Liberal…I don't think that word means what you think it means

People keep telling me I’ve gone a little conservative on the gun issue. No, I’ve stayed liberal on the gun issue, gun-banners have gone full-blown Republican and Tea Bagger on this issue. I haven’t changed my political philosophy. They have adjusted their philosophy to keep up with their party’s drive to become more authoritarian. Sure it doesn’t have to do with gay rights or women’s rights so most Democrats won’t give two shits. I think this guy sums that up best in “The Post in Which I Piss Everybody Off” http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/the-post-in-which-i-piss-off-everybody

Let’s start with a definition

 LIBERALISM: c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (as those involving race, gender, or class)(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalism)

 Any liberal that suggests the usurpation, severe restriction or banning of a civil right, by definition, isn’t a liberal. I would argue that the preservation of your own life is a human right. Any person that would suggest levying a fine or a fee (i.e. “insurance”) to practice a right is not a liberal. Sorry, you’re not. You may be a party line Democrat but that doesn’t make you a liberal. The conservatives have jumped so far to the right and the rules of the protection of civil liberties and rights have changed so much in the past decade, that you may be confused as to where you actually stand in the political spectrum. But don’t confuse being in lock step with the centrist corporatist party with being a liberal.

 It’s not just about the protection of civil liberties, let’s talk about the “amelioration of social inequities” and how “insurance” as a requirement to own firearms. Such a burden would make it cost prohibitive for those on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder to practice a right. So, the poor, working poor and some middle class won’t be able to afford this insurance and you say, “so what?” If you look at it from a Marxian viewpoint the Proletariat will be left defenseless and unarmed while the Bourgeoisie and elite rich will be the only people to afford to be legally armed. To me, as a more Social-Democrat, I see that as a large issue. The last thing you want is the working class unarmed while the rich are the only ones that have the ability to arm themselves. Talk about a fast-track to the slavery of the working class.

 So, let’s be honest about why you want the “insurance” requirement: it’s not for any sort of liability, it’s the same reason Republicans want voter ID, it’s the same reason we had poll taxes. It is in order to make it cost prohibitive to own a gun therefore reducing the number of people who will go through the process of getting one.

You want de facto outlaw gun ownership with bureaucracy and, what would be for some, unattainable financial burdens.

 Instead of going through the front door and having a vote on the repeal of the 2nd Amendment which would set the party back politically for years, you will wrap your arguments in ignorance, fear, prejudice and emotion. You will use these mostly inane argument to have votes to do silly things like require liability insurance, allow people to only have 4.236 bullets in a 7 1/2 round magazine, make up arbitrary rules about which cosmetic features make a gun legal or illegal. You want to make the rules so confusing and the violation of those rules so severe that you scare people away from practicing a civil right. The new gun laws aren’t much different in ideology, practice and theory of the new voting rights laws.

 So, you can call yourself a Democrat or a progressive but please don’t call yourself a Liberal. You may be confused about what that word really means.

To dumb gun-ignorant liberals: Magazine size

 This is a Springfield XDM Subcompact (smaller than small) 9mm handgun. Full size then compact then sub compact is the general hierarchy from largest to smallest varieties of handguns. This is the primary gun my wife carries for personal protection and uses to protect herself and our home. I've laid it on a Blu-Ray case so you can see that it's not really a very large gun.

Here it is closed and unloaded. Really it's not very large at all. It fits almost entirely in my hand. It's one of the smallest handguns you can purchase that doesn't go into the micro variety of handguns.

 Now how many rounds do you think are in the standard capacity magazine for this handgun? 5 or 6? Remember it's a subcompact 9mm. Now look below. The standard capacity magazine for this subcompact is 13 rounds. 13. That means the standard capacity magazine for this small firearm would make this gun as illegal as an assault rifle if the new assault weapons ban and magazine regulation are put into place. This is the problem I have with these new laws. It makes no sense that you would label this gun as dangerous and deadly as a semi-automatic AR with a 30 round magazine. The 10 round magazine limit makes absolutely no sense. One day I'm a law abiding citizen, next I'm a felon because I own a magazine for a small gun that has the potential to hold 3 more rounds than the arbitrary number set by people that know nothing about guns.

Honestly we never keep all the rounds in there. Right now there aren't even 10 rounds in the magazine for two reasons 1) it makes the gun heavier when you concealed carry and 2) it stresses the spring.

 Here's the gun with the magazine inserted so you can see that this magazine fits completely inside the gun and does not hang down 10 inches below because this is the standard capacity, not high capacity, magazine for a gun this size and caliber.

So, when you talk about this 10 round magazine limit, it actually effects more than those scary assault style rifles. It effects the weapons people depend on every day for personal and home defense. It will make these people criminals simply for possessing these magazines. You don't even have to have rounds in them ask the soldier from New York that was arrested for having 30 round magazines in his trunk.

UPDATE: So, stop asking me why I need a 30 round magazine clip you goddamned fucktards. It's a magazine unless you have a WWII machine gun. I would like to have a 30 round magazine for my AR as that is the standard capacity magazine for that weapon, but I would most like to be able to use the magazine designed for my goddamned personal protection handguns without the threat of federal prison. And if you think that's wrong, then you can go fucking hang yourself because I don't give a shit what you think.

Gun Control: Whiny Asshats to the left of Me, Paranoid Fucktards to the Right

I noticed one thing after the Sandy Hook massacre, the right blames an imaginary magic sky wizard and the left blames inanimate objects. First let me start off by saying I certainly am not going to solve the problem of gun violence. It is a multi-faceted problem and really the smallest of the symptoms is the access to guns, as all the guns used by shooters in the mass shootings recently were all legally owned and registered as required. Gun crimes by definition are committed by people either using an illegal weapon to commit an illegal act or a legal weapon to do something already against the law. So, I’m skeptical that any new legislation to require more registration, more burden on the law-abiding gun owner will do anything to stem these violent attacks.

 Also to frame the argument as gun control advocates versus gun nuts is absolutely a false dichotomy. Every legal, responsible gun owner, even those gun nuts like me in the NRA, ARE gun control advocates. That’s why we take the time to research the laws, fill out all of the paperwork, make sure our firearms are secured and placed away from children and the incompetent. That is gun control. I control, when, where and how the guns I owned will be fired. Enforcing liability for irresponsible gun owners should be a part of any new reform.

 Now two people I really respect put out two different arguments on the subject. Well-renowned atheist thinker Sam Harris on the anti-new-regulation side, and noted atheist from the Richard Dawkin’s Foundation for Reason, Sean Faircloth on the the pro-gun ban side as a rebuttal to Harris. You click on their names for their articles, as a primer for what I’m going to discuss.

 Second, if liberals are going to have a place at the table discussing legislation concerning gun laws and ownership they need to be educated about guns in general and specifically what laws already exist. Ignorant and stupid comments like this one: “An AR is just a semi auto AK47,” aren’t going to get you anywhere with gun owners. It shows you’re complete lack of knowledge on the issue. So, educate yourself. Because having people that make comments that ignorant on the issue proposing legislation and reform is scary and could actually be dangerous. Your calling for a ban but you don’t even know what the hell you are banning.

 As far as party affiliation goes I would say gun owners are split down the middle. I know just as many Democratic gun owners as Republican. All gun owners are now screaming because Pres. Obama is now going to institute sweeping gun reform according to the Washington Post, as they should. The NRA and conservative gun owners rightfully argue that the good majority of gun violence occurs in the inner-cities, population centers of over 200,000 and they’re correct. Republicans are partially to blame for the gun reforms that are coming because the call for stricter laws because of more gun crimes can be correlated to their social policies that have left the urban dweller to their own devices with dwindling assistance from the collective. They don’t want to help the inner-city and the desperate poor. They disparage those on food stamps and welfare, saying the $1 a day they receive for food is more than enough charity. Don’t invest in their schools and communities to help improve the community situation that would have a direct impact on reducing crime and especially the gun crimes that are of issue now. Libertarian environmental standards that allowed lead to be pumped into our environment. Lead exposure as a child permanently effects parts of the brain for impulse control, judgement and ability to pay attention. Parts of the brain that, if effected when you are young, will make you a violent person. Of course the communities have to shoulder most of the blame but the social Darwinism of heartless conservative libertarianism does not help the situation, where generations are born into hopelessness. 

