Ron Paul’s Lies: The Constitution for Dummies

12/25/2011

2 Comments

 

Ron Paul’s intended elimination of the Departments of Energy, Commerce, the EPA, Social Security, Medicaid, the Minimum Wage, etc., have been based upon Ron Paul appearing out of the bushes and chirping “Unconstitutional! Unconstitutional!” like that Bloom County cartoon character who used to pop up and shrill “No Nukes! No Nukes!” in response to a hunter’s call.

Sooo. Let’s visit what the constitution actually has to say about these false claims of unconstitutionality by the elitist, racist troll Paul.

1) The Departments: Constitutional Legitimacy

“The President is both the head of state and head of government of the United States of America, and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Under Article II of the Constitution, the President is responsible for the execution and enforcement of the laws created by Congress. Fifteen executive departments, each led by an appointed member of the President's Cabinet, carry out the day-to-day administration of the federal government. They are joined in this by other executive agencies such as the CIA and Environmental Protection Agency, the heads of which are not part of the Cabinet, but who are under the full authority of the President.”

“And The Cabinet is only mentioned briefly in the Constitution, in Article 2, Section 2 with the words "he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices," and in the 25th Amendment Section 4.

Without saying so directly, the Constitution created the Cabinet with those words. Note, however, that the Constitution does not go into what the executive Departments will be, how many there will be, or what their duties should be.”

2) Specific areas of Federal Regulation of the states are stated in the Constitution:

For example, let’s start with commerce. That’s why the commerce clause, an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) states that “the United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States…,” thereby providing a constitutional basis for the federal government to regulate interstate commerce.

Defense is another specific example of an area of authority granted by the Constitution to the United States federal government. The General Welfare Clauseand the Uniformity Clause, Article 1, Section 8, states: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

The Constitution also bestows upon congress the power to “promote the Progress of Science,”(Article 1, Section 8); think the Department of Energy’s Office of Science and Technology, NOAA etc., and “To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court” think Department of Justice.

Congress is authorized by Article 1, section 8 “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

Remembering that the “President is responsible for the execution and enforcement of the laws created by Congress,” a clear justification for the legitimacy of the various Federal Departments is obvious.

3) The Constitution also provides for general federal areas of authority

Again, the general Welfare Clause: “Promoting the general Welfare of the United States,” has been used a justification for funding the various departments such as the Department of Education which clearly are constitutional.

In fact, the Social Security system, a favorite whipping boy of boneheads such as Ron Paul who claims Social Security is unconstitutional, was found constitutional in 1937 by the Supreme Court. In Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937), the Supreme Court upheld the program because "The proceeds of both [employee and employer] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes generally, and are not earmarked in any way". The Social Security Tax was found constitutional as a mere exercise of Congress's general taxation powers.

However, Medicare was designed to promote the general welfare of the United States General Welfare clause), by a congress realizing that medical care for fixed low income United States citizens promotes the general welfare of the population.

Homosaps comment: That Social Security was not found constitutional on the basis of “promoting the general Welfare of the United States” shows just how vicious and depraved the elite class enemies of the working class are.

 

3) Funding for the Departments

The Spending and Taxation clause, Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, is known as the Taxing and Spending Clause. The Constitution states that  Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; It is the clause that gives the federal government of the United States its power of taxation. The clause “Promoting the general Welfare of the United States” has been used a justification for funding the various departments which clearly are constitutional.

Homosaps: comments on Departments. Only an idiot would argue that the United States does not need a federal agency to regulate radioactive materials and nuclear energy (i.e. The Department of Energy), or fishing quotas (Department of Commerce). Yeah, yeah, I know. The Constitution doesn’t specifically mention nuclear energy (who’d a thunk that; only the neocon cretins who use the fact that the constitution doesn’t specifically mention technologies that haven’t been invented yet or social concerns not extant in 1787 in an attempt to delegitimize the Departments), or that states could practically regulate issues such as fishing quotas which span states.

An examination of the current bleatings by Ron Paul and his ilk, claiming the various Federal Departments, Social Security, unions, etc., are unconstitutional reveals the true face of the de facto American aristocracy’s class war on the American worker.

The fact remains that Ron Paul is a stone cold liar when he claims that the various Departments are unconstitutional. There is clearly another agenda being pursued here, and it sure aint for the general welfare of the United States.

Go right ahead, Ronnie boy. Eliminating Social Security, Medicare, unions and the various Federal Departments will, sure as shooting, lead to a real class war.

Remember: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

2 Comments
 

THE TAR AND FEATHER PARTY HONORS NEWT GINGRICH

12/11/2011

0 Comments

 
THE TAR AND FEATHER PARTY HONORS NEWT GINGRICH

In response to the “Tea Party” which has been co-opted by the likes of Bachmann, I’m forming the “Tar and Feather Party” in honor of a good old American custom. In addition to Ron Paul, my initial candidate for tar and feathering, I’d now like to nominate the back from the Night of the Living Dead disgraced zombie, flesh eating politician, Newt Gingrich, for a good joyous tar and feathering and free ride out of town on a fast mule.

Let’s review the resume of Newton Gingrich, who, apparently like his nickname “Newt”, will eat anything he can swallow (apologies to other amphibians). Off we go and I do mean off. Wayyyy, off.

Let’s start with his views on poor folk and children. The aptly named Newt actually said: “Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works, so they literally have no habit of showing up on Monday,” Gingrich said. “They have no habit of staying all day. They have no habit of ‘I do this and you give me cash’ unless it’s illegal.”

