You wonder why us young people are mad?
Maybe it's because older people say we are lazy, don't work at all,
Yet the average work week is longer than it's been in over a decade.
Maybe it's because they say we're dumb, don't know shit,
Yet we're the most educated generation America has ever had.
Maybe it's because they say we're stupid with our money,
Yet inflation has made it even harder for us just to get by.
Maybe it's because they're saying we're ruining this country,
Yet we're not the ones who tanked the whole fucking economy,
nor were we the ones that launched the disastrous wars of Afghanistan and Iraq,
and Yemen,
and Somalia,
and Pakistan,
and Libya,
and who knows Gods where tomorrow.
Maybe it's because they say we need to more mature,
Yet we're the ones who have to balance two part-time jobs and school at the same time,
We weren't privileged like you mother fuckers,
Who could just work during the summer and bam your school is paid for the year.
We work more for less money,
and you say we should be more grateful?
Maybe it's because they fuck up shit and then act like it's our fucking fault,
We weren't the ones that shipped all the middle class jobs overseas,
We weren't the ones that have destroyed the standard of living in this country,
We weren't the ones that passed thousands upon thousands of stupid ass government red tape that strangles small businesses,
We weren't the ones that create corporate loopholes so companies that make billions in profit don't have spend a God damn fucking dime on it.
They vote for the same two parties again and again and again,
Political parties that have a proven record for killing jobs,
and then they berate us for not finding jobs.
They scold us for not trusting people,
But never fail in the opportunity to backstab us again and again and again.
They say innovation is the key to future of America,
Yet they castigate us for not doing things exactly how they did them.
They wonder why we can't find jobs,
Yet they make it legal for companies to discriminate in hiring based on race or gender.
They pass law after law curtailing our freedoms,
Then complain that we get arrested too much.
Well, maybe if you didn't make every third God damn fucking thing illegal,
People wouldn't get arrested as much,
You ever think of that, dickhead?
Yeah, I admit, there are some lazy stupid young people.
But there are lazy and stupid people of every age.
For every lazy and stupid young person you find, I can find a lazy and stupid adult to match.
So your statements mean nothing,
Just because we are the same age doesn't mean we act the same,
Don't generalize a whole group of people,
You wouldn't want us to stereotype you fuckers, now would you?
You think this is a mindless angry rant,
Yeah, maybe it fucking is,
I'm only ranting because I'm constantly being told not to complain,
Not to talk back,
Not to rile up the system,
Not to be ungrateful,
To accept my poverty and fucking deal with it.
All this anger at injustice, at avarice, at arrogance, at haughtiness, at just straight up being a self centered bitch,
Just builds up over the years when we're not allowed to express our opinion, our thoughts, our anger at the shit you've thrown at us.
Why don't you older people just shut the fuck up,
Get off our fucking God damn backs as we toil and sweat in low wage jobs,
Let us get through this hell as best we can,
This hell you created for us!
Weekly blog, (or close to weekly as I can get it), on whatever is on my mind the minute I sit down to write. Usually it is about international politics but there's random social and culture stuff too.
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Republicans. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Saturday, October 25, 2014
Why I'll be voting for Robert Sarvis for U.S. Senate
In the race for the Senate seat of Virginia, there is a 3 way battle going on right now. Despite what the media may have told you, there are three men running for the seat. What, the media told you there was only two? Figures, that's a common tactic used by the mainstream media, since they are bought for and the mouthpieces of the two corrupt and long overdue political parties. They ignore 3rd party candidates and therefore, people who only listen to the mainstream media, and nothing else, do not hear about the 3rd party candidates.
Anyway, back on topic. We have Robert Sarvis of the Libertarian party, Mark Warner of the Democratic party, and Ed Gillespie of the Republican party. The later two will continue to destroy America bit by bit. If you think I'm exaggerating by saying the word "destroy," just look at our country, and tell me it isn't an exaggeration. We are trillions upon trillions of dollars in debt, we are like a crazed psychopath with an unlimited credit card. Our image and strength abroad is the laughing stock of the world. We are the target of attacks because we cannot stop killing people overseas. Our economy is still in shambles, thanks to the crony capitalists and the 1% completely destroying the middle and lower classes of America to gobble up more wealth for themselves. The "War on Drugs" is wrecking havoc through communities around the country, the NSA knows every single thing we do on the internet and the vast majority of Americans don't care, undocumented immigrants pour into this country by the millions, a generation of young adults have no future because of the recession, I mean, if that isn't destruction, then what the fuck is?!
Warner and Gillespie support all of this destruction. Their parties support and orchestrate all of it, they thrive off it. The 1% has never been better off than they are now. So that's why I'm voting for Sarvis, because he and other libertarians seek to end of all this.
Here, I'll go by an issue by issue basis, stating Warner's or Gillespie's opinion on the issue, and then Sarvis's, and explain why I like Sarvis's opinion better than the formers.
1. The national debt and budget crisis.
Mark Warner has no problem not balancing the budget, just borrow more money, that's his solution. That, and raise taxes. Because us pesky lower class workers aren't paying enough in taxes, apparently! "Warner told CNN in 2011 that he is convinced that when it comes to managing federal finances, long-term bipartisan planning is a superior way to lowering debt than a balanced budget amendment."
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2014/jun/30/mark-warner/warner-has-changed-position-balanced-budget-amendm/
Mark Warner has voted with President Obama a whooping 97% of the time. Nothing says lap dog like doing everything your master tells you to. And we all know how much Obama's economic policies have totally wrecked this nation's economy: He's increased the deficit by at least 57%, and he's borrowed 60 TRILLION DOLLARS since taking office.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/9/obamas-national-debt-rate-on-track-to-double/
Warner had a hand in all that....97% of it, to be exact. He thinks going trillions of dollars in debt is perfectly okay. He never stops to think "Hmmmm, maybe we'd better take a look at all of these wealth transferring policies and see if all of them are Constitutional." Damn the Constitution, Warner and his fascist pigs have money to steal!!
Conservatives routinely tout that they do not spend a lot and can balance a budget. Apparently they haven't looked at the debt since 2001. Despite stereotypes that Democrats borrow and go into debt and conservatives spend less and balance the budget, the fact is, they're dead wrong. Gillespie was part of the Bush administration, and we all know how well that group of brain dead retards did. Bush increased the deficit by 38%.
Sarvis won't do what either man did. Straight from his website:
Anyway, back on topic. We have Robert Sarvis of the Libertarian party, Mark Warner of the Democratic party, and Ed Gillespie of the Republican party. The later two will continue to destroy America bit by bit. If you think I'm exaggerating by saying the word "destroy," just look at our country, and tell me it isn't an exaggeration. We are trillions upon trillions of dollars in debt, we are like a crazed psychopath with an unlimited credit card. Our image and strength abroad is the laughing stock of the world. We are the target of attacks because we cannot stop killing people overseas. Our economy is still in shambles, thanks to the crony capitalists and the 1% completely destroying the middle and lower classes of America to gobble up more wealth for themselves. The "War on Drugs" is wrecking havoc through communities around the country, the NSA knows every single thing we do on the internet and the vast majority of Americans don't care, undocumented immigrants pour into this country by the millions, a generation of young adults have no future because of the recession, I mean, if that isn't destruction, then what the fuck is?!
Warner and Gillespie support all of this destruction. Their parties support and orchestrate all of it, they thrive off it. The 1% has never been better off than they are now. So that's why I'm voting for Sarvis, because he and other libertarians seek to end of all this.
Here, I'll go by an issue by issue basis, stating Warner's or Gillespie's opinion on the issue, and then Sarvis's, and explain why I like Sarvis's opinion better than the formers.
1. The national debt and budget crisis.
Mark Warner has no problem not balancing the budget, just borrow more money, that's his solution. That, and raise taxes. Because us pesky lower class workers aren't paying enough in taxes, apparently! "Warner told CNN in 2011 that he is convinced that when it comes to managing federal finances, long-term bipartisan planning is a superior way to lowering debt than a balanced budget amendment."
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2014/jun/30/mark-warner/warner-has-changed-position-balanced-budget-amendm/
Mark Warner has voted with President Obama a whooping 97% of the time. Nothing says lap dog like doing everything your master tells you to. And we all know how much Obama's economic policies have totally wrecked this nation's economy: He's increased the deficit by at least 57%, and he's borrowed 60 TRILLION DOLLARS since taking office.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/9/obamas-national-debt-rate-on-track-to-double/
Warner had a hand in all that....97% of it, to be exact. He thinks going trillions of dollars in debt is perfectly okay. He never stops to think "Hmmmm, maybe we'd better take a look at all of these wealth transferring policies and see if all of them are Constitutional." Damn the Constitution, Warner and his fascist pigs have money to steal!!
Conservatives routinely tout that they do not spend a lot and can balance a budget. Apparently they haven't looked at the debt since 2001. Despite stereotypes that Democrats borrow and go into debt and conservatives spend less and balance the budget, the fact is, they're dead wrong. Gillespie was part of the Bush administration, and we all know how well that group of brain dead retards did. Bush increased the deficit by 38%.
Sarvis won't do what either man did. Straight from his website:
Let's face it: Neither Republicans nor Democrats, neither
Ed Gillespie nor Mark Warner, has any credibility when it comes to
protecting taxpayers' money and shepherding scarce resources. Both parties have enacted new, expensive entitlements. Both parties have increased discretionary spending. Both parties have supported wars of choice.
I pledge to make debt-reduction and balanced budgets a priority. I support simplifying the tax code, reforming entitlements, and cutting bloated budgets—including military spending. And I support a balanced budget amendment and protections against accounting gimmicks.