The Republican base casts them off as welfare queens and lazy people trying to get something for nothing. They don’t want to invest in improving quality of life the inner city through those dreaded social programs, ergo crime runs rampant as the only means survive. When you pull what little support people have away from them and back them into a corner people become desperate as they feel abandoned and they do what they must to survive. Ask Jean val Jean. So, as they turn to crime they use guns to commit these crimes as is shown in FBI statistics where these population centers own 1/2 the legally and registered guns of rural areas but have two times the number of violent gun crimes. I’m not saying these individuals and community leaders don’t hold responsibility for their actions but when you abandon sections of your country to the libertarian philosophy to each their own, well, each will go and get take care of their own. Not to mention the people in the inner city carrying unregistered/illegal firearms are following the lead of the fringe, minority, gun owners who believe weapons should not be registered or tracked by the government.

 The Second Amendment and owning a gun has nothing to do with hunting and, here’s a kicker, I don’t believe the Amendment has complete bearing on whether or not Americans have a right to own something privately in their home so long as they don’t harm anyone else, it goes more to privacy and being secure in your person papers in effects. I have never hunted probably never will but it has nothing to do with me owning a tool or a machine. The 2nd Amendment has to do with a well-regulated militia having weapons, so militia members can have firearms to protect the government from a revolting mob, not to protect a mob from government. Conservatives are often confused by this and have obviously never heard of the Whiskey Rebellion. But there is no exclusion anywhere else in law that does not allow a law-abiding citizen to own a firearm…or a chainsaw…or an axe…or a Sanyo television. It’s a tool, but it’s the tool of a free man. There are limitations and constraints in the laws as to which firearms you can own but no prohibition. Why? Because in this country prohibition has never worked. How many people smoke pot? The purchase of that pot was just as illegal as buying a black market gun. Anyone remember when we tried to outlaw alcohol? All it did was create a HUGE criminal market. Really, you want to push the purchase of all guns to the criminal market with NO checks, no bureaucracy where everything goes to the person that can pay? That seems like a horrible idea. If you’re advocating total ban, that is what you are advocating.

 Arguing that we didn’t have assault rifles in 1776 so people shouldn’t be able to own assault rifles is asinine and stupid. We had rifles and muskets which were the deadliest small arms of the time. So, whether you know it or not you are making the argument that we should only be allowed to own up to the most efficient small arms of our times…the AR. We didn’t have the internet, television or radio when the First Amendment was written, does that mean the protections of the First don’t apply to those media. I know, I know, I said above the 2nd isn’t really the whole reason we should be able to legally own guns, it’s not the whole reason but it does have some bearing.

 So we can’t ban them, then what is the answer? Well think outside your talk radio box where all you hear is how evil guns are and how crazy anyone who owns a gun must be. Gun owners are Americans and they deserve the rights afforded to them under the Constitution. Freedom is scary and dangerous. Yes, more people will get shot by guns, stabbed by knives, killed by drunk drivers. But that’s freedom. I don’t like the idea that we have to legislate away every little thing that is scary to one group or another. Freedom takes courage.

 The pissing and moaning of a bunch of ignorant, knee-jerk reactionary liberals calling for bans and prohibitions won’t help get any meaningful reform accomplished. Every time you put someone like Sen. Feinstein on TV to talk about guns, all you do is entrench those on the hard right and lose those in the middle to the right who feel they are protecting one of the few alleged rights we have remaining. We don’t need to ban anything.

So, what can we do? And believe me I don’t like some of these anymore than any other gun owner but compromise comes out of concession. And reasonable, responsible gun owner need to add their input or the rules will get made without them and do you really want a bunch of hippies that have never seen a gun in their life setting the national laws for firearms.

 For fuck’s sake the first thing we need to do is close the gun show loop hole. It’s stupid that we haven’t. Every responsible gun owner that purchased their firearms from a reputable dealer that did the background check should want this as well. People with bad intentions are getting armed in these places and making it more difficult for us legal, responsible gun owners to enjoy our freedom. BLUF: it’s fucking it up for all of us.

 1) National standardization of requirements for firearm ownership, addressing, training, security of firearms and civil and criminal liability if reasonable means aren’t made to secure your firearms and they are used to commit a crime. ie. Adam Lanza.

 2) A national law that sets the standards for concealed handgun licensing and carry. This would piss off the "Tenthers" taking it out the hands of the states that all have 50 separate rules and laws and makes it very confusing and potentially legally hazardous when traveling. This has been a complaint of all gun owners no matter their political stripe for years. These permits would be issued by the FBI or ATF. In the process we'll be creating a whole new bureaucracy with lots of jobs just to make people feel better.

 These are your carrots and here's the catch to gun owners which they will hate, especially the civil libertarians, but who gives a shit about civil liberties anymore would someone think of the children? What you do with all of this is you add national gun registration, which is a concession on part of the gun owners. I, like most gun owners, don't like the idea of registration but I would even go so far as to say that maybe we do need to register all firearms; if that is the course we need to go to make you feel better. I don't like it but on my side that's a concession I'm willing to make. I don't think it will be prohibitive of any crime and I'm not sure what good that would do because the people committing heinous and illegal acts certainly aren't going to make sure they fill out the proper paperwork to make sure their gun is registered before they go shoot up a school, but it would hold gun owners liable and responsible for making sure their weapons are secured properly and kept from the incompetent.


 Sam Harris Article link: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-riddle-of-the-gun Sean Faircloth’s Rebuttal: http://richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2013/1/4/sam-harris-neglects-the-most-important-evidence-about-guns#.UOm1z6Vb0sk

Killing bin Laden matters to me, personally.

When people say that killing bin Laden doesn’t matter I think there is something that those who haven’t served in these wars should understand and I’m going to try and convey that to you in this lil’ story.

In 2003 I was just going to serve my time in the Army Reserves take my college money and get out.

There was no reason for me to go active duty. I had aspirations for a career in TV and radio broadcasting. In January 2003 I signed a contract with ROTC to commission as an officer and go active duty when I graduated from college. This is a decision that took me on quite a journey.

Since 2004 I have lived on 3 continents in 3 countries and 4 states. At one point we moved twice in 6 months once from country to country then to another state.

In 2006, I deployed for my first time to Iraq. Starting my deployment in a comparatively restive northern Iraq and ending it 13 months later in the wild west of Anbar province, Ramadi after a wild and scary adventure. My wife deployed as well. It was a scary year as we waited for the other to be hit by a mortar, or killed by an IED. Imagine waiting for or just accepting as fact that the person you love most in the world is going to get killed. Imagine accepting the fact that you are already dead in order to do your job with some sort of bravery or courage. We suffered that for 13 months then returned home.

Nearly twelve months to the day after coming home we deployed again. This time to Kuwait for 15 months. Again separating ourselves from our son and separating our son from both of his parents. Believe this is not the easiest thing to do. Me in Kuwait and my wife going to Baghdad a few months into the tour…again the psychopathy applied as I just assumed she would be killed, just to take the sting away at that moment when I was taken aside and told, “Your wife was killed…”

So, late one evening, I saw President Obama was going to be announcing something special to the American people. When Obama said those words, “the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden,” I was relieved and saddened. All that rushed through me is that everything I had worked for, every moment I had spent scared and worried. Every moment I had spent homesick and pretending to be brave. It was worth it because I did my part, however insignificant and however small to make that happen. The people that I knew, that I’ve lost to the toils of war and the hidden and foreign struggles of returning home they were sacrificed on the alter of justice. The sanity and time that I will never get back. The personal friction created by the stress of the deployments and managing careers. All of this collapsed on those words… “that killed Osama bin Laden.” The man behind an event that had shaped my generation and called it to arms was dead. The war was over. Wasn’t it?

