable concern that Prince Charles is less likeable and that the prospect of his wife Camilla becoming queen would be deeply unpopular with much of Britain." It's believed the Prime Minister's subtle hints were not taken kindly by the sharp monarch. "He didn't get a warm response from the Queen, who would only say, 'I believe William has the makings of an extraordinary king – when his time comes.'"
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Riviera Beach, Florida Breaking from Orlando's, WPTV.com, Marvin McTeare arrested in 'Barack Obama' Riviera Beach robbery:The gun-toting ' Barack Obama' restaurant robber is in custody, police said early Wednesday. According to Riviera Beach police, a man named Marvin McTeare, 22, is the person who robbed a McDonald's restaurant while carrying a gun and wearing a 'Barack Obama'-type mask. The incident happened early on the morning of January 28 at the McDonald's at 3551 Broadway. Wearing the mask, white gloves and black clothing, McTeare brandished a gun, walked behind the counter and ordered all the workers into the back office, police said. He then forced the manager to take money from a safe and put it into a cloth bag, according to police.
Today POLITICO Arena asks:
Does the appearance of New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan (who is suing the Obama administration) to deliver a blessing to the GOP convention blur the line between religion and politics?
The invocation of blessings from above is as old as the nation's founding document, the Declaration of Independence. So if Democrats want to take exception to Cardinal Dolan's appearance at the GOP convention, they'll do so at their peril.
Some of course will use this appearance as a way to try to keep alive the alleged Republican "war on women." But that charge is wearing thin. And it too is fraught with peril for Democrats, because the dozens of suits that have been brought against Obamacare's contraceptive and abortifacient mandate are really about religious liberty, not about preventing access to contraception. So if anything, the cardinal's appearance will shift the focus back to the compulsion that runs through Obamacare, the unpopularity of which is why Obama so seldom mentions it.
Original Page: http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/C09WrQzWAMo/
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
I am not even sure what the benefit for a pro-immigration politician would be in falsifying a greater number of deportees....
Monday, August 27, 2012
Every once in a while, you have to feel sorry for Mitt Romney. One of his surrogates during his unsuccessful 2008 campaign for the Republican presidential nomination was Dr. John Willke, the controversial doctor who inspired Missouri Congressman Todd Akin's now infamous belief that a raped woman is unlikely to become pregnant. Moreover, the good doctor is inconveniently sticking to his guns. A woman being raped, he told theNew York Times last week, "is frightened, tight, and so on. And sperm, if deposited in her vagina, are less likely to be able to fertilize. The tubes are spastic."
According to the Times, Dr. Michael Greene, a professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School, dismisses Willke's theories as "just nuts."Another 2008 Romney supporter was Joe Arpaio, the Arizona sheriff charged by the U.S. Justice Department with discrimination and racial profiling who is also one of the foremost proponents of the equally wacky proposition that President Obama was not born in Hawaii, is therefore not a naturally born U.S. citizen, and consequently is ineligible to serve as president. Arpaio believes the president's birth certificate to be a forgery, and it appears that nothing under the sun can convince him otherwise.There are lots more birthers out there, including most prominently Donald Trump, all driven by an irrational animus toward the president. Understandably, Governor Romney does not want to needlessly antagonize them. They, too, may well be nuts, but a vote is a vote irrespective of the citizen's IQ or emotional equilibrium.Still, it was disturbing to hear Governor Romney quip this past Friday that "No one's ever asked to see my birth certificate." To be sure, he subsequently dismissed his comments as an attempt to "have a little humor" in the campaign. "I've said throughout the campaign and before, there's no question where [President Obama] was born," he told CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley. "He was born in the U.S." The problem, of course, is that the generally humorless birthers were certain to interpret the "birth certificate" comment not as a joke but as an indication that Governor Romney was sympathetic to their cause. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowddescribed it as "a bat's squeak calling to the basest emotions."Last year, in an article in which I argued that Governor Romney's Mormon faith should not be made an issue in the 2012 presidential campaign, I observed that he "does not come across in any way as mean-spirited," and quoted him as telling the Values Voters Summit that, "We should remember that decency and civility are values, too."
Saturday, August 25, 2012
The presidential debates — the single most important electoral events — should provide voters with opportunities to see the popular candidates discussing important issues in an unscripted manner. Unfortunately, the presidential debates often fail to do so, because the major party candidates exert excessive control over them. Presidential debates were run by the civic-minded League [...]
Original Page: http://usahitman.com/pdalsnc/
According to the New York Times, because of the expectation of bad weather in Tampa, the Republican National Convention will immediately recess after it convenes on Monday, picking back up on Tuesday afternoon. "Our first priority is ensuring the safety of delegates, alternates, guests, members of the media attending the Republican National Convention and citizens of the Tampa Bay area," said Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee.
What about the safety of foreigners on the receiving end of the U.S. military and the safety of American citizens in danger of being killed on Romney's orders?
Original Page: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/118952.html
The video below just released from Team Obama, has nothing to do with America or swaying voters; it's chum for Obama's sycophant punks in the media:
Ron Paul supporters should not vote for Romney.