I’m also the only candidate who supports expanding and
protecting both economic and personal freedom—and I understand how they
are linked. For instance, our failed War on Drugs contributes to the
United States having the highest incarceration rate in the world. That’s
not only unjust, it's expensive and perpetuates poverty. By unleashing freedom, we will expand economic growth and opportunity, and in turn, reduce the burden on the safety net.
http://www.robertsarvis.com/debt-spending-and-balanced-budgets
Sarvis would run the national debt like a person who runs the money of a household. When you have $200 to spend for the week, do you say "Hmmmm, now how to make that $200 last so I don't go over?" or do you say, like a dumbass maniac "Oh I'll just spend all of that and when I need to buy more I'll just put it all on my credit card and after that I'll just get a loan from the bank, etc."
A fiscally responsible manages his finances within his budget; a Republican or Democrat says "To hell with my budget, I wanna spend this much, so let's borrow this much right now!"
2. Civil Liberties.
Mark Warner and Gillespie see us as cattle, as fodder to grow their sadistic fascist empire. They do not give a flaming fuck about any one of your human rights. If breaking your human rights meaning getting more money or power for them, then they will not think twice about fucking breaking it.
This is where libertarianism really shines in comparison to neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism. Conservatives and liberals are basically identical when it comes to foreign policy, identically fucking retarded. Just take a quick look around the world and you'll see the oppression and destruction wrought by our foreign policy over the decades.
2. Civil Liberties.
Mark Warner and Gillespie see us as cattle, as fodder to grow their sadistic fascist empire. They do not give a flaming fuck about any one of your human rights. If breaking your human rights meaning getting more money or power for them, then they will not think twice about fucking breaking it.
- Ed Gillespie has worked for the Republican party for decades, a party that has persecuted Muslims both here and abroad. He will surely believe he believes in the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights when it comes to protecting religion...unless your Muslim. Then to hell with your religion, we're Amurca here! Just type "The Republican party and Islam" and you'll get all the examples you need of how this party persecutes Muslims. Hell, see how the Bush Administration dealt with Muslims here in America after 9/11.
- Both do not support your freedom of speech. Both Warner and Gillespie support the Patriot Act, the NDAA, the NSA surveillance, etc. If you say anything against them, then you're automatically and without question a terrorist. If they saw this blog, they'd call me a terrorist supporter, even though they're the ones who are supporting terrorism, (we'll get to that in second). So that's the 4th Amendment out the fucking window!
- Bush created Guantanamo Bay, and Gillespie was part of that administration. Obama loves Guantanamo, keeping it open even though 6 years ago he said he would get rid of it, (when's he going to get that?). Mark Warner has no problem with Guantanamo Bay, after all, he votes with Obama basically all the time, and has been a part of the Democratic party, which has kept the Bay open for years when they could've gotten rid of it. So, both Warner and Gillespie have no problem getting rid of the 5th Amendment if it's in the name of "national security." Oh, and the 6th Amendment as well, that comes under the rights broken by both parties with the creation of Guantanamo and the mass arrests right after 9/11, in which people were kidnapped from their homes in the dead of night, held without charges or access to lawyers. Does everyone just fucking forget about that and act like it didn't fucking happen?!
- Both parties support asset forfeiture. This is a law that originally was designed to halt drug operations, but now, as usual, the cops abuse this law and use it to legally steal money from people. That's right, if they find you with a large amount of cash, (large amount is subjective of course), then they can say "Oh it's drug money," and without any evidence or a trial, steal your cash. Then, they use it to buy nice and pretty things for their police department. Most people can't get their money back even through a trial, and even then, a trial takes months and months, and all the while, you don't have your money that you legally worked for and paid taxes on. Fucking bullshit. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2014/09/11/how-cops-got-a-license-to-steal-your-money/ Using cash to pay your landlord because you don't have checks? Better not get pulled over while going from the bank to home, otherwise, you might get robbed by the boys in blue. Gonna use cash to buy an expensive item and you don't want to use a credit card because of all the identity theft recently? Better not get pulled over coming from Best Buy or Home Depot to home. Sarvis wants to end this fascist and highway robbery rule. He stands up for human rights, saying "No, I don't care who you are. If you don't have evidence that this money is drug money, then you cannot steal it. Every person has the right of personal property, and no one, not even the police, can steal it."
This is where libertarianism really shines in comparison to neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism. Conservatives and liberals are basically identical when it comes to foreign policy, identically fucking retarded. Just take a quick look around the world and you'll see the oppression and destruction wrought by our foreign policy over the decades.
- Mark Warner and Ed Gillespie want the "War on Drugs" to continue. We'll talk about the domestic issues of this "War" in a little bit, but right now, we'll talk about how it affects our foreign policy, more specifically, Mexico, and South American countries, (Yes, Mexico is in NORTH America). Warner, Gillespie, and the whole Democratic and Republican party want to keep giving millions of dollars to the Mexican military and government. People conveniently forget that the Mexican government and military is a fascist machine that oppresses and kills their own citizens. Look at any number of these human rights reports and tell me: Is this where you want your tax money going to?!
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/220667.pdf
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/mexico
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/countries/LACRegion/Pages/MXIndex.aspx
Many people refrain from criticizing the Mexican government and military, because "the drug cartels are worse so we gotta support them," or because they don't want to be seen as racist. I say fuck all that shit. Race has nothing to do with it. The Mexican government and military are oppressive regimes that are not in line with American values. They do not deserve our hard earned tax dollars, not because of their race, but because of the specific terroristic and fascist actions their military and government have taken. They take away Mexicans' freedom of speech. They torture innocent people charged with no crime. They do not give them trials. They deny their citizens a way to defend themselves; with only one legal gunstore in all of Mexico, many Mexicans are forced to buy guns illegally to defend their friends and family from cartel thugs and corrupt Mexican "security forces."
Not only that, but there are many American "advisers" that actively help Mexican security forces carry out raids and tortures. Now, do you like the fact that armed American men paid by the government are helping a terrorist regime kill and oppress their own citizens? Warner and Gillespie love that. They feed off the blood and suffering of innocent Mexican citizens. They are crazed beasts who's bloodlust is never satisfied. Tens of thousands of Mexicans have died over the decades, and what do Warner and Gillespie say? More guns! More advisors! More repression! Less rights!
Sarvis is completely opposite of this demonic mindset. He opposes giving military aid to any country, for if no military aid was given, then there is no chance of it being misused for terrorist activities. He opposes military aid, regardless of the race or religion of the country in question. So that means no weapons, ammo, and training for Israel, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Nigeria, etc, all of these countries who oppress either their own people or another people with U.S. made weapons.
Not only that, but libertarianism refuses to trade or do business with terrorist governments. Trade and business is taxable, and we cannot allow taxes from our trade and business to be used to oppress and kill innocent people. On principle, that is what we must do. We cannot continue to have innocent blood on our hands just so we can make a quick buck. So, that means no more trade with China, Russia, India, etc, all of those corrupt fascist and/or communist regimes.
But if we do that, opponents of libertarianism would say, then we would not be able to buy all those cheap goods from these countries, especially China. Good, bring these jobs here back to America, who has plenty of people unemployed or underemployed who would love to work any one of those millions of jobs that would be brought back here. Opponents of this idea would say that the price of these goods would go up, because we cannot make them as cheap as China can. Well in that case, if morales are not involved in the decision process, if we are only going by the price it takes to produce something, then let's reintroduce slave labor in the U.S. to make those goods as cheap as they are made in China. Now you see how stupid it sounds. You support slave labor overseas to make your cheap ass stuff, but then as soon as someone suggests that Americans do the same, then suddenly that's off limits.
Fact: sometimes you pay a monetary price to stand by your morales. We do that every day by saying no to slave labor, even though slave labor is cheaper than paying a worker to make something. The same must apply to this case: We will pay more for goods in order to stand by the moral of not giving money to terrorist regimes so they can oppress and kill their citizens. Americans are innovative. We will find a way to make those goods in a cheap enough fashion that other Americans can buy them.
Another plus of libertarian foreign policy is that we only fight if we are being attacked by another country. No more making up data and lies to invade other countries for their natural resources, (Iraq and Afghanistan). No more fighting to keep tyrants and corrupt governments in power, (Somalia, Nigeria, Pakistan, etc). No more creating enemies so then we have an excuse to fight them (Al-Qaida, ISIS, etc). We have this novel idea that people don't like being bombed for no reason. WHO WOULD'VE FUCKING THOUGHT OF THAT, RIGHT?!
4. War on Drugs
So here is where we can talk about the devastating effects the War on Drugs has at home. Warner and Gillespie love the War on Drugs. They want it to be waged forever. They love locking people up for doing actions that affect no one but themselves. Warner and Gillespie have the mindset of "Hey, since I think drug xyz is immoral to use, I'm going to force EVERYONE to think this way by making it illegal!" or "Hey the Constitution says nothing about this drug xyz being illegal. Well fuck the Constitution, fuck Americans' rights, since I think it should illegal, then it is going to be illegal!"
Both parties want to continue to throw huge amounts of money at this "problem" and it not be solved, ($51 BILLION A YEAR, on average, to be exact). Both of them want to continue to arrest Americans, so many that we have the highest concentration rate of citizens in prison IN THE WORLD. They want to continue to make drugs illegal, even though, if they were legal and taxable, would bring in $46.7 BILLION in revenue annually.
http://www.drugpolicy.org/drug-war-statistics
Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, why the hell do you think it would work for any other drug? Why do you think you have the right to tell people what they can and cannot put in their own body? It's not your fucking body!
Sarvis says "Hey, unless an action is infringing on someone else's human rights, then I don't have a problem with it. It shouldn't be illegal. Things should only be illegal if they break someone else's human rights. Does someone smoking pot have any effect on me? No, so I have no right to tell him/her not to do it." I know, it's so simple that it ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE.
Republicans usually have a "holier than thou" complex, especially when it comes to drugs. They think they are doing God's work by prohibiting these drugs from being legal. 1st of all: fuck your religion. This country was founded on the principle that people cannot force their religious beliefs onto other people. So if you think smoking weed violates your religion, fine, that's your interpretation of the Bible. But don't go around thinking that is the only possible interpretation and forcing everyone else to abide by your personal beliefs.
