For the past few weeks, specifically since I found out Les Otten was running, I've attempted to get in communication in some way with his campaign. I've sent e-mails, posted on his blog, and that is on top of the writings on this blog. I have zero responses so far. My level of unbiased approach is dropping as I continue my efforts to get a response of any kind from his campaign. So I pulled the gloves off. I wrote the following on a blog post which was a review by someone who glorified Les Otten as being able to fix Maine's problems and pull us from a long shot in comparison to how the Red Sox won under Les Otten's part ownership. It had no statement of positions and was more or less an endoresment of Les Otten. His website has so far made limited statements to to where he stands on positions and my review of his website is further down on this blog. I did not remain silent, I've complained to him formally with the following on his blog:
Maybe it is one of the many mental illnesses I've been accused of having, but what is the point of this blog? Is it to provide another forum for which discussion and debate can unfold or to simply post what makes you feel better about yourself and your campaign? Your website doesn't respond to e-mails. My questions on your previous posts go unanswered. A large part of bipartisanship is responding, confronting, and debating with your critics and opponents. If you are unwilling to do so by private e-mail, I figured this blog was a more public forum for you to prove yourself. I may sound scathing but I'm only being an observant citizen. As much as I ask for answers, I also ask for forgiveness for being harsh. That said, what is the purpose of this blog?
Thursday, July 9, 2009
ALBA (Not Jessica)
ALBA is the acronym for the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas. It includes, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Cuba, Nicaragua, ?Honduras?, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Antigua and Barbuda, and Dominica. They are introducing the SUCRE currency next year, and it will be similar in purpose to the Euro for its members.
One can notice the trend with the Euro, East Caribbean Dollar, and now SUCRE that a world currency is forming. Whether this is good or bad, a sign of unity or the apocalypse I don't care. What matters is that so far the benefits definately outweigh the negatives. I think the U.S. should push for a worldwide currency in trade. The currency is coming, and it would be beneficial to be the leaders in this global change rather than the ones left behind. The currency does not have to betray our values. The basic understanding of human rights, freedom, and democracy can be presented with global symbols instead of only national. What does this mean? Statue of liberty instead of one-eyed pyramid. Perhaps instead of leaders there could be words written in the five most common languages promoting freedom of speech, democracy, and human rights. It is a change that seems unpatriotic at times. I know the concerns about supranationalism.
The "beyond borders" nation is forming. It is undeniable. What forces control it is still up to us if we take the lead in creating it. Unlike the U.N. we can stall progress because we are the super power. Promote it now while we still have leadership in the world. Without us any effort for a greater state will fail. Yet with the forces at work our supremacy is being lost and the world is moving into a position to be able to go ahead with a global state without us. We can not let this happen or our future is not secure and our strength in peril.
What has really placed ALBA on the rising ranks in the world is oil. Venezuela and Cuba working together to extract and refine oil cheaply (compared to other makers) and sell them to the other nations in Latin America as aid could not be turned down. This is why many countries currenty recieve oil aid from the ALBA network even if they are not members. Costa Rica is an example. This oil supply comes from a breakthrough in refining heavy oil (the type of oil found in Venezuela which has, in the past, been expensive to refine and could only be refined in Texas) by Cuba, whose partnership founded ALBA.
How do we counter this cheaper oil? Since we in the U.S. have leaders unwilling to get oil domestically, we must turn to the alternatives. Today President Obama spoke at the G8 about alternative energy and climate change. Regardless of my opinion, he said we made the effort to become a major alternative energy producer and have initiatives to increase our use and improve the technology. Whether or not this will work, it is what Obama and his team came up with so we are stuck with it. Now, the long-run thinking is we could become the industry nation for green technology. Good or bad, it would make us a leader in the position of clean energy (if it works.) We could export the green technology and thus have our place in the world as a manufacturer restored.
Why do I mention this? Because geopolitically, if we could supply alternative energies that could reduce, perhaps even eliminate the need for oil in Latin America then we could diffuse the initial power of the ALBA alliance. All of its members had the reduced cost oil aid before becoming full members. So if we provide the capability to not need oil, ALBA will lose recruiting power in the region. The current members I believe are so entrenched in their new political leanings towards continuismo that just making oil less appealing will not work. However with four nations, possibly five, becoming or planning to become members of ALBA this year alone the reduced oil option is one that must be thwarted. Obama's green energy plan, should it work, may provide the resources we need to do that very thing.
Now whether or not I feel Obama sympathizes with the ALBA leftist leanings toward Socialism and Fascism makes little difference. It is if he does that we need be concerned. His support for Zelaya shows hints of support for ALBA that he could not state publicly. I fear Barack Obama desires the referendums and reforms for limitless presidential power that the leaders in the ALBA alliance have sought. It would explain why he supports Zelaya, a drug smuggler, to be returned to Honduras as president after he attempted such a referendum. I still lack the hardened evidence of why the world has turned on justice, but my theories may become more irrational as the logic stares me in the face.
The logic provided by the world is that this is a military coup in Honduras. I've proven that wrong, so the other explanations are still lacking. I seek the answers and if you have them please tell me.
One can notice the trend with the Euro, East Caribbean Dollar, and now SUCRE that a world currency is forming. Whether this is good or bad, a sign of unity or the apocalypse I don't care. What matters is that so far the benefits definately outweigh the negatives. I think the U.S. should push for a worldwide currency in trade. The currency is coming, and it would be beneficial to be the leaders in this global change rather than the ones left behind. The currency does not have to betray our values. The basic understanding of human rights, freedom, and democracy can be presented with global symbols instead of only national. What does this mean? Statue of liberty instead of one-eyed pyramid. Perhaps instead of leaders there could be words written in the five most common languages promoting freedom of speech, democracy, and human rights. It is a change that seems unpatriotic at times. I know the concerns about supranationalism.
The "beyond borders" nation is forming. It is undeniable. What forces control it is still up to us if we take the lead in creating it. Unlike the U.N. we can stall progress because we are the super power. Promote it now while we still have leadership in the world. Without us any effort for a greater state will fail. Yet with the forces at work our supremacy is being lost and the world is moving into a position to be able to go ahead with a global state without us. We can not let this happen or our future is not secure and our strength in peril.
What has really placed ALBA on the rising ranks in the world is oil. Venezuela and Cuba working together to extract and refine oil cheaply (compared to other makers) and sell them to the other nations in Latin America as aid could not be turned down. This is why many countries currenty recieve oil aid from the ALBA network even if they are not members. Costa Rica is an example. This oil supply comes from a breakthrough in refining heavy oil (the type of oil found in Venezuela which has, in the past, been expensive to refine and could only be refined in Texas) by Cuba, whose partnership founded ALBA.
How do we counter this cheaper oil? Since we in the U.S. have leaders unwilling to get oil domestically, we must turn to the alternatives. Today President Obama spoke at the G8 about alternative energy and climate change. Regardless of my opinion, he said we made the effort to become a major alternative energy producer and have initiatives to increase our use and improve the technology. Whether or not this will work, it is what Obama and his team came up with so we are stuck with it. Now, the long-run thinking is we could become the industry nation for green technology. Good or bad, it would make us a leader in the position of clean energy (if it works.) We could export the green technology and thus have our place in the world as a manufacturer restored.
Why do I mention this? Because geopolitically, if we could supply alternative energies that could reduce, perhaps even eliminate the need for oil in Latin America then we could diffuse the initial power of the ALBA alliance. All of its members had the reduced cost oil aid before becoming full members. So if we provide the capability to not need oil, ALBA will lose recruiting power in the region. The current members I believe are so entrenched in their new political leanings towards continuismo that just making oil less appealing will not work. However with four nations, possibly five, becoming or planning to become members of ALBA this year alone the reduced oil option is one that must be thwarted. Obama's green energy plan, should it work, may provide the resources we need to do that very thing.
Now whether or not I feel Obama sympathizes with the ALBA leftist leanings toward Socialism and Fascism makes little difference. It is if he does that we need be concerned. His support for Zelaya shows hints of support for ALBA that he could not state publicly. I fear Barack Obama desires the referendums and reforms for limitless presidential power that the leaders in the ALBA alliance have sought. It would explain why he supports Zelaya, a drug smuggler, to be returned to Honduras as president after he attempted such a referendum. I still lack the hardened evidence of why the world has turned on justice, but my theories may become more irrational as the logic stares me in the face.
The logic provided by the world is that this is a military coup in Honduras. I've proven that wrong, so the other explanations are still lacking. I seek the answers and if you have them please tell me.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Black Eyed Peas New Album
Yes, they have another album coming out. Today actually. For those who don't know me very well, I own all of their cds. I started listening to their music after I saw the video for "Where is the love?". I heard several of their other songs and they stood out to me as a band with many good message songs. I am glad they are back together and can't wait to buy their album.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
City Council Infrastructure Meeting
Today's infrastructure committee addressed at length two issues, resolved three, and had a comprehensive development wrap up. This was also the first meeting I have attended and my first reaction is I am going to love this job.
Now, to the two length topics: the removal of three trees at the Sea Dog due to debris from the trees seasonally, and the neon sign discussion ongoing for months so far.The trees ended up being voted to be removed by a vote of 4-1. However, only one alternative was proposed and it had been attempted already. However, I did not speak due to fear of, I don't know. However I was wondering if there was a way to perhaps tent the patio and preserve the 35 year old trees.
Then the neon sign discussion became hung up over the removal of signs when a business goes out. It continued for quite a while until I decided to make a proposed solution: the business could pay into a fund of some sort when they get the permit for a neon sign that would cover the cost of removal should the company go bankrupt. An insurance policy for the city so that the cost would not fall on Bangor's city budget.This was quickly deemed a possibility that had not been considered, and then the discussion of what could be advertised continued.
The time limitation for the other topics led to a thought I had about possible lewd advertising not being allowed not being presented: the city of Bangor does not have the resources to have its own neon sign morality police. The neon sign making companies are getting their signs legal, they should take their victory and come for the other battles another day.
The meeting went well, but I feel the neon sign discussion has lasted months due to the complexity of the codes and also the persistence for more changes by the neon company.Thats all for now, thank you for reading.
Now, to the two length topics: the removal of three trees at the Sea Dog due to debris from the trees seasonally, and the neon sign discussion ongoing for months so far.The trees ended up being voted to be removed by a vote of 4-1. However, only one alternative was proposed and it had been attempted already. However, I did not speak due to fear of, I don't know. However I was wondering if there was a way to perhaps tent the patio and preserve the 35 year old trees.
Then the neon sign discussion became hung up over the removal of signs when a business goes out. It continued for quite a while until I decided to make a proposed solution: the business could pay into a fund of some sort when they get the permit for a neon sign that would cover the cost of removal should the company go bankrupt. An insurance policy for the city so that the cost would not fall on Bangor's city budget.This was quickly deemed a possibility that had not been considered, and then the discussion of what could be advertised continued.
The time limitation for the other topics led to a thought I had about possible lewd advertising not being allowed not being presented: the city of Bangor does not have the resources to have its own neon sign morality police. The neon sign making companies are getting their signs legal, they should take their victory and come for the other battles another day.
The meeting went well, but I feel the neon sign discussion has lasted months due to the complexity of the codes and also the persistence for more changes by the neon company.Thats all for now, thank you for reading.
Taxing Health Benefits
There has been a proposal to fund the government option healthcare with a tax on health benefits that people not on the government plan will have to pay. I oppose this. To tax either the company generous enough to provide health benefits to its workers or the worker who has earned the healthcare is not right. It either taxes charity of companies or the earnings of workers who already pay income taxes. The tax code has many flawed taxes, we don't need to add another one.
ACORN Part 1
ACORN is a political organization. It helped found the WFP (Working Families Party) in New York that has expanded to be present in several other states. In this blog: http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/2009/06/fox-news-vs-wfp/
You should watch the video, and read the response. The video never mentions the WFP. It mentions the ACORN protestors, but never WFP. However the WFP responds with: That’s my way of letting you know that the largest right wing echo chamber in the country has decided to pick on the Working Families Party because of our role in making sure that the Democrats don’t go back to being the minority in the NY State Senate.
Excerpt over. If you watch the video, the discussion is about the assaults of several Republican New York state senators being assaulted as they tried to go to a vote. The organization protesting and blocking the entrance to the senate chambers was ACORN. WFP sees the report on ACORN's protest as an attack on its work. It says it is making sure Democrats don't become a minority which makes me wonder why they are not simply the Democratic Party. Perhaps ACORN and the Democratic Party need a fall organization for more unconventional methods.
Now later in the post it says it did not organize the protest. So why did it just say that a report that didn't mention them was about their efforts? They mention news articles on the protest and point out the non-mention of the WFP. So why did they just say it was their efforts involved? When you read the blog they have, they also have many "adjective defenses." I personally see those as a sign of guilt because a substantial case can not be made in their defense, so they must go on the offensive and use racism charges.
What I conclude from this is simple: ACORN is a political entity.
You should watch the video, and read the response. The video never mentions the WFP. It mentions the ACORN protestors, but never WFP. However the WFP responds with: That’s my way of letting you know that the largest right wing echo chamber in the country has decided to pick on the Working Families Party because of our role in making sure that the Democrats don’t go back to being the minority in the NY State Senate.
Excerpt over. If you watch the video, the discussion is about the assaults of several Republican New York state senators being assaulted as they tried to go to a vote. The organization protesting and blocking the entrance to the senate chambers was ACORN. WFP sees the report on ACORN's protest as an attack on its work. It says it is making sure Democrats don't become a minority which makes me wonder why they are not simply the Democratic Party. Perhaps ACORN and the Democratic Party need a fall organization for more unconventional methods.
