53R1A75

Since I’m on such a crazy political rampage, I thought I might just include this little note I found lying around reddit. Its by Dr. Ron Paul. Look, it should be obvious at this point that the Government had a little more than something to do with the current market scares and down-trends. Albeit most of the blame still has to be put on really really bad risk management on the part of the banks (something I like to call greed). But I like to look at more from a perspective of: “and you still want the government to control — insert target of gov’t program here –!?”

Also I would like to point out that the other aspect of the government involvement may have been more directed to PROTECTING it’s citizens from bad lending practices and not PROVIDING HOMES FOR THEM.

I think I would title this of Marx and Socialism.

Recently I was listening to one of those evil conservative talk show hosts when I heard one of them call Barack Obama a Marxist. It was in reference to the debacle concerning his pastor in which he distanced himself from the beliefs of the congregation to the extent that you couldn’t really call him a racist (which I do, his pastor as well, maybe more on that later). But, on the other hand you had to ask yourself how do you exist in a cultural environment such as a church and not take away anything from it. Barack may not be a racist because of the church he was a part of, but he certainly is Marxist.

Certainly that is a broad and sweeping generalization that needs some explanation. Let me first say that I am only an observer. And like any observer I have a cultural background and the biases that follow it. Also, I believe that the other candidates are generally Socialist as is our current congress and attitude towards governing. Now Socialism is essentially a small branch of Marxism or at least is a distant cousin. So I see Marxism as an extreme and blatant position. Whereas I see America currently involved in a sort of accidental socialism that develops once the voting public realizes that they can vote to be paid for not working and once the politicians realize that the can make a living being a politician as long as the people are pacified.

Karl Marx did not write an application of Marxism book. He simply outlines the class struggle created by the idea that profit is simply not paying workers for the value of their product. Therefore, the reality of Marxism is far different then they application. As my brother says, Marx was just smart, most of the capitalists that are famous in the US were apt students of Marx. In other words they read Marx’s theories and actually used them to make a ton of cash. So we see Marxist theories taking life in capitalism and not Socialism or Marxism.

I believe there is a reason for this. There is one framework truth that I adhere to arrive at the idea that Marxism and Socialism actually remove freedom from the lives of people and in fact result in far worse class struggles. That is the idea that man is essentially evil. We start corrupt and we fight to become less corrupt. Why does that matter at all? In fact, I’m not even sure that Marx ever assumed outright one way or the other. However, it leads me to my next point which is that because man tends towards acts of evil, man must be governed. The point of the government is not power or control or redistribution of wealth but the protection of the people. While there are people who struggle against acts of evil to lead good, decent and productive lives, there will always be those who succumb to it and willingly harm those around him. So essentially, no matter what shape or size, there will always be a need for a government.

At its very best philosophical peak, Marxism completely removes the government in Communism. In Communism, the workers control the resources, the means of production, and the means of distribution. Socialism is on the path to Communism where the workers take over the government and organize a system by which all are owners and all are workers. Eventually this new government simply has no use and fades completely away.

In practical reality, the road to communism dead ends at socialism. The working class becomes the ruling class and sets forth production standards that remove incentive and choice from the individual. And because there is no longer any “market” for jobs there is no choice. You will be born into job x and you will stay in job x. There is no vertical movement, no lateral movement, and there will always be a ruling class. If that ruling class is benevolent, the people will be taken care of and will at least lead good lives. If however, the ruling class is evil – see my first assumption – the people and therefore the workforce will deteriorate and will cycle again to become a new revolutionary working class. And this cycle of classes replacing each other will continue on and on.

I hope you were able to bear that little foray into my ideas on political theory because this is about our government and its potential leaders now campaigning for the public’s permission to lead our nation. In at least two of Barack’s speeches and every single one of his advertisements he is creating a class divide. He says that the workers are being treated unfairly and being abused by the companies who employ them. His answer is to tax the companies, “make them pay” and uplift Joe Everyman to financial stability. But I say to you that this will only increase the class divide, enlarge the government and remove the choices you have to move forward or sideways in the economy.