Democrats have a similar attitude, but without the religious overtones. They think they are so damn smart that they know what's best for you, better than you do. They want to be in control of your personal decisions, not you.
5. Economics
Bush tanked the economy, and Obama is continuing to hold it down in the mud. There, that should be reason enough not to vote for either party on the principle of economics, because both parties have shown that they are not able to manage the national economy. They only look out for the 1%, their bloc of power, and fuck everyone else. Gillespie was part of the Bush administration, the one that, you know, ruined the lives of millions of people throughout the world, but especially Americans with its disastrous economic plans. And Warner votes with Obama 97% of the time. So he's signed off on basically every single economic policy that is continuing the recession, keeping the middle and lower classes down, keeping the underemployment high, etc, etc.
Not only that, but libertarianism refuses to trade or do business with terrorist governments. Trade and business is taxable, and we cannot allow taxes from our trade and business to be used to oppress and kill innocent people. On principle, that is what we must do. We cannot continue to have innocent blood on our hands just so we can make a quick buck. So, that means no more trade with China, Russia, India, etc, all of those corrupt fascist and/or communist regimes.
But if we do that, opponents of libertarianism would say, then we would not be able to buy all those cheap goods from these countries, especially China. Good, bring these jobs here back to America, who has plenty of people unemployed or underemployed who would love to work any one of those millions of jobs that would be brought back here. Opponents of this idea would say that the price of these goods would go up, because we cannot make them as cheap as China can. Well in that case, if morales are not involved in the decision process, if we are only going by the price it takes to produce something, then let's reintroduce slave labor in the U.S. to make those goods as cheap as they are made in China. Now you see how stupid it sounds. You support slave labor overseas to make your cheap ass stuff, but then as soon as someone suggests that Americans do the same, then suddenly that's off limits.
Fact: sometimes you pay a monetary price to stand by your morales. We do that every day by saying no to slave labor, even though slave labor is cheaper than paying a worker to make something. The same must apply to this case: We will pay more for goods in order to stand by the moral of not giving money to terrorist regimes so they can oppress and kill their citizens. Americans are innovative. We will find a way to make those goods in a cheap enough fashion that other Americans can buy them.
Another plus of libertarian foreign policy is that we only fight if we are being attacked by another country. No more making up data and lies to invade other countries for their natural resources, (Iraq and Afghanistan). No more fighting to keep tyrants and corrupt governments in power, (Somalia, Nigeria, Pakistan, etc). No more creating enemies so then we have an excuse to fight them (Al-Qaida, ISIS, etc). We have this novel idea that people don't like being bombed for no reason. WHO WOULD'VE FUCKING THOUGHT OF THAT, RIGHT?!
4. War on Drugs
So here is where we can talk about the devastating effects the War on Drugs has at home. Warner and Gillespie love the War on Drugs. They want it to be waged forever. They love locking people up for doing actions that affect no one but themselves. Warner and Gillespie have the mindset of "Hey, since I think drug xyz is immoral to use, I'm going to force EVERYONE to think this way by making it illegal!" or "Hey the Constitution says nothing about this drug xyz being illegal. Well fuck the Constitution, fuck Americans' rights, since I think it should illegal, then it is going to be illegal!"
Both parties want to continue to throw huge amounts of money at this "problem" and it not be solved, ($51 BILLION A YEAR, on average, to be exact). Both of them want to continue to arrest Americans, so many that we have the highest concentration rate of citizens in prison IN THE WORLD. They want to continue to make drugs illegal, even though, if they were legal and taxable, would bring in $46.7 BILLION in revenue annually.
http://www.drugpolicy.org/drug-war-statistics
Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, why the hell do you think it would work for any other drug? Why do you think you have the right to tell people what they can and cannot put in their own body? It's not your fucking body!
Sarvis says "Hey, unless an action is infringing on someone else's human rights, then I don't have a problem with it. It shouldn't be illegal. Things should only be illegal if they break someone else's human rights. Does someone smoking pot have any effect on me? No, so I have no right to tell him/her not to do it." I know, it's so simple that it ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE.
Republicans usually have a "holier than thou" complex, especially when it comes to drugs. They think they are doing God's work by prohibiting these drugs from being legal. 1st of all: fuck your religion. This country was founded on the principle that people cannot force their religious beliefs onto other people. So if you think smoking weed violates your religion, fine, that's your interpretation of the Bible. But don't go around thinking that is the only possible interpretation and forcing everyone else to abide by your personal beliefs.
Democrats have a similar attitude, but without the religious overtones. They think they are so damn smart that they know what's best for you, better than you do. They want to be in control of your personal decisions, not you.
5. Economics
Bush tanked the economy, and Obama is continuing to hold it down in the mud. There, that should be reason enough not to vote for either party on the principle of economics, because both parties have shown that they are not able to manage the national economy. They only look out for the 1%, their bloc of power, and fuck everyone else. Gillespie was part of the Bush administration, the one that, you know, ruined the lives of millions of people throughout the world, but especially Americans with its disastrous economic plans. And Warner votes with Obama 97% of the time. So he's signed off on basically every single economic policy that is continuing the recession, keeping the middle and lower classes down, keeping the underemployment high, etc, etc.
Does the above picture make your blood boil? Do you understand the full implications of what it is saying? Bank of America foreclosed, it failed, as a business, it tanked. Done. Finished. But Bush couldn't allow that to happen. So he bailed them out on the taxpayer's dime. So the bank still exists. Even though it failed, even though it's own decisions and policies caused its failure, Bush cheated and gave it another life. It's like a student getting an F on a test because he's a dumbass and didn't study, but the teacher feels bad for him and gives him an A anyway.
But wait, it gets better. After being resurrected by the sweat of ordinary workers like you and me, Bank of America went through tax loopholes, intentionally ignored by the Bush and Obama administrations, and paid ZERO taxes on the $4.4 billion in profits. The administrations ignore these loopholes, because it is their cronies and supporters who exploit the loophole to pay no taxes. Year after year they leave the loopholes intact. See, if you or I tried to do that, we would be arrested for tax fraud. But if you're a member of this exclusive club, created by Obama, then you don't have to pay any taxes at all. Some capitalism. Some democracy.
How is this remotely fair? I am dirt poor, yet I still pay about 25% of my salary to taxes every year, if you combine all state, federal, and income taxes together. Yet Bank of America, who made a billion times more money than I ever will, did not pay a single penny on their profits.
Warner and Gillespie favor bailouts for failing companies. Where's the taxpayers' bailout? Sarvis, on the other hand, does not support intervention in the economy. He has a Master's in Economics from George Mason University, so I think he knows what the fuck he is talking about. If a company fails in the economy, then that gives an opportunity for another company to take that niche and offer a better service/product in its place. This is how a economy is supposed to work. It's like if the government kept on propping up the carriage companies when car companies were rising in the 20's. We wouldn't have cars because the government wouldn't allow the carriage companies to naturally go out of business and make room for the new company of transportation. If Bank of America failed, then a new bank would rise and take its place, only it would learn from Bank of America's mistakes, hence, be a better bank. They would offer better services at better prices. This artificial propping up of archaic/inefficient companies is only hurting the economy in the long run. Bank of America knows it doesn't have to do good in the economy, because if it fails, the government will just bail it out again. There is not incentive to provide a good service at a good price.
6. Secure the border.
Both major parties are not seriously guarding our southern border. That is why we have 13 million plus illegal immigrants in this country. It also means that criminals, gang members, and terrorists can cross our southern border with ease, and cause havoc in our nation. A huge percentage of illegal immigrants commit murder in this country. And terrorists have been caught trying to enter the U.S. through the unguarded southern border: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/10/07/Report-10-ISIS-Fighters-Arrested-Crossing-Southern-Border
Each party has its own reason to not put more troops at the southern border. They do not care about the welfare or safety of Americans. Democrats keep it open because they have this totally fucked up notion that keeping illegal immigrants out of this country is somehow racist against Hispanics. Well, then that means every country in the world is racist towards Hispanics, including Hispanic countries, because every single country in the world, including every single Hispanic nation, has immigration laws and procedures. Not one single country has completely open borders, because its national suicide. Its completely logical and rational to have procedures about who and when someone can enter your country. But nope, Democrats are paranoid about even possibly being considered racist, so they leave the border open for anyone, including rapists and murderers, to enter our country without anyone knowing. Apparently, not letting people break international law with impunity is racist. Who would've thought. Democrats also don't want the border guarded because the illegal immigrants overwhelmingly vote Democrat in elections. Coupled with the Democratic campaign of not having to show an I.D. to vote, this idea is a goldmine to get illegal votes in elections for Democrats.
Republicans purposely leave the border open so they can bash Democrats for it, using the reasons I just listed above. Libertarians however, realize the rationally and logical benefits of not having a completely open and monitored border. So they advocate for a faster legal immigration process while advocating for a tighter guarded border. For how to more tightly guard the southern border, read my past post The immigration reform that we actually need: http://noholdsonfreedom.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-immigration-reform-that-we-actually.html
If any of this seems extreme, that's because it is. Desperate times call for desperate measures. The two main political parties have allowed this situation to become desperate and extreme on purpose, so that when people like me call for the only real solution to the problem, they can whine "Oh you're a dangerous radical, your idea is racist and would never work." This way, they can continue doing whatever they want, and there is no real opposition to their plans, because anyone who offers a decent solution is a "radical."
So there you have it, the six main reasons why I'm going to vote Sarvis instead of Warner or Gillespie. I invite anyone to explain why Warner's or Gillespie's ideas on any of these six issues are better than Sarvis's. Usually, I don't get any alternate explanations, only that Sarvis's ideas "are too radical and won't work." Like the Democrats and Republicans' ideas are working?! I mean c'mon. Do you want a continuation of the status quo? It sucks! I'm open to change my mind on these issues if someone can convince me of a better plan, but so far, no one has been able to do so.