I do this and you give me cash? Like the illegal lobbying and ethics violations that forced Gingrich to resign from congress? Anyone, anyone? More about this topic in a wee bit.

And also on the topic of poor folk, according to Newt: "It is tragic what we do in the poorest neighborhoods, entrapping children in, first of all, child laws, which are truly stupid," said the former House speaker, according to CNN.

“Child laws, which are truly stupid.” Did Newt really say that? In addition to tar and feathering Newt, I also now officially nominate Newt for the bully role in a real “Bully Beat Down” episode. Mayhem will be in touch…

Lest we think Newt doesn’t have a heart or a brain (or sense of humor), Newt proposed employing school children as janitors after first firing union janitors in a brilliantly original plan to solve America’s economic woes. Newt opined: “Most of these schools ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor and pay local students to take care of the school.” This stunningly insightful statement is strangely reminiscent of Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal,” which satirically advocated eating poor Irish babies as a means of combating Irish poverty.

But, Newt, what happens to all of those unemployed janitors and their families once they’ve been fired for evidently having the temerity of having a living wage union job? Maybe we could eat their babies…

Curiously, after discussing Newt’s Einsteinian idea of firing union janitors to save money to right the economy to a few casual acquaintances, a few actually liked this boneheaded suggestion. It seems a certain segment of America hates union employees for making a living wage but are not duly concerned with the likes of Newt Gingrich and his wife owing 500,00 dollars on what he claimed was a “standard no interest” Tiffany jewelry account. They are also apparently unconcerned with the growing gap between CEO and worker’s wages. But those union janitors…

Well we shouldn’t have to worry about Newt ever having to earn an honest living. We already know he can’t. After all, Newt was forced to resign from congress amidst charges of ethics violations.

“Gingrich, preacher of personal responsibility, honesty, and ethics, used tax-exempt foundations for political purposes in violation of House Rules. Gingrich admitted his guilt, and was fined $300,000 by the House Ethics Committee.”

Moving right along with an examination of Newt’s ability to earn an honest living, perhaps Newt could teach those poor kids about scams like using Taxpayer subsidies for his partisan campaign course. “Newt in his political career was the king of using tax-payer subsidized donations for his personal and political purposes. He stooped so low as to hijack not one but two charities for poor inner city kids and use their donations for his personal goals. GOPAC, Newt's longtime political action committee, was the centerpiece of a complex network of non-profit, and mostly tax exempt organizations that Newt has used to support himself and other conservative candidates. In an act of incredible hypocrisy, this crusader against taxes obtained taxpayer subsidies for his personal and political goals, by misusuing (sic) these tax-exempt groups.”

And in an illuminating exploration of this GOPAC sleaze: “For example, one GOPAC document said that its goal for the 1990s was "to both create and disseminate the doctrine of a majority Republican party." In another GOPAC document, titled "Key Factors in a House GOP Majority," Gingrich wrote "It is more powerful and more effective to develop a reform movement parallel to the official Republican party", instead of using the party structure, because it would get more attention and be more credible. Shortly thereafter, GOPAC paid for a television program promoting a "grassroots" movement to reform government; publicly they claimed it was nonpartisan, but private internal documents made its partisan goals clear. After it got expensive, Gingrich transferred the program to the "Abraham Lincoln Opportunity Foundation," a tax-exempt group controlled by a GOPAC official named Bo Callaway. It had been set up years earlier to help inner city kids, which is why it was tax exempt. The group spent $260,000 on the television program in 1990. That same year, Newt started another tax-exempt group that paid poor students for reading books. He bragged of this in many a political speech. But after the first two years, most of this foundation's money went to Mel Steely, a former Gingrich aide who is now Newt's official biographer.

The best known effort was a college course (titled "Renewing American Civilization") at a third-rate college that Gingrich nakedly used to recruit and organize conservative candidates, and to feed them his carefully constructed ideology and political slogans.”

 

The "Abraham Lincoln Opportunity Foundation," which ripped off inner city kids? Who said Newt doesn’t have a keenly developed sense of humor? Another example of Newt’s legendary Will Roger’s like sense of humor was found in the House Ethics Committee charges that Newt used a charity called “Learning for Earning” to pay the salary of a staffer who was writing a Newt Gingrich biography, and of lying to the ethics committee.

Newt also surfaces in the Freddie Mac fundraising scandal. You remember Freddie Mac, don’t you? In addition to illegal contributions to Republican fundraising causes, Freddie Mac was involved in the infamous mortgage scandals which have driven this country toward financial ruin and resulted in Freddie Mac being put under a conservatorship of the U.S. Federal government. But where does Newt fit in the Freddie Mac story?

Serving as the swollen filling in Newt’s gigantic pimple of corruption, Newt was paid between $1.6 and $1.8 million by Freddie Mac, for as Newt said, his “advice as a historian.”

You remember Freddie Mac, don’t you? In addition to illegal contributions to Republican fundraising causes, Freddie Mac was involved in the infamous mortgage scandals which have driven this country toward financial ruin and resulted in Freddie Mac being put under a conservatorship of the U.S. Federal government.

From: BUSTED: Newt Gingrich Lied About What He Did For Freddie Mac: “In last week's CNBC debate, newly-minted top-tier Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich claimed he was hired by Fannie Mae to be a "historian," and claimed that pointed out flaws in their "insane" business model.

But an investigation by Bloomberg reveals that Gingrich was much more involved with the government-backed lender than he let on and that he was hired to promote the company (and its business practices) to other conservatives.