You don’t realize, that when I signed up I was afraid I was going to miss this war due to the statements of the leaders at the time. I deployed twice in support of a venture that had nothing to do with getting the guy that killed my fellow Americans on American soil. I thought my service was futile. I thought my deployments were for naught and they were, mostly as it pertains to getting bin Laden. But I still endured that pain…I spilled sweat in sand on a foreign land because that’s where I was told to go.

But when I heard those words…killed Osama bin Laden…all that rage, anger and hope for vengeance that had driven me to a life of military service, and created so much pain and sidetracked so much of my life, it didn’t go away. It collapsed into exhaustive sadness, especially knowing the jobs was done but the wars weren’t over. But if the worst I’ve had to endure is exhaustion, physical and mental pain and anguish for almost a decade, some of that emotional trauma and pain I will endure for the rest of my life, I guess, it’s a comparatively small price to pay for my country; for justice. For vengeance.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, if you didn’t serve in the military you don’t get why getting OBL is a big deal because all you were told to do after 9-11 was shop, I was called to go get shot at. If the largest sacrifice you made was losing the yellow ribbon magnet off the back of your SUV you probably won’t get it.

The faithful can just fuck off. America needs to be saved from them.

You believe in God? Great. Well, you can just fuck off today because I’m not buying what you’re selling.

First, there’s this story out of the illustrious Bible belt of the U.S. In Missouri, a student can now opt out of any teaching that violates their religious beliefs. Excellent. We wouldn’t want the future generation of closed-minded bigots to have any exposure to anything outside of their magic bubble of Christian sharia teachings. We wouldn’t want them to have a thought that didn’t come directly out of their parents’ mouths. We wouldn’t want to break the spell of occultic brainwashing through fear their parents have over them. We wouldn’t want that.

Here’s the part that really pisses me off, we, as a country are in a recession. We have a workforce that is not educated for the jobs of the future. If we want people to have jobs in the future they are going to have to be educated in science, technology, engineering and math. Yes, all of those scary things that violate the foundations of religious orthodoxy because if you study them you find out that if there was a grand designer, its designs are inherently flawed, which means the designer is flawed, which means it’s not omniscient which means it’s not god. Then what happens? You lose control over them. That’s the purpose of religion and religious parents raising their kids in religion. Control.

Conservatives say they want to make America great. Well, here's one way to not do it...becoming the Christian versions of an Iran/Somalia hybrid. A religious authoritarian libertarian Randian death land. A land where people are more educated in dogma than science.

You want to opt out of science and math and chemistry and biology and physics and astronomy because they loosen you’re faith in magic floating sky wizard, that’s fine with me. Please don’t forget to put the oil back in my car and please don’t smash my bread when you’re bagging my groceries.

Want to stop mass shootings? Press control, not gun control

While we're limiting Constitutional amendments, I call for press control. Experts have told the media time after time to tone down their coverage of these shooters because they are sensationalizing their actions for other would-be shooters. They refuse to follow that course.

I know, I know if it bleeds it leads. That’s for a reason. That is news.

There's a way to make it the lead story without sensationalizing the shooter or their actions. Simple coverage at the top, what is the NEWS concerning this story. Then move to the next story. Honestly, all the coverage of these guys just leads to bad journalism, ie. Holmes was a member of the Tea Party, which turned out to be false. But in the rush to make the story more interesting they got it wrong.

How about better press control? Such as preventing press/journalist/media from knowing a shooter's name or allowing them access to a photo. How about a fine for any new organization that uses the news of a shooting in any sensational manner? A penalty for using the shooter's name more than a certain number of times in a 24 hour period. It has been shown empirically that the amount of attention given to the shooter gives rise to more shooters. The media's culture of sensationalism is just as culpable as the gun in creating more shooters like this guy.

The only thing that gives the press the "right" to do their job is that same pesky document that gives people the right to own weapons. So, if we're going to amend the document in the name of keeping people safe we should also amend or limit the rights of the press. They are just as culpable for mass shootings as guns, gun manufacturers and gun owners with their sensationalism, propagation of mass paranoia and playing fast and loose with information and facts.

Chip Berlet, an expert on right wing fanaticism and militarism, wrote an excellent article where he sort of dips into media culpability in mass shootings.

“According to Dr. Marvin Swartz, while “we don’t know whether there was a specific relationship between the political climate that [Loughner] was exposed to and his thinking, it’s a reasonable line of inquiry to explore.” Swartz explains that “One’s cultural context does [have an effect on] people’s thinking and particularly their delusions. It gives some content and shape to their delusions.” Swartz, a professor of psychiatry at Duke University, says it is legitimate to study “the cultural influences on people’s delusions or persecutory thinking,” and consider “different aspects of culture” and the how they affect people’s behavior—even the actions of terrorists.”
“The link between mass media vilification of a scapegoated group and incidents of aggression and violence against that group is well-established. Not everyone gripped by the media massage reacts by assaulting or killing the scapegoat, however, and a few people actively resist the campaign. Some terrorists write a script in which they see themselves as a Superhero out to avenge a wrong—real or illusory. Men in the United States seem oddly attracted to this role which intersects with guns and violence.”

Limiting the press, not being facetious now, would be a horrible idea. Although, given the state of today’s media, obsessed with sensationalism, obsessed with being first not right, obsessed with ratings not facts, I don’t know what harm it would do since they aren’t fulfilling their obligation as the fourth estate. Anyways, let’s operate off the premise that we don’t want to limit their rights (much like they’re cheering to limit the 2nd Amendment which is right after theirs). What do we do? Well, journalistic and news institutions have propriety policies. They are allowed, legally, to show you the most horrific terrifying shit, dead bodies, naked people, sex acts, so long as it falls in the guise of news. The reason they don’t show you this stuff is because they have a propriety policy, where they have come together as a board in their organization and said that it doesn’t add any good information to show a dead body so we’re not going to show that at 10 p.m. As a matter of fact they don’t do it because it could turn people off from their station. So, they have their own limiting laws and practices already. Another limitation they put on themselves, they usually won’t put out information unless they have a certain number of identifiable, independent sources confirming that information. They already limit themselves, why not with coverage of mass shooters in the name of public safety.

Then why not ask these institutions to limit themselves when it comes to coverage of a mass shooting? Give the news and the facts then move along. Why should they do this? Because as you can read in the Chip Berlet article they are adding to the “superhero complex” that these mass shooters need in order to commit their crime. So, if we’re going to make all this limitations of freedom, especially concerning gun rights which are just as protected in the Constitution as speech, in the name of safety, should we start front the top and work our way down. If there’s nobody rooting these people on in the national media that just might stop some of these guys from acting out their macabre fantasy.

Sages are dragons and unicorns

I realized something the other day when I was reading about rBGH (recombinant Bovine Growth Horomone), the horomone they give milk cows to make them produce 10% more milk but causes infections and cancer in cows...and humans. Well, anyways that's not the point. The point I have is that we trusted the grown ups, our parents and grandparents to protect us when we were young, to teach us about the world. We relied on them and trusted that they would solve the problems of the present to ensure our future. It turns out they were just looking the other way for most of our childhood, or getting involved and making things worse. Turns out milk and dairy, not good for you at all and it makes sense if you think about it. Why in the fuck are we drinking the food for a baby cow? It's simple things like that which should tip us off that not everything we were told and learned is right.

And here I'm mostly talking about the stalwarts, the conservatives, the authoritarians that are afraid of change. When I look at issues like rBGH, BPA toxicity, global climate change, a decade plus long war and crashing stock markets. These are all problems, they knew would be problems but their generation covered them up, brushed them under the rug and looked the other way in the name of profit and upward mobility for themselves. In some cases they started them expecting us to finish them and clean up their mess.