Original Page: http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t909113/
Friday, August 24, 2012
Activists retaliate against the US government by suing them for signing a bill they say goes against the Constitution.
The US government seems determined to have the power to do away with due process and Americans' right to a trial.
I am one of the lead plaintiffs in the civil lawsuit against the National Defense Authorization Act, which gives the president the power to hold any US citizen anywhere for as long as he wants, without charge or trial. In May, following a March hearing, Judge Katherine Forrest issued an injunction against it; this week, in a final hearing in New York City, US government lawyers essentially asserted even more extreme powers - the power to entirely disregard the judge and the law. Indeed, on Monday, August 6, Obama's lawyers filed an appeal to the injunction - a profoundly important development that as of this writing has been scarcely reported.
In the March hearing, the US lawyers had confirmed that yes, the NDAA does give the president the power to lock up people like journalist Chris Hedges and peaceful activists like myself and other plaintiffs. Government attorneys have stated on record that even war correspondents could be locked up indefinitely under the NDAA. Judge Katherine Forrest had ruled for a temporary injunction against an unconstitutional provision in this law - after government attorneys refused to provide assurances to the court that plaintiffs and others would not be indefinitely detained for engaging in first amendment activities. Twice the government has refused to define what it means to be an "associated force", and it claimed the right to refrain from offering any clear definition of this term, or clear boundaries of power under this law. This past week's hearing was even more terrifying: incredibly, in this hearing, Obama's attorneys refused to assure the court, when questioned, that the NDAA's provision - one that permits reporters and others who have not committed crimes to be detained without trial - has not been applied by the US government anywhere in the world - after Judge Forrest's injunction. In other words, they were saying to a US judge that they could not or would not state whether Obama's government had complied with the legal injunction that she had lain down before them.
In his article in London's Financial Times, professor Jeffrey Sachs laments the inevitable shrinkage in America's federal government, regardless of which political party takes the White House in November. Calling the national elections "a full-throated ideological brawl … the small-government agenda has already prevailed. No matter who is elected on November 6, dangerous cuts in public goods and services are already in train."
Thursday, August 23, 2012
"Today, everybody agrees that the recession is over and the question is what the pace of the expansion is going to be," said National Economic Council head Larry Summers...on December 13, 2009!
Almost every month since President Obama took office, a different member of his administration has offered a wildly optimistic prediction about the upwards direction of the economy.
"The Recovery That Wasn't," the cover story of Reason's brand-new October issue, juxtaposes those phony proclamations with the actual economic data to make a comical (and sad) commentary on the state of the job market during the Obama years.
[...]Obama's Recovery That Wasn't; Plus: How to Really Cut Defense Spending! - Reason.com
Want a real recovery? The government needs to get out of the business of managing the economy through fascistic methods.
If you're serious about cutting government, Democrats have to cut entitlements and Republicans have to cut defense. - Rand Paul
Not something you're likely to hear very many places these days...
President Obama needed a do-over to spell "Ohio" correctly on the campus of Ohio State University this week. Although Obama and several students at a campaign stop Tuesday morning at Sloopy's Diner on the campus of OSU tweeted out photos … Continue reading →
Really? Of all of the legitimate issues, focusing on spelling skills of a politician with excellent public speaking skills is seriously misguided. Maybe focus on illegal kill lists, circumventing constitutionality in regards to executive orders, or a host of other issues.
A spelling flub is a non-issue.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson almost certainly can't win the presidential election this year. But his supporters claim he could determine who does.
Johnson, the former New Mexico governor who briefly and unsuccessfully competed for the Republican presidential nomination before joining the Libertarians, is polling barely above 5 percent nationwide. Yet his numbers in key battleground states suggest he could make a difference in what is shaping up to be a tight contest between President Obama and Mitt Romney.
He was rating at 13 percent in New Mexico and 9 percent in Arizona in recent polling — not enough to win, but certainly enough to disadvantage whichever major-party candidate he's drawing votes away from.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
The last couple of weeks have seen a major dust-up over President Obama's proposal to waive some of welfare reform's work requirements. It might be a bit of a stretch to say that the president has "gutted" welfare reform, since we don't yet actually know what those waivers will be. Right now, we are more or less left to trust the president when he says that he won't use the waivers to weaken welfare-to-work, a dubious prospect given the president's long record of hostility to welfare reform.
However, an even bigger concern is the president's assertion that he has the power to waive those requirements in the first place, especially since the law clearly appears to prohibit such waivers. The authors of welfare reform, both legislators and staffers, are on record as saying that they intended to prohibit any waiver of work requirements. Representative David Camp, who helped write the law as a member of the Ways and Means Committee, says "it contained specific language prohibiting any administration from granting states waivers from the work requirement."
The administration, on the other hand, contends that they have found a loophole because the work requirements are mentioned, tangentially, in another section of the law over which the administration does have waiver power. That may or may not stand up in court, but it certainly seems to violate the spirit of the welfare-reform law.
