The Day the Music Died

Every soldier lives in the quiet reality that every second of every day could see the last flicker of light in their existence. For the past 10 years, these soldiers have born the burden of ever growing conflicts, ranging from Afghanistan to the Ivory Coast. They have given the best years of their lives in far flung locations across the world, to further ends they are often unaware of. They sacrifice their own happiness, their families, and even their lives, doing so without complaint towards those outside their fraternal order. All they ever asked for in return was the morsel of scraps Congress throws their way to keep the machine well oiled. A simple covenant of livelihood for flesh and bone given in earnest.

At midnight on April 8th, 2011 that Covenant will be broken. The armed wing of America held hostage to be used on the political battleground for the sake of talking points. Still expected to give so selflessly, based on I.O.U.'s from the Government they protect, while the thieves and liars in Congress will still collect full pay with benefits. All the while a young soldier in Afghanistan wonders which is his biggest worry, his young child going hungry, his wife being without a home, or the bullets that seek to end his life.

Every Soldier says an oath when they first take up the mantle that is the uniform. Part of that oath reads as follows-

"I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same"

Soldiers talk, and they will always remember the day their government betrayed them.


What you might ask could so justify this course of action.

Condoms.
Women's Health Care.
Climate Pollution Control.


The reason the budget has not been approved is because it allowed for condom distribution in clinics, funded Women's Health Care, and Climate Pollution Control.

America, this is the Goverment you have chosen for yourself, it is no caused by the current Democratic Party who as decided to defend women's rights and EPA regulations, its caused by a conservative agenda, to hold our way of life hostage because the vast majority of American's, no longer support their ideology.

We have a word for such people that tends to get thrown around carelessly. What do you call a person or group that uses fear and attacks a system that doesnt hold to their beliefs?
Oh yes, terrorist.

A separate budget that would fund only the Department of Defense, minus all other spending was put forth and subsequently forgotten, laid to rest on a lonely desk another victim of political maneuvering.

A Disease Called Jealousy

Jealousy.
Envy.
That slow trickle of hate in the dead of night.
The weight of the green monster on your back, eating away frantically at feeble sanity.

The tattered garments of a diseased soul, based in the roots established at the dawn of human civilization. The word spoken from the divine to his people "I the LORD thy God am a jealous God." There is a disease called jealousy and even in the Bible it is mentioned before love, oh priorities that can’t be healthy.

It is a natural human state to desire what others want, to covet what others have. Be it money, material blessings, or relationships. That is the thing to understand, jealousy and love cannot co-exist. Jealousy gives way to hate, contempt, sorrow, fear, in obsessive proportion. Jealousy leaves no room for other emotions.

Jealousy is in a sense, a sickness of the mind and soul. Like most illness, it can be cured, or at least addressed, the question most would ask, is how.

There is a Greek word, Agape which has casually been tossed around in the Christian Community to describe love, usually at a slanted angle to better promote the message in a sermon. The word means love, though its connotation is what should draw attention. When used Agape came to mean an unconditional love, a love given freely without expectation of return or even notice. A tragedy of sorts, but one that brings peace to the fevered and troubled mind.

Or in simple terms, the Hindu's got this one right, ponder it.
"Where there is love, there is my grace."
-Lord Krishna

Totally no mention of jealousy.

Rick Scott's Brilliant Hustle.

Florida Governor Rick Scott has exposed his nascent political career as a simple personal enrichment scheme.

The Governor's new plan is to test state employees and recipients of public assistance for recreational drug use. Scott's chain of urgent-care clinics, Solantic, would benefit financially from this proposal, as they offer drug-screening services to employers. Random drug testing of state employees and welfare recipients sounds like a good hustle. This is in addition to his plan to privatize Medicaid, another potential windfall for Solantic.

However, sensing a potential conflict of interest, Scott claimed he transferred his stock in Solantic, so he technically doesn't own it anymore.

His wife does.

Besides the conflict of interest, Scott has managed to create a potential cash cow by doing something that will cost the government of Florida a lot of money, will not reduce "welfare fraud," but will enjoy the overwhelming support of the public. The debates about this proposals going forward are going to be about whether it's a good idea to screen welfare recipients for drug use and not whether it's a boon for Rick Scott. People opposed to the plan because Scott will benefit personally will be tagged as "soft" on drug abuse. Florida legislators who vote against it will see ads in 2012 see ads play in their districts saying they voted against requiring drug testing to receive welfare benefits and when they explain that their vote was an effort to prevent Rick Scott and his wife from making money off of taxpayers no one will understand because that will be totally eclipsed by the public's hatred for government assistance programs.