Bloomberg reports:"Former Freddie Mac officials familiar with the consulting work Gingrich was hired to perform for the company in 2006 tell a different story. They say the former House speaker was asked to build bridges to Capitol Hill Republicans and develop an argument on behalf of the company's public-private structure that would resonate with conservatives seeking to dismantle it."

From: Did Newt Gingrich Play a Part in Freddie Mac's Fundraising Scandal? “Freddie Mac was accused of illegally using corporate resources between 2000 and 2003 for 85 fundraisers that collected about $1.7 million for federal candidates. Much of the fundraising benefited members of the House Financial Services Committee, a panel whose decisions can affect Freddie Mac. The fundraisers were organized by then-Freddie Mac lobbyists Robert Mitchell Delk and Clark Camper, who described them to the corporation's board of directors as "political risk management," the FEC [Federal Election Commission] said. Freddie Mac had held more than 40 fundraisers for House Financial Services Chairman Michael Oxley, R-Ohio. The FEC also found Freddie Mac officials used staff and resources to raise money from company employees to give to candidates, and that in 2002 the corporation itself gave $150,000 to the Republican Governors Association. The RGA ultimately returned the money. Due to that illegal contribution and those fundraisers, Freddie Mac ultimately paid a $3.8 million fine, the biggest to date in Federal Election Commission history. It could be coincidence that, just as a powerful former speaker of the House was hired by the organization's chief lobbyist as a highly paid consultant, it began to funnel large amounts of money to his erstwhile Republican colleagues.”

Although Newt’s Gingrich group received about 1.6 million from Freddie Mac, Newt stated “I do no lobbying of any kind. I never have. A very important point I want to make. I have never done lobbying of any kind.”

However, The Gingrich-founded Center for Health Transformation charged companies up to $200,000 for memberships and promoted those firms’ interests with public officials. Gingrich sold his majority interest in the for-profit group this year when he launched his bid for president.

Is this the track record of a man who wants to be President of the United States?

Newt couldn’t even balance his checkbook while in congress. In matters of financial irresponsibility which can get you jail sentences for fraud in many states, Newt Bounced 22 Checkswhile serving in the House: “Remember the House Banking scandal, where so many congressmen wrote rubber checks on government money? Newt hopes you don't, because he bounced 22 himself, which almost cost him reelection in 1992.”

For some more heart warming examples of Newt’s ideas and behavior, a review of this hypocritical self-identified Christian’s acts will only lead to the question: What part of Christianity and the New Testament doesn’t this guy get?,

For example, When addressing the issue of illegal drugs, Congressman Gingrich stated that he planned to introduce legislation to allow for the death penalty for drug dealers. “The first time we execute 27 or 30 or 35 people at one time, and they go around Colombia and France and Thailand and Mexico, and they say, 'Hi, would you like to carry some drugs into the U.S.?' the price of carrying drugs will have gone up dramatically. If you import a commercial quantity of illegal drugs, it is because you have made the personal decision that you are prepared to get rich by destroying our children. I have made the decision that I love our children enough that we will …kill you if you do this. They'd have one chance to appeal. They wouldn't have 10 years of playing games with the system. We should say to them, 'When you make the decision that you're going to get rich at the expense of our children, you are signing your own death warrant.'

Guess I just missed the part in the New Testament where Jesus preaches “hang the drug dealers.” I also forgive Newt for not remembering ripping off foundations set up to help inner city kids and stealing money meant for poor children’s reading books.

Newt also seems to have forgotten he was a former pot-head who supported drug dealers with his purchases. Newt has been quoted as saying about the wonderful idea of hanging pot dealers, that when it comes to dealing with illegal drugs, “Places like Singapore have been the most successful at doing that,” ostensibly endorsing the idea that anyone caught with 18 ounces of cannabis face mandatory death by hanging.”

On other character issues, Newt’s the kind of guy who if you were around while your sister was unfortunate enough to have been one of his ex-wives, you would have punched Gingrich’s lights out. After all, Gingrich while condemning Clinton’s infidelity and simultaneously hypocritically preaching family values, was also carrying on an affair with a much younger congressional employee who reported to him. Gingrich served his first wife (Jackie Battley, his high school math teacher) with divorce papers while she was in the hospital with cancer, and split with his second wife (Marianne Ginther) over the phone on Mother's Day, soon after learning that she had been diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis.

And wait shoppers, there’s more! Newt, that exemplar of Christian values, was quoted as saying about his first wife Jackie, "she isn't young enough or pretty enough to be the president's wife. Court records also show that Jackie had to take Newt, a dead beat dad, to court because he wasn't paying child support and her electricity was about to be cut off.

On the subject of dope smoking, I’m not so sure that Newt isn’t off pot and isn’t on crack. After all, Newt said that people receiving food stamps -- or as they say in the government that Newt so desperately hopes to lead, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are using their electronic benefit transfer (EBT) cards to visit our nation's archipelago paradise.

On the subject of religion and a secular state, Newt has again distinguished himself, saying: “A country that has been now since 1963 relentlessly in the courts driving God out of public life shouldn’t be surprised at all the problems we have,” the thrice-married, serial adulterer said. “Because we’ve in fact attempted to create a secular country, which I think is frankly a nightmare.”

Newt has also babbled like some drooling holler roller preacher lambasting the congregation with some hell and damnation speech; “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time [my grandchildren are] my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American.” [Address to Cornerstone Church in Texas, March 2011

Secular atheist country, potentially dominated by radical Islamists? Huh, Wazzat? Let’s see, if the country was secular…Ah, forget it. Hey Newt, have you been snorting oxycodone again with Rush Limbaugh?