The key is choice and freedom or perceived freedom of choice and government control. The constitution was created as a contract between a government setup by the people, and the people. It firstly and correctly identifies that people need to be governed. It secondly identifies corruptive power. It then sets up the mechanisms by which the government may be limited to the will of the people and then may not take advantage of the people. Through this the people have the choice to live as a worker or a business owner. That through no one else’s meddling, you can earn money by creating resources that you control or by working for a company and being paid less than your value.

The idea that the government can solve the problems of the people is silly. Protection is not provision. To confuse the two can only lead to an inflated economy and inflated government. That is what we are seeing now. The government needs a reformation. The judicial branch has been too slow and unresponsive in protecting the people from the laws that hurt them by not upholding the contract we’ve signed with the government. We have an executive branch that tortures, lies, kills, threatens, and spies on the people who elected it. And finally we have a legislative branch that does not create laws that protect people but instead creates laws that wins them popularity so that they can be career politicians at the whim of lobbyist and corporate sponsors.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain are not that reformation.

I’m going to subtitle this post: The most important question. But that probably is too artsy, light-hearted, vague and airy for what I’m about to talk about.

Its been in the news a lot. Obama & Wright. Dear me! How the media loves controversy because the culture supports it. And by “it” I mean, personal slanders and such trash that would only befit to amuse the mind of a good American. This line of conversation is such filth that several news sources have blatantly lied or misrepresented facts to try and pin Obama in the congregation at the time of the sermons. And don’t even get me started on the 5 or so (if even that many) 5 second sound clips. I want to have all these news reporters’ and politicians’ audio from all of their collective careers of everything they’ve ever said publicly crammed into just 25 seconds that will then judge the weight of their soul. Everyone, myself included, would fail and surely be damned to hell, not mention be declared anti-American, anti-semetic, rascist and bigoted. That’s the state of humanity, we’re imperfect.

But still there’s an argument that Rev. Wright is rascist and anti-american. Recently my brother sent my family a link for reading during an online conversation on the subject. I found a very revealing part at then end after the usual rebuttal/accusatory/observational think piece found en masse on the internet these days. While the bulk of the article went about (in general) comparing and contrasting white evangelical leaders and their political figureheads to the Rev. Wright and Obama, in the end there is a quote from Frank Schaeffer, son of Francis Schaeffer that caught my attention.

When Senator Obama’s preacher thundered about racism and injustice Obama suffered smear-by-association. But when my late father — Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer — denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.

The writer goes on to follow through with this point. I cannot disagree with this seemingly blatant racism in politics. But what has been unsaid by any thinking voice on the topic (that I am aware of) is the distinct tone of what is being said.

This question must be asked, but cannot be asked by those in the media. The question is this:

When the punishment and destruction of the nation is called for by it’s religious leaders, and it’s rulers and principalities must face certain punishment and destruction for their sins, for the sins of the people, and the sins of a culture that has largely turned its back on a God they beg blessings from in word only, is the sin they are blaming this for the sin of a man sinning against his God, or the sin of a man sinning against another man?

Some may say this is the same thing, and in most cases I wouldn’t disagree. But in my opinion, most of what I’ve heard from Wright (in gross summary) is WHITE MAN HAS SINNED AGAINST BLACK MAN and BLACK MAN MUST/WILL BE AVENGED by God. Perhaps in God’s eyes this is true, but man is not God. Jesus’ gospel was colorblind. If I am truly to believe that then I must be very honest when I ask this question. Who is being sinned against that God would obliterate a nation? For a man, preacher or lay, to claim that the bearer of those sins is another man, it is simply wrong. On the other hand, claiming destruction upon, and damning America because we have given our love to another, forsaking our first love is totally true and accurate. We will reap what we sow, but we will reap whether we are white or black.

Another tasty Friday post! This time with 100% more entertainment and not-serious posting. But its got some serious stuff to. So, on with the fun!

Congress, congress, congress! If you’re pissed about the war, overthrow congress and get rid of your rep and senator. They have the power to declare war and have lamely gone along with Chairman Bush’s illegal war this whole time. Now they are busy not doing the peoples will yet again with two major issues on the table. The spy bill that would free telecoms from being responsible for protecting their clients privacy and the tax cuts that the economy needs (as opposed to the paltry 600$ I’m getting this year). If you want to save the economy 1) convict Bush of an illegal war, and remove our troops from any military base not on American soil (also illegal), and 2) make earmarks illegal.