But wait, it gets better. After being resurrected by the sweat of ordinary workers like you and me, Bank of America went through tax loopholes, intentionally ignored by the Bush and Obama administrations, and paid ZERO taxes on the $4.4 billion in profits. The administrations ignore these loopholes, because it is their cronies and supporters who exploit the loophole to pay no taxes. Year after year they leave the loopholes intact. See, if you or I tried to do that, we would be arrested for tax fraud. But if you're a member of this exclusive club, created by Obama, then you don't have to pay any taxes at all. Some capitalism. Some democracy.
How is this remotely fair? I am dirt poor, yet I still pay about 25% of my salary to taxes every year, if you combine all state, federal, and income taxes together. Yet Bank of America, who made a billion times more money than I ever will, did not pay a single penny on their profits.
Warner and Gillespie favor bailouts for failing companies. Where's the taxpayers' bailout? Sarvis, on the other hand, does not support intervention in the economy. He has a Master's in Economics from George Mason University, so I think he knows what the fuck he is talking about. If a company fails in the economy, then that gives an opportunity for another company to take that niche and offer a better service/product in its place. This is how a economy is supposed to work. It's like if the government kept on propping up the carriage companies when car companies were rising in the 20's. We wouldn't have cars because the government wouldn't allow the carriage companies to naturally go out of business and make room for the new company of transportation. If Bank of America failed, then a new bank would rise and take its place, only it would learn from Bank of America's mistakes, hence, be a better bank. They would offer better services at better prices. This artificial propping up of archaic/inefficient companies is only hurting the economy in the long run. Bank of America knows it doesn't have to do good in the economy, because if it fails, the government will just bail it out again. There is not incentive to provide a good service at a good price.
6. Secure the border.
Both major parties are not seriously guarding our southern border. That is why we have 13 million plus illegal immigrants in this country. It also means that criminals, gang members, and terrorists can cross our southern border with ease, and cause havoc in our nation. A huge percentage of illegal immigrants commit murder in this country. And terrorists have been caught trying to enter the U.S. through the unguarded southern border: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/10/07/Report-10-ISIS-Fighters-Arrested-Crossing-Southern-Border
Each party has its own reason to not put more troops at the southern border. They do not care about the welfare or safety of Americans. Democrats keep it open because they have this totally fucked up notion that keeping illegal immigrants out of this country is somehow racist against Hispanics. Well, then that means every country in the world is racist towards Hispanics, including Hispanic countries, because every single country in the world, including every single Hispanic nation, has immigration laws and procedures. Not one single country has completely open borders, because its national suicide. Its completely logical and rational to have procedures about who and when someone can enter your country. But nope, Democrats are paranoid about even possibly being considered racist, so they leave the border open for anyone, including rapists and murderers, to enter our country without anyone knowing. Apparently, not letting people break international law with impunity is racist. Who would've thought. Democrats also don't want the border guarded because the illegal immigrants overwhelmingly vote Democrat in elections. Coupled with the Democratic campaign of not having to show an I.D. to vote, this idea is a goldmine to get illegal votes in elections for Democrats.
Republicans purposely leave the border open so they can bash Democrats for it, using the reasons I just listed above. Libertarians however, realize the rationally and logical benefits of not having a completely open and monitored border. So they advocate for a faster legal immigration process while advocating for a tighter guarded border. For how to more tightly guard the southern border, read my past post The immigration reform that we actually need: http://noholdsonfreedom.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-immigration-reform-that-we-actually.html
If any of this seems extreme, that's because it is. Desperate times call for desperate measures. The two main political parties have allowed this situation to become desperate and extreme on purpose, so that when people like me call for the only real solution to the problem, they can whine "Oh you're a dangerous radical, your idea is racist and would never work." This way, they can continue doing whatever they want, and there is no real opposition to their plans, because anyone who offers a decent solution is a "radical."
So there you have it, the six main reasons why I'm going to vote Sarvis instead of Warner or Gillespie. I invite anyone to explain why Warner's or Gillespie's ideas on any of these six issues are better than Sarvis's. Usually, I don't get any alternate explanations, only that Sarvis's ideas "are too radical and won't work." Like the Democrats and Republicans' ideas are working?! I mean c'mon. Do you want a continuation of the status quo? It sucks! I'm open to change my mind on these issues if someone can convince me of a better plan, but so far, no one has been able to do so.
Friday, February 7, 2014
The immigration reform that we actually need
I'm probably gonna get some shit for this, (or maybe none at all cuz no one knows how to counter anything I write) but as you should know by now, I literally could not give a fuck. I'm sorry that I'm "racist," (even though I can't be racist towards half of myself), too "radical" or "extreme" for suggesting the one fucking thing that will solve a problem, while most people just skirt around the issue with PC and convoluted suggestions that won't do jack shit. This post is gonna be very short because the solution is so simple. The fact that our worthless shit faced leaders haven't solved this problem speak to their incompetence and point to the conclusion that they just don't want to solve this problem, even though they perfectly well can.
We're talking about immigration reform here guys. Here's all we need to do to solve it:
P.S. So am I racist to half of myself? Is it my right side of my body or my left side of my body that is the Hispanic part that I hate so much because apparently anyone who suggests anything I suggested is OBVIOUSLY racist towards Hispanic people, right?!?!?!!
We're talking about immigration reform here guys. Here's all we need to do to solve it:
- The U.S.-Mexican border is 1,954 miles long. A U.S. Army or Marine can shoot a sniper rifle effectively, on average, half a mile, (some are much better but others aren't). So that's at least 3,908 soldiers we need to effectively guard the border. Factor in difficult to see terrain for some parts of the borders, plus back-up squads and support personnel, and we're looking at what, 5,000, 6,000 soldiers tops to guard the border. Maybe a little more but that just goes to show you how few soldiers we actually need to do it.
- A massive police and citizen nation-wide crackdown to round up as many illegal immigrants as we can find in this nation and send 'em back to where they came from. We can't get all 12 million of them but we can get a sizable number.
- Speed up the LEGAL immigration process. It's bogged and slowed down by excessive government red tape and micromanagement. There's no reason why it needs to take as long as it does. We have the NSA, we can find out every detail about anyone who's alive right now to do a background check in 5 seconds. My family from my dad's side came over here, legally, even though they were poor as shit. My mom's side was chilling in northern Mexico, minding their own business, and then the U.S. invaded and made the place Texas and my family just stayed there and became U.S. citizens because they wanted to stay on their land.
- Change U.S. culture. Oh yes, changing culture is hard and takes a long time. So we gotta start now. We have to change people's mindsets and attitudes towards illegal immigration. We have to get people thinking that yes, it is a crime to come to this country illegally. Just because your life sucks in Mexico doesn't mean that suddenly, Mexican, U.S., and international law doesn't apply to you and suddenly you can break whatever law you want. Show them that yes, the majority of illegal immigrants commit other crimes besides the crime of being in this country illegally http://cis.org/myth-law-abiding-illegal-alien, http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/10/07/Exclusive-New-report-shatters-narrative-illegal-aliens-abide-by-laws-other-than-immigration-ones. Show them that no, giving illegal immigrants benefits like in-state tuition and driver's licenses does nothing to help the situation at all, it just costs taxpayer's more money to pay for benefits for criminals.
P.S. So am I racist to half of myself? Is it my right side of my body or my left side of my body that is the Hispanic part that I hate so much because apparently anyone who suggests anything I suggested is OBVIOUSLY racist towards Hispanic people, right?!?!?!!
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
People admire Obama for WHAT?!
The mindless drones that are Obama worshipers continue to adore him, even as he fucks them over again and again. This is evident in the poll that shows that Barack Obama is the most admired man in the world for the 6th year in a row.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166646/obama-clinton-continue-reign-admired-man-woman.aspx
The insanity of this is mind boggling. These people conveniently ignore and do not mention the numerous horrible, atrocious, and sickening actions that Obama does year after year, and turn all of those actions into good, helpful, noble actions. They defy logic. They clash against rationale. When I mention these awful crimes that Obama does, his lovers simply cannot respond. They have no response when challenged on their beliefs. The set of morals and values one must have to admire Obama is completely nauseating.
Let's go through a list of all the crimes, horrible actions, and acts of terrorism Barack Obama has done while in office, shall we???
1. Enacted policies that benefit the 1% and the Wall Street cronies.
Obama acts like he's a friend to the poor, a protector to the most vulnerable of our society, when in reality, he couldn't give a flaming fuck about us. He's a servant to the 1% of our country, those fat greedy fucks whose sole mission in life is to gobble as much wealth as they can, and damn anyone who gets in their way. This article says it all:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/11/24/obamas_policies_have_helped_wall_st_fat_cats_120768.html
The stock market has had it's best year in several years, despite the fact that the economy is still in ruins, thanks to “quantitative easing” (money creation) by the Federal Reserve Board. This has helped Wall Street while destroying the middle class, because near zero interest rates undermine savings. Despite ample evidence of fraud, Obama has protected all Wall Street executives. Not a single one has been prosecuted for fraud or completely destroying the economy in 2008. He's also given fat cats a break such as in this example he "signed a stimulus bill that spent $165 on bonuses for AIG executives."
During George Bush's presidency, the top 1% percent earned 65% of the national income. Now, they earn 95% of it. Wall Street investment banks also get from federal loan guarantees what amounts to an $83 billion subsidy. And guess where the money from that subsidy comes from? Yeah, the sweat of us hard working Americans. President Obama has “redistributed” more tax dollars to crony capitalists than to the poor. From the $787 billion “stimulus” that didn’t stimulate, to subsidies for “green” companies that produced more corruption than energy, to Obamacare, every “investment” he has made has produced a windfall for the politically connected but hasn’t helped ordinary Americans.
The evidence is overwhelming, and this is just from one article. There are literally dozens and dozens of other examples out there that all point to the same conclusion: Obama hates poor people, and loves the mega-rich. He says he's all about "reducing income inequality," yet he enacts policies that increase income inequality.