Finally, for a few last examples of Newt’s awesome side-splitting humor, we have from The Eleven Craziest Things Newt Gingrich Has Ever Said: “The idea that a congressman would be tainted by accepting money from private industry or private sources is essentially a socialist argument.” [To Mother Jones magazine, October 1989]

“This is one of the great tragedies of the Bush administration. The more successful they’ve been at intercepting and stopping bad guys, the less proof there is that we’re in danger…. It’s almost like they should every once in a while have allowed an attack to get through just to remind us.” [At a book talk in Huntington, NY, April 2008]

“How can you have the mess we have in New Orleans, and not have had deep investigations of the federal government, the state government, the city government, and the failure of citizenship in the Ninth Ward, where 22,000 people were so uneducated and so unprepared, they literally couldn't get out of the way of a hurricane.” [Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference, March 2007]

After inspecting these quotes, the conclusion is made that Newt is apparently channeling the most ignorant Babylonian politician demon imaginable. In the future, in some Scary Movie sequel, children possessed by demons and undergoing exorcisms will growl Newt’s voice vomiting these hilarious words and adopt Newt faces which will be far scarier than Linda Blair’s puss-ridden face in her starring role as the possessed child.

Remember the Monty Python film where the peasant exclaimed “She turned me into a newt! A newt? I got better…”

Well Newt, you just didn’t get better, did ya?

Add Comment
 

Why Is Ron Paul Being Given A Free Pass By the Alternative Media?

12/07/2011

0 Comments

 
Why is Ron Paul Being Given a Free Pass by the Alternative Media? Censorship and Biased Reporting by the Alternative Media

 Ronnie boy is clearly an enemy of the American worker and espouts the most ignorant anti-progressive positions imaginable. Ron Paul believes unions are unconstitutional, wants to abolish Social Security, Medicaid, student loans, the Minimum Wage, the Departments of Education, Commerce, Energy, Health and Interior, doesn’t believe the U.S. government was involved in 911, doesn’t believe in evolution, believes taxpayers should pay for religious home schooling and believes that states and parents should determine the education of our young. Well, duh.

Curiously, popular (and rightfully so) alternative news sites such as WhatReallyHappened.Com and Rense.Com, consistently publish pro-Paul articles and either never, as in the case of WhatReallyHappened.Com, or hardly ever (Rense.com.) publish any articles critical of Ron Paul.

Why this blatant censorship? Are these sites on the take? Although U.S. Government involvement in the 911 attacks is a favorite topic of these sites, Ron Paul has been given a free pass on this seminal topic by these websites.

Huh?

Along with this head-scratching pro-Paul bias, these two sites also consistently publish anti-global warming articles without the slightest semblance of a fair presentation of the issues. Although bona fide scientific organizations such as the U.S. Academy of Sciences have presented evidence of global warming due to human activities, articles presenting the mainstream scientific viewpoint are apparently never published by these alternative news sites.

Instead, we are fed a daily diet of anecdotal or questionable articles on global warming by these websites. Although these websites claim to present “the real news,” see i.e., “WhatReallyHappened.Com,” somehow any balanced reporting of critical issues seems to have been eschewed in favor of “the established order is always lying to you and manipulating you.”

Sometimes these sites apparently reflect single issue biases of their founders. Although Rense.Com must be lauded for publishing many articles ignored by the mainstream media, a tunnel vision commitment to one side of any issue such as Rense’s continual one-sided publishing of Dr. Henry Niman’s blather about the H5N1 “bird flu, undermines the credibility of this website.

Without any articles being published by Rense.com rebutting or presenting alternative views to Niman’s self-serving alarmist articles, which are primers in using non-sequiturs and faux scientific writing, and which would surely cause any Ph.D candidate to fail his orals, the credibility of this website is called into question. (Niman’s thought processes and con man-like articles cause Ph.D.’s to weep.)

I realize that these sites serve a useful niche, but I ask these sites to be accountable and also publish some reasoned and documented articles presenting alternative views to frequently published critical topics. I ask these sites to realize, as important forums for the discussion of many critical issues which are beyond the ability of individual blog sites to address, to step up and cast an objective review of their content, with an eye to not publish only one side of any issue, but to present at least some reasoned articles portraying alternative views.

Otherwise, perhaps a disclaimer such as “For Entertainment Purposes Only” should be presented in the header of these sites. The downside is that the credibility killing charges of: Is this a Disinfo site? Or, are they on the take? legitimately come into question.

What did that Who song “We won’t Get Fooled Again”say? Oh yeah. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

Add Comment
 

Saps Who Apparently Don't Know How to Use Hyperlinks

11/21/2011

0 Comments

 
Well, well. I’ve received a lot of vituperative comments regarding the Ron Paul blog.

 

So, in response, I’ve again addressed some of the major boneheaded charges leveled at this article. I also remind and request those that accuse this blog of not doing its homework, that all statements are documented with hyperlinks. Don’t bother me with “No he didn’t.” Prove it or STFU. If you can’t be bothered checking documentation, at least come up with humorous insults, ya saps.