Now later in the post it says it did not organize the protest. So why did it just say that a report that didn't mention them was about their efforts? They mention news articles on the protest and point out the non-mention of the WFP. So why did they just say it was their efforts involved? When you read the blog they have, they also have many "adjective defenses." I personally see those as a sign of guilt because a substantial case can not be made in their defense, so they must go on the offensive and use racism charges.
What I conclude from this is simple: ACORN is a political entity.
The Websites Style
The recent accusations of plagarism against Les Otten has yet to yeild criminal charges. The logo was the big thing, the second part was the design. I've decided check the similarities, and the donate button is red, and the tiered system below the title gives access to the various pages with a side bar for other options. Very similar to this website: http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/
Yet, that website is not facing the same accusations. I wouldn't apply the same accusations because it is petty to do so, but the Otten website is no more plagarizing Obama's website than that one is. This is my final word on the issue: press charges or apologize. Plagarism is a crime, so let justice prevail.
Yet, that website is not facing the same accusations. I wouldn't apply the same accusations because it is petty to do so, but the Otten website is no more plagarizing Obama's website than that one is. This is my final word on the issue: press charges or apologize. Plagarism is a crime, so let justice prevail.
Monday, July 6, 2009
ACORN
I have heard the reports, and decided to look into ACORN myself. I'll keep you posted on what I find.
Life is Good
Today, checked in to my university. Everything is in the green. Courses are set so that I can be at almost every City Council meeting, financial aid came through and everything is paid for, and I learned the bus route I will be taking is going to be free, saving me roughly 500 dollars next year. So quite simply, life is good.
Instability Approaches
South America's recent trouble for Honduras was just the beginning. I've been looking at the data and Peru, Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico are moving towards political crisis. Mexico's crisis lies in the new government being unwilling to cooperate with the drug war. Peru has its troubles in a cabinet of the president that seems ready to call it quits. Argentina has a string of issues from the recent election where political parties are calling for their own leaders to be changed and the current president is going to have much opposition in the new government. Brazil's Congressional leader has the backing of the president, but not much else. He may be forced to resign on corruption charges which will definately hurt the credibility Brazil's president has with the congress. These situations could lead to political gridlock in the very least for some of the most critical nations in South America.
Brazil and Mexico can be seen as potential U.S. allies. Brazil is without a doubt the political powerhouse of South America with military and economic superiority. A political gridlock could lead to some unlikely, and for us unwanted, changes in the leanings of those who lead Brazil. Mexico being in gridlock means the efforts against drugs in Mexico will be lessened, if not halted and that will mean the fight goes to our side of the border once more with street battles in San Diego once more instead of Tijuana.
For Peru to become held up could lead to a political opening for the Communists, yes they still exist in Peru, to gain more power. This would allow the Shining Path to have allies within the government which, to say the least, is a very very bad thing. Argentina could see a more pro-America approach follow what has been a very hostile speech giving approach from the current leaders.
Brazil and Mexico can be seen as potential U.S. allies. Brazil is without a doubt the political powerhouse of South America with military and economic superiority. A political gridlock could lead to some unlikely, and for us unwanted, changes in the leanings of those who lead Brazil. Mexico being in gridlock means the efforts against drugs in Mexico will be lessened, if not halted and that will mean the fight goes to our side of the border once more with street battles in San Diego once more instead of Tijuana.
For Peru to become held up could lead to a political opening for the Communists, yes they still exist in Peru, to gain more power. This would allow the Shining Path to have allies within the government which, to say the least, is a very very bad thing. Argentina could see a more pro-America approach follow what has been a very hostile speech giving approach from the current leaders.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
World Slowly Turning
Honduras, the world media is slowly announcing one by one, that the urgency and militarized situation of a coup in Honduras was actually civil, and the military was following orders. Now to see if the world leaders who based their condemnations on such reports will retract and recognize the new Honduran president.
The next question I have, after looking into the connection between Zelaya and Chavez further, is why is Obama supporting Zelaya? The reason this becomes even more important than before is the fact that in February the State Department released a report which linked Zelaya to helping Chavez smuggle drugs to the United States. Why are we supporting the return to power of a man who is causing so much pain and suffering to our nation? Obama wake up and do your damn job. There is no excuse for not knowing what causes our country harm and knowing the names of those responsible!
To speak of Zelaya as legitimate, in any form is beyond me. Now my opinion of him is nothing more than a drug peddler for Chavez. Barack Obama has stated he supports the placing of the executive power of a country to a drug smuggler. The outcry must become larger. It must become louder. America needs to wake up from the sleep it has right now. It is 3:34 in the morning and I am awake, and I am supporting freedom still. When our nation takes stands against the freedom and democracy we promote, we negate our efforts. Iran, and Honduras have proven where Obama stands on Democracy. He believes our nation elected him as a social justice, not out of knowing he was a good candidate. When that social justice no longer is in his favor, I fear we will have a Chavez style approach to our nation's future. We must not let this happen. We can't. I won't.
The next question I have, after looking into the connection between Zelaya and Chavez further, is why is Obama supporting Zelaya? The reason this becomes even more important than before is the fact that in February the State Department released a report which linked Zelaya to helping Chavez smuggle drugs to the United States. Why are we supporting the return to power of a man who is causing so much pain and suffering to our nation? Obama wake up and do your damn job. There is no excuse for not knowing what causes our country harm and knowing the names of those responsible!
To speak of Zelaya as legitimate, in any form is beyond me. Now my opinion of him is nothing more than a drug peddler for Chavez. Barack Obama has stated he supports the placing of the executive power of a country to a drug smuggler. The outcry must become larger. It must become louder. America needs to wake up from the sleep it has right now. It is 3:34 in the morning and I am awake, and I am supporting freedom still. When our nation takes stands against the freedom and democracy we promote, we negate our efforts. Iran, and Honduras have proven where Obama stands on Democracy. He believes our nation elected him as a social justice, not out of knowing he was a good candidate. When that social justice no longer is in his favor, I fear we will have a Chavez style approach to our nation's future. We must not let this happen. We can't. I won't.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
The World's Recognized Honduras
Could the world please explain to me how they expect the Honduran government to operate under Zelaya, his foreign minister, and about half of Honduras' diplomats overseas to function? The military, supreme court, congress, human rights umbudsmen, and lower courts with a new president chosen from the line of succession currently rule the country. The world is supporting the under dog that should be dropped for the people of Iran.
Honduras, OAS, and New World Order?
The Organization of American States was going to ban Honduras from the organization in response to what they call a coup. Honduras, today, withdrew before they were able to be suspended. From a Telegraph article today:
But the OAS - meeting Saturday evening in Washington to consider suspending the country's membership - says that the government of Honduras isn't legitimate and therefore can't withdraw from the group.
OAS assistant secretary-general, Albert Ramdin, told reporters that the OAS doesn't recognize the government that ousted Zelaya from office last Sunday and that "only a legitimate government" can decide to withdraw from the OAS.
Excerpt over. So my question is what will the OAS do when no representative of Honduras with any real power shows up to the meetings? What will they do when the current government refuses to abide by the OAS agreements they have withdrawn from? Cease-fires in Israel can be unilateral, and so is Honduras' withdrawal. The OAS can do their best to try and get an agreement with Honduras, but if the people at the border don't let them in, what do they think they are going to do?
If this leads to war, I condemn any nation that attacks Honduras. If our nation takes any part other than defending Honduras, I condemn my own nation.
But the OAS - meeting Saturday evening in Washington to consider suspending the country's membership - says that the government of Honduras isn't legitimate and therefore can't withdraw from the group.
OAS assistant secretary-general, Albert Ramdin, told reporters that the OAS doesn't recognize the government that ousted Zelaya from office last Sunday and that "only a legitimate government" can decide to withdraw from the OAS.
Excerpt over. So my question is what will the OAS do when no representative of Honduras with any real power shows up to the meetings? What will they do when the current government refuses to abide by the OAS agreements they have withdrawn from? Cease-fires in Israel can be unilateral, and so is Honduras' withdrawal. The OAS can do their best to try and get an agreement with Honduras, but if the people at the border don't let them in, what do they think they are going to do?
If this leads to war, I condemn any nation that attacks Honduras. If our nation takes any part other than defending Honduras, I condemn my own nation.
Powell Contradicts His Endorsement
http://news.aol.com/article/powell-warns-obama-on-big-government/556058?icid=webmailwbml-aimdl6link3http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Fpowell-warns-obama-on-big-government%2F556058
He endorsed Barack Obama, who didn't lie about the massive tax cap and trade was, didn't lie about health care, didn't lie about the stimulus proposals. So why did Powell endorse someone who, as in the article he warns Obama against (too late), :
"Keep it as small as possible. Keep the tax burden on the American people as small as possible, but at the same time, have government that is solving the problems of the people,"
"The right answer is, 'Give me a government that works,'" the former secretary of state said in a television interview to be aired Sunday. "Keep it as small as possible," added Powell, who said he has spoken recently with Obama and stays in touch with him.
Excerpt over. If Powell believed those words, he would not have endorsed Barack Obama. If he does believe those words, there was another reason for his endorsement of Obama. I just know Powell, by endorsing Obama, betrayed these beliefs.
He endorsed Barack Obama, who didn't lie about the massive tax cap and trade was, didn't lie about health care, didn't lie about the stimulus proposals. So why did Powell endorse someone who, as in the article he warns Obama against (too late), :
"Keep it as small as possible. Keep the tax burden on the American people as small as possible, but at the same time, have government that is solving the problems of the people,"
"The right answer is, 'Give me a government that works,'" the former secretary of state said in a television interview to be aired Sunday. "Keep it as small as possible," added Powell, who said he has spoken recently with Obama and stays in touch with him.
Excerpt over. If Powell believed those words, he would not have endorsed Barack Obama. If he does believe those words, there was another reason for his endorsement of Obama. I just know Powell, by endorsing Obama, betrayed these beliefs.
Announcement
I would like to make several statements about our city council. We had Mr. Bronson at the Bangor GOP meeting last week telling us about the dismal attendance at the meetings and he mentioned how the budget was changed by nickles and dimes. He mentioned a 75,000 dollar study, the fourth of its kind, covering the Auditorium project.
There were some unwanted cuts in other parts of the city, the merit of which varies. However, this was waste. Hearing Bronson refer to this 75,000 dollar project as more nickles and dimes irritated me. 75,000 dollars is 75,000 dollars. Sure, compared to the stimulus bill it seems petty, but we need to start rebuilding this country from the ground up. The lowest level is our city council. We need to eliminate the waste close the home and worry about the rest when we can. They always say make sure your house is in order before you clean the neighbors, so I'm going to help clean up our house.
The budget crisis across the country, I believe, could have been spared if the thirty years of waste that was just seen as another little project, money we can send for any purpose, was stopped. Right now with our city in the recession just like everywhere else, the money we pay to the city should be spent as wisely and prudently as we have to spend ours. Listening to Brohnson refer to the nickle and dime approach by our councilors let me know that something is wrong with the council. So I went to the meetings and my opinion was generous to their approaches. They speak of increases and cuts in programs without any idea of what half the programs do!
When Peter D'errico spends months pushing for the anti-car smoking bill we know our money is being wasted on the lights in their hall. The moral value of the bill is certainly high, but the necessity of the law, which the police, as far as I've seen, don't enforce, is negligable. We do not need these time consuming new laws against our rights taking away from the discussions about our budget, which is tossed together in a few weeks because the city doesn't give itself enough time to look at the revenues and the efficiency of the programs they go towards. Our city has several million dollars in its budget process, so this is a bit more than nickles and dimes and we need people to manage that money to the best possible impact for the city. I announce I am going to run for city council to give better management to the city and stop the wasteful spending in our community.
There were some unwanted cuts in other parts of the city, the merit of which varies. However, this was waste. Hearing Bronson refer to this 75,000 dollar project as more nickles and dimes irritated me. 75,000 dollars is 75,000 dollars. Sure, compared to the stimulus bill it seems petty, but we need to start rebuilding this country from the ground up. The lowest level is our city council. We need to eliminate the waste close the home and worry about the rest when we can. They always say make sure your house is in order before you clean the neighbors, so I'm going to help clean up our house.
The budget crisis across the country, I believe, could have been spared if the thirty years of waste that was just seen as another little project, money we can send for any purpose, was stopped. Right now with our city in the recession just like everywhere else, the money we pay to the city should be spent as wisely and prudently as we have to spend ours. Listening to Brohnson refer to the nickle and dime approach by our councilors let me know that something is wrong with the council. So I went to the meetings and my opinion was generous to their approaches. They speak of increases and cuts in programs without any idea of what half the programs do!
When Peter D'errico spends months pushing for the anti-car smoking bill we know our money is being wasted on the lights in their hall. The moral value of the bill is certainly high, but the necessity of the law, which the police, as far as I've seen, don't enforce, is negligable. We do not need these time consuming new laws against our rights taking away from the discussions about our budget, which is tossed together in a few weeks because the city doesn't give itself enough time to look at the revenues and the efficiency of the programs they go towards. Our city has several million dollars in its budget process, so this is a bit more than nickles and dimes and we need people to manage that money to the best possible impact for the city. I announce I am going to run for city council to give better management to the city and stop the wasteful spending in our community.
July 4th, and 100
This is my 100th blog post. Since I started this blog I have graduated high school, been accepted to UMaine, got engaged, and formalized my run for city council. While I am certainly not the brightest or most active American I do my part. It is fitting that July 4th is the day when this momentus number is passed by my blog.