2. Enacted policies that directly hurt poor people.
Remember that whole story about Mitt Romney paying less in taxes that his secretary? Well, guess who was the president during that time that approved that tax plan? Oh right, it was Obama. Obama makes the poor people pay more and more in taxes every year, while, percentage wise, he makes the rich pay less and less. I can just look at my paycheck from year to year and see the negative impacts the fat greedy politician has cost me. (I'm not going to tell you how much I make, rest assured, it's close to nothing). In the first half of 2012, I paid 4.3% in all taxes combined. In the last half, I paid 9.1%. That's almost doubling my taxes in 6 months. Now, I pay a whopping 20.6% in all taxes. That's 1/5 of everything I make. That may not seem like a lot, to you people who make a lot more money than me. But when you don't make a lot of money, each percentage increase is felt more because poorer people need every dollar they make.
Not only has Obama raised taxes directly on the vast majority of Americans, he's added more indirect taxes and taxes on things people buy. Obamacare alone put 21 new taxes on the American people. He gloats about it on it's own fucking website:
http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-taxes.php
3. Enacted fascist policies, such as the NDAA, the renewal of the Patriot Act, and the continuation of Guantanamo Bay.
Liberals who cried and cried when George Bush, (I hate him just as much as Obama), enacted the Patriot Act were strangely silent when Obama signed the NDAA into law, which gives the government the right to kill you without having to give any reason at all. It also allows the government to indefinitely detain you, no trial, without charging you with anything, and without giving you access to a lawyer. Mussolini and Franco would be jumping with joy if they were in charge of a government with that legal power. The government can now basically do whatever it wants to the American people, and justify it as "fighting terrorism."
Obama is perfectly clear: He hates the American people. He has declared war on the American people. He could not care less if you died right fucking now.
4. Obama has increased the debt more during his first 3 years than George Bush did in his entire 8 years.
Obama loves spending over peoples' money just as much as he hates them. His spending is completely and utterly out of control. We are trillions and trillions of dollars in debt. The deficit is skyrocketing. He spends more in government handouts, spends more on the military industrial complex, spends more in foreign aid to dictators and terrorists, spends more in bloated government bureaucracies, more More MORE! It's never enough for him, he just has to out-do himself every year. Inflation is rising so much faster than people's wages, it's constantly decreasing peoples' spending power, making them poorer and poorer. He's just running this country into the fucking ground.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/
5. Has killed hundreds of unarmed innocent civilians through his terroristic drone program, while trying to cover up how many civilians the program has killed.
God, does this make my blood boil. I can't stand it. I cannot stand my tax dollars being used to kill unarmed civilians WHO AREN'T FUCKING BOTHERING ANYONE. It's the very definition of terrorism. He is deliberately killing civilians in these countries so these governments will politically do whatever he tells them. It is no different than Al-Qaeda slamming planes into buildings to try and make the US do what it wants. In fact, Obama is worse than Osama Bin Laden could ever hope of being, because the US is a trillion times stronger than a dozen men in a cave. Thus, their capacity to do damage is a trillion times bigger than Al-Qaeda's. The US oppresses and kills more people than Al-Qaeda ever will.
People try and skirt around this issue. They conveniently don't mention it when they are flattering Obama. Well, just because you don't talk about it, doesn't mean it isn't happening!!!! According to the definition of terrorism, Obama is a terrorist. It is not un-American to say so, in fact, it's in line with our American morals and values to tell the truth, to not judge Obama differently because of his nationality or position. Now matter what race, religion, occupation, or nationality a person is, we have a duty to say that if that person is killing unarmed people on purpose, that person is a terrorist!
Look at just this one website, with all its examples, all its evidence, all its data on the terroristic drone program. It's completely overwhelming, it leaves no doubt at all. The Obama lovers simply have no response for this: "What? Obama kills innocent people? But....but...liberals like him love everyone!"
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/
The whole purpose of the program is to kill innocents, so people in Yemen, Pakistan, etc, will get mad at the US. Rightly so, they have every right to take up arms against the US to protect themselves. It is logical and rational, not driven by religious hate, as the neo-cons would have you believe. So when these people attack the US, the neo-cons can stand up and cry "Oh see how they hate us! They won't stop attacking us! We have to spend more on our military empire, more drone strikes, more intervention, more killing, more death, more misery, more suffering, and most of all: MORE AMERICAN TERRORISM!
6. Gives money and weapons to dictators, terrorists, and oligarchies, so they can kill even more unarmed people.
Obama's endless blood-thirst isn't satisfied with the amount of the civilians the US kills directly, oh no, that wouldn't be nearly enough. So he gives billions and billions of dollars every year, our hard earned tax dollars, and gives them to governments, saying "Oh, I know you guys kill civilians on purpose, and oppress your people, and suck their wealth dry, and have a completely incompetent government full of crooks and cronies.....so here's 2 billion dollars to buy more weapons and tanks and missiles and jet fighters with. Have a nice day!"
Just look at the top ten recipients of US foreign aid in 2012:
Is that the type of governments you want running around with weapons bought with your money?! Selling weapons to terrorists is in of itself, an act of terrorism. The majority of these countries have terroristic governments. By definition, the US government is committing an act of terrorism by giving these governments money. Just Google these countries' human rights records and list of war crimes. You can go to HumanRightsWatch.org or AmnestyInternational.org or any of the hundreds of sites you will get in a Google search with any of these countries' human rights record. You could spend days reading all of them. It's sickening. We are financing the suffering of literally millions and millions of people. Why don't more people care? Just because they aren't Americans doesn't make them any less a people than we are. You and I could've just as easily been born in one of these countries as we could've in America.
7. Supports the fascist NSA and their Orwellian policies and practices.
Do I even need to say more? Every month or so we get a new revelation about how the NSA tramples all the fuck over our 4th amendment rights. It never stops. Just when you think it couldn't get worse...it does. Again and again. The NSA is the most fascist un-American institution out there. It's all about total and utter control of the American people. It doesn't do what it does to protect you, it doesn't give a flaming fuck about you or me. It just wants one thing: control.
Here's just a few things the NSA does to you and me on a daily basis:
Conclusion
People love Obama for this sick shit. They think he's the greatest thing to happen since Clinton. They think he honestly cares about the American people, but it's just those nasty Republicans who limit how much good he can do! How the hell can you admire a thief, a terrorist, a thug, a crook, a fascist, a rich elitist scumbag?!
Oh, I know the NSA looks at this website. I post provocative, anti-government posts all the time. I know they're all over this. They're probably gonna charge me with some bullshit charge like "online terrorism," even though I've never endorsed violence against civilians, and I has always spoken out against terrorist acts, no matter who the perpetrator is. Even if it's the President himself! Fine, let them spy on me, let them harass me, I don't care. I know I'm doing the right thing by speaking out against terrorism and criminals. If doing that gets me in trouble, then I'll wear it like a badge of honor.
The stupidity of the American people is the #1 source of suffering for people in the entire world.
And for you personally Mr. Obama:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166646/obama-clinton-continue-reign-admired-man-woman.aspx
The insanity of this is mind boggling. These people conveniently ignore and do not mention the numerous horrible, atrocious, and sickening actions that Obama does year after year, and turn all of those actions into good, helpful, noble actions. They defy logic. They clash against rationale. When I mention these awful crimes that Obama does, his lovers simply cannot respond. They have no response when challenged on their beliefs. The set of morals and values one must have to admire Obama is completely nauseating.
Let's go through a list of all the crimes, horrible actions, and acts of terrorism Barack Obama has done while in office, shall we???
1. Enacted policies that benefit the 1% and the Wall Street cronies.
Obama acts like he's a friend to the poor, a protector to the most vulnerable of our society, when in reality, he couldn't give a flaming fuck about us. He's a servant to the 1% of our country, those fat greedy fucks whose sole mission in life is to gobble as much wealth as they can, and damn anyone who gets in their way. This article says it all:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/11/24/obamas_policies_have_helped_wall_st_fat_cats_120768.html
The stock market has had it's best year in several years, despite the fact that the economy is still in ruins, thanks to “quantitative easing” (money creation) by the Federal Reserve Board. This has helped Wall Street while destroying the middle class, because near zero interest rates undermine savings. Despite ample evidence of fraud, Obama has protected all Wall Street executives. Not a single one has been prosecuted for fraud or completely destroying the economy in 2008. He's also given fat cats a break such as in this example he "signed a stimulus bill that spent $165 on bonuses for AIG executives."
During George Bush's presidency, the top 1% percent earned 65% of the national income. Now, they earn 95% of it. Wall Street investment banks also get from federal loan guarantees what amounts to an $83 billion subsidy. And guess where the money from that subsidy comes from? Yeah, the sweat of us hard working Americans. President Obama has “redistributed” more tax dollars to crony capitalists than to the poor. From the $787 billion “stimulus” that didn’t stimulate, to subsidies for “green” companies that produced more corruption than energy, to Obamacare, every “investment” he has made has produced a windfall for the politically connected but hasn’t helped ordinary Americans.
The evidence is overwhelming, and this is just from one article. There are literally dozens and dozens of other examples out there that all point to the same conclusion: Obama hates poor people, and loves the mega-rich. He says he's all about "reducing income inequality," yet he enacts policies that increase income inequality.
2. Enacted policies that directly hurt poor people.
Remember that whole story about Mitt Romney paying less in taxes that his secretary? Well, guess who was the president during that time that approved that tax plan? Oh right, it was Obama. Obama makes the poor people pay more and more in taxes every year, while, percentage wise, he makes the rich pay less and less. I can just look at my paycheck from year to year and see the negative impacts the fat greedy politician has cost me. (I'm not going to tell you how much I make, rest assured, it's close to nothing). In the first half of 2012, I paid 4.3% in all taxes combined. In the last half, I paid 9.1%. That's almost doubling my taxes in 6 months. Now, I pay a whopping 20.6% in all taxes. That's 1/5 of everything I make. That may not seem like a lot, to you people who make a lot more money than me. But when you don't make a lot of money, each percentage increase is felt more because poorer people need every dollar they make.