1)      Charge 1:Ron Paul doesn’t want to abolish Medicare or Social Security. In addition to atavistically proclaiming, it seems, everything he doesn’t like unconstitutional like some broken 78 rpm record, the sad fact remains: Oh yeah he does want to “transition” off Medical, Medicaid and Social Security. Watch and listen to this video starting at 4:45. And let’s consider the cretinous “opt out” comments which would be the death knell of Social Security. However…Ronnie also says:

      Q: Are you still in favor of abolishing Social Security?

      A: “Yes, but not overnight.’ Source: 2008 GOP debate in Boca Raton Florida, Jan 24, 2008

Comment: Ron Paul is maliciously misrepresenting Social Security’s ability to pay benefits for future participants and an outright liar for stating that Social Security is insolvent now.

According to a professional analysis of the program: “Social Security's Long-Range Outlook Remains Strong

The Trustees project that the combined Old-Age, Survivors and Disability (OASDI) Trust Funds will be able to pay benefits until the year 2037. Thereafter, Social Security will have sufficient annual revenue to pay about 78 percent of benefits. Last year's Trustees' Report also predicted that Social would be able to pay full benefits until 2037, but pay only 75 percent of benefits thereafter. The projected actuarial deficit of the Social Security program, measured as a percent of taxable payroll over the 75-year projection period is 1.92 percent of taxable payroll, 0.08 percentage point smaller than last year's estimate. At the same time, Social Security's accumulated assets continue to grow. For 2010, Social Security's reserves are projected to rise to $2.6 trillion by the end of the year and reach $3.8 trillion by 2019.”

Do you know that Social Security taxes are levied on covered earnings up to a maximum level set each year? In 2010, this maximum or what is referred to as the taxable earnings base is $106,800.

Here’s food for thought and a quick fix. “Raising or eliminating the cap on wages that are subject to taxes could reduce the long-range deficit in the Social Security Trust Funds. For example, if the maximum taxable earnings amount had been raised in 2005 from $90,000 to $150,000—roughly the level needed to cover 90% of all earnings it would have eliminated roughly 40% of the long-range shortfall in Social Security. If all earnings were subject to the payroll tax, but the base was retained for benefit calculations, the Social Security Trust Funds would remain solvent for the next 75 years.”

Well, Ronnie, haven’t heard you address this reasonable short term fix of raising the Social Security tax cap on wages. How ‘bout it Ronnie? Don’t wanna piss off your rich friends?

2)      And, I wonder, why don’t the critics address Ron Paul’s intent to abolish the Minimum Wage or his views on unions?

3)      C’mon people. Ron lives in La-la land. Just because he wants to abolish the Fed and not keep bombing the rest of the world like the current GOP presidential candidates or OBummer, doesn’t mean he’s all there….

For those of you who apparently don’t know, those underlined, those red or blue colored words and phrases thingies are hyperlinks which, if clicked, will take you Lordy, Lordy, to referenced videos or websites.

Don’t Be a Sap….

Add Comment
 

Get Off Ron Paul's Horse Drawn Elitist Bandwagon

11/19/2011

2 Comments

 
     

Get off Ron Paul’s Horse Drawn Elitist Bandwagon, Tar and Feather the Bum

Yeah, yeah, I know, you probably like Ron Paul, the so-called populist candidate, because he seems so unlike those other Republican candidates who seem to have been conjured up from hell (think Perry or Bachmann) or the Night of the Living Dead (think Romney or Gingrich), and it seems that the only one that’s missing is the Wicked Witch of the West, now that Palin has retired (I quit as Governor of Alaska because Ah, Ah, Er, you betcha I quit!).

And unless you like watching videos of American jets bombing the beejesus out of some poor saps, you like Ron Paul because, unlike the other contemptible Republican presidential candidates, he doesn’t want to bomb Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc. He also makes himself attractive because he believes that Americans should be accorded rights and liberties already guaranteed by the constitution. What a radical thought! He also wants to audit the Fed. Obviously. So far, so good.

However, Ron is just a “limited hangout” candidate who by virtue of some reasonable and other quasi-reasonable isolationist foreign policy positions meant to deceive, is in reality, a deadly elite class stooge enemy of the American working class. Consider for a moment: You can vote for Romney, Perry, Cain, Gingrich, Bachmann etc.,(Yee gods! I’d rather vote for Putin), or, you can vote for someone you don’t really know enough about but who seems initially attractive and let the elitist’s fox into the hen house. A win-win for the elitists no matter what. Ron Paul is nothing less than elitist bait being used as a lure in a vicious attempt to dismantle America.

Let’s briefly examine his anti-middle class and mind-blowingly anti-progressive positions that raise the question: “Who let this guy out of the psycho ward?” When Ron solemnly voices his idiotic positions in the guise of a wise elder statesman, you wonder when the guy in the white coat with the butterfly net is going to snag him and return him to where he belongs. I suggest neuroscientists study Ron Paul to identify what parts of the human brain still live in the 1700’s.

Here we go: Ol’ Ronny boy wants to eliminate the Department of Education and student loans. Oh, I almost forgot. Ronny also wants to abolish Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security (new enrollees could “opt out”, how well would that work?), eliminate the Department of Commerce, the Department of Health and Human Services, etc.

Uhh, Ronnie also wants to eliminate the Department of Housing and Urban Development the Department of Interior, and the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, and the EPA. Ron, who evidently can’t be accused of having any realistic vision at all and apparently rivals a flat worm in intelligence, would erase billions in research spending.

For just one example of how we’d all benefit by eliminating Ron Paul’s targeted Departments, let’s consider the Department of Commerce, which sets fishing quotas among other responsibilities. Just how would the fishing industry fare without regulation? Can you spell extinction? Can you imagine economic collapse? Just review the collapsed cod industry of Newfoundland due to overfishing by greedy selfish idiots who espouse unregulated free market idiotic drivel like Ron Paul.