In this little micro world we have talked about world war 5, cats, distractions, Honduras, my possibly flawed yet common sense approaches to government policy, healthcare, economics, elections for governor, Iran, Afghanistan, history, Obama, prison improvement, lies, fringe elements of society, cancer, budgets, California, slavery, apologies, insults, North Korea, Sarahwi Democratic Republic, Republican family values, alcohol, news stories, religion, abortion, human rights, psychology, campaigns, ethnicity, Madagascar, music, peotry. It seems the topics have been as numerous as the posts because the list is certainly longer.
I have scolded, encouraged, congradulated, and thanked many people. I have met with candidates for governor and interviewed them (I was more surprised for the interview than they were.) I've accomplished many things in this time frame and focused on local, national, and global issues. My opinions have lost their power to the research and information I find in order to prove the world what is right.
I have gone from just giving my word to looking for the truth. I've explained my philosophy and lived by it rigorously. This has all be a prelude though. The first 100 posts were just the beginning. The first chapter of many. This is because it is today, on July 4th, that I think of the reasons why I am running for city council. It is this day that tells the story of why I will be serving the people in this great land should I get elected. The history of this country, the glory of its freedoms are unmatched in the world.
We all complain, because it can always be better. However this nation is the best in the world by far. We are hospitable to our visitors from abroad, who in their countries are suspicious and hostile to Americans. You can walk through our streets and feel safe, unlike many in the third world. This safety, this welcoming manner is givable because of our great freedom. Without the freedom to think of ideas and promote them ourselves, we would not have the chance to choose the people who run for office. Our leaders are elected for the ideas they have the freedom to create and think of.
This freedom to think, to make an idea and have an opinion are what have made our economy the most innovative in the world. This spirit of freedom of thought is what allows me to run for city council. I will serve the people who have ideas and opinions that will sometimes be similar to my own, and sometimes different. However, I will never close the door to a new idea or opinion. It would simply be un-American. Happy July 4th everyone.
In this little micro world we have talked about world war 5, cats, distractions, Honduras, my possibly flawed yet common sense approaches to government policy, healthcare, economics, elections for governor, Iran, Afghanistan, history, Obama, prison improvement, lies, fringe elements of society, cancer, budgets, California, slavery, apologies, insults, North Korea, Sarahwi Democratic Republic, Republican family values, alcohol, news stories, religion, abortion, human rights, psychology, campaigns, ethnicity, Madagascar, music, peotry. It seems the topics have been as numerous as the posts because the list is certainly longer.
I have scolded, encouraged, congradulated, and thanked many people. I have met with candidates for governor and interviewed them (I was more surprised for the interview than they were.) I've accomplished many things in this time frame and focused on local, national, and global issues. My opinions have lost their power to the research and information I find in order to prove the world what is right.
I have gone from just giving my word to looking for the truth. I've explained my philosophy and lived by it rigorously. This has all be a prelude though. The first 100 posts were just the beginning. The first chapter of many. This is because it is today, on July 4th, that I think of the reasons why I am running for city council. It is this day that tells the story of why I will be serving the people in this great land should I get elected. The history of this country, the glory of its freedoms are unmatched in the world.
We all complain, because it can always be better. However this nation is the best in the world by far. We are hospitable to our visitors from abroad, who in their countries are suspicious and hostile to Americans. You can walk through our streets and feel safe, unlike many in the third world. This safety, this welcoming manner is givable because of our great freedom. Without the freedom to think of ideas and promote them ourselves, we would not have the chance to choose the people who run for office. Our leaders are elected for the ideas they have the freedom to create and think of.
This freedom to think, to make an idea and have an opinion are what have made our economy the most innovative in the world. This spirit of freedom of thought is what allows me to run for city council. I will serve the people who have ideas and opinions that will sometimes be similar to my own, and sometimes different. However, I will never close the door to a new idea or opinion. It would simply be un-American. Happy July 4th everyone.
Irony In Central America
Why is it that the leading nations, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Venezuela, calling for freedom and democracy in Honduras, are the same nations that are taking away those two essential things in their own countries?
Friday, July 3, 2009
Capitalism Of Tyranny
A U.S. company will seek legal action against Lenovo, Acer and Sony next week over their shipment in China of controversial software that the company says stole its programming code.
From a new article at: http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/167842/suit_over_chinas_web_filter_to_target_lenovo_acer_sony.html
How is it that we have allowed U.S. companies to be part of the removal and restriction of freedoms around the world? Should those companies actions and programs not extend the Constitution to all of their business deals? Who in those companies has such a lacking of care for human beings as to enable tyranny? I will find out and I urge you to do the same.
From a new article at: http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/167842/suit_over_chinas_web_filter_to_target_lenovo_acer_sony.html
How is it that we have allowed U.S. companies to be part of the removal and restriction of freedoms around the world? Should those companies actions and programs not extend the Constitution to all of their business deals? Who in those companies has such a lacking of care for human beings as to enable tyranny? I will find out and I urge you to do the same.
Honduras from State Department Perspective
The briefing on Honduras with two officials, the names of which were not in the briefing here: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2009/july/125564.htm
Now, they insist that the actions in Honduras were a coup, but do not explain why there is in fact no suspension of the aid that a coup requires by the State Department. And then there is this quote:
[C]oncerns or doubts about the wisdom of his actions relating to his proposed non-binding referendum have are independent of the unconstitutional act taken against him.
Excerpt over. Lets turn to an excerpt from the Constitution of Honduras:
No citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.
Excerpt over. Zelaya did not cease in his function as President, and so the Supreme Court acted. Lets go back into reality, I know its difficult to leave the safe zone in denial, to the purpose of a Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is meant to protect and ensure that the laws and actions of the country abide by the Constitution. So when Zelaya did not cease his function, it came to them to order the military to have him removed. Zelaya's proposal to change the Constitution to run for re-election was the reason he was removed from office. The official who said that was lucky his name was not in the article because I'd find his public contact information and request he resign because he certainly isn't doing his job.
Now the news missed this statement by the other official present:
The transfer of leadership was not a military action.
Excerpt over. Excuse me while I loudly proclaim in the peanut gallery: I told you so.
Next statement is a contradiction of our actions:
And again, in terms of how we attempted to address this issue, at the end of the day, this is a Honduran issue and a Honduran problem. And we and the OAS and other partners can work to try to create a context in which solutions are found, but we can’t compose those solutions.
Excerpt over. If we are not composing the solutions, why did we sign onto the OAS demand for the reinstatement of Zelaya? Does that not qualify as a solution to the coup?
The direct contradiction to the previous statement took only a question's time:
Well, again, we and all the countries of the region have called for an unconditional return – in other words, a return of President Zelaya and a restoration of the democratic and constitutional order, which means that President Zelaya is president of Honduras with all the powers and privileges that adhere to the presidency.
Excerpt over. It only needs common sense to see the contradiction.
Our money gives these people paychecks. I'm annoyed immensely.
Now, they insist that the actions in Honduras were a coup, but do not explain why there is in fact no suspension of the aid that a coup requires by the State Department. And then there is this quote:
[C]oncerns or doubts about the wisdom of his actions relating to his proposed non-binding referendum have are independent of the unconstitutional act taken against him.
Excerpt over. Lets turn to an excerpt from the Constitution of Honduras:
No citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.
Excerpt over. Zelaya did not cease in his function as President, and so the Supreme Court acted. Lets go back into reality, I know its difficult to leave the safe zone in denial, to the purpose of a Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is meant to protect and ensure that the laws and actions of the country abide by the Constitution. So when Zelaya did not cease his function, it came to them to order the military to have him removed. Zelaya's proposal to change the Constitution to run for re-election was the reason he was removed from office. The official who said that was lucky his name was not in the article because I'd find his public contact information and request he resign because he certainly isn't doing his job.
Now the news missed this statement by the other official present:
The transfer of leadership was not a military action.
Excerpt over. Excuse me while I loudly proclaim in the peanut gallery: I told you so.
Next statement is a contradiction of our actions:
And again, in terms of how we attempted to address this issue, at the end of the day, this is a Honduran issue and a Honduran problem. And we and the OAS and other partners can work to try to create a context in which solutions are found, but we can’t compose those solutions.
Excerpt over. If we are not composing the solutions, why did we sign onto the OAS demand for the reinstatement of Zelaya? Does that not qualify as a solution to the coup?
The direct contradiction to the previous statement took only a question's time:
Well, again, we and all the countries of the region have called for an unconditional return – in other words, a return of President Zelaya and a restoration of the democratic and constitutional order, which means that President Zelaya is president of Honduras with all the powers and privileges that adhere to the presidency.
Excerpt over. It only needs common sense to see the contradiction.
Our money gives these people paychecks. I'm annoyed immensely.
Honduras
For the moment here is an excellent article. http://www.miamiherald.com/1506/story/1125872.html
Later I will write about the inconsistencies WITHIN the same article that make me question the quality of reporting.
Later I will write about the inconsistencies WITHIN the same article that make me question the quality of reporting.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Honduras Press Silenced?
When state run media is shut down, it is not censorship. It is the promotion of more realistic journalism that will not be blindly in favor of the government! Use common sense people!
I'm going to go out on a limb and explain for the government of Honduras to the world (since they are a bit busy right now) why the media has been turned off (many were international stations.) The provision in a treaty that I can't remember the name of, I think the American Convention or some U.N. provision, gives nations the benefit of being able to suspend several freedoms in times of emergency. I am not making this up, this provision was explained in the Human Rights Watch letter to the U.N. regarding Honduras.
Now, it certainly is an emergency. The world refuses to aknowledge the government exists. However, might I suggest considering the tone the world has taken, and the way the media continues to call this a coup (which for all people, including Hondurans, will be a spark for revolt) and under such a condition they need to calm their people from rebelling based on a lie. Again, use common sense.
I'm going to go out on a limb and explain for the government of Honduras to the world (since they are a bit busy right now) why the media has been turned off (many were international stations.) The provision in a treaty that I can't remember the name of, I think the American Convention or some U.N. provision, gives nations the benefit of being able to suspend several freedoms in times of emergency. I am not making this up, this provision was explained in the Human Rights Watch letter to the U.N. regarding Honduras.
Now, it certainly is an emergency. The world refuses to aknowledge the government exists. However, might I suggest considering the tone the world has taken, and the way the media continues to call this a coup (which for all people, including Hondurans, will be a spark for revolt) and under such a condition they need to calm their people from rebelling based on a lie. Again, use common sense.
Hondurus and the World
Why the world was so quick to respond to Honduras when they are still failing with Iran's people being slaughtered, I don't know. However although I've proven the coup to not be a coup time and time again in previous posts, the reason for the unanimous global condemnation of this incident lacks a reason. The gut response is the world thinks it is a coup, and that would certainly lend to the ignorance of the world opinion. However, is it possible for a majority of the world, including the leader of the free world, Obama, to be that stupid? I prefer to be an optimist and think not.
So why? Honduras deployed troops to Iran for the invasion, a reason the world may dislike them. This was from a president before the current one, but may lend to the support of a long-shot return (using as many destabalizing time wasting methods possible) of Zelaya to the presidency. Then there is the withdrawal of their forces following the Madrid bombings, under a former president but still a sign of cowardice. In this they offended the world already. They offended those in favor of the war in Iraq and those against. I'm theorizing so don't shoot me.
Isreal and Taiwan and the opposition leader in Venezuela recognize the new president. The support ends there. Common sense for the legitimacy of a nation comes easier to nations who know what it feels like to have their own government, freedom, and nation and still not be recognized by China. They know Honduras is legitimate. They did not recognize Honduras becuase they want to form an alliance of unrecognized nations in the world. If this were the case Abkhazia, Ossetia, Kosovo, Chechnya, and Sahrawi Democratic Republic would all recognize each other. This is not the case. Honduras' government is legitimate, but the world for some reason does not recognize them. Why? I still don't know.
A trade embargo has also been put in place by Venezuela, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. The mystery for the U.S. response continues when the State Department, despite Obama's coup calling, will not list the action as a coup and thus cut off aid to the country.
Now the U.S. relations with Honduras are generally good. Very little trouble. Except when Zelaya withdrew our ambassador last year with Venezuela and others following Bolivia's accusation of our ambassadors actually working with the cartels to smuggle drugs (no evidence or charges were put forth or made.) So defending Zelaya makes no sense as that was an act of hostility. Why why why why why. Yes, I am confused. I look at it, and I know the truth, but the world is all wrong on this. I can't figure it out. What makes Zelaya so popular among all sides?
Why is Zelaya considered the good man in this? Why is he seen as the better option? It all comes down to why. He was removed with a reason, the why is explained there. The why for the world reaction is missing. Venezuela is simple: Zelaya was creating a regime similar to Chavez and in alliance with Chavez. Which makes Europe and America's responses confusing.
Would it not be better to allow the alliance that I speak of take the hit, and support the new government and have excellent relations while Chavez takes a loss? Zelaya has chosen his side and it is against us, so why do we think by supporting him that we will change the influence Chavez has on his leadership policies? I can't figure any of it out. If you can please tell me.
So why? Honduras deployed troops to Iran for the invasion, a reason the world may dislike them. This was from a president before the current one, but may lend to the support of a long-shot return (using as many destabalizing time wasting methods possible) of Zelaya to the presidency. Then there is the withdrawal of their forces following the Madrid bombings, under a former president but still a sign of cowardice. In this they offended the world already. They offended those in favor of the war in Iraq and those against. I'm theorizing so don't shoot me.
Isreal and Taiwan and the opposition leader in Venezuela recognize the new president. The support ends there. Common sense for the legitimacy of a nation comes easier to nations who know what it feels like to have their own government, freedom, and nation and still not be recognized by China. They know Honduras is legitimate. They did not recognize Honduras becuase they want to form an alliance of unrecognized nations in the world. If this were the case Abkhazia, Ossetia, Kosovo, Chechnya, and Sahrawi Democratic Republic would all recognize each other. This is not the case. Honduras' government is legitimate, but the world for some reason does not recognize them. Why? I still don't know.