It is time for this to end. I think the new generation, the next generation, the Millenials, Gen Y and forward have a different calling. We have a calling to cirlce the wagons, to unite and collectivize in the name of solving these problems for sake of ensuring our future and the future of our children. The grown ups, the false sages, we have trusted too long have failed us. It is time for them to get out of the way of the solutions and stop causing problems. Part of the problem is that we are taught to trust our elders wholeheartedly and without question. Give your grandma an iPhone and try no to laugh the first time she turns it on...if she can get it on. The bottom line is they don't know any more or any better than we do, and if they do they've done a horrible job at applying that knowledge or they have been hiding it.

Look at the relics of their generation we now have to contend with. Our air and water is poinsoned. Our "food" is poison. Global climate change is destroying ecosystems. Our economic system has essentially taken our country's wealth from the middle class and given it all to the top 1% rendering capitalism and democracy virtually useless, only giving us the illusion of choice. Really, what is the difference in voting for a Republican versus a Democratic. It's a lesser of two evils scenario.

Our generation has an opportunity to be smarter. Our generation has an opportunity to take power now. Our generation has the ability, with that power wrested from the control of the insane, to address problems head on instead of turning a blind eye to make an extra buck or get that next promotion. This is not just in the US. Look at the uprisings of the middle east where the people our age and younger have finally grown tired of the old men telling them that everything is fine because it is as it has always been, when they can look around and see that what has always been is not what they want for themselves or their neighbors.

Deference for the sake of age is a tradition, a legacy, that we can no longer afford. They had their chance and they, for the most part, have failed to solve anything and have only created more problems.

Rant with a side of rant

From "Politics with Jared and Dave" on the Facebook: "The following was posted on a conservative's page. The page admin posts here from time to time under a couple different names, so she (yes, she) will no doubt see your responses. Here it is:I am curious to know why so many liberals are so jacked up on the so-called "war on woman" just because they might lose their right to abort an innocent baby, when the laws are actually help them open up their minds to how developed this unborn human is. Also complaining about their precious BC and insisting on someone else pay for their choice to use it? These complaints go on while we have the NDAA signed and other freedoms taken away. Our Gas prices going higher than they ever have been etc. So womans right to kill and take BC is the most important issue to them?"

****Takes in deep breath*****

Gas prices are high and will continue to go higher with inflation and a OPEC cartel-induced shortage of supply. This combined with members of your Randian-Objectivist Corporatist Death Cult on Wall Street hav...e using free license gained through deregulation to mess with the market using commodity short sells to jack the price up based on subjective assumptions about world socio-political climate. Not to mention we have reached peak oil and the oil we can get to now is so hard to get to that they have to raise the cost of the product because the cost of production has increased. So, gas prices, not much we can do about that.

Second, the NDAA doesn't directly effect peoples everyday lives but having babies they can't afford to care for will effect them, you and me directly and indirectly, personally and as a society. So, we have this great preventive medication that PREVENTS people from 1) having kids they can't afford so they have to go on welfare and 2) PREVENTS fucking abortions you jackanape. And you aren't paying for anybody's contraception, even the little bit of federal tax that does go to birth control. So, what? Taxes go to pay for shit that people don't want to pay for everyday. I don't like my tax dollars to go to religious institutions but yay varily they find a way to get that money by running deficient day cares and prostelyzation centers disguised as soup kitchens. And how has the NDAA limited your freedom's practically?

Besides the fact that it allows woment to not be boodmares BC is also important because it is about a personal freedom and a personal choice besides the fiscal and social ramifications. And more of a threat to personal freedom than the NDAA, don't you think? You're worried about the government using NDAA to know what bestiality, bondage and rent-boy sites your husband searches while you're protesting Planned Parenthood clinics but have no problem with the government stepping directly between a patient, their doctor and their personal choice of what medication to take. And then if they do get pregnant because you didn't want them to take a pill once a day because your book of magic fucking cock sucking fairy tales says they shouldn't you want to step between them, their doctor and a personal and emotionally painful choice to have an abortion. So, fuck off with your bullshit about the NDAA and limiting freedom blah, blah, blah. You only care because it's not limiting people's freedoms based on your book of Aesop's fables.

*****And breathe*****

Snitches get stitches

“Can't blame the dude for having a breakdown, it's been a rough few weeks over there. Can't say I don't condone the method either if w'ere going to stay there. But let this be a lesson on the toll we could exert if we wanted. One dude can walk off the base and kill 16, we could kill every motherfucker in that country if we had the inclination.”

There has been some outcry about my commentary concerning the soldier who ran off base and killed 16 civilians in Afghanistan. Well, first don’t say you’re for free speech and then complain to someone in the Army because you don’t like what I said. Second, this is my personal page which implies my personal opinions based on my experience not the my official Army page. If you want the official Army opinion go to their official page. My page represents my personal views not the views of the DOD, the Army or my unit.

Third let’s dissect the comment above for those that need more explaining.

“Can't blame the dude for having a breakdown, it's been a rough few weeks over there.”
It has been a rough few weeks over there. I have been in the middle of a country and war with increasing hostility. To put it into context the time I was in Iraq we were averaging 100 troop deaths per month. So, I know the mental and emotional toll that being in the middle of that situation can create. Oh yeah, and I’ve done that for 30 months and I am about to add 12 more. So, I don’t need some weekend warrior lecturing me on how I should be more restrained.

“Can't say I don't condone the method either if w'ere going to stay there. But let this be a lesson on the toll we could exert if we wanted. One dude can walk off the base and kill 16, we could kill every motherfucker in that country if we had the inclination.”
I said that to make a point. Either we are there to win or we are not. The only way to win with these people, who are one step above cave-dwellers, is to kill them all and if we don’t have the guts or the sociopathy (which, I hope we don’t) as a country to do that then we need to leave. Immediately. So, essentially I was making the point that this war is over and we need to wrap it up because we are not there to win by military means. The second part was meant to demonstrate the lethality of a single American soldier. That statement is two points, we are a lethal force if you don’t want us to kill people then don’t send us to foreign countries in a war, and to demonstrate even with that amount of lethality in a single soldier we have been fairly restrained and disciplined in the engagement of these two alleged wars.

And whether you like to believe it or not this guy will be a hero to some soldiers because he did what they all think about and talk about doing, “just going out and killing everyone.” Shit, he did what I have fantasized about doing during the darkest times of war but I was able to obviously realize that was wrong. Because when you lose a buddy, a friend, all you can think about is vengeance because war isn’t about justice it’s about winning at all costs because winning means you come back alive. After all it’s what we do, it’s what we’re trained to do and if you have a problem with that then you should look into something other than the Army or Marine Corps. And if you want to deny the reality of what we actually are trained to do then you need to get a good dose of reality. Are we trained to run off base alone and just start randomly killing people? Of course not. But if you think we’re petting puppies and crocheting then you need to have your head examined, not me. I’ve been examined and certified. So, what’s your excuse for denying reality? And if you don’t appreciate my honesty then unfriend me, don’t talk to me, if you have a problem with something I said please let me know not my NCOIC via my official FB page.

Africa? I don't give a fuck! *WARNING EXPLICIT RANT AHEAD* Now with 26% more Hippie bashing…

I'm going to take an unpopular stance here, I don't give a fuck how many people some religious nut job has killed in Africa. It all comes down to natural selection. If they want to naturally select themselves out of the world that's on them. Fuck 'em. Not my problem. I'm not heartless I'm practical. If the Ugandans, Congoans and others can't team up to stop this Kony guy, that's on them. Not me, not America.

And here’s the other thing, you pacifist bleeding-heart hippies. “Liking” a Facebook status isn't going to stop a blood thirsty mad man. Blood begets blood, my friends. Much more killing will have to be done to stop this guy. Are you willing to get bloody? Are you willing to get dirty? Because that is what it’s going to take. Good I’ll see you on the battlefield. If you think sending pretty notes with rainbow pictures and unicorn stickers is going to stop this guy you are delirious and you need to check yourself into an institution.