Ok, now after oversimplifying those issues for the sake of laziness, here’s some more fun stuff. Check out google sky. If you think space is overwhelming, just wait till you try and figure out what the heck you’re looking at on there.

Speaking of space, I just finished 2001: A Space Odyssey. All I can say is… if we didn’t have to waste so much money on the military we too could have been busy finding big monoliths on the moon that turn us into babies and send us back to earth… in 2001. I don’t need to mention what actually happened. P.S. The last time anyone was on the moon was 1972.

Now, not many of my friends care too much about this, but anyone who knows I like anime knows that one of my favorites is Appleseed. This week I finished watching the sequel, Appleseed Ex Machina, and I can honestly say that it is my new favorite anime film. Its got all the great anime qualities (big eyes, hot chicks, huge mecha, zombies, destruction… this is starting to sound like a crappy action flick… you get the point, well, except for the on-going discussion of the dilemma between cyborgs, bioroids, and humans… that’s pretty engaging on an intellectual level) plus really wonderful 3d rendering. I will most likely be purchasing this dvd.

Welcome to the Friday Clampdown edition.

Verizon is being implicated in a totally free surveillance service they have been providing for the FBI. Last I checked the government and politicians were the criminals, not the people. That’s just one of the many reasons why we have the constitution, folks.  My girlfriend recently dropped verizon. Thank goodness. Heaven knows what criminal activity the two of us are up to that warrants them wiretapping us without a… warrant (pun not intended).

California, sometimes known as being the most progressive state in terms of freedoms and liberties (though I frequently can’t see how socialism is an equivalent to freedom), is being cited for a court ruling that essentially makes homeschooling illegal. Now I’m no big lawyer or politician, but can that possibly be an infringement on personal rights and freedoms? I just don’t know.

wow, twice in one day. my brother linked to a really well made candidate picker by usa today.

my picks were: 1) Ron Paul (duhh), 2) Rudy G., and 3) Mitt Romney (why oh why did you quit?).

usa today’s reader’s picks were: 1) Mitt Romney (… T-T …), 2) Huckabee (I’ve got another name for this guy, it goes something like THEOCRATIC NITWIT), 3) Some guy who’s already out, but also an R.

So while this in no way is scientific (i’ve already gone through twice just so i could review the results after i accidentally closed the window), I would like to point out two things: THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS OBVIOUSLY DEVELOPMENTALLY CHALLENGED. They are so fixated on “a strong leader” with “an honorable military background” because our country “is in dire need of protection” they’ve totally lost sight of what “small government” should be and most importantly what “personal freedoms” are. Shame on them because they voted for a dunce who doesn’t even follow the platform. And two, MITT WHAT ARE YOU DOING? DON’T QUIT. You should instead beat Huckabee from an inch of his so called life so he can’t steal your hard-earned votes.

So you may ask, “who are you voting for?”

“Well,” I would reply, “I’m a registered Libertarian and since Pennsylvania has closed primaries and the LP isn’t actually having primaries,” I chuckle, “I won’t be voting until Nov. 5th or whenever that big election thingy is. And I, sure as Hell is as real as Heaven, will not be voting for McCain” As I stomp off in a huge rage of helplessness. Besides, based on the USA today Poll, I’m more like Billary and Osama Obama than I am McCain. I’ll prolly write in the LP candidate when push comes to shove (too bad the LP isn’t included in the USA Today Poll).

Well, I just published something I had written a month ago in defense of Ron Paul. It ended up being really long and boring so I quit writing it and saved it. Today I was inspired to write some drivel about some wikipedia events going on and just include my largely unoriginal thoughts.

As it turns out Islamic culture (largely it seems, uneducated extremists) is having another spat with the rest of the world. This time it’s over images of Mohammed in WikiPedia. I won’t go into it anymore than this: there seems to be a fundamental misuderstanding of freedom within the culture of Islam. Because you are free to censor images of your key prophet doesn’t mean you should. Claiming that people who, in the name of scholarship, insult you by including these images is laughable. Claiming that these same people should be more sensitive of your culture is rediculous. On a world stage Islam needs to learn something that Christians have know since Piss Christ and before even that: NOTHING IS SACRED, GET OVER IT.