Abolish the Department of Energy which oversees nuclear safety and energy development? What, let the free market regulate radioactive material? No EPA? What about toxic waste? Anyone, anyone?

A brief inspection of the effects of Ron Paul’s targeted for elimination Federal Departments of Energy, Commerce, Interior, Education, and Housing and Urban Development, would erase, among other programs, the Energy Department's $5-billion Office of Science, the $4.5-billion National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the $750-million National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the $1.1-billion U.S. Geological Survey.

Someone please explain to Ron verry, verry slowly, what this all means.

Ronny is rich (net worth over $4 million), brain dead and thinks medical students can still work their way through medical school, as he claims he did, even though the medical school he attended now costs $46,621 an academic year. And don’t forget room, board, housing clothing etc.

Hey Ronnie, did you forget who paid for your education from grammar school through college and med school and established the culture you live in? Ronnie, you were educated by teachers who were trained using standards established by the Department of Education and schools paid for by the American tax payer (Where’d you go to grammar school and high school, eh?). Yeah, I know you think you just did it yourself. Just who taught you to read? How about all that federally taxpayer supported research that drives the sciences of Medicine, Biology and Chemistry which was part of the unseen core of your medical school curriculum?

What was the real cost of your education, Ronnie?

Ron Paul’s grand and sweeping vision of the future of education in America includes Ron’s plan of letting states, localities and private citizens handle the education of our young. This educational plan worthy of the deepest Taliban thinkers, would return us to the good old days of the Scopes evolution trial, when ignorant religion set the curriculum for education in many states. Don’t believe in science? Don’t want your kids contaminated by new fangled ideas? No problem. Ron supports the idea that “Parents have the right to spend their money on the school or method of schooling they deem appropriate for their children.”

Ron also supports tax credited programs for Christian schooling and tax payer funded vouchers for parents to send their children to religious schools. What, you don’t like the idea of your taxes being used to promulgate someone else’s religion?

Continuing to look at Ronnie’s education policies, his plan to eliminate student loans would likely destroy the hopes of a generation of low and middle class Americans to attend higher education and result in a more cynical, undereducated and ignorant society. Yeah, that’s it, Ron. Kill the American Dream.

Ronnie doesn’t believe in evolution. We are left with a medical doctor who doesn’t understand the origins of the science of health and his own craft: Anatomy, physiology, disease, bacteriology, etc. Any grad school Molecular Biologist or Paleontologist worth his salt can irrefutably prove evolution, period. By the way Ronnie, evolution IS used daily to design microorganisms. For one example of a brief intro to directed evolution, see.

Yeah, Ron. Not a rational peep about the current obscene cost of medical care, housing or the inequality of wages versus the cost of living. The myth of the free market will correct all that eh, Ron? What free market?

Oh, and let’s see. You don’t believe the government was involved in the 911 attacks, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Yeah Ron, explain the controlled demolition collapse of WTC7, which was not hit by any aircraft. Your ignorance on this topic is a glowing neon sign in 20 foot high letters proclaiming that you are an establishment tool. But then again, Ron ignores or probably doesn’t understand spectroscopic evidence of thermate in WTC dust or the fact that jet fuel fires will not melt steel girders.

Oh, and another thing. Ron doesn’t like unions, calling them unconstitutional. Apparently Ron probably doesn’t believe in worker’s rights, sick days, pensions, reasonable work hours and health insurance concerns, all of that. Obscene medical charges and health care premiums seem all right though. Ron also seems to believe that someone living on minimum wage or Social Security retirement benefits could possibly afford health insurance.

Incredibly, Ronnie believes that in his fantastic future of no Medicare or Social Security, that people who are unable to pay for medical care would be taken of by charities.

Ron is even against the pathetic sop of minimum wage guarantees, somehow believing that letting a laissez-faire return to the horrors of the 1700’s would benefit workers. Well we all know how well that worked out.

Yeah, yeah, let’s just end the opportunity for the non-rich to achieve the American Dream.

Haven’t heard a word from Ronnie boy on any rational plan for affordable housing or a rational jobs policy.

And, man-o-man, I almost forgot to mention Ron Paul’s racist and homophobic newsletter.

prose. Ron admitted writing in this newsletter: “Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”

And: “In June 1992, in the wake of the ‘Rodney King riots’ in Los Angeles that killed dozens and caused $1-billion of property damage, the Ron Paul Political Report wrote: “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,”

 

And: for an initial samplingof pure homophobic diarrhea: June 1990 from Ron Paul’s newsletter: “The Pink House? What an outrage that, for the first time in our nation's history, the organized forces of perversion were feted in the White House.... I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities. They could also not be as promiscuous. Is it any coincidence that the AIDS epidemic developed after they came 'out of the closet,' and started hyper-promiscuous sodomy? I don't believe so, medically or morally.”

Americans, ya gotta ask yo’self. Are you gonna be a just another chicken voting for Colonel Sanders? Ron Paul’s crackpot libertarian theories fail any reality test. Do you really want this clown as president?

As Lincoln said in a quote which could well be applied to Ron Paul’s libertarian positions: "The perfect liberty they seek is the liberty of making slaves of other people."