The one thing Rick Scott isn't is stupid.

True Story

Every day I hear more and more about liberals trying to take our rights, our God-Given rights, trying to trample on the constitution and banish God to some dark abyss. This war on Christianity, on good God-fearing people, is getting out of hand. Every day I hear another story about some liberal crazy who strikes another blow against God.

It wasnt a week ago I heard about some guy who crashed a church, completely wrecked it, even hit some of the people there, all because they were selling some political bumper stickers on the side to make a little bit of money? God forbid the Church gets funds from elsewhere.

Then this same douchebag has the balls to walk down the road, and start asking people to help him out with some charity work. Pretty sure he just wrecked up a Church, and I know i'm not giving ANY money to somebody that hates God so much. Then he actually gets up on some highhorse about how the rich are slaves to their money and how its some social responsibility for those who have, to help those who have not. This is America, the land of oppurtunity, leave your requests for handouts at the door, this is not a welfare state.

Apparently though, this guy got a little bit of help so him and his buddies started some make-shift soup kitchen in the middle of nowhere. Completely ignored rules and regulations regarding mass assembly and didnt even bother to wonder where the money would come from to fund it. No wonder this man and people like him hate the rich, they spend all their money on the lazy who wont find a damn job and now he's serving food? Somebody should stop him, this is the same man who's running around with some whore off the street's, that shit cant be sanitary somebodies going to get sick and its gonna be the taxpayer who handles the burden when they cant afford the hospital bill.

The dude is out of his damn mind. Just what the world needs right? Another liberal socialist pig pandering hand-outs, hating business, and even more hating God. What kind of asshole really gets upset over seperation of Church and State? Our country was founded on Christianity. Somebody should really take care of that asshole, make him disapear all quiet like.

What was his name again?



Oh yeah, Jesus, Jesus Christ.

On Birthrights

The notion of birthright citizen, or jus soli, comes to us from the common law tradition of the United Kingdom. This legal tradition holds that individuals born within the territorial confines of a given polity are citizens of that polity, with all rights, privileges, and duties associated with citizenship. It is often the law in states with little or no ethnic connection to the land. Several countries who share America’s status as a former British colony, as well as continental European countries, have modified their jus soli citizenship laws to exclude children born to illegal immigrants or temporary workers. But the rule in America dictates that your physical presence here at birth guarantees you all of the rights, privileges, and duties of US citizenship. Debates have been raging recently about whether our laws governing citizenship should be amended to restrict access. Several Republican elected officials have proposed the abolition of birthright citizenship; most notable of these is Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce, of SB 1070 fame. Senator Lindsey Graham has argued in favor of restrictions on birthright citizenship similar to other former British colonies that preclude the children of illegal immigrants and temporary workers. This post is not intended to discuss at length the wisdom of these proposals, but will discuss the constitutional history of citizenship in the United States in light of comments from Senator Pearce regarding the nature of US citizenship, who claimed that there is no such thing.

He is, in fact, correct. But only if we’re living in 1867. Last time I checked, we weren’t.

Prior to the founding of the United States, people born in British colonies in North America were, by custom, automatically granted citizenship of their respective colony in addition to being a subject of the British Crown. After the end of the American War of Independence, the several states continued this tradition of birthright citizenship, though without subjection to the Crown. However, prior to the Civil War there was no such thing as American citizenship. People were considered citizens of the states in which they resided. In the early American republic, federal regulation of immigration was limited to safety conditions on shipping vessels. States would often restrict immigration by preventing the poor, the mentally ill, and convicted criminals from immigrating to their states.

It was not until the ratification of the 14th amendment that national citizenship came into existence. The 14th amendment guaranteed federal protection of citizenship rights because of racial discrimination at the state level. It was the intent of the framers of that amendment that states be bound to the Bill of Rights in addition to the federal government. With the establishment of federal citizenship came federal regulation of citizenship, which was included, but not limited to, deciding who could become a naturalized citizen and the process of acquiring citizenship. The state of Arizona has no authority to regulate citizenship because of the 14th amendment, which states:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

The intent of the amendment could be no clearer. It creates US citizenship.

As to the wisdom of restrictions on birthright citizenship, America must be careful if there are actual proposals. We can’t go the route of Germany, with thousands of legal Turkish immigrants who came after WWII and had children who were neither German citizens nor citizens of Turkey. In many cases there were 3 or 4 generations living in the same household and only one senior citizen had legal authorization to work. Such a situation in the US would be unsustainable.