And for some more wikidrama, check the register noted a cult oriented conflict of interest. If you read through the COI complaint it was resolved that he was not at fault because there weren’t any edit wars over it. I read it more as, the article is a whitewash, but no one really cares enough to make a section of criticisms. Sigh.

Finally on a lighter and much less controversial note, I leave you with a new read I’ve found this year. It’s the art of manliness and it’s not too great for manly tips as it seems geared to a much younger crowd (and I’m not that old… yet). But it is very light and easy to read with some good laughs and sometimes an insight or two.

Happy new year! Hope everyone had a wonderful time doing stuff, seeing things etc. I recently was sent a link to a break down of Ron Paul’s voting history and since I’m a supporter of the constitution and big fan, I wanted to take some time and analyze my thoughts regarding this article. It’s a huge article, so I may get bored and abandon it, but here goes.

Part I: On individual rights.
Subsection: “He opposes the right of women to be free to control their own reproductive systems if they happen to live in particular states or other countries, or if they work for the Peace Corps. ”

People, this is merely a matter of semantics. Which is more important? Should the government fund population control? NO. This has with it implications ranging from government making decisions of how many children you have to the contraversy of whether this is murder, thus making the government complicit in crime. While I’m for the woman’s right to choose (mostly simply government non-interference), what makes it necessary for the government to fund this? The idea that because the government doesn’t fund it, it is against it seems really quite absurd and is clearly an instance of “forcing the issue”. The keyword that seems to be interpreted as “pro-life” is “funding”. None of the bills say, “I’m taking away your rights”. They all say “To prohibit any Federal official from expending any Federal funds”. To interpret it any other way is simply myopic thinking.

Subsection: “He wants to erase the distinction in U.S. law between a zygote and a person”
I’m not a doctor. Are you? Is one cell that is part of human less human than the other cells of that body. Paul is a doctor. I’m not, and I’m not familiar with the scientific debate on this section. The abortion issue is also not black and white, but murder is murder. It is the governments job to protect it’s citizens from committing crimes against one another and to judge those who do. If society has problems killing their young, the government must make a clear decision on where it stands in relation to the issue. It must define whether or not a zygote constitutes a person, and therefore a citizen worthy of judicial protection. It seems to me that saying that human life begins at conception is a very rational idea and not radical or controversial at all. I would go so far as to say it’s common sense. And also the summary of the final resolution makes his issue almost laughable. YOU WOULDN’T WANT A BILL GUARANTEEING YOUR RIGHT TO LIFE? These kind of choices as to who lives and who doesn’t live must be quite trifling to you since it’s not your life in question. Seems a bit selfish, that’s all.

Subsection: “He would deny the use of the Federal court system — and even Federal precedent — to people discriminated against because of their religious beliefs or sexual orientation. This would also limit the cross-state recognition of same-sex marriages. Some of these bills he cynically calls this the “We the People Act”.”
Here I view the situation as this, on the one hand government protection of religion is a good thing, until it becomes discrimination against other religions. At which point the government must then protect all religions. It really doesn’t sound that bad, and it’s probably not. But really if the government is supposed to be separated from religion why should it protect it? Leave religion alone and let people worship the way they like. The second part of those resolutions listed were protections of speech and religious speech. I can’t figure out why the author thinks these are bad things… unless he doesn’t like some people’s opinions. Particularly as he mentions: same sex marriage. Government involvement in that specific arena is ludicrous to begin with, and any legislation to the left or the right simply encroaches on the choices a person can make about his or her lifestyle (besides, marriage is a largely religious institution, why is the government involved?). Based on the resolutions he mentions and the way he presents them, it is clear he only wants to protect some speech, as it relates to his agenda.

Subsection: “This includes limits on courts’ hearing cases related to abortion, and he has introduced bills specific to these kinds of cases. He also uses the deceptive term “partial-birth abortion”
It seems to me that this also only allows for less government involvement and more personal freedoms. If you want to have women to be able to freely choose whether they want to abort a child or not, why would the federal government need to have jurisdiction of those cases? Again, this is a situation where less government involvement would produce more personal freedom and privacy.