While much of this might seem like an arcane legal dispute, it is part of a disturbing trend. The Obama administration has developed a penchant for unilateral action that would make even the most ardent advocate of an imperial presidency blush. On issue after issue, the president insists that "we can't wait." He won't wait for a Congress that may not agree with his ideas for remaking America; he will simply act all by himself.
For example, the Obama administration has taken upon itself the authority to waive many of the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act. Twenty-six states have now received waivers from NCLB, allowing them to work around the law's toughest provisions: that all students test proficient in math and science by 2014, and that schools make "adequate yearly progress" in getting students to pass standardized tests to avoid being labeled "failing." Another dozen or so states' waiver requests are pending.
Again, the issue is not the material effects of the waivers. NCLB is, after all, a significantly flawed piece of legislation that imposed federal control over the traditionally state-level responsibility for education. But the Obama administration used the waivers to effectively rewrite the law, establishing a whole new set of rules for those states receiving a waiver. The Obama administration simply dispensed with the messy legislative process and imposed its own federal education law.
Of course, there is no better example of the Obama administration's penchant for unilaterally rewriting laws than Obamacare. It is well known that the Obama administration has already issued more than 1,200 waivers of various provisions to companies and even entire states. It has also postponed the implementation of provisions that have proved inconvenient. For example, it simply dropped implementation of the CLASS Act, an actuarially unstable long-term-care-insurance program, after it had opposed congressional attempts to officially repeal the provision.
More: Obama's Overreaches | Michael D. Tanner | Cato Institute: Commentary
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
REPUBLICAN challenger Mitt Romney has attacked President Barack Obama again for running a campaign that was "all about division and attack and hatred."
Romney's comments in an interview with CBS This Morning came as the two camps clashed over the tone of the campaign, with the Obama campaign on Tuesday calling the Republican standard bearer "unhinged."
"The president's campaign is all about division and attack and hatred," Mitt Romney told CBS. "My campaign is about getting America back to work and creating greater unity in this country, which of course has always been the source of America's vitality and strength."
"The president seems to be running just to hang onto power - I think he'll do anything in his power to try to get re-elected," he said.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
It's no secret that I am not a fan of Sarah Palin. Most of the time when she opens up her mouth, I cringe. I don't like her politics. I think she is a hypocrite as well, and I don't feel she is an honest person. I think she should just step down and go about her life.
But, I have to say I was shocked, saddened and very angry over many of the comments that I saw pertaining to the posted photo.
Palin is wearing a a Superman T-shirt, a pair of black capri pants and some high heels.
She looks good. She's a middle aged woman and she obviously takes care of herself. More power to her.
I couldn't walk in those shoes, but I think she is rocking them out. And I personally love the T-shirt. I want one!
The remarks that I saw all over the Internet about this particular picture, well..shocked me.
Let me repeat. I am NOT a fan of Palin, but when I saw the picture, I pretty much just kept on going. I didn't have an opinion on it and I didn't see what other people saw. I really had no clue why that picture was showing up all over the Internet, until I saw some actual posts about it.
I saw several references to her picture calling her a "whore, slut, trailer trash." I saw comments about her breasts being fake and her shoes being called, "come fuck me shoes."
One man said, "She looks like a trailer park whore.. sorry,,"
(You're not sorry. You're ignorant.)
Another said, " She just needs a wild liberal 'Superman', with a big gun, to show her some tuff love… anybody know one…?"
(Yeah, just what every woman needs. Fuck her good. Teach her something.)
I am convinced that people say things like this to dehumanize a person.
Strip them down to nothing. And for women, it is even worse. Why is this okay?
Friday, August 3, 2012
The Obama campaign is desperate. Actually that is an understatement. They have already requested that people send their mothers a Mother’s Day Card about Obamacare, have their wedding guests send money to his campaign on behalf of the bride and groom and now lo and behold, the campaign sinks to new depths. Obama Tweeted requesting that you send that $5 you were going to spend on a beer or other adult beverage to his campaign. After all, it’s to “help this campaign win.”
While they had hoped they would raise $1 billion, it seems now they aren’t even going to make the drastically slashed amount of $750 million.
One thing is for sure, Obama is doing so poorly that he donated $5,000 of his own money to his own campaign.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
While Barack Obama and the Democrats like to give lip service to our men and women in uniform, it’s what they do they betrays their rhetoric. He likes to get his picture with troops even though behind closed doors they are giving him the finger and sleeping during his speeches. This all makes things quite interesting when both the Obama campaign and the Democrat party are suing to restrict the military’s ability to vote in the upcoming election.
On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state’s law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is “arbitrary” with “no discernible rational basis.”So now we see the Democrat playbook come out again. We see the praise of the lips while they drive the knife into the back of our service men and women that they are using abroad in unconsitutional wars. While I disagree with Mike Flynn that they “have more right to vote than the rest of us,” I emphatically agree that they have the right to vote and that right should be defended by those of us at home.
Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as “arbitrary” and having “no discernible rational basis”, I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women’s time and their obligations to their sworn duty.
The National Defense Committee reports:
[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.