There is one reactionary perspective I’d like to share with Ronnie boy since he obviously doesn’t live in the here and now and is nothing but a despicable troll. Let’s roll back the clock, haul out the tar and feathers and give you your richly deserved overcoat. Then put a dunce cap on you, mount you on a fast mule and ride you out of town, along with the rest of the feathered Republican candidates: Perry, Romney, Cain, Bachmann and Gingrich, the most reprehensible collection of presidential candidate politicians in recent memory.

Actually Ron, in lieu of tar and feathering, why don’t you follow your own beliefs about term limits for elected leaders (Ronnie the hypocrite has been in Congress for over 22 years) and do us all a favor by not running for re-election and letting a new candidate represent your district?

After all, our children deserve a hopeful future.

    



2 Comments
 

The Nonsense Of Islamophobia

05/03/2011

0 Comments

 
THE NONSENSE OF “ISLAMOPHOBIA”

Time for a reality check…

Let’s stop the nonsense about portraying Islam as some harmless poor misunderstood religion, a force for goodness and basic human rights or a religion which permits peaceful co-existence.

Oh, no reason to be wary of Islam. Just ask the Copts recently murdered by Islamists in Egypt who have endured religious persecution by the benevolent Islamists of Egypt (including the Sharia-demanding Muslim Brotherhood), just like their fellow Christians who have been persecuted by Islamists in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, etc. Although apologists have claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood is a “moderate” organization, an inspection of their stated goals of establishing a world caliphate under sharia law proves otherwise. It appears now that after Mubarak has been deposed, Egypt may soon be dominated by radical Muslim religious parties. So much for the propaganda of “the Arab Spring” which may well result in radical Islamic governments hostile to human rights dominating the Near East (think Iran) as the so-called “Arab Spring” turns into an Iranian winter.

Turkey, held up as the example of a modern secular society with an Islamic religious majority, is in fact waging a constant battle against radical Islamists who wish to return Turkey to the Dark Ages.

Wake up! Let’s just continue to explore the actions of Islamists.

Hmm, let’s see. Just in the month of March, 2011, Islamic attacks accounted for 766 dead in 15 countries, including India, Nigeria, Thailand, Brazil, the Philippines, Somalia, Indonesia, Yemen, Ethiopia, Egypt, Algeria and Germany (not even bothering to mention Islamic crimes committed in Iraq, Saudi Arabia or Iran). Add to this the beheadings of innocent U.N. workers in Afghanistan because someone burned a Koran in the U.S, murders of targeted secular innocent teachers in Thailand (over 134 killed since 2004), the murders of school teachers and burning of secular schools in Thailand resulting in the closure of 365 secular schools, (a regular event), and we unarguably see the intent and behavior of our Islamic brothers.

An illuminating example of Islamic ethics and humanitarianism is provided by the beating death of a Buddhist female Thai teacher (Juling Pongkanmul), by Muslim women. This innocent, precious soul was a children’s art teacher.

As usual, when Islamic criminals are brought to task for committing horrific crimes they cry discrimination or apologists rise to “explain” the reason for their vicious crimes.

Moving right along. Scroll down to the end of the website religion of peace.com for a table detailing the current carnage rolled up by the “religion of peace.” And let’s just ignore murders of Americans on American soil by Muslims. And, if you haven’t been convinced yet of the potent dangers presented by Islam, please acquaint yourself with running, current accounts of Islamic world wide outrages detailed on the websites jihadwatch.org and theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblog/myth-of-islamophobia.

So, how well do Islamic immigrants co-exist and/or assimilate with their adopted countries in Western cultures? Can you spell dhimmitude?

Let’s see: 750 “No-Go” Islamic zones in France which are extremely dangerous for non-Muslim French citizens to enter. No-go zones for non-Muslims in Germany.

A vicious Muslim immigrant crime wave including rapes etc., erupting in England, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands, has targeted the natives of these countries in a war of Western civilization versus Muslim immigrants. Make no mistake about it. This is a death to the end war.

The complete failure of multiculturalism (read: severe social problems caused by Muslim immigrants) in Europe has been recently acknowledged by Merkel of Germany, Sarkozy of France and Cameron of England. There is a deadly immigration jihad ongoing which threatens to replace European cultures with an Islamic one and a cultural war being waged in every western European country by Muslim immigrants.

On this topic, Frosty Wooldridge has realistically pointed out the threat posed by Islamic immigrants to the United States.

On the reverse side of the coin, that is, just how are non-Muslims treated by Islamic countries across the world? Tried to visit Mecca lately if you are not Muslim? In fact, in Saudi Arabia, “The Government prohibits the public practice of non-Muslim religions.”

To return to the question of religious freedom in the Muslim world, according to the Open Doors 2011 World Watch list, “the most dangerous countries in which to practice Christianity are overwhelmingly Islamic ones. Of the top 10 countries on the 2011 WWL, eight have Islamic majorities.”

And again, “No freedom of conscience exists in countries where the Sharia has been established.”

As for apostates who try to leave Islam, "The Prophet (Mohammed) said, 'If a Muslim discards his religion, kill him.'" Bukhari:V4 B52 N260, and Mohammed also says "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them" Qur'an (4:89). This is no idle threat as Muslim converts have been murdered by Islamic fundamentalists in India and Somalia.

Man, just can’t wait to get a significant Muslim population in the U.S. Really can’t wait to live under Sharia law and experience the same severe threats caused by Muslim immigrants in EVERY western country that has any significant numbers of Muslim immigrants. I’d just love to hear loudspeakers blaring calls to prayer five times a day (in Brooklyn now as well!) from minarets and accept animals slaughtered by cutting their throats (slaughter to be performed only by a “pious” Muslim), according to Halal, which is the required way to slaughter animals under Islamic law.