A trade embargo has also been put in place by Venezuela, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. The mystery for the U.S. response continues when the State Department, despite Obama's coup calling, will not list the action as a coup and thus cut off aid to the country.
Now the U.S. relations with Honduras are generally good. Very little trouble. Except when Zelaya withdrew our ambassador last year with Venezuela and others following Bolivia's accusation of our ambassadors actually working with the cartels to smuggle drugs (no evidence or charges were put forth or made.) So defending Zelaya makes no sense as that was an act of hostility. Why why why why why. Yes, I am confused. I look at it, and I know the truth, but the world is all wrong on this. I can't figure it out. What makes Zelaya so popular among all sides?
Why is Zelaya considered the good man in this? Why is he seen as the better option? It all comes down to why. He was removed with a reason, the why is explained there. The why for the world reaction is missing. Venezuela is simple: Zelaya was creating a regime similar to Chavez and in alliance with Chavez. Which makes Europe and America's responses confusing.
Would it not be better to allow the alliance that I speak of take the hit, and support the new government and have excellent relations while Chavez takes a loss? Zelaya has chosen his side and it is against us, so why do we think by supporting him that we will change the influence Chavez has on his leadership policies? I can't figure any of it out. If you can please tell me.
Honduras FACT
The following article: http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0702/p09s03-coop.html
explains the situation of Honduras from the perspective of someone who knows Honduras a lot better than I do. This should be the final word on the issue of the legality of the removal of Zelaya. It is as follows:
Tegucigalpa, Honduras - Sometimes, the whole world prefers a lie to the truth. The White House, the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and much of the media have condemned the ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya this past weekend as a coup d'état.
That is nonsense.
In fact, what happened here is nothing short of the triumph of the rule of law.
To understand recent events, you have to know a bit about Honduras's constitutional history. In 1982, my country adopted a new Constitution that enabled our orderly return to democracy after years of military rule. After more than a dozen previous constitutions, the current Constitution, at 27 years old, has endured the longest.
It has endured because it responds and adapts to changing political conditions: Of its original 379 articles, seven have been completely or partially repealed, 18 have been interpreted, and 121 have been reformed.
It also includes seven articles that cannot be repealed or amended because they address issues that are critical for us. Those unchangeable articles include the form of government; the extent of our borders; the number of years of the presidential term; two prohibitions – one with respect to reelection of presidents, the other concerning eligibility for the presidency; and one article that penalizes the abrogation of the Constitution.
During these 27 years, Honduras has dealt with its problems within the rule of law. Every successful democratic country has lived through similar periods of trial and error until they were able to forge legal frameworks that adapt to their reality. France crafted more than a dozen constitutions between 1789 and the adoption of the current one in 1958. The US Constitution has been amended 27 times since 1789. And the British – pragmatic as they are – in 900 years have made so many changes that they have never bothered to compile their Constitution into a single body of law.
Under our Constitution, what happened in Honduras this past Sunday? Soldiers arrested and sent out of the country a Honduran citizen who, the day before, through his own actions had stripped himself of the presidency.
These are the facts: On June 26, President Zelaya issued a decree ordering all government employees to take part in the "Public Opinion Poll to convene a National Constitutional Assembly." In doing so, Zelaya triggered a constitutional provision that automatically removed him from office.
Constitutional assemblies are convened to write new constitutions. When Zelaya published that decree to initiate an "opinion poll" about the possibility of convening a national assembly, he contravened the unchangeable articles of the Constitution that deal with the prohibition of reelecting a president and of extending his term. His actions showed intent.
Our Constitution takes such intent seriously. According to Article 239: "No citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform [emphasis added], as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years."
Notice that the article speaks about intent and that it also says "immediately" – as in "instant," as in "no trial required," as in "no impeachment needed."
Continuismo – the tendency of heads of state to extend their rule indefinitely – has been the lifeblood of Latin America's authoritarian tradition. The Constitution's provision of instant sanction might sound draconian, but every Latin American democrat knows how much of a threat to our fragile democracies continuismo presents. In Latin America, chiefs of state have often been above the law. The instant sanction of the supreme law has successfully prevented the possibility of a new Honduran continuismo.
The Supreme Court and the attorney general ordered Zelaya's arrest for disobeying several court orders compelling him to obey the Constitution. He was detained and taken to Costa Rica. Why? Congress needed time to convene and remove him from office. With him inside the country that would have been impossible. This decision was taken by the 123 (of the 128) members of Congress present that day.
Don't believe the coup myth. The Honduran military acted entirely within the bounds of the Constitution. The military gained nothing but the respect of the nation by its actions.
I am extremely proud of my compatriots. Finally, we have decided to stand up and become a country of laws, not men. From now on, here in Honduras, no one will be above the law.
Octavio Sánchez, a lawyer, is a former presidential adviser (2002-05) and minister of culture (2005-06) of the Republic of Honduras.
explains the situation of Honduras from the perspective of someone who knows Honduras a lot better than I do. This should be the final word on the issue of the legality of the removal of Zelaya. It is as follows:
Tegucigalpa, Honduras - Sometimes, the whole world prefers a lie to the truth. The White House, the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and much of the media have condemned the ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya this past weekend as a coup d'état.
That is nonsense.
In fact, what happened here is nothing short of the triumph of the rule of law.
To understand recent events, you have to know a bit about Honduras's constitutional history. In 1982, my country adopted a new Constitution that enabled our orderly return to democracy after years of military rule. After more than a dozen previous constitutions, the current Constitution, at 27 years old, has endured the longest.
It has endured because it responds and adapts to changing political conditions: Of its original 379 articles, seven have been completely or partially repealed, 18 have been interpreted, and 121 have been reformed.
It also includes seven articles that cannot be repealed or amended because they address issues that are critical for us. Those unchangeable articles include the form of government; the extent of our borders; the number of years of the presidential term; two prohibitions – one with respect to reelection of presidents, the other concerning eligibility for the presidency; and one article that penalizes the abrogation of the Constitution.
During these 27 years, Honduras has dealt with its problems within the rule of law. Every successful democratic country has lived through similar periods of trial and error until they were able to forge legal frameworks that adapt to their reality. France crafted more than a dozen constitutions between 1789 and the adoption of the current one in 1958. The US Constitution has been amended 27 times since 1789. And the British – pragmatic as they are – in 900 years have made so many changes that they have never bothered to compile their Constitution into a single body of law.
Under our Constitution, what happened in Honduras this past Sunday? Soldiers arrested and sent out of the country a Honduran citizen who, the day before, through his own actions had stripped himself of the presidency.
These are the facts: On June 26, President Zelaya issued a decree ordering all government employees to take part in the "Public Opinion Poll to convene a National Constitutional Assembly." In doing so, Zelaya triggered a constitutional provision that automatically removed him from office.
Constitutional assemblies are convened to write new constitutions. When Zelaya published that decree to initiate an "opinion poll" about the possibility of convening a national assembly, he contravened the unchangeable articles of the Constitution that deal with the prohibition of reelecting a president and of extending his term. His actions showed intent.
Our Constitution takes such intent seriously. According to Article 239: "No citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform [emphasis added], as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years."
Notice that the article speaks about intent and that it also says "immediately" – as in "instant," as in "no trial required," as in "no impeachment needed."
Continuismo – the tendency of heads of state to extend their rule indefinitely – has been the lifeblood of Latin America's authoritarian tradition. The Constitution's provision of instant sanction might sound draconian, but every Latin American democrat knows how much of a threat to our fragile democracies continuismo presents. In Latin America, chiefs of state have often been above the law. The instant sanction of the supreme law has successfully prevented the possibility of a new Honduran continuismo.
The Supreme Court and the attorney general ordered Zelaya's arrest for disobeying several court orders compelling him to obey the Constitution. He was detained and taken to Costa Rica. Why? Congress needed time to convene and remove him from office. With him inside the country that would have been impossible. This decision was taken by the 123 (of the 128) members of Congress present that day.
Don't believe the coup myth. The Honduran military acted entirely within the bounds of the Constitution. The military gained nothing but the respect of the nation by its actions.
I am extremely proud of my compatriots. Finally, we have decided to stand up and become a country of laws, not men. From now on, here in Honduras, no one will be above the law.
Octavio Sánchez, a lawyer, is a former presidential adviser (2002-05) and minister of culture (2005-06) of the Republic of Honduras.
TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) - Honduras' Congress approved a decree on Wednesday to crack down on opposition during a nightly curfew imposed after the recent coup.
Lets examine this sentence. After a coup the Honduran Congress approved a decree. The rest of the sentence doesn't really matter (unless you want the news tid bit.) The coup, with no military general in control, has allowed the Supreme Court, Congress, and Presidential power structure to remain intact. Either this is the strangest and low-bar coup in history, or it isn't a coup!
Lets examine this sentence. After a coup the Honduran Congress approved a decree. The rest of the sentence doesn't really matter (unless you want the news tid bit.) The coup, with no military general in control, has allowed the Supreme Court, Congress, and Presidential power structure to remain intact. Either this is the strangest and low-bar coup in history, or it isn't a coup!
The airing of grievances in society as a whole is nothing new. The solutions offered by some who do this differs greatly even if the complaints do not. As a whole the problems are known. The solutions are many, and it is the radical who uses violence as a solution.
The Coming Insurrection is a book. It was written by radicals. Most of the book is airing grievances. These are legitimate complaints against the world. There are solutions offered and this is where a social examination becomes a handbook for the worst of crimes against the innocent. It blames all in society, and demands their deaths by force. I am making it my mission to work through this book and analyze the source of the complaints, and the insanity of the solutions. I will disprove this book at every solution calling for violence or the destruction of society. They are not solutions but a controlling mechanism for the hatred they inspire with their stories of social injustice in today's world.
I am exposing, denouncing, and proving wrong this book so that those who have read it can come and regain their sanity and rejoin the real solutions. I am providing an alternative to the violence. Democracy is not dead, is not a revolving door and I will prove it to you.
For those who haven't read the book, you may think I'm crazy for even doing this. However right you may be, I have a reason. The book was written to spread an ideology and indeed it has. Europe has this book spreading like wildfire even though it is banned. The ideology is right there. I have the words before me. I condemn them yes, but I must fight the ideology with another ideology. That is why the Taliban have proven so successful, the grievances for the civilian deaths, regardless of who caused them, is harnessed and turned against us in America. The grievances stir emotion in this book and is guided towards the state in whatever form it takes. It calls, as Al Qaeda Jihad does, violence and the destruction of society.
Nobody else has written a counter ideology to these ideologies and as a social experiment and an attempt to stop the spread of these advocates for violence I will write the counter. Right here on my blog. Maybe I'm crazy and this is all just worthless, but I feel it is my obligation to try. Things are wrong in the world and they must be made right. This is just a small part of my effort to make it right.
The Coming Insurrection is a book. It was written by radicals. Most of the book is airing grievances. These are legitimate complaints against the world. There are solutions offered and this is where a social examination becomes a handbook for the worst of crimes against the innocent. It blames all in society, and demands their deaths by force. I am making it my mission to work through this book and analyze the source of the complaints, and the insanity of the solutions. I will disprove this book at every solution calling for violence or the destruction of society. They are not solutions but a controlling mechanism for the hatred they inspire with their stories of social injustice in today's world.
I am exposing, denouncing, and proving wrong this book so that those who have read it can come and regain their sanity and rejoin the real solutions. I am providing an alternative to the violence. Democracy is not dead, is not a revolving door and I will prove it to you.
For those who haven't read the book, you may think I'm crazy for even doing this. However right you may be, I have a reason. The book was written to spread an ideology and indeed it has. Europe has this book spreading like wildfire even though it is banned. The ideology is right there. I have the words before me. I condemn them yes, but I must fight the ideology with another ideology. That is why the Taliban have proven so successful, the grievances for the civilian deaths, regardless of who caused them, is harnessed and turned against us in America. The grievances stir emotion in this book and is guided towards the state in whatever form it takes. It calls, as Al Qaeda Jihad does, violence and the destruction of society.
Nobody else has written a counter ideology to these ideologies and as a social experiment and an attempt to stop the spread of these advocates for violence I will write the counter. Right here on my blog. Maybe I'm crazy and this is all just worthless, but I feel it is my obligation to try. Things are wrong in the world and they must be made right. This is just a small part of my effort to make it right.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Radical Reality
A radical. Someone on the fringe. The outcast, with a repressed desire to do something more than they are.
The ideas of radicals cause for sudden change, which is why violence is often the halmark of a radical's actions. The sudden change creates violence because violence is still the abnormality of society. It is thrown at us, but the experience is denied and that is why radicals advocate violence. A solution, if one were to jump to conclusions, would be to allow them to experience violence. NO.
The root cause is their desire to do something they are not. The achievement to a higher level of society is often what they seek, and since they can't go higher, and they can only stay where they are, they want to destroy the hierarchy.
I know this comes out of nowhere and you probably did not expect social-radical philosophy to be on this blog. Neither did I. Violence, however, is never the answer. It is the society that rises from the ashes and keeps rising until the next burning that is remembered in history for its treatment of humanity and the greatness it achieved. The violence, however, is always the downfall. Violence is always the end of society. The between points in history where civlization is growing, prospering, is repetitive. Societies rise with laws and order and leadership, and always seems to follow a process. The violent upheavals that tear down a society are always different with a different story to it. The purpose of the violence changes every time: one repressed group seeking freedom, another seeking more of something, and sometimes the lacking saw those with something lower their gaurd. However the process of the downfall is different and involves thought in itself. However it is not a man who destroys society: it is an animal.