Subsection: “Even though he claims to be a “libertarian”, he opposes people’s freedom to burn or destroy their own copies of the design of the U.S. flag”
Forcing the issue. Despite many people’s ideas of free speech, there should not be any real reason to burn the US flag. It’s pretty. It’s also pretty symbolic of people who made it possible to be able to burn the flag. Don’t be irresponsible. Don’t burn the flag.

Part II: LAWS IMPROVING THE LOT OF THE WORKING CLASS

Subsection: “He has tried to repeal the Occupational Safety and Health Act”
This idea that the government is somehow obligated to protect workers is simply socialist and I do not, will not and cannot abide by it. On one hand I do agree that if the employer does not take the personal responsibility to protect it’s employees it has no business to complain when the government smacks it with costly regulation to protect the populace. On the other hand government regulations can be reduced to simple meddling and interfering with business. Also I would like to clarify between privately owned business and corporate status. Corporations have no place in America (recall the Boston tea party was against the East India Trading Company as much as it was against English rule and taxation). They should be strictly controlled and monitored, which they are not. But private, business owning and operating citizens should be left alone.

Subsection: “He would like to make it much easier to decertify labor unions”
Unions are disruptive to business. Again this is not black and white. If companies abuse workers so that they find it necessary to be in unions, then the companies deserve to have to deal with unions. I would actually disagree with Paul on this particular point. There should be resolutions to make it easier to decertify corporations who abuse consumers and workers. However a contiguous economy makes voters happy.

Subsection: “He opposes the Minimum Wage”
To this I have to callously say: Let the markets decide the wages. And repeat myself in saying that the minimum wage really should only exist as a punishment to abusive corporations. It should not exist as it seemingly does, which is to subsidize substandard laborers. This only raises costs to companies whose costs are then offset by the consumer.

So I’m only really about 1/4 through this guy’s post and I’m really just bored with it.

Entirely a rant… on multiple Subjects. Read at your own risk.

Recently there was a tragedy in which a seemingly mentally health man went into a mall and killed a bunch of people. That’s a tragedy. People, while born, live to die. However our propensity for terminal lives does not excuse us from wishing otherwise. In fact man kind consistently seems in denial of this fact. More over we are social beings. Not only desiring things such as love and attention, but we are in physical need of these things. The effects of deficiencies in love and attention and social nurturing have very serious, scientifically observed consequences to a human psyche. And while the human psyche has also been proven to be quite tensile, malleable, flexible and resilient, there will always be a point at which all sense is lost and all a man is left with is a decision. And when his faculties fail him he will have no other choice but to do evil and inflict harm on those around him as an outcry against the social fabric that has failed to meet his emotional needs.

When the social fabric is so dramatically ruptured, it’s parts seek answers within itself. Asking questions such as, “could I have done more.” The culture will be deeply examined. The daily routine of the killer is examined. His mental health, his relationships, his success relative to the cultural status quo is held under great scrutiny. Because in all the tragedy there must be a single answer. But there is not. There will not be a single answer.

Laws do not help people be better people. They help to define what is evil and provide the government a tool with which to judge those who do evil. In any case of a workman with a tool, it is not the tool that determines it’s use but the hand that wields it. And so the government must make responsible, just laws that help to define, judge, and punish those who would impede the inalienable rights of others.

I had more to say, but I got bored writing this. Yawn.

Mostly I just wanted to point out this douchebag that’s masquerading opinion as news/fact. And actually, this can’t even be considered fact. Totalitarian statements like NONE or ALL, are simply deceptive exaggerations. I cannot think at how this actually can be considered news. Oh wait, it’s sensational news. Douchebag.

Once again there has been a mass shooting in the United States, this time in a Nebraska shopping mall. Once again there is no national outcry for gun control.

This guy’s an idiot. It’s just so banal and ignorant of the larger picture that I don’t even want to discuss. I feel sorry for you if you don’t get my frustration.

And while I’m really TO’d I’ll include this cute but useless little invention. Hint: YOU STILL HAVE TO USE THE F’ING TONGS.