Not only has Obama raised taxes directly on the vast majority of Americans, he's added more indirect taxes and taxes on things people buy. Obamacare alone put 21 new taxes on the American people. He gloats about it on it's own fucking website:
http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-taxes.php
3. Enacted fascist policies, such as the NDAA, the renewal of the Patriot Act, and the continuation of Guantanamo Bay.
Liberals who cried and cried when George Bush, (I hate him just as much as Obama), enacted the Patriot Act were strangely silent when Obama signed the NDAA into law, which gives the government the right to kill you without having to give any reason at all. It also allows the government to indefinitely detain you, no trial, without charging you with anything, and without giving you access to a lawyer. Mussolini and Franco would be jumping with joy if they were in charge of a government with that legal power. The government can now basically do whatever it wants to the American people, and justify it as "fighting terrorism."
Obama is perfectly clear: He hates the American people. He has declared war on the American people. He could not care less if you died right fucking now.
4. Obama has increased the debt more during his first 3 years than George Bush did in his entire 8 years.
Obama loves spending over peoples' money just as much as he hates them. His spending is completely and utterly out of control. We are trillions and trillions of dollars in debt. The deficit is skyrocketing. He spends more in government handouts, spends more on the military industrial complex, spends more in foreign aid to dictators and terrorists, spends more in bloated government bureaucracies, more More MORE! It's never enough for him, he just has to out-do himself every year. Inflation is rising so much faster than people's wages, it's constantly decreasing peoples' spending power, making them poorer and poorer. He's just running this country into the fucking ground.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/
5. Has killed hundreds of unarmed innocent civilians through his terroristic drone program, while trying to cover up how many civilians the program has killed.
God, does this make my blood boil. I can't stand it. I cannot stand my tax dollars being used to kill unarmed civilians WHO AREN'T FUCKING BOTHERING ANYONE. It's the very definition of terrorism. He is deliberately killing civilians in these countries so these governments will politically do whatever he tells them. It is no different than Al-Qaeda slamming planes into buildings to try and make the US do what it wants. In fact, Obama is worse than Osama Bin Laden could ever hope of being, because the US is a trillion times stronger than a dozen men in a cave. Thus, their capacity to do damage is a trillion times bigger than Al-Qaeda's. The US oppresses and kills more people than Al-Qaeda ever will.
People try and skirt around this issue. They conveniently don't mention it when they are flattering Obama. Well, just because you don't talk about it, doesn't mean it isn't happening!!!! According to the definition of terrorism, Obama is a terrorist. It is not un-American to say so, in fact, it's in line with our American morals and values to tell the truth, to not judge Obama differently because of his nationality or position. Now matter what race, religion, occupation, or nationality a person is, we have a duty to say that if that person is killing unarmed people on purpose, that person is a terrorist!
Look at just this one website, with all its examples, all its evidence, all its data on the terroristic drone program. It's completely overwhelming, it leaves no doubt at all. The Obama lovers simply have no response for this: "What? Obama kills innocent people? But....but...liberals like him love everyone!"
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/category/projects/drones/
The whole purpose of the program is to kill innocents, so people in Yemen, Pakistan, etc, will get mad at the US. Rightly so, they have every right to take up arms against the US to protect themselves. It is logical and rational, not driven by religious hate, as the neo-cons would have you believe. So when these people attack the US, the neo-cons can stand up and cry "Oh see how they hate us! They won't stop attacking us! We have to spend more on our military empire, more drone strikes, more intervention, more killing, more death, more misery, more suffering, and most of all: MORE AMERICAN TERRORISM!
6. Gives money and weapons to dictators, terrorists, and oligarchies, so they can kill even more unarmed people.
Obama's endless blood-thirst isn't satisfied with the amount of the civilians the US kills directly, oh no, that wouldn't be nearly enough. So he gives billions and billions of dollars every year, our hard earned tax dollars, and gives them to governments, saying "Oh, I know you guys kill civilians on purpose, and oppress your people, and suck their wealth dry, and have a completely incompetent government full of crooks and cronies.....so here's 2 billion dollars to buy more weapons and tanks and missiles and jet fighters with. Have a nice day!"
Just look at the top ten recipients of US foreign aid in 2012:
Is that the type of governments you want running around with weapons bought with your money?! Selling weapons to terrorists is in of itself, an act of terrorism. The majority of these countries have terroristic governments. By definition, the US government is committing an act of terrorism by giving these governments money. Just Google these countries' human rights records and list of war crimes. You can go to HumanRightsWatch.org or AmnestyInternational.org or any of the hundreds of sites you will get in a Google search with any of these countries' human rights record. You could spend days reading all of them. It's sickening. We are financing the suffering of literally millions and millions of people. Why don't more people care? Just because they aren't Americans doesn't make them any less a people than we are. You and I could've just as easily been born in one of these countries as we could've in America.
7. Supports the fascist NSA and their Orwellian policies and practices.
Do I even need to say more? Every month or so we get a new revelation about how the NSA tramples all the fuck over our 4th amendment rights. It never stops. Just when you think it couldn't get worse...it does. Again and again. The NSA is the most fascist un-American institution out there. It's all about total and utter control of the American people. It doesn't do what it does to protect you, it doesn't give a flaming fuck about you or me. It just wants one thing: control.
Here's just a few things the NSA does to you and me on a daily basis:
- Steals your emails, (over 75% of all Internet traffic).
- Steals your phone calls, (Over 50% of the entire amount of cell phone calls made in the world. Reported by the Washington Post on December 5th , 2013).
- Infects computers with viruses and malware to get information.
- Infects companies' computers and networks with viruses and malware in retaliation when the company doesn't hand the NSA the information it wants.
- Bribed companies with millions of dollars to get information.
- Steals your Internet history.
- Can track your movement via your phone.
- Spies on foreign citizens, governments, journalists, and other news media.
- Broke it's own rules about surveillance 2,776 times. (They must be fucking retarded, or they simply don't care. Or probably both. What other company or business would still be running if they broke the rules 2,776 times?!)
- They intercept computers mid-shipment and install spyware on them.
- Snoops in on online video games (Oh yeah, gotta catch all those terrorists that play World of Warcraft online all the time huehuehue).
- NSA leaders routinely lie about what they do/what they do not do, and lie about statistics about these programs.
- Secret courts "authorize" the NSA to do these programs, and the government tries to keep these courts secret so the public won't know what the NSA is authorized to do.
- Shares American's private information with Israel, (reported by the Guardian on September 11th, 2013).
Conclusion
People love Obama for this sick shit. They think he's the greatest thing to happen since Clinton. They think he honestly cares about the American people, but it's just those nasty Republicans who limit how much good he can do! How the hell can you admire a thief, a terrorist, a thug, a crook, a fascist, a rich elitist scumbag?!
Oh, I know the NSA looks at this website. I post provocative, anti-government posts all the time. I know they're all over this. They're probably gonna charge me with some bullshit charge like "online terrorism," even though I've never endorsed violence against civilians, and I has always spoken out against terrorist acts, no matter who the perpetrator is. Even if it's the President himself! Fine, let them spy on me, let them harass me, I don't care. I know I'm doing the right thing by speaking out against terrorism and criminals. If doing that gets me in trouble, then I'll wear it like a badge of honor.
The stupidity of the American people is the #1 source of suffering for people in the entire world.
And for you personally Mr. Obama:
FUCK YOU!
Labels:
Barack Obama,
Democrats,
domestic spying,
drone strikes,
Fascism,
George Bush,
Liberalism,
Libertarianism,
Neo-conservatism,
Neo-liberalism,
NSA,
Republicans,
self-defense,
Terrorism,
War Crimes,
Washington DC
Saturday, December 7, 2013
And everyone's...okay with this?
Every week, the world learns more and more about how the NSA is being the world's #1 douchebag when it comes to respecting our privacy and actually doing anything to protect us or better this country. This week's revelation is that they collect and log 5 billion cell phone calls everyday.
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/how-the-nsa-is-tracking-people-right-now/634/
Not only that, but they use these logs to track your every movements. They can even track your relationship with others, since they have the ability to run tracking data to identify which cellphone users' paths cross, even when you're not even using it. When you move from cell phone tower range to another cell phone tower range, the NSA keeps track of these movement. When confronted about this by the Washington Post, the NSA replied in the most fucked up, retarded piece of shit reply I've ever seen in my entire life.
"NSA says it doesn't collect intentionally US location information in bulk."
Hey, NSA asshole dipshit. You log 5 billion cell phone calls every damn day. What, by accident? Do you expect anyone in the entire planet to believe that pathetic excuse?
The NSA just doesn't do this to terrorist suspects, no, it does it to millions of Americans, who have done nothing wrong. This is its normal, run of the mill practice, it's default surveillance. It's pissing companies off so much, that even big business proponents like Google and Microsoft are getting pissed off, and introducing new methods to try and hide data from the NSA. Because every time the NSA spies on an American, it has to get through a company's data in order to do so, such as Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, etc. And companies do not like that at all, not any less than Americans, but companies have more power to do something about it when they're pissed off. The American people have the potential to be more powerful, but that would require mobilization off their fat couches and doing something about it, which doesn't look like it's gonna happen anytime soon.
But, a small section of the population is getting really pissed off. Activists in Utah want to cut off the water supply to a NSA database center:
http://swampland.time.com/2013/12/04/nsa-opponents-want-to-cut-off-utah-facility-from-water-supply/
The NSA has called their database "FASCIA." Isn't it hilarious and ironic that word is very similar to the word "fascist?" Or maybe that's the reason they named it that in the first place, to publicly gloat how much fascism they're getting away with in broad daylight.
Oh wait, it gets better. The NSA also has infected ten of thousands of computers with viruses and malware to get the information they want.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/74845/the-nsa-probably-has-installed-a-virus-on-your-computer-and-everyone-else-s
This is massive destruction of the 4th amendment. The NSA is at war with the American people. They must hate us a hell of a lot to be able to do all the shit they do to us on a daily basis and be okay with it all. They believe they have the right, the privilege, to know anything and everything in the world, laws and logic be damned. They will do whatever it takes to get the information they want. They will pass any law to protect their own actions, so that if anyone complains, they can sneer "Oh it's legal!"