The instict to take, instead of earn, comes from animals. The concept of earning, of living is in us alone. Mankind has achieved the step above animal however can be dragged back when our minds lose their places in society. When our minds are pressured, through suffering from desire or from pain, the animal is revived and the humanity dies. The purpose of society should be the reduction of suffering to a level that allows for the continued growth of society.
I've been reading the writings of radicals lately. No, I have not adopted the viewpoints of their writings. I've analyzed their meanings, their sources. I want to know how to stop them from destroying society. Some claim to want another society when they are finished, others claim an act of solitary violence will alter society to what it should be. I know they are wrong. The radicals have their underground because the animals will never overcome us. They must join the animals in our sewers, in our forests, outside our homes of comfort and our workplaces of living. They are cast out for their primal desires and must stay out for they lost their humanity. The key to what I am saying is that we should stop them from needing to go into the underground.
The purpose of society, according to the radicals before the violent steps are chosen, are to help the neediest of us all: the people with nothing but desire for that which they have not earned.
Their viewpoint is disguised as compassion at first. They join the humanity side which helps those who cannot help themselves. However soon it is realized that they can not disguise it any further, the animal within them doesn't get enough. When there is hope of getting something they want, the animal sleeps, but it doesn't go away. Right now Barack Obama, either out of genuine compassion, or as I fear, out of animal instict, is the hope for the radicals. They are staying at bay for the most part because they put their faith in democracy to give them what they wanted: that which they desired. (Wealth.)
For humans being an animal is a 50/50 road. Cannibalism isn't chosen, but the desire for society's wealth is. The creations of society are desired by the radicals as a dog desires scraps from the dinner made by its master. If not given enough, the dog will attack. Sometimes it is trained, and controlled, so that when it does not get what it wants it attacks, but what the master tells it to. The desire is thrown into emotion and rage against a target. The despirate believe anything.
I am writing this as a manifesto. Not as a radical, but a defender of society. The radicals are repressed, yes, but they resort to violence. They seek the violence. I do not. I oppose them. I may sound ambiguous, but I am speaking in exact detail. The nouns can be replaced over and over again but the meaning will be the same. Apply it to your daily life and the meaning remains the same every time. These are not the ravings of a madman. Thank you for reading.
The ideas of radicals cause for sudden change, which is why violence is often the halmark of a radical's actions. The sudden change creates violence because violence is still the abnormality of society. It is thrown at us, but the experience is denied and that is why radicals advocate violence. A solution, if one were to jump to conclusions, would be to allow them to experience violence. NO.
The root cause is their desire to do something they are not. The achievement to a higher level of society is often what they seek, and since they can't go higher, and they can only stay where they are, they want to destroy the hierarchy.
I know this comes out of nowhere and you probably did not expect social-radical philosophy to be on this blog. Neither did I. Violence, however, is never the answer. It is the society that rises from the ashes and keeps rising until the next burning that is remembered in history for its treatment of humanity and the greatness it achieved. The violence, however, is always the downfall. Violence is always the end of society. The between points in history where civlization is growing, prospering, is repetitive. Societies rise with laws and order and leadership, and always seems to follow a process. The violent upheavals that tear down a society are always different with a different story to it. The purpose of the violence changes every time: one repressed group seeking freedom, another seeking more of something, and sometimes the lacking saw those with something lower their gaurd. However the process of the downfall is different and involves thought in itself. However it is not a man who destroys society: it is an animal.
The instict to take, instead of earn, comes from animals. The concept of earning, of living is in us alone. Mankind has achieved the step above animal however can be dragged back when our minds lose their places in society. When our minds are pressured, through suffering from desire or from pain, the animal is revived and the humanity dies. The purpose of society should be the reduction of suffering to a level that allows for the continued growth of society.
I've been reading the writings of radicals lately. No, I have not adopted the viewpoints of their writings. I've analyzed their meanings, their sources. I want to know how to stop them from destroying society. Some claim to want another society when they are finished, others claim an act of solitary violence will alter society to what it should be. I know they are wrong. The radicals have their underground because the animals will never overcome us. They must join the animals in our sewers, in our forests, outside our homes of comfort and our workplaces of living. They are cast out for their primal desires and must stay out for they lost their humanity. The key to what I am saying is that we should stop them from needing to go into the underground.
The purpose of society, according to the radicals before the violent steps are chosen, are to help the neediest of us all: the people with nothing but desire for that which they have not earned.
Their viewpoint is disguised as compassion at first. They join the humanity side which helps those who cannot help themselves. However soon it is realized that they can not disguise it any further, the animal within them doesn't get enough. When there is hope of getting something they want, the animal sleeps, but it doesn't go away. Right now Barack Obama, either out of genuine compassion, or as I fear, out of animal instict, is the hope for the radicals. They are staying at bay for the most part because they put their faith in democracy to give them what they wanted: that which they desired. (Wealth.)
For humans being an animal is a 50/50 road. Cannibalism isn't chosen, but the desire for society's wealth is. The creations of society are desired by the radicals as a dog desires scraps from the dinner made by its master. If not given enough, the dog will attack. Sometimes it is trained, and controlled, so that when it does not get what it wants it attacks, but what the master tells it to. The desire is thrown into emotion and rage against a target. The despirate believe anything.
I am writing this as a manifesto. Not as a radical, but a defender of society. The radicals are repressed, yes, but they resort to violence. They seek the violence. I do not. I oppose them. I may sound ambiguous, but I am speaking in exact detail. The nouns can be replaced over and over again but the meaning will be the same. Apply it to your daily life and the meaning remains the same every time. These are not the ravings of a madman. Thank you for reading.
I AM NOT AFRAID
"The Coming Insurrection" is a book. I have thus far read three paragraphs. The danger of the book is in its logic followed by insanity. The statement of grievances against the current system create a mental opening to options, and then they provide a historical example to replicate. Be on gaurd in your lives for this tactic. I urge you to take social complaints with a blocked mind. It is the same approach by Barack Obama.
He will mention the pain of those suffering with the current healthcare system. Then say that all those opposed to his method are the ones who also want to have that pain continue. This then leaves his option as the only option because otherwise it is the same suffering being endured. The hatred stirred by the social grievance of healthcare issues is directed to anyone who is against the public option in Obama's plan. Obama says that those against his reform are against all and any reform which is completely untrue. The book takes the same approach, and so does the world's dictators. The comparison is not spiteful or sinnical. It is true.
Chavez, when the people oppose his reforms to the Constitution, blames the U.S. for plotting against the people's happiness. In the mind of Zelaya, former president of Honduras, his removal was a coup by the U.S. and not by the people of Honduras. The other nation's can blame the United States because we are the "super power". We in the U.S. can not blame another country for our grievances because of our power and wealth. Obama then has to direct the blame to within, to his oppoents in the U.S. The Republican Party is this verbal punching bag he has set up, sometimes Fox News, sometimes the rich, or generally the right. It changes to what he needs it to be.
You want proof, the GM bankruptcy, when it occured, Obama blamed share holders and banks for not giving GM the money and expecting the terrible act of federal funding to intervene. This was despite the situation of GM at that point was due to federal funding intervention in the first place (and in case you missed it the bankruptcy happened anyway.) Then, when it came time for healthcare Obama stated that if we don't fix our healthcare we will go the way of GM with excessive healthcare costs. The enemy changed overnight. It was no longer the banks with rich CEOs, it was the healthcare industry charging GM too much for insurance for the workers. The emotion of the GM bankruptcy was the mind opener to rage, and then the rage was directed to the insurance companies.
This tactic must be fought against with logic. We must remember every statement, hold the statements in audio, video, and in written form. The grievances must be examined and the switch overs in this tactic must be outlined and brought to the public's attention. The hatred should be focused on what you know to be true in your own experiences. The stories told of people that bring out your emotion and make you attached, whose suffering then brings out emotion, should be ignored. You need to close yourself to the reception of emotional explanations for government action.
If you see the homeless in your city, help them. If a politician tells you about the homeless to get something they want done, tell the politician to be quiet. Tell the people on the street corners giving speeches to crowds that unless they can bring the person needing help to the crowd, they should not ask for help at all. Jerry's Kids does this brilliantly. You know your helping them because you know the people are there to help and that once you give the money, the people who need help are there to recieve it. However when Obama says we need to support this healthcare to help people, and never brings those people to us, he is lying to us. With them not there to recieve his help, or us to know that they are going to get this help proposed by Obama, we must silence the lies and bring forth the truth.
He will mention the pain of those suffering with the current healthcare system. Then say that all those opposed to his method are the ones who also want to have that pain continue. This then leaves his option as the only option because otherwise it is the same suffering being endured. The hatred stirred by the social grievance of healthcare issues is directed to anyone who is against the public option in Obama's plan. Obama says that those against his reform are against all and any reform which is completely untrue. The book takes the same approach, and so does the world's dictators. The comparison is not spiteful or sinnical. It is true.
Chavez, when the people oppose his reforms to the Constitution, blames the U.S. for plotting against the people's happiness. In the mind of Zelaya, former president of Honduras, his removal was a coup by the U.S. and not by the people of Honduras. The other nation's can blame the United States because we are the "super power". We in the U.S. can not blame another country for our grievances because of our power and wealth. Obama then has to direct the blame to within, to his oppoents in the U.S. The Republican Party is this verbal punching bag he has set up, sometimes Fox News, sometimes the rich, or generally the right. It changes to what he needs it to be.
You want proof, the GM bankruptcy, when it occured, Obama blamed share holders and banks for not giving GM the money and expecting the terrible act of federal funding to intervene. This was despite the situation of GM at that point was due to federal funding intervention in the first place (and in case you missed it the bankruptcy happened anyway.) Then, when it came time for healthcare Obama stated that if we don't fix our healthcare we will go the way of GM with excessive healthcare costs. The enemy changed overnight. It was no longer the banks with rich CEOs, it was the healthcare industry charging GM too much for insurance for the workers. The emotion of the GM bankruptcy was the mind opener to rage, and then the rage was directed to the insurance companies.
This tactic must be fought against with logic. We must remember every statement, hold the statements in audio, video, and in written form. The grievances must be examined and the switch overs in this tactic must be outlined and brought to the public's attention. The hatred should be focused on what you know to be true in your own experiences. The stories told of people that bring out your emotion and make you attached, whose suffering then brings out emotion, should be ignored. You need to close yourself to the reception of emotional explanations for government action.
If you see the homeless in your city, help them. If a politician tells you about the homeless to get something they want done, tell the politician to be quiet. Tell the people on the street corners giving speeches to crowds that unless they can bring the person needing help to the crowd, they should not ask for help at all. Jerry's Kids does this brilliantly. You know your helping them because you know the people are there to help and that once you give the money, the people who need help are there to recieve it. However when Obama says we need to support this healthcare to help people, and never brings those people to us, he is lying to us. With them not there to recieve his help, or us to know that they are going to get this help proposed by Obama, we must silence the lies and bring forth the truth.
Examining More Claims
The email sent out by the mainedems.org's Arden Manning said the following:
Republicans just don't get it! Barack Obama was not elected president because he has a cool logo. Barack Obama was elected president because the vast majority of Americans are more in line with his political views and values and because they agreed it is time for a change.
Excerpt over. Lets look at Obama's political views and values. They always say actions speak louder than words, and indeed they do with Obama. His words, the words of a politician, can instantly be seen as almost worthless (except to those who believe he still isn't a politician.)
Now what I am about to say will probably seem like old news and unimportant. However it is of the utmost importance. The life of leaders and why they make the decisions they do start in their developing careers. For some, and don't take offense, it is only a reference I know because of the History Channel's numerous documentaries, the process starts in youth before politics are even considered. Hitler's hatred of the Jews developed when Germany lost WW1 and Jews were the outlet for his anger of suffering the trauma of war on the front lines. Barack Obama's political career has effected his decisions and should be looked to in order to see where we are going. I feel that Hitler's Mein Kamf was the plan of his WW2 madness. Barack Obama has a Mein Kamf as well and it is his actions already made. He was smart, because written words now are looked at unlike they were during the days of Hitler. So his actions are his greatest liability and they are known. So under this reasoning I cover things that seem unimportant today, but will form the final picture of the man we know today as Barack Obama.
In a sideline news story, "The Coming Insurrection" is a book read by those who are a threat to our society and way of life. Ideologies I thought were once gone, Communism and Anarchy, are reviving. We have religious jihads of violence against our society, and we have the return of Communism and Anarchy. Do not dismiss the readers of "The Coming Insurrection", follow them, keep an eye on them. If anything, and I mean the slightest thing, seems out of place please report them to the police, FBI, or CIA, or our military. I am declaring on my own, and you are free to disagree right now (perhaps not later if the readers succeed), that the readers of this book are to be considered highly dangerous and (as the book demands of them) to be armed as well. The report on Obama will come later as I examine this developing , I don't even know what to call it, this developing threat to our society.
Republicans just don't get it! Barack Obama was not elected president because he has a cool logo. Barack Obama was elected president because the vast majority of Americans are more in line with his political views and values and because they agreed it is time for a change.
Excerpt over. Lets look at Obama's political views and values. They always say actions speak louder than words, and indeed they do with Obama. His words, the words of a politician, can instantly be seen as almost worthless (except to those who believe he still isn't a politician.)
Now what I am about to say will probably seem like old news and unimportant. However it is of the utmost importance. The life of leaders and why they make the decisions they do start in their developing careers. For some, and don't take offense, it is only a reference I know because of the History Channel's numerous documentaries, the process starts in youth before politics are even considered. Hitler's hatred of the Jews developed when Germany lost WW1 and Jews were the outlet for his anger of suffering the trauma of war on the front lines. Barack Obama's political career has effected his decisions and should be looked to in order to see where we are going. I feel that Hitler's Mein Kamf was the plan of his WW2 madness. Barack Obama has a Mein Kamf as well and it is his actions already made. He was smart, because written words now are looked at unlike they were during the days of Hitler. So his actions are his greatest liability and they are known. So under this reasoning I cover things that seem unimportant today, but will form the final picture of the man we know today as Barack Obama.