In fact, pressure by English Muslims to force the general populace to eat Halal prepared meat has resulted in Halal meat secretly being sold in England’s top supermarkets to the unsuspecting general public and Halal only meals have been served in public school cafeterias to every student without the students’ knowledge.

So let’s have no more of this nonsense about “Islamophobia.” Hell, if they really are trying to kill ya’, it’s not a phobia. The very word “Islamophobia” is an oxymoron meant to deceive morons.

To give credibility to the word “Islamophobia” is like coining the word “Naziophobia” and issuing apologies for the poor misunderstood National Socialists of Hitler’s Nazi Germany and their WWII crimes. We would be realistically served if every time the propaganda word “Islamophobia” is employed, the word “Islamofascism,” substituted.

Well, what else would you expect from followers of Islam who model themselves on Mohammed, a pedophile, rapist and murderer and who are intent on establishing a world caliphate by violence? The Islamic goal of establishing a modern world caliphate is currently being implemented.

Any hopes or plans for a better world most surely do not include embracing or giving the slightest respect or leverage to atavistic totalitarian politico-religious systems which are antithetical to western democratic values and basic human rights, reduce women to second class citizens, advocate killing or enslaving non-believers and would like to turn the clock of history back to 600 A.D. For those of you who would like to be aware of what the Koran teaches, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran is a good starting place. Further insights may be gained by considering The Prophet of Doom and the video What Every American Should Know About Islam.

Let’s just face it. There is no place for barbaric Islam in modern democratic Western cultures. It is nothing less than suicide to allow Muslim immigrants into the United States.

Add Comment
 

Pentagon Needs More Cannon Fodder for Unpopular Illegal Wars: Dream Amnesty

12/19/2010

1 Comment

 
Pentagon Needs More Cannon Fodder for Unpopular Illegal Wars: Dream Amnesty

 

Upon contacting the Democrat freshman senator for Alaska, Mark Begich, the only U.S. Senator without a college degree, and writing him to ask that he not support the “Dream Amnesty Act,” his office responded with the following duplicitous and full of outright lies, statement.

 

“Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 5281, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2010, known as the DREAM Act.

 

This legislation, originally introduced in 2005 by a Republican Senator from Utah, is believed by Senators of both political parties to be highly beneficial for the U.S. Armed Forces by increasing the pool of highly qualified homegrown talent to recruit for military service.  The Department of Defense (DOD) has supported the DREAM Act since the Bush Administration and continues to support the legislation.

 

This bipartisan bill would allow young undocumented immigrants, who have been present in the United States since childhood, graduated from a U.S. high school, and have never been in trouble with the law, an opportunity to join our armed forces.  Currently, these young men and women, many of whom were unaware that their parents brought them into this country without proper documentation but have lived here their whole lives, cannot serve in the military. Under this legislation, only after honorably serving two years in the armed forces or completing a similar requirement, will someone be eligible to begin the long process of over more than a decade to achieve legal permanent resident status. Based strongly on the increased recruitment for the U.S. Military, the House of Representatives recently passed this legislation with bipartisan support.

 

The bill also ensures these young men and women who will join our military as legal permanent residents are not eligible for federal education assistance, will be ineligible to sponsor family members, must speak English fluently, and are not eligible for Medicaid, food stamps, or other entitlement programs unless they become citizens.

 

Based on the likely impact of an increase in talented, homegrown, and smart young men and women serving in our armed forces, and the support of both the DOD and military experts, I am supportive of this legislation. 

 

Thank you for contacting me on this topic and please stay in touch on any other issues or concerns.”

 

“Home grown talent?” THESE PEOPLE ARE ILLEGALS AND COME FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. Are you fookin’ kidding me or what?

 

I’ll leave it to the reader to read the text of H.R.6497 and consider the analysis of Ten Things You Need To Know About The DREAM Act (H.R. 6497), to fully appreciate the many outright lies and duplicity of Begich’s response. And note, nowhere in this response does Begich address concerns about the economic shafting of American citizens and the extreme danger to American culture which this bill ensures by providing for chain immigration and economic deficits.

 

So, it’s come to this: At some point even lucky Americans who still have a job and who are content with a flat screen color TV will refuse to join the armed forces to get their legs blown off or be blinded for life for some illegitimate war on behalf of the ruling class (Hey, Obama, just how long are U.S. armed forces going to remain in Afghanistan and Iraq? Change, my ass.).

 

Ho, ho, ho, no problem. We’ll just get illegal immigrants to fill the ranks despite the fact that as Rep. Steven King points out:“Rep. Steve King says the DREAM Act is an amnesty bill that America cannot afford. It is unjust to those who have played by the rules in order to come into the country legally, and it is unjust to American taxpayers who will be asked to shoulder the costs of rewarding illegal immigrants for ignoring the law.”

 

Don’t worry about war protests, fragging, draft dodging or all of the usual rational responses to off-the-wall wars cooked up by the powers that be. No problemo, we’ll just get around it by stuffing the cannons with illegals and the lawful American public be damned. And please note: Begich never served in the military.

 

The Dream Amnesty Act is nothing but a simple cynical tool for hiring mercenaries whose cost will be born by the American public; a political ploy to ensure votes for Democrats, and a suicidal payment which will ring the death knell of America.

 

This is your new blog post. Click here and start typing, or drag in elements from the top bar.
1 Comment