What can we ordinary citizens do about it? Not much unfortunately, but the things we can do, we should do very adamantly. Resist resist resist. Write to your congressmen, write letters to the editor to your newspapers, follow activist groups that are fighting on this issue, go to a protest, or write about in your blog, twitter, whatever. Heck, the NSA is probably reading this blog right now. I know I write provocative anti-government, anti-fascist, anti-neo con shit. I know exactly what I'm doing. Provocative, in your face shit gets people thinking. I ain't scared of the NSA, and nor should anyone else, including you. They're bullies, they're trying to intimidate us into submission. They're trying to scare us into not speaking up, to stay silent. They want complacent, docile, drone citizens. Don't let them win!!
To the NSA prick who's reading this: FUCK YOU ALL!!
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Why I'll be voting for Robert Sarvis and not Ken Cucinelli or Terry McAuliffe
The election for Governor of Virginia is less than a week away. The candidates are Republican Ken Cucinelli, Democrat Terry McAuliffe, and Libertarian Robert Sarvis. Wait, there's a third candidate? I thought there was only Cucinelli and McAuliffe. I mean, that's all the media talks about, (Of course they do. They wouldn't want to give attention to a non-establishment supporter, RIGHT?!)
I will be voting for Sarvis for a number of reasons. It's really no contest. Cucinelli and McAuliffe are both God awful candidates. It's a testament to both the parties' decadence that this is the best they can come up with. So here are the reasons:
Gun control restricts peoples' inalienable right to defend themselves. It hurts law abiding citizens while helping criminals and thugs. There is really no argument here. The thing that will hurt citizens the most will be limiting magazines to only 10 rounds. I don't know about you, but if I'm facing 2 thugs each with gun that can hold 30 bullets, I'd sure as hell want a gun that can hold 30 bullets rather than 10. It's still possible to beat them, but a smaller magazine will just make it harder. And in a life or death situation, you want every advantage you can get.
3. Cucinelli voted to not raise the minimum wage.
http://votesmart.org/bill/3821/11799/50871/minimum-wage-increase#.UnFgFBBKQTs
One of the most basic things they teach you in economics is that the minimum wage must be proportional to inflation and standard of living. Well, the neo-cons have been so successful in keeping the minimum wage down for decades, while inflation and the standard of living have skyrocketed. If the minimum wage was proportional to inflation today, it would be more than $10. (Look it up, I'm not gonna waste my time putting a link for this well known fact).
Cucinelli follows the standard Republican mantra of not giving a flaming fuck about the poor people working their asses off to put food on the table. He just wants to lower taxes for his super rich friends and supporters, while squeezing the middle class out of existence and forcing them into the poor class.
4. McAuliffe wants to increase Medicaid, furthering our national debt and furthering peoples' dependence on government. Sarvis does not.
http://votesmart.org/public-statement/800471/issue-position-healthcare-and-virginias-economy#.UnFidxBKQTs
Where in the Constitution does it say that the federal government has the right to take money from hard working people and give it to other people? That's right, nowhere. The Constitution does not give the federal government the right to run such programs as Medicaid and Medicare. Those two programs are an overwhelming huge part of our federal debt. As tragic as peoples' stories are, we just cannot afford to keep these programs. They're running our country into the ground. Do I sound heartless because I don't want to give money to Grandma and poor kids? Maybe. But I don't think it is heartless to say to someone who is old and sick "I'm sorry, but I am in debt up to my eyeballs. My financial situation is a complete and utter wreck. I really can't afford to give you any money right now."
What the government should be focused on is strengthening the economy enough so that people do not need to rely on Medicaid and Medicare and lowering ridiculous medical costs so they don't cost the same as a house to get a simple operation done. There's nothing in the Constitution saying that the states themselves cannot provide Medicaid and Medicare, just so as long as they don't use federal money. People should also change their spending and lifestyle habits so that they're not completely broke when they get old. For example, in many other countries, old people move in with their children when they cannot live and work on their own. The child then pays for much of their old parents' expenses, eliminating the need for such programs as Medicaid and Medicare.
5. Both Cucinelli and McAuliffe do not want to legalize marijuana or end the ridiculous war on drugs. Sarvis wants to do both.
http://www.robertsarvis.com/issues/drug-reform
Cucinelli and McAuliffe both believe that the government knows what's better for you than you do. They believe the government knows how to better spend your money than you do. They believe that since they personally do not believe smoking marijuana is a good idea, then that means they should force that idea down peoples' throats, and make it so no one can smoke it.
If you think that smoking marijuana is bad/immoral, fine, I have no problem with that. Then don't do it then! But don't try and make everyone else think that same way!
Outlawing marijuana gives power to the Mexican drug cartels, because now they have a monopoly on selling the stuff, because legal companies can't. Estimates say that a whooping 60% of the cartels' profits come from selling marijuana:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19longmire.html?_r=0
Just imagine if every ABC store also sold marijuana, for example. You could get it virtually in any town, and for much cheaper, because getting stuff on the black market is always more expensive than getting something the legal way. It wouldn't be profitable for the cartels to sell it anymore. Boom. There goes 60% of their profits. With a crippled income, it makes it a hell of a lot easier to fight them. But Republicans and Democrats want the war on drugs to continue. They want Mexican citizens to be continued to get kidnapped and beheaded. Why? Because as long as there is a war right next to us, the government can continue to sell weapons to both the cartels and the Mexican government. War is a racket. They can continue to get money for training the Mexican army and police. They don't give a flaming fuck about the Mexican people. They just want money money money.
Prohibition didn't work with alcohol, and it's not working with marijuana. The government should not micro-manage peoples' individual spending habits on luxuries. They should stop viewing casual users as criminals, just like casual users of alcohol are not alcoholics.
And there concludes my list. This is not a completely full list, just the top 5. Notice that both Cucinelli and McAuliffe both have ideas that I like. Cucinelli does not favor gun control. I agree with him on that issue. McAuliffe supports gay marriage. I agree with him on that issue. The thing is that their negatives far outweigh their positives. Sarvis is the only one where I agree with him on all the important issues and the majority of issues in general.
Vote on November 5th!
I will be voting for Sarvis for a number of reasons. It's really no contest. Cucinelli and McAuliffe are both God awful candidates. It's a testament to both the parties' decadence that this is the best they can come up with. So here are the reasons:
- Cucinelli opposes gay marriage. Sarvis supports it.
- Gay marriage will ruin the sanctity of marriage. Really?! Look at the stats at marriages now in days. 45% of all marriages end in divorce is a low ball estimate, some estimates say as high as 65%. Abuse is rampant, cheating is a plague, people being their children's friends instead of disciplining them when they do illegal or immoral things is the new norm. So, all that doesn't ruin the sanctity of marriage, but gay marriage will? Yeah right. Someone else's marriage has no effect on how I see my marriage or what it means to me.
- Gay marriage is against Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. No. It's. Not. You can read the Torah, Bible, and Quran from front to back, and you will find absolutely NOTHING about banning gay marriage. This is just another example of people using religion as a cover to protect their own hatred ideals. Besides, let's just say for argument's sake, that Christianity does ban gay marriage. Fine, then you personally, don't get married. But just because you think you shouldn't do something, does not give you the right to shove that ideal down someone else's throat, and say to them that they have to have the same opinion about this certain something that you do.
- More gay marriages end in divorce that heterosexual marriages. There is no conclusive evidence that shows this. Yes, some websites say so, but other websites, which are just as credible, say no. So one of them is lying. Which one is it? I don't know. That's why it's inconclusive. Besides, let's just say for argument's sake, that more gay marriages end in divorce than heterosexual marriages. So, using that same logic, we should ban Christians from getting married, because more Christians get divorced than Muslims. We should only allow Muslims to get married in this country. If we made that law, people would be up in arms, rightly so, because that's infringing on their rights. So why should we do the same thing to gays if Americans would riot if that same thing happened to them?
- Gay marriages lead to more trouble making kids, lower grades, etc. Again, no conclusive evidence. Sure, you can find a scientific study done by a influential organization that says so, but then you can turn around and find another scientific study done by another influential organization that says completely the opposite. Besides, even if it were true, since when did America ban everything except the group that is the best? That's like looking at schooling demographics, and banning all races from going to school except Asians, because Asians do the best in school. It's insane!
Gun control restricts peoples' inalienable right to defend themselves. It hurts law abiding citizens while helping criminals and thugs. There is really no argument here. The thing that will hurt citizens the most will be limiting magazines to only 10 rounds. I don't know about you, but if I'm facing 2 thugs each with gun that can hold 30 bullets, I'd sure as hell want a gun that can hold 30 bullets rather than 10. It's still possible to beat them, but a smaller magazine will just make it harder. And in a life or death situation, you want every advantage you can get.
3. Cucinelli voted to not raise the minimum wage.
http://votesmart.org/bill/3821/11799/50871/minimum-wage-increase#.UnFgFBBKQTs
One of the most basic things they teach you in economics is that the minimum wage must be proportional to inflation and standard of living. Well, the neo-cons have been so successful in keeping the minimum wage down for decades, while inflation and the standard of living have skyrocketed. If the minimum wage was proportional to inflation today, it would be more than $10. (Look it up, I'm not gonna waste my time putting a link for this well known fact).
Cucinelli follows the standard Republican mantra of not giving a flaming fuck about the poor people working their asses off to put food on the table. He just wants to lower taxes for his super rich friends and supporters, while squeezing the middle class out of existence and forcing them into the poor class.