Let's work on America first then we can start worrying about people that have been killing each other, literally, since the birth of Homo erectus 2 million years ago. So, change 2 million years of that bullshit then we can start talking about how capturing one fucking fuck-twat, doing what they've done since the dawn of time in that area, is going to change anything on that whole goddamned continent.

Free-Market Capitalism: Threat to Freedom

Which do you love more Republicans? Free speech or the free-market because you have created a world with your policies where the latter controls the former.

So which will you defend, free-speech to keep Rush on the air? Or will you defend the free-market capitalism that is silencing him and could possibly force him off the air? I thought corporations could do no wrong. They are people, my friend, as the front-runner for the Republican Presidential nomination reminded a person at one of his events.

And to be honest this isn’t about free-speech because Rush still has the right to say whatever he wants, and I agree with Rush having the right to call people names whenever he wants. But you don’t have a right to say whatever you want on the public-owned, corporate-leased airwaves. The corporations are concerned with keeping that license.

Many of you may lay-people not realize that even with the PICAN standard abolished by Reagan and annihilated by Clinton in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 it only takes one substantiated complaint at the right time for a corporation to lose its broadcast license. These corporations rely on the lease they have for the public airwaves to run their stations that run the commercials that give them the money. The shows are simply filler, the shows don’t make money, but the commercials do. That is why it is a big deal when a show starts losing advertisers.

So, if it seems there is cognitive dissonance coming out of the conservatives/Republicans/right-wing (really, nothing new there) it’s because they are trying to defend two ideas that are incompatible with each other. They are trying to defend Rush’s right to slander and libel while cursing free-market capitalist ideology that has kept him on the air this many years. You can’t have both for Rush in this case. He is going to be relegated to the status of the Westboro Baptist Church just yelling “slut” at passing cars on your local highway because that’s the way the corporations and free market want it.

Capitalism, the continuous work of concentrating wealth and power, is the true enemy of democracy and free speech. You can’t have free speech in a country where speech can be bought by the highest bidder because if you have to buy it or access to it then it is not free.

Nothing Good Happens After Midnight

I swear to you nothing good ever happens for me to be awake after 12 a.m. I'm either too drunk that I know tomorrow, or today as it will, will be horrible or I'm responding to something or doing something that is going to make my preceding days more painful than a Scotch hangover.

This morning is case and point. Had to drop Alissa off to deploy. Now, you may think you drive up to an airfield somewhere and soldiers immediately line up and board a high-performance military aircraft. First, stop watching "The Unit." Second, the Army has found a way to draw out this overtly and deeply painful event. We awoke at 12:30 a.m. knowing my wife had to be there at 1:10 a.m.

People put on happy faces it's hard to distinguish between bravery, callousness and numbed indifference of a decade of war as most of these soldiers and their families have been called into service of deployment before.

Refreshments are served for the family members willing to brave the early morning call.

After arriving at 110 on the dot...we wait in cars and open buildings while soldiers draw their weapons and final gear.

Now 3 a.m and sitting at the gym that has been opened up way early for this occasion, and still no sign of the soldiers that were left at their company.

False levity tries to be infused among the solemn and earnest somber occasion with upbeat music. The music does nothing to hide the fear and anguish on the faces of family members.

And so now we wait, the tears and facades held back by the hope afforded by the hour hands slow ticking which cant beat slow enough or fast enough.

The faces are tired. I don't know if it's the tired of the 3 a.m. or the weariness wrought after ten years of this. After all this will be Alissa's third deployment and I'm not far behind.

3:15 a.m. Soldiers arrive.

In a portion of military ceremony that is probably now known by the rest of the world. Soldier’s arrive in a gymnasium with their weapons and carry-on equipment for time with their families before they board the plane.

All of the sudden a familiar face arrives. The civilian movement control guy. I saw him on my last deployment in 2009. How many of these has he seen? Does it even have an affect anymore? This is the man who will take the soldiers from the gym, to the bus and into the plane.

4:45 a.m. We are warned that the time is coming to an end and that the soldier’s are going to form up to prepare to get on a bus to head to the air terminal to board a plane. This is the last moment families will have with their soldiers for nine months. Through tearful goodbyes the soldiers leave their families one by one to line up.

5:30 a.m. I arrive at home tired and exhausted and sleep for a few hours in the clothes I was wearing and notice that the empty space in the bed next to me will be empty temporarily but a long temporary.

Last time I saw her she was sitting on the bleachers with her gear where I left her, waiting to form up, as I walked out choking back tears.

It was 5 a.m. and that’s why nothing good happens after midnight, especially on this night.

Reaffirming "In god we trust," as the national motto

Woke up this morning to see that Congress, finally, is doing the big work. Are they tackling the unemployment problem with a job’s bill? No. Are they going after the banks that robbed the economy of a trillion dollars and a created a mult-trillion dollar false derivatives market. Uhhh, no. They’ve moved onto something much more important, reaffirming that’s right RE-affirming “In God we trust,” as the national motto.

According to Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA), the founder of the Congressional Prayer Caucus…First, why is there even such a thing as a “prayer caucus?” So, you were sent there to collect a staggering $100k per year salary, not to solve the nation’s problems or debate legislation with facts and reason, but to create a group, inside the congress, whose sole purpose is to come together and talk to their imaginary friend. I wonder. Are Pagans invited to this prayer Caucus meeting? What about the only Muslim congressman? Is he allowed into the meetings with his prayer rug and incantations.

How about we start a motherfucking JOBS Caucus, or Infrastructure Caucus. Can’t be an atheist Caucus and there is only one in the House of Representatives, Pete Stark (D-CA)

Well, anyway, according to this guy Forbes who wants to waste money and time by talking to an imaginary friend and then waste more money and time by dragging his fellow zombie death cult with him, “As our nation faces challenging times, it is appropriate for Members of Congress and our nation—like our predecessors—to firmly declare our trust in God, believing that it will sustain us for generations to come.”

Just fuck it all. Not only are they damned-near pissing on the Constitution, which is probably more important than the motto established in 1956 as well at the same time they put “Under God” in the pledge, but it appears members of Congress have just thrown their hands up on issues facing our country and have just screamed “Jesus take the wheel!” Apparently, their imaginary friend and the zombie son are going to solve all of our problems. If faith alone will solve the problems then you don’t need to be an elected official to do it.

If you’re really concerned about the under God motto dumbfuck shit, you shouldn’t be re-elected. You can then spend more of your time talking to the wall instead of addressing real issues. I think concentrating on doing something as a ceremonial gesture that has already been done displays a problem with Republicans, they’re not problem solvers. They’ve run out of ideas for solving real problems and really, mostly, creating more problems, and when all else fails turn to the imaginary. The social issues are always a big hit with their retarded base (and that’s not a slur, their mental growth is obviously challenged in a few areas if they still believe in goblins and tooth fairies and the like.) They’re out of touch with the American electorate who could give two shits about the National motto and is more concerned about the economy and the fucking bridge they drive on everyday going to their minimum wage job falling down. Prayer won’t hold up a bridge dumbfuck, but luckily for you it will hold you up through the next election.

One Soldier's Opinion of the End of DADT

        I guess I should be proud. The military and the Army have finally decided to live up to values they preach and the freedom they defend. I’m a little proud I guess. I’m more happy for all of my brothers and sisters in arms who are LGB who can finally put their ass on the line between good and evil defending freedom as themselves. Those jingoistic words seem relative when you are considered a second-class citizen, and your partner will not receive benefits like other military spouses. I guess small steps are required to appease small minds.

        This is my promise to you, my LGB Soldiers present and future, if you are in my unit I will train you with the same vigor and provide you the same opportunities I do any other soldier. I will give you just as many opportunities to succeed or fail and base all decisions objectively, on your ability to lead troops, take care of soldiers and complete the mission. I promise you no more and no less than your straight counterparts, and really I think that’s all you wanted anyways, while being allowed...permitted...to be yourself. Most honestly, because I don’t have the time or energy to care about who the fuck you’re sleeping with at night.