In a sideline news story, "The Coming Insurrection" is a book read by those who are a threat to our society and way of life. Ideologies I thought were once gone, Communism and Anarchy, are reviving. We have religious jihads of violence against our society, and we have the return of Communism and Anarchy. Do not dismiss the readers of "The Coming Insurrection", follow them, keep an eye on them. If anything, and I mean the slightest thing, seems out of place please report them to the police, FBI, or CIA, or our military. I am declaring on my own, and you are free to disagree right now (perhaps not later if the readers succeed), that the readers of this book are to be considered highly dangerous and (as the book demands of them) to be armed as well. The report on Obama will come later as I examine this developing , I don't even know what to call it, this developing threat to our society.
Plagarism Accusations
Les Otten, according to a Democratic Party email, plagarized Obama's website and logo for his campaign. I want to see the Democratic Party bring this accusation to court. If it is legitimate, they won't have a problem bringing a Republican candidate out of the running. If their complaint is not legitimate, if I was Les Otten I would demand a retraction and apology.
In any accusation of criminality against leaders the truth should be pursued to the end. This email I believe is nothing more than slander. They accuse Otten of stealing Obama's O logo. It is a circle and colorful, but the design is different. Yes it has a circle, but the rest of it doesn't match at all. Seriously, there are only so many ways you can put red white and blue in a circle and have the lower half represent the land and upper half represent the sky. Seriously, press charges or apologize.
The design is colorful with reds, blues, and whites everywhere. Our nation's colors. The similarities are as follows: Red donate button, lots of color and pictures, and the logo is in the shape of a O.
Check it out for yourself and see if you want to also charge plagarism against Les Otten (who, if you read earlier, I dislike his website and positions, so this isn't partisan.)
http://www.lesotten.com/
http://www.barackobama.com/
In any accusation of criminality against leaders the truth should be pursued to the end. This email I believe is nothing more than slander. They accuse Otten of stealing Obama's O logo. It is a circle and colorful, but the design is different. Yes it has a circle, but the rest of it doesn't match at all. Seriously, there are only so many ways you can put red white and blue in a circle and have the lower half represent the land and upper half represent the sky. Seriously, press charges or apologize.
The design is colorful with reds, blues, and whites everywhere. Our nation's colors. The similarities are as follows: Red donate button, lots of color and pictures, and the logo is in the shape of a O.
Check it out for yourself and see if you want to also charge plagarism against Les Otten (who, if you read earlier, I dislike his website and positions, so this isn't partisan.)
http://www.lesotten.com/
http://www.barackobama.com/
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
The Race is... Still On
Les Otten is the third official Republican candidate for Governor of Maine. So as I did with the other two, I am checking his website out first. First thing is take a glance at his website: http://www.lesotten.com/
I thank you for returning to the blog. Alright, now first thing I noticed was the amount of color and pretty pictures. I felt like I had opened up a kindergarten school website. The bitterness I have against the simplicity of appealing to children shall be placed aside. The website is appealing, and thus shows an artistic element to his campaign not as obvious on either Matt or Bruce's websites. This artistic creativity will be a strong benefit for the campaign trail.
Now to the issues page. The statements you see first are almost word for word repeated when you click on the link, with some extras added here and there. On his energy page, let me give you the exerpt:
We need to create opportunities and let private enterprise lead the way out of Maine’s energy crisis to build a model that will be emulated throughout the nation. Maine needs a stated goal of energy independence. Ultimately, if Maine declares energy independence, and takes meaningful steps in that direction, the industry will follow.
Excerpt done. Alright it seems contradictory to me to say we need to let private enterprise lead the way and then say in the next sentence that if Maine's {government?} starts to move for energy independance, the free enterprise industry will follow. The rest of his energy page is a duck hunt for alternatives other than oil. Les has a thing against oil industry. Its very obvious. Moving on.
His section on jobs focuses on tourism (and only tourism.) Yes, tourism is our largest industry, but this month (record amount of rain) has proven even having great landscapes doesn't mean the tourists will come. I don't know why but I feel slightly less approving of Les Otto's approach. Just from my basic knowledge of economics, and archaic phrases, don't put your eggs in one basket. I personally feel Maine should diversify, while strengthening, its industries. Les places strong emphasis on the tourism industry while not mentioning the other parts of our state.
Onward to his section of efficiency. This is the first time I've seen efficiency as an issue. It is often an underscored approach to issues, but never an issue all its own. Thats my guy reaction to the one word: efficiency. Now I read the rest of it.
His section on efficiency starts out covering the state's failed budgets. Then five paragraphs cover how we as individuals should lead healthier lives. Otto, if you read this, efficiency and obesity don't seem to go together for me. Connect it to your efficiency through lowering costs of healthcare, please explain how lower costs for healthcare will increase efficiency of the states budget. Wow, I feel like a critic. Wait, your running for governor of Maine. I live in Maine. Your accountable. Woooo, power trip. Alright one more page to go.
Otto's page on leadership is by far his strongest page. It clearly outlines good guide lines for policy. They are as follows:
• We need to declare that Maine is open for business.
• We need to take advantage of Maine’s renewable resources to solve our energy crisis from within.
• We need to take full advantage of our tourism assets.
• We need to prepare our workforce and attract businesses that will keep our kids in Maine.
• We cannot continue to defer hard budget decisions to the next governor.
Now that is the best part of his website. That said, his website fails for a person running for governor, or a candidate for anything really. No specifics at all. Generalized overviews of things that are not made relevent to our lives that lack a plan, and a vision. The website lacks cohesion to his purpose for running and what he will do for us.
Now, a quick look at his 'support' page brings you to donate money. That is the whole page. Time for this madman to rant. However I will save it for another blog later tonight. Thank you for reading and come again soon for a meal you didn't order, but I didn't screw up.
I thank you for returning to the blog. Alright, now first thing I noticed was the amount of color and pretty pictures. I felt like I had opened up a kindergarten school website. The bitterness I have against the simplicity of appealing to children shall be placed aside. The website is appealing, and thus shows an artistic element to his campaign not as obvious on either Matt or Bruce's websites. This artistic creativity will be a strong benefit for the campaign trail.
Now to the issues page. The statements you see first are almost word for word repeated when you click on the link, with some extras added here and there. On his energy page, let me give you the exerpt:
We need to create opportunities and let private enterprise lead the way out of Maine’s energy crisis to build a model that will be emulated throughout the nation. Maine needs a stated goal of energy independence. Ultimately, if Maine declares energy independence, and takes meaningful steps in that direction, the industry will follow.
Excerpt done. Alright it seems contradictory to me to say we need to let private enterprise lead the way and then say in the next sentence that if Maine's {government?} starts to move for energy independance, the free enterprise industry will follow. The rest of his energy page is a duck hunt for alternatives other than oil. Les has a thing against oil industry. Its very obvious. Moving on.
His section on jobs focuses on tourism (and only tourism.) Yes, tourism is our largest industry, but this month (record amount of rain) has proven even having great landscapes doesn't mean the tourists will come. I don't know why but I feel slightly less approving of Les Otto's approach. Just from my basic knowledge of economics, and archaic phrases, don't put your eggs in one basket. I personally feel Maine should diversify, while strengthening, its industries. Les places strong emphasis on the tourism industry while not mentioning the other parts of our state.
Onward to his section of efficiency. This is the first time I've seen efficiency as an issue. It is often an underscored approach to issues, but never an issue all its own. Thats my guy reaction to the one word: efficiency. Now I read the rest of it.
His section on efficiency starts out covering the state's failed budgets. Then five paragraphs cover how we as individuals should lead healthier lives. Otto, if you read this, efficiency and obesity don't seem to go together for me. Connect it to your efficiency through lowering costs of healthcare, please explain how lower costs for healthcare will increase efficiency of the states budget. Wow, I feel like a critic. Wait, your running for governor of Maine. I live in Maine. Your accountable. Woooo, power trip. Alright one more page to go.
Otto's page on leadership is by far his strongest page. It clearly outlines good guide lines for policy. They are as follows:
• We need to declare that Maine is open for business.
• We need to take advantage of Maine’s renewable resources to solve our energy crisis from within.
• We need to take full advantage of our tourism assets.
• We need to prepare our workforce and attract businesses that will keep our kids in Maine.
• We cannot continue to defer hard budget decisions to the next governor.
Now that is the best part of his website. That said, his website fails for a person running for governor, or a candidate for anything really. No specifics at all. Generalized overviews of things that are not made relevent to our lives that lack a plan, and a vision. The website lacks cohesion to his purpose for running and what he will do for us.
Now, a quick look at his 'support' page brings you to donate money. That is the whole page. Time for this madman to rant. However I will save it for another blog later tonight. Thank you for reading and come again soon for a meal you didn't order, but I didn't screw up.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Emergency Honduras Update
I have confirmed through various news sources (a vast majority) that Venezuelan troops are stationed in Nicaragua. What I have yet to confirm is a battle between Nicaraguan, Venezuelan troops against civilians in a town called El Paraso (Paraiso?). If the battle did take place, the civilians most likely lost. Anyhow, the speculation over possible truths or rumors could take up a whole million years worth of blogging. However, the Venezuelan troops, either being there before this or going there in response to the violence in Honduras, are on high alert. We will see how this continues to develop.
Cancer Treatment
The future of cancer seems to be heading towards more treatable, 99% survival rates. A new treatment, used for the past two years in mice, has had a 100% survival rate. It does a one two punch, where one nano cell disables the cancer cell and a second targets and kills the cancer cell with chemotherapy. It will focus chemotherapy, unlike today where it attacks both kinds of good and bad cells. In the next few months human trials are going to begin, and it will be interesting to see how this moves forward.
Honduras In Focus
I'm going to make a prediction that tomorrow's headlines, and the future reporting of the situation in Honduras, will focus on what the military is doing. The articles will start with describing what the military did, then add a few small paragraphs, by which time people will not bother to finish reading since it will be little details, on what the "new" government is doing. The only thing new is the president. However, you will see headlines about the clash of the military and protestors.
I fully condemn the strong use of the military as the force to stop the violent protests. What needs to be made clear is how the protests became violent, then the military acted. The first reports I saw today showed the fires and barricades set up by the protestors with the military standing at watch. This lasted for about eight hours before the military acted against them.
I will not support the use of violence against the protestors, but I also do not support the protestors methods of holding protests with the specific purpose of confronting the military forces at the presidential compound. The media blackout is also what I am against. However, while these violations make the new government violators of the nation's constitution and reduce their legitimacy, Zelaya's government is no more legitimate. It violated the Constitution and needed to be removed. The first mistake of the new government was ordering his exile instead of his impeachment.
This is not a blank check to the new regime, and the 60 injured so far, and possibly 1 dead (reports conflict over death by a truck accident or an intentional death by being run over, 9 reports, and its a 2 for intentional, 7 for accident) are deplorable results. For a solution, an emergency presidential election within a month. A new president. Zelaya may not run, and Roberto will agree to return to his post in the Congress and not run for president himself.
More as I hear it, the current government is losing my support with its heavy handed approach to keeping order, but I know the previous president has no place in the country at all.
I fully condemn the strong use of the military as the force to stop the violent protests. What needs to be made clear is how the protests became violent, then the military acted. The first reports I saw today showed the fires and barricades set up by the protestors with the military standing at watch. This lasted for about eight hours before the military acted against them.
I will not support the use of violence against the protestors, but I also do not support the protestors methods of holding protests with the specific purpose of confronting the military forces at the presidential compound. The media blackout is also what I am against. However, while these violations make the new government violators of the nation's constitution and reduce their legitimacy, Zelaya's government is no more legitimate. It violated the Constitution and needed to be removed. The first mistake of the new government was ordering his exile instead of his impeachment.
This is not a blank check to the new regime, and the 60 injured so far, and possibly 1 dead (reports conflict over death by a truck accident or an intentional death by being run over, 9 reports, and its a 2 for intentional, 7 for accident) are deplorable results. For a solution, an emergency presidential election within a month. A new president. Zelaya may not run, and Roberto will agree to return to his post in the Congress and not run for president himself.
More as I hear it, the current government is losing my support with its heavy handed approach to keeping order, but I know the previous president has no place in the country at all.
Lies, Rumor, and Crisis
The War in Georgia was the first time I saw how the media bias worked on issues outside of the United States. Now, with Honduras, I see it again. Aljazeera has reported that the Honduran military is choosing the next president, while the truth is the Honduras Congress voted in Roberto Mitcheletti as the successor until January when the next president, following the scheduled November election, will be inaugurated. The military is not behind the removal of the president of Honduras. It is the checks and balances system within the Republic style government of Honduras that has protected its constitution.
So why have the military arrest him? Because his personal bodygaurd was too much for the local police to handle on their own. The military fought a twenty minute gun battle, reports on casualties I've yet to find, before they arrested him. The military sent him to Costa Rica. The referendum on the alteration of the Honduras Constitution that would allow former President of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, was timed within six months of a presidential election. The timing was unconstitutional but the president insisted on the referendum. I will go as far to say that he violated the constitution and was, upon resisting the Supreme Court and Congress, illegitimately in power. Due to this illegitimacy, he was removed from office and replaced.
I am not saying the way the military is conducting the shift is good, they are doing quite the botch job actually. However at the end of the day the military is still following orders from the government, not its own commanders. They are told to do something from the Supreme Court, Congress, and new President, and they will. Their generals still follow the orders, instead of making them. That is what makes this accusation of a coup entirely wrong.