4. McAuliffe wants to increase Medicaid, furthering our national debt and furthering peoples' dependence on government. Sarvis does not.
http://votesmart.org/public-statement/800471/issue-position-healthcare-and-virginias-economy#.UnFidxBKQTs
Where in the Constitution does it say that the federal government has the right to take money from hard working people and give it to other people? That's right, nowhere. The Constitution does not give the federal government the right to run such programs as Medicaid and Medicare. Those two programs are an overwhelming huge part of our federal debt. As tragic as peoples' stories are, we just cannot afford to keep these programs. They're running our country into the ground. Do I sound heartless because I don't want to give money to Grandma and poor kids? Maybe. But I don't think it is heartless to say to someone who is old and sick "I'm sorry, but I am in debt up to my eyeballs. My financial situation is a complete and utter wreck. I really can't afford to give you any money right now."
What the government should be focused on is strengthening the economy enough so that people do not need to rely on Medicaid and Medicare and lowering ridiculous medical costs so they don't cost the same as a house to get a simple operation done. There's nothing in the Constitution saying that the states themselves cannot provide Medicaid and Medicare, just so as long as they don't use federal money. People should also change their spending and lifestyle habits so that they're not completely broke when they get old. For example, in many other countries, old people move in with their children when they cannot live and work on their own. The child then pays for much of their old parents' expenses, eliminating the need for such programs as Medicaid and Medicare.
5. Both Cucinelli and McAuliffe do not want to legalize marijuana or end the ridiculous war on drugs. Sarvis wants to do both.
http://www.robertsarvis.com/issues/drug-reform
Cucinelli and McAuliffe both believe that the government knows what's better for you than you do. They believe the government knows how to better spend your money than you do. They believe that since they personally do not believe smoking marijuana is a good idea, then that means they should force that idea down peoples' throats, and make it so no one can smoke it.
If you think that smoking marijuana is bad/immoral, fine, I have no problem with that. Then don't do it then! But don't try and make everyone else think that same way!
Outlawing marijuana gives power to the Mexican drug cartels, because now they have a monopoly on selling the stuff, because legal companies can't. Estimates say that a whooping 60% of the cartels' profits come from selling marijuana:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19longmire.html?_r=0
Just imagine if every ABC store also sold marijuana, for example. You could get it virtually in any town, and for much cheaper, because getting stuff on the black market is always more expensive than getting something the legal way. It wouldn't be profitable for the cartels to sell it anymore. Boom. There goes 60% of their profits. With a crippled income, it makes it a hell of a lot easier to fight them. But Republicans and Democrats want the war on drugs to continue. They want Mexican citizens to be continued to get kidnapped and beheaded. Why? Because as long as there is a war right next to us, the government can continue to sell weapons to both the cartels and the Mexican government. War is a racket. They can continue to get money for training the Mexican army and police. They don't give a flaming fuck about the Mexican people. They just want money money money.
Prohibition didn't work with alcohol, and it's not working with marijuana. The government should not micro-manage peoples' individual spending habits on luxuries. They should stop viewing casual users as criminals, just like casual users of alcohol are not alcoholics.
And there concludes my list. This is not a completely full list, just the top 5. Notice that both Cucinelli and McAuliffe both have ideas that I like. Cucinelli does not favor gun control. I agree with him on that issue. McAuliffe supports gay marriage. I agree with him on that issue. The thing is that their negatives far outweigh their positives. Sarvis is the only one where I agree with him on all the important issues and the majority of issues in general.
![]() |
| Robert Sarvis, Libertarian candidate for governor of Virginia |
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Maybe this government shutdown will wake people the hell up
I don't even need to put a link for this story. Everyone knows the U.S. government shut down, and now doesn't have any money for anything except for "essential personal," (Like all those soldiers overseas and NSA pricks are "essential," but hey, that's another story.)
By itself, this shutdown wouldn't be an incredibly big issue, because hey, people run outta money every once in a while. If this was the one thing the government fucked up at, I'd forgive 'em.
But that's not even remotely the case, isn't it? This fuck up is only the last in an incredibly long and painful list of things our government does wrong. My argument today is that this shutdown should be the breaking point for people, because it is personally affecting their wallets.
The government is killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq? What do I care? I'm not in Iraq. My life is fine.
I'm not getting my paycheck because of a government shutdown? AW FUCK NO MAN!! We gotta do something about this!
^^^Unfortunately, this is how most people think. It's psychological, but that doesn't make it right. Whatever, I'll take contempt against the government any way I can. The point is, our government has failed us. It's failed us a long time ago. Not just the people currently in office, but the system itself is busted. It doesn't care about us, the common people, the people struggling to pay our bills, to put food on the table. It only cares about the 1%, the unimaginable rich that line the politicians' pockets full to the brim with money.
Yes, there is a bit of difference between Republicans and Democrats, but at the end of the day, both parties want to tyrannize us with minimal rights and poverty, while they get to have all the wealth and power they want. Republicans and neo-Liberals want corporations to rule America. They want us to go back to the way things were in the 1930's, with sweat shops, no federally mandated safety laws, 12 hour shifts, no paid vacation, getting fired for no reason, no workman's comp if you've been injured on the job, etc. They want constant wars with 12+ countries at one time, killing civilians, stealing resources, and setting up illegitimate puppet governments.
Democrats and neo-Conservatives want the government to rule America. They want us to be like Italy and Japan in the 1940's, with no privacy, secret police and NSA spies knowing everything you're doing 24/7, no right to bear arms to defend yourself and your loved ones, no freedom of speech, Constitution be damned, (fuck that old piece of irrelevant shit!!!).
At the end of the day, tyranny is tyranny. It doesn't matter whether the person shoving a gun against your temple is liberal or conservative, a government thug or a corporation thug. Both parties don't give a shit about us. The fact that so many people still vote for them stands as a testament to how good those parties are at brainwashing and dolling out propaganda. The parties don't even try to hide their agenda. It's out for everyone to see. They openly say they're going to do all these harmful things to people, and then those same people turn around and vote for them.
This article clearly states what I want to happen to Congress as a result of their extreme incompetence: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ways-to-punish-congress-for-threatening-a-shutdown/2013/09/30/4778f724-29ed-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html
I'm surprised a government controlled media source openly said that people said "Off with their heads," and “Line ’em up and shoot ’em. I consider what they’re doing treason.” They might be exaggerating or half joking, but the words clearly show the extreme anger many people have with the government. People that don't normally get pissed off at the government, now are really pissed off at the government.
Okay, so what's the point of this entire rant? If you take one thing away from all this, it's this:
That's a valid question. I'm not asking for anyone to vote for a party that they don't believe in. I would ask that you research all of the third parties out there in America. There are a lot more of them then you might think. Research them, find out their opinions on important issues. I think you'll be thoroughly surprised that you'll find a couple that have the same opinions that you do. You just haven't heard of them yet because the main stream media puts a tight clamp over them when they're trying to get their message out. Here is a tentative list of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_party_%28United_States%29
By itself, this shutdown wouldn't be an incredibly big issue, because hey, people run outta money every once in a while. If this was the one thing the government fucked up at, I'd forgive 'em.
But that's not even remotely the case, isn't it? This fuck up is only the last in an incredibly long and painful list of things our government does wrong. My argument today is that this shutdown should be the breaking point for people, because it is personally affecting their wallets.
The government is killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq? What do I care? I'm not in Iraq. My life is fine.
I'm not getting my paycheck because of a government shutdown? AW FUCK NO MAN!! We gotta do something about this!
^^^Unfortunately, this is how most people think. It's psychological, but that doesn't make it right. Whatever, I'll take contempt against the government any way I can. The point is, our government has failed us. It's failed us a long time ago. Not just the people currently in office, but the system itself is busted. It doesn't care about us, the common people, the people struggling to pay our bills, to put food on the table. It only cares about the 1%, the unimaginable rich that line the politicians' pockets full to the brim with money.
Yes, there is a bit of difference between Republicans and Democrats, but at the end of the day, both parties want to tyrannize us with minimal rights and poverty, while they get to have all the wealth and power they want. Republicans and neo-Liberals want corporations to rule America. They want us to go back to the way things were in the 1930's, with sweat shops, no federally mandated safety laws, 12 hour shifts, no paid vacation, getting fired for no reason, no workman's comp if you've been injured on the job, etc. They want constant wars with 12+ countries at one time, killing civilians, stealing resources, and setting up illegitimate puppet governments.
Democrats and neo-Conservatives want the government to rule America. They want us to be like Italy and Japan in the 1940's, with no privacy, secret police and NSA spies knowing everything you're doing 24/7, no right to bear arms to defend yourself and your loved ones, no freedom of speech, Constitution be damned, (fuck that old piece of irrelevant shit!!!).
At the end of the day, tyranny is tyranny. It doesn't matter whether the person shoving a gun against your temple is liberal or conservative, a government thug or a corporation thug. Both parties don't give a shit about us. The fact that so many people still vote for them stands as a testament to how good those parties are at brainwashing and dolling out propaganda. The parties don't even try to hide their agenda. It's out for everyone to see. They openly say they're going to do all these harmful things to people, and then those same people turn around and vote for them.
This article clearly states what I want to happen to Congress as a result of their extreme incompetence: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/ways-to-punish-congress-for-threatening-a-shutdown/2013/09/30/4778f724-29ed-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html
I'm surprised a government controlled media source openly said that people said "Off with their heads," and “Line ’em up and shoot ’em. I consider what they’re doing treason.” They might be exaggerating or half joking, but the words clearly show the extreme anger many people have with the government. People that don't normally get pissed off at the government, now are really pissed off at the government.
Okay, so what's the point of this entire rant? If you take one thing away from all this, it's this:
- Do not vote for a Republican or Democrat for any office.
That's a valid question. I'm not asking for anyone to vote for a party that they don't believe in. I would ask that you research all of the third parties out there in America. There are a lot more of them then you might think. Research them, find out their opinions on important issues. I think you'll be thoroughly surprised that you'll find a couple that have the same opinions that you do. You just haven't heard of them yet because the main stream media puts a tight clamp over them when they're trying to get their message out. Here is a tentative list of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_party_%28United_States%29
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)

