        I’m sure there will be “queer-panic,” but that, in time, will resolve itself as the bigots who can’t handle living in the 21st century expose themselves to the test of relevancy and sanity only to be found lacking both. This, therefore, makes them no-value added in an organization that prides itself on its values.
The seven values, that you remember we were taught in basic training: Loyalty, Duty, RESPECT, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity and Personal Courage. These values that we, as soldiers, are supposed to live, fight and die by, values that all soldiers were forced to violate daily since the implementation of DADT.

        “But Marcus, this doesn’t effect you? You’re a straight guy like us, just stay in the club.”

        Anytime any American is treated unfairly or unequally especially by a government institution, it effects all of us. It especially effects me when I am the enforcer of these unfair and archaic rules, laws and practices. You would change your mind if you would have seen the mental anguish caused in young men and women who have chosen to volunteer only to be unexpectedly caught between being themselves, living honorably, or living a life that was lie in order to serve their country. Men and woman who were unfortunately being offered the paradox of which honor do you want, the honor of openly being yourself or the honor of serving your country because we, for some odd reason, in the “home of the brave” couldn’t afford them both.


        We have a far many more domestic issues that you can help resolve that are more a threat to national security than who is sleeping with whom. You know how many soldiers I’ve seen leave the Army for homosexuality? None. You know how many good soldiers I’ve seen get kicked out because they had inherited bad lifestyle choices from their parents and society in the ways of food and exercise? Too many to even fucking count, a little fewer than 100 in 12 years in the Army.
        
        I did see one allegedly homosexual soldier get discharged but not because she was a lesbian, even though from all accounts and my own good circumstantial evidence she was and is. This soldier was kicked out because she had a mental and emotional breakdown. She broke down, I’m assuming, because she couldn’t live the lies in both worlds. How often does this happen? How can we force people to live like this? She was forced to hide who she was and could only do it for so long. But those were the rules at the time and we can only operate in the parameters set forth on us by Congress which is set by their constituents, you the American people.

        I think we Americans have finally taken a step in the right direction and have done the right thing. I know we in the Army can make it work because we can finally live by our values and apply them always and equally to all of our Soldiers.

Ayn Rand and her followers are sociopaths

It's not that there would be a shortage of people to run those corporations but there would be a shortage of people with the sociopathic mentality to run the corporation as it would be wished to be run by the stock holders and Boards of Directors.

They need amoral people who have no problem putting money and profit ahead of people. These sociopaths are few and far between. There aren't very many people willing to actually sell out their fellow man for a few more dollars, people who will take the entire burden of the actions, allowing the boards and stock holders to place distance between themselves and the actions of their corporations.

The only thing they produce is the cover for the sociopathic, authoritarian dominator plutocrats and oligarchs to continue to consolidate power and money and through money consolidate more power.

Ayn Rand’s admiration of sociopaths extends beyond the captains of industry as her infatuation with murderer William Hickman is well documented. If this is the type of person she admired, the type of person upon which she wrote “Atlas Shrugged,” then what does that say about the people worshipping at the altar of objectivism? They are no better, at least mentally and morally, than the cultists that followed Manson to the Tate home. Although they may not realize it because the authoritarian followers will not allow this information to penetrate their bubble and if it does it will be dismissed as a lie because it is something that does not confirm their world view.

Sociopaths amongst us and they call themselves dirty names...

Finishing up a book that you can get for free called “The Authoritarians” if you google it and had a few thoughts.

Fascists don't like democracy, it's mob rule after all. They don't like the mobs unless it's the mobs of dupes they have fooled to march for them, to anthropomorphize the corporation that's sucking the country dry. Corporations as people, fascists and Ted Bundy all have something in common, they're sociopaths.

So, for those of you true-believers who think the Koch Brothers, GE, Exxon, Goldman Sachs have the best intentions of the country at heart, best of luck to you as you are fed to the machine of your own making, just like the people of Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida. If you think you can appease your fascist masters to give you your jobs back with tax cuts and lowering wages and working conditions collectively to those of a third world nation I have no sympathy for you. You're a fool, a dupe, a follower and a coward and in the end the lowest level of fools pay the price.

You voted in the surrogate fools of fascism and they are bringing it in wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. You will be left wondering where your country went and you’ll want it back and it will be too late. And it won’t be because of your inherent xenophobia or racism because your country will actually disappear as we become the United Corporatocracy of America with a ruling oligarchy. However, you will succumb to your master so long as he spouts the right language to appease you and gives you a “them” to hate and bomb. So, tell me Teabaggers, Republicans, Corporatists all followers of Randian objectivism who by any other names are fascists, are we at war with Eurasia or Eastasia?

Pat Sajak is a moron

I saw this article from Pat Sajak posted on facebook and I found it laughable. I have not been able to confirm that it was actually written by Sajak since the right-wing likes to make up fake articles from celebrities and send them around the internet in spam style. It also wouldn’t be beyond Fox News to post it without verifying that it was, in fact, written by Pat Sajak. but I’m going to take a stab at responding too it after just waking up and pre-coffee.

At a dinner party in Washington the other night, I was asked a question I’m often asked. No, not, “Can I buy a vowel?” but, rather, “Why is Hollywood so uniformly made up of liberal Democrats?” 
There are a lot of theories on the subject, and I have a few of my own. First, I would strongly argue with the premise. My industry is certainly made up predominantly of liberal Democrats, but there is a surprising number found on the other side of the political spectrum. Lots of writers, producers, directors and performers are quite conservative in their views, but you don’t hear from them as much or as noisily as you do from the left. Part of it, sadly, is the fear that they’ll suffer professionally if they’re “outed”, and a number of them have stories to tell about being confronted on the issue.

[So money is more important than the country. We get it you’re conservatives, of course it is.]

But another factor is they’re far less comfortable lecturing their fellow citizens on how to live their lives.

[We all know conservatives don’t like telling people how to live their lives. You know I’ve never been told by a conservative that I need to accept Jesus as my lord and savior or I’m going to hell. Isn’t it conservatives that want to legislate abortion out of existence so they can tell women what to do with their bodies. And it’s a favorite past time of conservatives to tell gays they’re living their lives all wrong.]

You’re much more likely to see a liberal singer interrupt his performance with a global warming diatribe than you are to see a conservative singer praising the free enterprise system between songs.

[Because over the last 4 years we have learned 1) there is no such thing as a free enterprise system which 2) allows white collar criminals to collapse the economy and get away scott-free. It’s not something that’s easy to defend in modernity without sounding like a sociopathic brainwashed Randian ideologue.]

Another fact that might surprise you is that most of Hollywood—like most of America—isn’t really all that interested in politics except near election time. 
Most of the men and women who make their living in the entertainment field are much more focused on finding jobs and reading scripts and getting awards and going to events than they are on the intricacies of American politics. If you ask them about their views, they’re likely to spout a few liberal talking points because they’ve heard them so often, and it’s the safer position to take.

[It’s a safer position to take because unlike conservative positions you don’t sound like a sociopathic, Darwinist asshole. So being polite, people will take the position of caring about the plight of the less fortunate and the working class, a liberal position, over whether or not oil corporations get to make a few billion dollars more per year in profit.]

And that point leads me to my primary theory on why one side dominates the other. Putting aside the true believers and usual suspects (you know who they are on both sides), the liberal position provides the path of least resistance, especially for high-profile members of the Hollywood community. It’s hard to describe the bubble in which these folks live, but I’ll try. 
They are financially successful in ways most people can scarcely imagine

[as a conservative I can’t believe that you are begrudging them for making money in a capitalist, “free-enterprise system.];

their whims are treated as commands; outrageous or boorish behavior is condoned

[You mean outrageous or boorish behavior like: leaving your wife on her cancer bed for your third wife you’re having an affair with, or picking up men in an airport bathroom, or paying for hookers while on the House floor, or sending sexual explicit texts to teenage boys, or ordering a same sex hooker and meth, or escaping to Venezuela to see your mistress, or having a mistress and then paying her husband hush money, or is that not boorish just par for the course for conservatives as they lecture us on how to live.];

they travel in limos and fly (often privately) between their multiple homes

[much like McCain and his seven homes, or Sarah Palin and her private jet];

they hobnob with politicians who come to them for advice and input (and money); the glamour of their business rubs off on them and gives them access and a sense of importance and wisdom

[Isn’t that the same reason you’re writing this article? Seems a bit ironic.]. 