The protestors outside the Presidential house were not prevented by the military at the house from burning tires and protesting in the street outside. This is not Iran. Another note, why has the world attention diverted onto Honduras' Constitutional dilema from Iran's massacres of protestors? Why has the world defended, in contrast to Russia's invasion of Georgia, a leader who is very critical of the United States and a strong ally of Venezuela?
Domestically I inquire:
Why is it that Hillary Clinton can call this a coup, yet the State Department does not formally list it as a coup and shut off all aid to the country?
Why did Hillary say we are not demanding that Manuel Zelaya be returned to power yet we signed onto a statement by the Organization of American States that did?
Globally I question:
How can Zelaya say he wants to alter the Constitution because it favors the countries elites in a way that allows him to remain in power, and thus elite, longer?
Then why does Hugo Chavez place his military on high alert and say he is willing to defend Zelaya from this rebellion of the poor when it is the elite that Zelaya stated he opposed?
Conclusion:
I believe Zelaya, regardless of the details of how he was removed, presuming non-violence is preferred option by the military, should not be president of Honduras. As the military is following orders from the Supreme Court and the Honduras Congress, this is not a coup. The military is following orders from a civilian government. It has a job to do and will do so. Five days, the same time it took Obama to critisize Iran, should be given to this new government to determine if it is legitimate as I claim, or if the military will make a grab for power that they have not done yet.
So why have the military arrest him? Because his personal bodygaurd was too much for the local police to handle on their own. The military fought a twenty minute gun battle, reports on casualties I've yet to find, before they arrested him. The military sent him to Costa Rica. The referendum on the alteration of the Honduras Constitution that would allow former President of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, was timed within six months of a presidential election. The timing was unconstitutional but the president insisted on the referendum. I will go as far to say that he violated the constitution and was, upon resisting the Supreme Court and Congress, illegitimately in power. Due to this illegitimacy, he was removed from office and replaced.
I am not saying the way the military is conducting the shift is good, they are doing quite the botch job actually. However at the end of the day the military is still following orders from the government, not its own commanders. They are told to do something from the Supreme Court, Congress, and new President, and they will. Their generals still follow the orders, instead of making them. That is what makes this accusation of a coup entirely wrong.
The protestors outside the Presidential house were not prevented by the military at the house from burning tires and protesting in the street outside. This is not Iran. Another note, why has the world attention diverted onto Honduras' Constitutional dilema from Iran's massacres of protestors? Why has the world defended, in contrast to Russia's invasion of Georgia, a leader who is very critical of the United States and a strong ally of Venezuela?
Domestically I inquire:
Why is it that Hillary Clinton can call this a coup, yet the State Department does not formally list it as a coup and shut off all aid to the country?
Why did Hillary say we are not demanding that Manuel Zelaya be returned to power yet we signed onto a statement by the Organization of American States that did?
Globally I question:
How can Zelaya say he wants to alter the Constitution because it favors the countries elites in a way that allows him to remain in power, and thus elite, longer?
Then why does Hugo Chavez place his military on high alert and say he is willing to defend Zelaya from this rebellion of the poor when it is the elite that Zelaya stated he opposed?
Conclusion:
I believe Zelaya, regardless of the details of how he was removed, presuming non-violence is preferred option by the military, should not be president of Honduras. As the military is following orders from the Supreme Court and the Honduras Congress, this is not a coup. The military is following orders from a civilian government. It has a job to do and will do so. Five days, the same time it took Obama to critisize Iran, should be given to this new government to determine if it is legitimate as I claim, or if the military will make a grab for power that they have not done yet.
California
Shame on you all. From the governor, to the legislature, to the people and even the illegals, you screwed up. You ruined your state and now turn your backs on those who need help. I sure hope you help the people you are making homeless when you see them begging door to door. Fifty years you have had the same situation, and now you reap the rewards of your failure. The people refused to be even higher taxed (being some of the highest taxed already) and the response is a complete suspension of the safety net. What the hell are you spending the rest of the money on? If your state has incredibly high taxes, and you have no state safety net, where the hell is all that money going? Seriously, wherever it is going I think I am certain it isn't helping the people of California. Cut the crap, not entire programs helping those who need the most help. You have actually driven me to work on creating a priority list of people who need to be helped by the government in times of need. Single mothers with jobs, sorry, but not as sad a story as the disabled blind guy down the street living under the box. For your state to have made me think of which people to help, while being the 6th largest economy in the world, is appalling. In the land of the free, the United States, such a situation is the result of pure incompetence. Fifty years you had the problem, and all across the state from the top to the bottom nobody fixed it. Shame on you all.
Honduras
The events taking place in Honduras are not a coup. They are the legitimate upholding of the nation's Constitution ordered by the Supreme Court of Honduras. Former President Zelaya violated the nation's constitution by having a referendum vote to overturn the Constitution within six months of a presidential election. His reason for the overturn was to remove the ban on re-elections (so he could stay in power.) The planned Novemeber election will go forward, and I urge the U.S. to defend the nation's legitimate leadership now in power. Should Venezuela invade, as they have threatened by placing their armed forces on high alert over the incident, we should defend Honduras.
Zelaya says the Constitution should be overturned because it benefits the countries elites. Hugo Chavez, the reports I've read, says he defends Zelaya against a revolt by the region's poor. This makes no sense to me. Our leaders in the United States have called it a coup and deny any involvement in its occuring. While I know we had nothing to do with it, this was not a coup. More as I get it later. Thank you for reading.
Zelaya says the Constitution should be overturned because it benefits the countries elites. Hugo Chavez, the reports I've read, says he defends Zelaya against a revolt by the region's poor. This makes no sense to me. Our leaders in the United States have called it a coup and deny any involvement in its occuring. While I know we had nothing to do with it, this was not a coup. More as I get it later. Thank you for reading.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Harness A Possibly Cheap Energy Source: Manpower
Wind power is unreliable, as in it won't work 100% of the time (since the wind isn't always blowing outside of D.C.'s congressional halls). So I say put the generators, with handles instead of the long wings, in prisons.
I know the gut reaction: cruel and unusual.
Pay attention, my plan doesn't end there. I understand that this has been attempted before and that the prisoners endured intolerable conditions. However that does not mean we can't try again with improved conditions. People work in power plants all the time, why not prisoners? Here in Maine we have the highest electricity costs in the North East. This would be an effective way to lower costs immensely. Monetarily, creating the electricity would be free with my plan. The prisoners would be payed, but in credits, which I'll address later.
Now this work would not be required. It would be open to non-felons and felons who have had 10 years of good behavior. The yard, or the library doesn't pay the prisoner and so they earn nothing from it except pride just knowing they didn't sit in their cell all day wasting away.While long term that may help them, it doesn't give them something then and there to hold on to and it isn't a gaurantee of success once out of prison. This could give them something tangible. The payment, the value earned would be credits towards early release or parole. They would be earning their freedom. Freedom throughout history has never been free. An effort to gain and maintain freedom has always had a cost in effort, bravery, and even blood. This only calls for effort towards earning their freedom.
In the process of doing this they do not forget what it is to earn something. The prisoner could spend the credits towards better conditions: from private rooms, more time in the yard, or even an extra serving at the lunch the options are limitless. Or the prisoner could put them towards their release. Maybe even if they commit their credits towards release and nothing else it could be treated as a savings account and earn interest. What does this allow the prisoner to do? It allows them to not forget how to survive in society.
Recidivism is one of the plagues of our current criminal justice system. One of the stand-out social stereotypes, even if overplayed, does apply. It is the one of criminals leaving prison not knowing how to function in society. Prisoners are those who have been deemed dangerous enough to seperate from society. I believe prisons should be isolated societies where the prisoners are seperated from the mainstream, but not so much so that they forget how to live.
With this work being a choice for the prisoner, it is not forced labor. Giving the prisoner choices makes certain they keep the sense of freedom and how to use it. It is not a blank check of freedom, because they are still being punished, but it makes sure they keep control over enough freedom to know how to survive when they finish their sentence. It would also give them a career opening into electricity when they leave because they (using their credits and passing a test) could even earn promotions to operate other aspects of the power plant then just moving the turbine to make it work.
If anyone disagrees with my plan let me know.
I know the gut reaction: cruel and unusual.
Pay attention, my plan doesn't end there. I understand that this has been attempted before and that the prisoners endured intolerable conditions. However that does not mean we can't try again with improved conditions. People work in power plants all the time, why not prisoners? Here in Maine we have the highest electricity costs in the North East. This would be an effective way to lower costs immensely. Monetarily, creating the electricity would be free with my plan. The prisoners would be payed, but in credits, which I'll address later.
Now this work would not be required. It would be open to non-felons and felons who have had 10 years of good behavior. The yard, or the library doesn't pay the prisoner and so they earn nothing from it except pride just knowing they didn't sit in their cell all day wasting away.While long term that may help them, it doesn't give them something then and there to hold on to and it isn't a gaurantee of success once out of prison. This could give them something tangible. The payment, the value earned would be credits towards early release or parole. They would be earning their freedom. Freedom throughout history has never been free. An effort to gain and maintain freedom has always had a cost in effort, bravery, and even blood. This only calls for effort towards earning their freedom.
In the process of doing this they do not forget what it is to earn something. The prisoner could spend the credits towards better conditions: from private rooms, more time in the yard, or even an extra serving at the lunch the options are limitless. Or the prisoner could put them towards their release. Maybe even if they commit their credits towards release and nothing else it could be treated as a savings account and earn interest. What does this allow the prisoner to do? It allows them to not forget how to survive in society.
Recidivism is one of the plagues of our current criminal justice system. One of the stand-out social stereotypes, even if overplayed, does apply. It is the one of criminals leaving prison not knowing how to function in society. Prisoners are those who have been deemed dangerous enough to seperate from society. I believe prisons should be isolated societies where the prisoners are seperated from the mainstream, but not so much so that they forget how to live.
With this work being a choice for the prisoner, it is not forced labor. Giving the prisoner choices makes certain they keep the sense of freedom and how to use it. It is not a blank check of freedom, because they are still being punished, but it makes sure they keep control over enough freedom to know how to survive when they finish their sentence. It would also give them a career opening into electricity when they leave because they (using their credits and passing a test) could even earn promotions to operate other aspects of the power plant then just moving the turbine to make it work.
If anyone disagrees with my plan let me know.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
God Exists
Let me explain the rather sudden turn around of my doubts. I spoke to God. Well, he spoke to me. Short and sweet, and I quote: "You should follow what makes you happy. It is up to you to decide." I was thinking about whether or not I really want to pursue a political career and balance the social battle of loving Josh, my true love. Of course I will never doubt my relationship with Josh, but I was concerned about the trouble being a politician would carry for our relationship. My alternative future choice was to become a writer, and pursue the creation of my vision for Atlantis in writing and in a movie.
My decision has already been made. The whole process took five minutes to go through. May not seem like long, but something within me, something eternal, was sparked. Not only was my belief in God solidified, but my belief in the guarantee of America's promise for the pursuit of happiness. This happiness is granted by the immense number of freedoms allowed to those who live in America.
To tie in to something occuring in the world that you may care about, the people of Iran are pursuing happiness. At least they are trying. They seek the happiness granted with freedom. I support them and I am still looking for Barack Obama to support them as well. Iran has killed innocent people. Those people died free, they died showing the power of freedom. Freedom inspires those who do not have it, and it brings a just punishment of fear to those who try to prevent it from being in the hearts of those who seek it.
My decision has already been made. The whole process took five minutes to go through. May not seem like long, but something within me, something eternal, was sparked. Not only was my belief in God solidified, but my belief in the guarantee of America's promise for the pursuit of happiness. This happiness is granted by the immense number of freedoms allowed to those who live in America.
To tie in to something occuring in the world that you may care about, the people of Iran are pursuing happiness. At least they are trying. They seek the happiness granted with freedom. I support them and I am still looking for Barack Obama to support them as well. Iran has killed innocent people. Those people died free, they died showing the power of freedom. Freedom inspires those who do not have it, and it brings a just punishment of fear to those who try to prevent it from being in the hearts of those who seek it.
The Race for Governor
Yesterday I was able to speak to Matt Jacobson, his website is as follows: http://www.jacobsonforgovernor.com/
At the Bangor GOP meeting he spoke, and is the second running Republican candidate for governor of Maine. My initial gut reaction: too idealist. Now this may be a good or a bad thing, but he believes Maine has a goal to reach, a vision of connecting with the world and being world-class in as much as possible. His goal for Maine is noble and I agree with it, however the fundamentals and practicality of some of his ideas seem to be business, not asministratively, possible. However there is still time.
Despite this, personally Matt is very approachable. He seems, not as bluntly as others, to be annoyed, fed up, irritated with the state as it stands. He definately believes Baldacci has not done enough on the LNG Terminal situation and believes that should have been easy to accomplish with Canada. He did note that Canada does have an issue, and we should be sensitive to it, from a disaster which, after some research, I have been unable to find information on.
A note about the LNG terminal is that Canada has approved it, but the Passamaquody tribe has only recently sold the land where it was to be built. The discussion at the GOP meeting with a Maine state senator, a Maine state representative, and a candidate for governor, among all of us, did not even mention this. The group seemed to focus on the initial environmental opposition in Canada which approved the plan in 2008. I didn't know this until I looked it up, and hopefully you've learned something here too.