I’m generally in favor of laws that increase access to US citizenship, because US citizenship is awesome. What we should be doing is finding a way to allow people to come here legally in greater numbers, not kicking people out.

Democrats and the lack of control over conversation surrounding policy

I’ve been watching the coverage of the enforcement of the no-fly zone in Libya, and how the Republicans are spinning it, and had the same thought I did during the debate over the Affordable Care Act: WHY ARE WE LETTING THEM CONTROL THE CONVERSATION?

A large portion of the voting population takes what they hear from their choice news outlet as fact, whether it be the Fox News followers, or the avid watchers of MSNBC. Either way you look at it, there is a huge spin, and at times, misinformation and opinion are accepted as gospel. The result of this is a lot of really good policies the Obama administration has pushed through are vilified, and people who would benefit most from it are among its most staunch opponents.

This is more a message to the leadership of the Democratic Party: man-up. DCCC, DNC, DSCC, we have a chance at electing quality candidates if you would stop letting Fox News hijack the message. The Health Care debate is one of the clearest, most recent examples of this. People STILL believe this legislation will result in the formation of death panels because WE DID NOT CONTROL THE CONVERSATION.

My advice is to be proactive, not reactive. If we have to go on the defensive, it is already too late. Democrats, I know it’s in our nature to be a little more meek and try to appease everyone, but our leadership needs to act like a spoiled only child: BRAG ABOUT YOUR ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PREVENT MISINFORMATION FROM DESTROYING YOUR SUCCESS.

Veterans, They Hate America?

It never ceases to amaze me the idiocy that comes out of people’s mouths. Most recently a little quip from a tea-bagger named Sharron Angle.

Angle’s most recent statement? The Veterans of Foreign Wars have betrayed America.

Now let’s wrap our heads around this a little. The people who have sworn to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States of America against enemies foreign and domestic have now betrayed America, the country they have laid down life and limb for? But how might that be?

Well this idiot, who is quoted as saying, "sometimes dictators have good ideas," says the veteran organizations betrayed America by supporting her opposition in the last running race in Nevada amongst others.

Yes the VFW betrayed America for supporting evil villains like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer and Ron Klein. Not to say that those ne’er-do-wellers didn’t support veteran interests, unlike the Republican party who has made a pledge to slash veterans benefits.

Yup the VFW betrayed America by supporting candidates that support veterans and not the Republican Party and Tea Baggers.


Funny how the people who always want war are always trying to screw over the veterans that fight the wars for them.

Iowa: It's No Longer Heaven

That title is obviously a play on the movie Field of Dreams. The twist comes from the 2010 election, when Iowa voters (read: dipshits) went to the polls and:

a) Voted to remove 3 State Supreme Court Judges who were “pro-gay marriage”

b) Voted a Republican after Republican candidate into office.

The reason move (a) was sad is because the initial decision to legalize gay marriage in Iowa was done unanimously by all NINE State Supreme Court Judges. It's not like the three voted out were "OMG radical liberals," all nine, Conservative and Progressive alike interpreted law as they saw fit, and apparently the law says "Discrimination is bad, mmmkay?" Move (b) was sad is because this week Republicans brought their third groundbreaking piece of legislation to the floor: legalizing a dove hunt in Iowa.

This follows fast on the heels of their first two VERY IMPORTANT bills: one to amend the state constitution and remove human rights from the state document, and the second to simply remove human rights from state citizens.

To clarify, the first bill was to outlaw gay marriage, and the second an attack on abortion.

And now they introduce the dove hunt. I’m sorry, I meant to write PASSED where I had “introduce,” because that fucker flew through a vote in about 24 hours. Apparently when you have something that is important to the economy, jobs, education and quality of life, you don’t bother writing it up. But when it comes to something simple, like giving people another something to shoot their guns at, yah-hoo! Yeah, that shoots through the system.

I personally can’t wait to see what shit they come up with next.

The only thing you have to fear, is fear itself. Oh, and gays and unions, too.

Americans have a deep rooted belief that our political system is the best in the world. We have mastered democracy, and no other country has a fair and equal representative government like ours. At one point, that may have been true. But today, you don't have to dig very deep to find just how much corruption and manipulation goes on behind the curtains. While the upper elite ruling class pull the strings in our political system, the masses are left fighting over things like gay marriage, health care or teachers collective bargaining rights. When we are scared of anything but the truth, the ruling class could not be happier.
    