So how should one speak from such a lofty perch? Well, many have concluded that the smartest way to handle it is to claim to be “one of the people.” So, no matter how rarified the air, liberalism is a smart career move. 
Is it hypocritical to ask people to drive electric cars while you’re flying in a Gulfstream? Or to tell them to conserve energy while the cumulative square-footage of your homes is measured in the tens of thousands of square feet? Or to ask them to pay more taxes while your high-priced accounting firms are protecting your money

[Much like the corpoations, Wall Street Execs, and tycoons that the conservatives flock to for advice. Except they don’t care about people, they are sociopaths]?

Of course it is, but hypocrisy cannot penetrate the bubble

[Oh we know it can’t Pat, you’ve just proven it in your previous paragraphs about conservatives and yourself.]. 

They care. Not like the greedy businessmen (from whom they collect their salaries and perks), but like the genuine people they really are.
However, the truth is that most celebrity political talk is just noise. It’s fodder for the entertainment shows and publications. People listen, not because they particularly care about what these folks have to say, or to get advice about how to vote or how to live, but simply because it’s a celebrity speaking

[No I don’t care what a celebrity says about politics because I’m not a Fox News watcher I base my political beliefs on rational logical facts that I believe will lead the country in a better direction. You’re on the wrong network if you care about reasoned political debate sans celebrity sensationalism. Again ironic seeing you are a celebrity.] 

Personally, I try not to mix my political side with my entertainment side

[FAIL!].

And, frankly, I would be appalled if anyone made an important political or lifestyle decision based on the advice of a TV game show host

[WIN! So this was just mental masturbation].

Maybe that’s the best news about the bubble: it not only protects us, but it protects you from us.

[Look if you’re dumb enough to believe something just because a celebrity says it you’re more than likely old or a Fox News watcher or more than likely both because one begets the other. Much the same reason they have Wilford Brimley do the diabetes commericals because old people don’t like to be challenged and like familiarity, the reason they watch Fox News.]

Labor Should Fight

It is time for the new labor movement. Young people don’t remember what it was like before Reagan started busting the unions. Maybe membership is dwindling because the new generation doesn’t understand the power and might of working class people united in ensuring that all workers are given fair compensation for their labor. A generation that grew up with Wal-Mart being the largest employer of underpaid, undercompensated workers wouldn’t understand that they have the right and ability to demand what is fair and they can bring about change through the power of collective bargaining. The young people today are just happy to get any job and are satisfied with the status quo. That was all planned by the corporatists. They shouldn’t be. They should do what our grandfathers did and not settle. If we become satisfied with earning an existence wage then we will soon become a country of forced labor like China. You see right wingers, workers get to vote with their feet. They get to walk out and they can conspire and collude to strike just as you can conspire and collude to create wars to send their children to fight, create fake markets to crash the US economy, and you collude and conspire to force them to give up their rights.

The Koch-Tea Party-front groups are now in the mix in Wisconsin, ensuring the voices of the billionaires are heard. Union reps have agreed to cut pensions and salaries but the Governor is not willing to negotiate. He wants everything and will give on nothing. This should be a total walkout across the country of all union workers. This is the continuation of a generational battle to take away the rights of workers that started with Reagan and will only end when workers are subjugated or workers fight back. IBEW, AFSCME, UAW, AFL-CIO, SEIU the whole lot should strike.

This is all because the collapse of the economy. You want a low down of what happened and why we can’t afford the pensions we promised to pay people. The pensions were invested in Wall Street, you know, like the plan to privatize Social Security would have done. Well, when the last bubble burst, thanks to Alan Greenspan,“The Biggest Asshole in the Universe,” as called by Matt Taibbi in “Griftopia,” this left the pensions depleted. The pensions were laden with the junk AAA-rated investments that at best were D-rated because the revolving door and deregulation left speculators and Wall Street tycoons to do whatever they wanted and get off scott-free with golden parachutes when the rigged bubble burst. This was the only outcome possible. This wasn’t an accident. This was so purposefully planned that these people should be lined up on death row for premeditated murder of the economy. So, now these pensions are coming due, the pensions people paid into over years of work. When unions negotiate they usually give up pay in order to gain benefits like pensions and healthcare. In a real free-market the pension holders would be required to pay what they owe or go to prison but in our kleptocratic oligarchy that will never happen. Wisconsin isn’t the end every state, 401k and nearly every pension program was invested in these junk securitized mortgage packages.

Because the people that owe the money have ensured that they can fix the rules by pumping billions into elections, thanks Citizens United and Supreme Court, that they will never have to pay what they owe or be held accountable. If you create a Ponzi scheme and dupe people out of thousands of dollars you’ll go to jail, but if you dupe people out of billions by creating a false economy that almost collapses an entire country then you get to go work for presidential administration or move to K Street and begin lobbying to ensure that rules are never put into place that would hold you or your future “yous” accountable for international grand larceny. So, who gets to pay for their greed? The working-class schlep who will never see a pension, lost their 401k and can’t afford to buy legislation to hold the scammers accountable.

Fascists don’t like unions because people are much easier to control individually. The autocratic personalities, like Republicans, conservatives and Tea Baggers like having one strong man in charge. The “every man for himself” mentality fits very well into their Social-Darwinist outlook. This is why they have obligatory masturbation whenever the word Ayn Rand is mention. One man’s “objectivism” is another man’s social Darwinism. Divide and conquer. Pit individual against individual and the objectivists can’t lose. That’s the Tea Party way, the conservative way, the Fascist way. Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. Doesn’t much fit their persona of good Christian American, because we all know as told to us in Matthew that Jesus asked for a co-pay before healing the lepers and welcomed the capitalists into the church.

As much as the right wing preaches about democracy, they don’t really like it. As much as they preach about being heard by their representatives they don’t really like that. Their adoration and worship of money and corporations puts their priorities on profits, prophets and corporations as holy institutions. Private industry and corporations can do everything better. CEOs are the latter-day Saints. This makes them Fascists, by definition. They would be much happier if we put the Koch Industries, Inc. in the White House and disbanded the legislature and the judiciary.

The only problem is that, as mentioned above, and as has been proven corporations are sociopaths. If you’ve watched the documentary “The Corporation” you know what I mean. If a real person, not a corporate person, did what a corporation does they would be put in a mental institution or locked away on death row as a danger to society. Operating with reckless and wanton abandon for the quality of human life with the only goal being “profit” does not leave very much respect for the working person or the human race. Doesn’t leave much room for rights.

So, who should be allowed to determine their destiny? The people themselves, en masse, as prescribed by democracy having their grievances heard? Or the unaccountable, megalomaniacal, corporations that have bought legislation to ensure subjugation? I think in a democracy the choice is clear and workers get to vote with their feet.

Fuck the Mormons, tax the churches

Tax the churches. Is there any doubt that churches are thrusting themselves into the political? A proposition that should go over well with the TeaBaggers. They don’t like lots of words, nuance or anything too complex. This would simplify the tax code a little for them. Churches should pay taxes on everything they do, like any other business. You know, like Joe the Plumber that wasn’t named Joe nor a plumber. If they don’t like it they can station themselves in a nice tax shelter in the Caribbean. Another reason the teabaggers should get on board is because they believe everyone should do their fair share and everyone should contribute equally. This should include all businesses that use the commons we all pay for to conduct their transactions. Think of how much property tax you could save if all of those churches had to pay property tax just like your business. I ask, why shouldn’t they be taxed? Out of some antiquated false and undeserved deference to a business hocking invisible wares?

They should also be taxed to pay for the government that they are involved in. Part of the deal of no taxation is that they can’t be involved in politics. Recent political and court battles have shown that churches are actively and defiantly involved in influencing politics to suit their theocratic agenda. This should not be taken lightly. If churches as an organization want a say, well, they have to pay.

This has been no more apparent than in the fight in California over Proposition 8 to legalize gay marriage. This fight was completely bankrolled and organized by none other than the flying batshit crazy Mormons which are only a step removed from Scientology and Jedi as a religion. They knew what they were doing was as wrong in California as it was in Hawaii years before, which is why they tried to keep it such a secret by creating front organizations like the National Organization for Marriage. I’m sure all the evangelicals that jumped on that train would be sickened to know that it was all created and funded by that dirty, crazy Mormon money. California didn’t speak on Prop 8, the Mormon Church did. How does it feel to have your state run by whackjob loons California? Well, not the usual California ones but the nutso religious ones.

When the church was first called on providing support to the Prop 8 fight they said they spent about $2,000 of in kind support. Then that went to 190,000, turns out it was well over $22,000,000. They either have a shitty accountant or they lied. I’m going to bet the holy Mormon church lied. Do the ends justify the means so long as it’s in the name of Jesus? Isn’t lying a sin? Did Jesus tell the President of the church to lie? Did he get one of those Monopoly get out of Celestial Heaven free cards? I bet it was on a gold plate.

So, the churches that should be spending that tax exempt money to follow the teachings of Jesus to help the poor, the needy, the sick, the challenged are instead using that money to manipulate politics, to push a Christian Taliban agenda where the end result is theocracy. That is their dream result. They are no better than the Taliban. There are 6000 references in the bible to helping and giving to the poor and a couple handful of mentions of homosexuality and Christ never even mentioned it. However, Christ did have a secret visit with the Lamanites or Nephites in the US after his death in his zombie phase, so he may have mentioned it then. It may have been in those secret golden plates of Joseph Smiths. The abuse and misuse of this special tax status is all the more reason to revoke it. If you think Taliban is too harsh read the story of Bruce Barton and what the leaders of the Mormon BYU campus did to him as a suspected homosexual. There is very little separation from them, most American evangelical leaders and the Taliban. They both have the same goal, the same endgame in mind: theocratic despot utopia. The leader of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Bullshit has created an environment in that state that has led to a higher per capita suicide rate amongst teens than all states and some countries. The great Christian leader said it was better to be dead than be gay. Ohhhh, I love those great Christian/Mormon morals and values. That’s straight from the prophet, the man that’s on Jesus’ speed dial. Isn’t suicide an unforgivable sin as well? I guess even Jesus gets confused by all of his father’s rules too.

The Mormon church is a organization of bigotry, racism, xenophoia and prejudice. Fuck them. Let their tax exempt status fall and make them pay taxes on all of those temples, churches and magic underwear.

And for the Evangelicals that think they are off of the hook now, your voodoo is just as much bullshit and made up as the Mormon’s. Your “religion” is being used as it always has been. It’s mind control. It makes you the “us” and gives you a “them” to hate and fight against. A common enemy to unite you and cement you in your beliefs. Moors, Moslems, witches, Communists and now homosexuals.

So, if I start selling some fake invisible bullshit; create an “us” and find a “them” to hate, If I just start spouting off about how much I hate everyone with blue eyes or something like that, can I be tax-exempt as well? I think it’s worth a shot and religion seems to be a pretty good racket right now. It provides a great protective umbrella from social and personal responsibility and always has the great out that the Almighty Spaghetti monster, or whatever, will forgive you no matter what you do. You can create rules for the society and push your agenda without having to contribute anything but your dogma based on zombie worship or some sort hatred of people that are different.

Cutting VA funding is not an option

If you were wounded in Vietnam you had a 70% chance of surviving. Due to advances and improvements in battlefield medicine, if you are wounded in OIF/OEF you have a +90% chance of surviving. When you come back and you complete your service and you separate from the military you may have wounds, physical or mental, that still need treatment or care. Some may even get a 100% disability rating for wounds they received in combat that were never physical at all. That’s the problem with war it’s messy. The war for the warrior doesn’t end on a date set by politicians and world leaders. The war will always be with them and me. It will be with us until the day we die. You called us to duty and we answered. Some of us answered the call multiple times and are suffering compounding injuries. The VA was created to take care of these injuries. It angers me to hear, as we are bogged down in two wars supposedly fighting for the American sheeple, that they want to cut VA funding as a solution to the deficit “crisis.” As a matter of fact it’s two wars I didn’t even hear mentioned by any, not one, of the fucking candidates for office. None of them that gained national attention even had the audacity to mention it. They don’t care about the wars because 1) these candidates, like Christine O’Donnell don’t know very much about them and 2) it’s longer than an episode of Dancing with the Stars so the wars have passed the attention span of the American people. But you would think in an election that was supposedly about deficits we would discuss the occupation-nation-building operations in two foreign countries costing the American taxpayers $200 million per day. Nah, they were more worried about raising the marginal tax rate on millionaires 3%.

The hypocrisy of the flag-waving patriots who speak out of both sides of their mouths is astounding and angering. Supporting the troops is more than a yellow ribbon magnet on your SUV. Partriotism requires more than lip service. It’s more than waving the flag and screaming about some imaginary Marxist boogeyman. You might want to discuss that at your next tea party. If the VA is underfunded, raise taxes to fund it. If you don’t want to pay for us to fight these wars then don’t fucking send us to fight these wars. True patriotism is about selfless service and sacrifice. Why don’t you just ask us, the veterans?

“Don’t tread on me,” is their battle cry. Well, don’t tread on us. Don’t wipe us veterans under your boot and think we’ll stay there. We’re fighters, we got these scars fighting and we won’t stay there long. Don’t brush us under the rug in chasing some imaginary white rabbit of deficit reduction. Don’t again make us casualties of a war of ideology. I’m tired of being in the shitty end of the stick in right wing delusional thrash cycle.

The VA is important. This is not a debt that is owed to me, this is a covenant from America to be kept. How can we fight for our country with the thought in our heads that we are expendable, that we are consumed in use overseas. That when we come home our sacrifice means nothing because the billionaires that benefit most from our fighting have decided they don’t want to pay 3% more in taxes. I’m sorry their patriotism doesn’t extend past their checkbook and can only be found in hackneyed platitudes of press statements from right wing think tanks that work for them and on the misspelled, offensive posters of supposed Tea Party “Patriots.”

Fund the VA every penny it needs. Tax every American that reaps the benefits of the security gained from the sacrifice of veterans to pay for it. Tax defense contractors that have reaped a whirlwind of profits from these two wars enough to make the war unprofitable to them just like we did in WWII. Take away the loopholes and shelters for corporations like GE, largest defense contractor in the US, and BP, largest US defense oil contracts, that paid $0 in taxes last year. Tax them until it hurts and it’s paid for.

Grow a spine, man up, put on some man pants and let’s be the country we once were. One that respected and appreciated the sacrifice of the warrior enough to ensure the wounds they received in defense of their country were treated, cared for and healed. Let’s be the patriots our grandparents were and not the faux-patriots the right-wing prides itself on being as guise to dupe people into voting against their best interests.

Let’s be the country we were under FDR. I for one don’t understand the brand of patriotism exhibited by people like Sewell Avery, CEO of Montgomery Ward in the 1940s. Mr. Avery didn’t want to pay his fair share of taxes to pay for WWII. The difference is that when he didn’t pay, FDR sent the national guard down to his office to arrest him and made an example of him and his faux-patriotism that puts profits before country. He was required to pay $30,000 and to put it in perspective in the 1950s he retired with a fortune worth more than $300 million, much of that from war profiteering. Don’t you think he owed a little back to the country that gave him the security, opportunity, roads to make that fortune possible?

So don’t wave your flag and yell about supporting the troops until you’re ready to put your money where your mouth is, or to make hold your corporate overlords accountable and have them do the same.