Although, the question of whether fear alone can be used to influence voters is like dirt alone makes trees grow. There are countless ways politicians, campaigns, the media, or our corporate masters can influence voters. Fear can usually prove to be more successful than someone who stands on a stage and tells you the truth. But, isn't that what we want? The truth?  

Of course, we all prefer the truth. But, it also seems the truth is something many people have a hard time believing: cue fearful conspiracy theory. In political advertising, a common basic conspiracy theory would include the belief that a series of events are somehow the result of an intentional or covert attempt to prevent certain facts from becoming public knowledge. It makes it very easy for people to believe in lies when they want to believe the lie. How many people believe the teachers unions broke the budget in Wisconsin? How many people are certain that the U.S. government covered up a UFO crash in Roswell, New Mexico? What about the government involvement in the J.F.K. assassination? Iraq was behind 9/11? Was our own government behind  9/11?  Did Barack Obama really want your grandmother to go in front of "death panel"? How do we know what is true or false?
    
Deception through a conspiracy theory can present an illusion that there is a sinister cause of some social, economic, or political problem. We can go back and look at Germany in the early 1930's. Germany was in social and economic chaos resulting from the repressive conditions resulting from the Treaty of Versailles. Through brutal sanctions, it essentially punished Germans for World War I. It had stripped Germany of its industry and infrastructure, denied them trade, or virtually any way of making money. And with the great depression factored in, Germany became very desperate to try anything: cue Adolf Hitler. Hitler’s Nazi party was elected by playing on the widespread fear and anti-semitism of the era, and creating a mass wave of German patriotism through a rapid buildup of military strength. It got people back to work, and in a few short years put Germany in a much better economic position than most of its neighbors. But, despite the short term benefits, we all know the result of Hitler’s use of conspiracies and propaganda.
    
Nazi German could be used as a "worst case" example of what could happen when a nation is lead to believe rampant conspiracies. The U.S. today is not anything like Nazi Germany, but commonalities do exist. As the public becomes more insecure because of economic reasons, the need for a tangible enemy becomes stronger. Someone facing unemployment would find it easier to blame "BIG government" for their problems than the extremely complicated system of world economics, especially when someone like Glen Beck tells them so. The fact that a TV personality may have an agenda of their own: cue Goldline.com.... and that their agenda would not be beneficial to the unemployed worker watching now becomes irrelevant. The viewer watching now has a tangible enemy.
    
Fear and conspiracy theories can serve to absolve people of some degree of accountability. If they feel they are now being oppressed by a real enemy, their efforts of improving their situation can seem futile, or just a waste of time. And sadly, in our current 24 hour news cycle, and instant information at the click of a mouse, this cycle of fear can spread very fast. For instance, when Sarah Palin used the term "death panel", it spread like wild fire. The media repeated it nonstop almost immediately.
    
Ironically, insurance companies do have something similar to a "death panel". How many times have we heard about people with cancer being denied treatment or someone being denied a transplant because of some small detail in their application? Insurance companies are in business to make a profit. To do that, they must take premiums from healthy people, and deny coverage to sick people. But, instead of accepting that truth, we will just blame the scary black man and refer to the part of the bill that gives people that are terminally ill the right to end of life counseling by calling it a death panel.
    
Anyway, the tactic worked. Almost overnight, a majority of Americans that were in favor of major health care reform were now against it. Nobody took the time to actually read the text of the bill, and find that no such "death panel" exists. You see, that would require time, and real investigative journalism, something that in our immediate information society, many in the media have no time for. Look at an investigative TV show like 60 minutes, or Frontline. They can spend months, sometimes years getting a story out that is factual, unbiased and fair.
    
The same could be said for print media. How many people read the New York Times anymore? Does anybody remember the affects of Dan Ellsberg's secret release of "the pentagon papers" to the national news papers in the early 1970's? The process took years from when he retrieved the information, released it, the investigations, and then the final result. It helped to bring down then president Nixon and end the war in Vietnam. Could that happen today? Just look at a show today like Bill O'Rielly or any number of politically bias opinion shows or online news sources. By the time a piece of information is fact checked, and sources are interviewed, and the truth is reported, the information has become ancient history. Facts are no longer as important as who can get the information out first. They can apologize in a later broadcast if they reported something that was untrue. Do you think avid Fox viewers payed attention when they later apologized for the palm trees in Madison? Or mixing up the statistics on how 62% of people were actually supporting the Wisconsin public unions, but they said 62% opposed. Honest mistakes, right?
    
Not to say that our problems now are new. In a University of Oklahoma study by George Mann in 1989, he notes that "...the prevalent use of sophisticated advertising techniques in political campaigns presents a great danger, for citizens can be manipulated to make political decisions out of emotion rather than rational thought. People must be provided with the educational tools needed to detect the bias, distortion, and other tactics used to influence them. The social studies curriculum can provide students with the skills needed to detect bias that will allow them to make good decisions and thus become better citizens." In other words, I think he was not blaming the media. He was putting the focus more on education. So why would anyone want to cut the budget for education or for teachers?
     
Many Americans tend to believe that the worst thing that can result from the lack of skill in detecting bias in advertising is that some people might purchase products that are unneeded or inferior. However, media specialists have now expanded their markets, it’s not just products, it’s now politics. The skills developed years ago on Madison Avenue to sell Americans tooth paste are now being used to sell political ideologies and candidates. These clever techniques influence our political views and our politicians’ decisions. We should not allow groups or individuals with large amounts of money, like the Koch boys, to employ skilled advertising agencies to manipulate citizens into adopting certain ideologies or supporting certain candidates, but with the recent Citizens United case in the U.S. Supreme court, money is considered free speech. The more money your candidate or campaign or supporter has, the more "free speech" you have.
    
A recent study at Ohio State University suggests that instead of manipulation or education, the blame should be more on passive reporting. It found that "...people are more likely to doubt their own ability to determine the truth in politics after reading an article that simply lists competing claims without offering any idea of which side is actually correct. There are consequences to journalists that just report what each side says with no fact checking." When citizens feel like they can't figure out what the truth is, that attitude can lead many people to tune out politics completely. For citizens to really choose between government policies or candidates is not like choosing flavors of ice cream. The answers to our political debates need to be centered on facts.
    
In a country as politically split as ours, the goal of a candidate or politician is now only to win over a very small group of people. Liberals and conservatives have done a good job over the last generation of polarizing their bases. It’s the group in the middle that they fight for. Independent America. In a winner take all political system, all you need is one more vote than your opponent. Why spend all your money and resources campaigning on facts? 20% to 30% of the people are going to vote for you just because you say you are a democrat, or a republican. 20% to 30% will never vote for you because of the same thing. Half of the electorate no longer matters. This is when candidates really need to one up their opponent to get that one extra vote. And they will do anything to get it. One side will tell you the other is going to take your guns. Or maybe invoke religion into their campaign. Maybe they will tell you that your support of gay rights or women's rights is somehow going against God? Maybe they will run an ad with actors playing Vietnam swift boat veterans who denounce a candidate that was a Vietnam swift boat veteran?
    
There seems to be no sign that the trend of influencing voters through fear and emotion will slow down anytime soon. What the hell can we do? Term limits? Public financing of campaigns? Real campaign reform to bring to light who is actually paying the tab for a candidate? Taking to the streets in large protests? Lately, it seems that protesting maybe the only way to make our voices heard. The best thing we can all do is stay informed. Take the time to research politicians and policies. The truth is there, it never went away, and we are just being forced to work harder to find it. When the next election or controversial bill comes around, they will know that people are not going to fact check every little sound bite that comes out. So they will use human psychology, and tell you what you want to hear. Or, they will prey on our own basic instincts, and tell you to be scared of something that you have never even heard of.  Or be scared of the government! Be scared of the poor! Be scared of the gays! Be scared of unions! Be scared of health care! Be scared of taxes, because if the rich have to pay higher taxes, they might not hire you! Don't let these things scare you. They want you to be scared of something so you forget about how bad the upper 1% is screwing you. THEY need to be scared of YOU!




　

How I learned to Love the Bomb

If you've a facebook account, odds are likely at some point in the last two weeks, you've seen Japan mentioned in that status of another. Usually followed by something extremely ignorant such as "Did Japan send aid after Katrina?" or "This makes up for Pearl Habor". Though to both, Japan did send aid after Katrina numbering in the millions of dollars as for the Pearl Habor comment, we did send that country a little present we Americans with affection dubbed Fat Man and Little Boy. A little something that by modern standards would be considered a war crime but still, its ok were Americans.

Lets take a look at the facts, the Japanese and American economies were very much intertwined, not to mention American military assets in and around Japan. Then after near nothing, one of the biggest economies in the world destroyed, this was the fall of a world leader, not a third world country that so dominates the news. People died by the thousands, left without food, water, shelter, pending further disaster based on what happens at a few nuclear plants, and some people have the audicity to demean the pitance we as Americans offer Japan in their time of apocalypse.

But hey, its cool right? At least we got to drop bombs on Ghadaffi.