Finally in my initial reaction, the core Republican values got a different response. The basis of the Republican Party, and I'm sure the issue would be similar for Democrats, but for the Republican Party the focus on a reason for being seems to be lacking among its members. I'll list MY Republican values (based on a quote from Ronald Reagan) once more:
1. Limited Government
2. Lower Taxes
3. Strong Military
4. Pro-Growth Policies
5. Maximum Individual Liberty
In the next week I will be clarifying the missing parts of the Bruce Poliquin interview, and make a transcript of this interview and meeting that way a comparison can be made, however should another Republican candidate become known to me I will attempt to arrange an interview with that candidate before I post the other two. I have a little personal rule: get as many as possible up to three before posting. This way there can be fundamental comparisons, and examinations of differences between the candidates. Thank you for reading and have a good day.
At the Bangor GOP meeting he spoke, and is the second running Republican candidate for governor of Maine. My initial gut reaction: too idealist. Now this may be a good or a bad thing, but he believes Maine has a goal to reach, a vision of connecting with the world and being world-class in as much as possible. His goal for Maine is noble and I agree with it, however the fundamentals and practicality of some of his ideas seem to be business, not asministratively, possible. However there is still time.
Despite this, personally Matt is very approachable. He seems, not as bluntly as others, to be annoyed, fed up, irritated with the state as it stands. He definately believes Baldacci has not done enough on the LNG Terminal situation and believes that should have been easy to accomplish with Canada. He did note that Canada does have an issue, and we should be sensitive to it, from a disaster which, after some research, I have been unable to find information on.
A note about the LNG terminal is that Canada has approved it, but the Passamaquody tribe has only recently sold the land where it was to be built. The discussion at the GOP meeting with a Maine state senator, a Maine state representative, and a candidate for governor, among all of us, did not even mention this. The group seemed to focus on the initial environmental opposition in Canada which approved the plan in 2008. I didn't know this until I looked it up, and hopefully you've learned something here too.
Finally in my initial reaction, the core Republican values got a different response. The basis of the Republican Party, and I'm sure the issue would be similar for Democrats, but for the Republican Party the focus on a reason for being seems to be lacking among its members. I'll list MY Republican values (based on a quote from Ronald Reagan) once more:
1. Limited Government
2. Lower Taxes
3. Strong Military
4. Pro-Growth Policies
5. Maximum Individual Liberty
In the next week I will be clarifying the missing parts of the Bruce Poliquin interview, and make a transcript of this interview and meeting that way a comparison can be made, however should another Republican candidate become known to me I will attempt to arrange an interview with that candidate before I post the other two. I have a little personal rule: get as many as possible up to three before posting. This way there can be fundamental comparisons, and examinations of differences between the candidates. Thank you for reading and have a good day.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
A New Level Of Horror In Iran
From ABC:
An Iranian woman has given harrowing details of what she says was a massacre of protesters in Tehran's Baharestan Square on Wednesday.
Reports this morning suggest thousands of police and pro-government militia used guns, clubs and teargas to suppress a large opposition rally in the square.
Speaking to CNN, the unnamed woman said it was a "massacre".
"I was going to Baharestan with my friends ... to express our opposition to these killings and demanding freedom," she said.
"But the black-clad police stopped everyone ... they emptied the buses that were taking people there and let the private cars go on.
"We went on ... and then all of a sudden some 500 people with clubs ... came out of [a nearby mosque], and they poured into the streets and they started beating everyone."
The woman said the attackers started beating people on a pedestrian bridge heading to the square, with some people being thrown over the side.
"They beat a woman so savagely that she was drenched in blood, and her husband who was watching the scene, he just fainted.
"I also saw [the security forces] shooting young people.
"This was a massacre. They were trying to beat people so that they would die. They were cursing... they were beating old men.
"This was exactly a massacre. You should stop this. You should help the people of Iran who demand freedom.
"There were thousands of people on the street.
"I heard the shooting and we just ran away. I didn't see what happened but I'm sure people are dead there."
CNN said another source inside Tehran had described people being "shot like animals".
The witness went on: "In the previous days they are killing students with axes, they put the axe through the heart of young men, and it's so devastating I don't know how to describe it.
"This is horrific, this is genocide, this is a massacre, this is Hitler. And you people should stop it. It's time to act."
==========================================
The people of Iran are begging us to stand up for their freedom. Obama needs to stop avoiding the toe-stepping with the leaders of Iran and urge immediate embargoes on all oil leaving Iran. The regime must be shown there are consequences for violations of human rights. There are punishments for crimes against humanity. The world needs to act. Iran is acting in a way that defies, instead of sanctions, instead of nuclear suspension requests, it violates human rights.
Iran is acting while Obama stands to the side. We must act. We need to act. The people of Iran are asking for our help. We have a moral obligation as the leaders of the free world to act.
The world dislikes the United States because of the first failed Kurd independance promise, the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, the failed Mogadishu incident, the failed war in Vietnam. The promise behind all of them was freedom for the people. We failed.
We can redeem ourselves by coming to the aid of those who ask us to help them. South Vietnam didn't ask us to help them, Somali's needed help but they didn't request us to do it, and the Bay of Pigs was organized by us. Iranian are asking for us to fulfil our promise to lead the world into freedom. We are the shining city on the hill. We shine with the energy, the feelings of freedom. We can share this power source to the world at no cost by simply standing up for the rights of others.
Obama, do your damn job already. Hillary, either quit or do your job. McCain, keep up the good work.
An Iranian woman has given harrowing details of what she says was a massacre of protesters in Tehran's Baharestan Square on Wednesday.
Reports this morning suggest thousands of police and pro-government militia used guns, clubs and teargas to suppress a large opposition rally in the square.
Speaking to CNN, the unnamed woman said it was a "massacre".
"I was going to Baharestan with my friends ... to express our opposition to these killings and demanding freedom," she said.
"But the black-clad police stopped everyone ... they emptied the buses that were taking people there and let the private cars go on.
"We went on ... and then all of a sudden some 500 people with clubs ... came out of [a nearby mosque], and they poured into the streets and they started beating everyone."
The woman said the attackers started beating people on a pedestrian bridge heading to the square, with some people being thrown over the side.
"They beat a woman so savagely that she was drenched in blood, and her husband who was watching the scene, he just fainted.
"I also saw [the security forces] shooting young people.
"This was a massacre. They were trying to beat people so that they would die. They were cursing... they were beating old men.
"This was exactly a massacre. You should stop this. You should help the people of Iran who demand freedom.
"There were thousands of people on the street.
"I heard the shooting and we just ran away. I didn't see what happened but I'm sure people are dead there."
CNN said another source inside Tehran had described people being "shot like animals".
The witness went on: "In the previous days they are killing students with axes, they put the axe through the heart of young men, and it's so devastating I don't know how to describe it.
"This is horrific, this is genocide, this is a massacre, this is Hitler. And you people should stop it. It's time to act."
==========================================
The people of Iran are begging us to stand up for their freedom. Obama needs to stop avoiding the toe-stepping with the leaders of Iran and urge immediate embargoes on all oil leaving Iran. The regime must be shown there are consequences for violations of human rights. There are punishments for crimes against humanity. The world needs to act. Iran is acting in a way that defies, instead of sanctions, instead of nuclear suspension requests, it violates human rights.
Iran is acting while Obama stands to the side. We must act. We need to act. The people of Iran are asking for our help. We have a moral obligation as the leaders of the free world to act.
The world dislikes the United States because of the first failed Kurd independance promise, the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, the failed Mogadishu incident, the failed war in Vietnam. The promise behind all of them was freedom for the people. We failed.
We can redeem ourselves by coming to the aid of those who ask us to help them. South Vietnam didn't ask us to help them, Somali's needed help but they didn't request us to do it, and the Bay of Pigs was organized by us. Iranian are asking for us to fulfil our promise to lead the world into freedom. We are the shining city on the hill. We shine with the energy, the feelings of freedom. We can share this power source to the world at no cost by simply standing up for the rights of others.
Obama, do your damn job already. Hillary, either quit or do your job. McCain, keep up the good work.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
I've Spoken On Healthcare And Iran Enough Lately (Episode of Distraction 2)
The Perfect War Game .01
Items:
1x2 Square Board
1 Blue Cube
1 Red Cube
1 Coin (Marked 1 and 2 on either side)
Rules:
Alphabetical Start
Cube can move forward or stay.
If moving forward onto an opponent cube.
Toss coin into atmosphere.
If coin lands on 2, move forward. If 1, stay.
After moving or staying, opponent's turn.
Repeat until all the board is of one color.
Variables:
2>1 = Win
1<2 = Lose
Items:
1x2 Square Board
1 Blue Cube
1 Red Cube
1 Coin (Marked 1 and 2 on either side)
Rules:
Alphabetical Start
Cube can move forward or stay.
If moving forward onto an opponent cube.
Toss coin into atmosphere.
If coin lands on 2, move forward. If 1, stay.
After moving or staying, opponent's turn.
Repeat until all the board is of one color.
Variables:
2>1 = Win
1<2 = Lose
Saturday, June 20, 2009
The Toll of Uprising
The difference between the riots now in Iran and the ones thirty years ago is the exchange of "Shah" for "Khomeni". They want him dead. The death toll today rose at least 40, bringing the minimum toll to 52 as far as I can tell. The reports go as high as 200 but I can not confirm them.
How The West Lost The Revolution
The leaders of Iran who support Ahmadinejad and the Ayatolla have won. The reason I place the loss on the West, the nations who have leaders who represent Democracy and freedom in the world, is because they did not do enough to put the message I urged here forward in the ears of all Iranians. They did not show the Iranian people the support they needed to create a reform that would be truly different from the regime they have now. The world failed when a suicide bomber blew up the tomb of the first Ayatolla of Iran.
The protests would be oppressed and the people of the world knew this. The world knows what oppressive nations do when an internal challenge to their authority arises: they oppress even further. History shows this pattern every time.
The response can be violence, as is now occuring in Iran with this suicide bombing. When violence is used to overthrow an oppressive regime what often replaces it is an equally oppressive government. Look at the past year of coups and revolutions in Africa and Southeast Asia. Peaceful, persistent voicing of views creates a real change. The violence of the mutinees, and the militarization of the coups has led to equally oppressive regimes when they succeed and worse regimes when they fail. The peaceful declaration of a new government has created a stable Kosovo. The violence in this act of cowardice in Iran, if it becomes a pattern, will lead to an oppressive regime if it succeeds. Should this revolution now fail, the regime in place will be continuously oppressive against its people to ensure this revolution does not occur again.
Where did the West fail? It started with the leader of the free world, the leader of the most powerful nation on earth, declaring that we should not "meddle" in Iran. This was a statement amounting to saying we do not care what occurs in Iran. By the time the U.S. responded it was three days into the protests and too late for the message to be heard. I am certain voices in Europe were made, but here in the U.S. they were not heard. No voice is as powerful as that of the President of the United States. When he speaks, the world always listens. Whether the world agrees or not, is up to them; but they always listen.
For him to say we don't want to stand up for the freedom of Iranians to vote, to speak, to live their lives we have failed. I voiced myself but my leaders did not. I am not the President yet, but I know he has failed me.
We did not tell Iran to allow the freedom to be placed with the people. We did not tell the people to protest freely as their right, but peacefully. We did say we don't care. The wrong message at the right time. For Persia's people to not have the blessings of freedom urged by the rest of the world we have failed in bringing one of the oldest nations on earth to the modern free age of man.
However I will not give up. I will condemn the acts of violence by all sides and the silencing of voices wherever they occur in Iran. Freedom must be given and peace will be what is returned.
The protests would be oppressed and the people of the world knew this. The world knows what oppressive nations do when an internal challenge to their authority arises: they oppress even further. History shows this pattern every time.
The response can be violence, as is now occuring in Iran with this suicide bombing. When violence is used to overthrow an oppressive regime what often replaces it is an equally oppressive government. Look at the past year of coups and revolutions in Africa and Southeast Asia. Peaceful, persistent voicing of views creates a real change. The violence of the mutinees, and the militarization of the coups has led to equally oppressive regimes when they succeed and worse regimes when they fail. The peaceful declaration of a new government has created a stable Kosovo. The violence in this act of cowardice in Iran, if it becomes a pattern, will lead to an oppressive regime if it succeeds. Should this revolution now fail, the regime in place will be continuously oppressive against its people to ensure this revolution does not occur again.
Where did the West fail? It started with the leader of the free world, the leader of the most powerful nation on earth, declaring that we should not "meddle" in Iran. This was a statement amounting to saying we do not care what occurs in Iran. By the time the U.S. responded it was three days into the protests and too late for the message to be heard. I am certain voices in Europe were made, but here in the U.S. they were not heard. No voice is as powerful as that of the President of the United States. When he speaks, the world always listens. Whether the world agrees or not, is up to them; but they always listen.
For him to say we don't want to stand up for the freedom of Iranians to vote, to speak, to live their lives we have failed. I voiced myself but my leaders did not. I am not the President yet, but I know he has failed me.
We did not tell Iran to allow the freedom to be placed with the people. We did not tell the people to protest freely as their right, but peacefully. We did say we don't care. The wrong message at the right time. For Persia's people to not have the blessings of freedom urged by the rest of the world we have failed in bringing one of the oldest nations on earth to the modern free age of man.
However I will not give up. I will condemn the acts of violence by all sides and the silencing of voices wherever they occur in Iran. Freedom must be given and peace will be what is returned.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Apologies, Freedom, and Reality
Today the senate passed a bill apologizing for slavery. They did the same thing last year which explains why it sounds so familiar. Two instant reactions came out: it was not enough, and it was pointless. I am on the side of pointless because they did this last year. Those who say it is not enough often have said reparations are necessary.
The people of America were oppressed by the British. The Revolution gave independance and freedom to the whites. They did not demand the British also pay money in return. The only payment was freedom. The blacks had their freedom granted in the civil war when whites and blacks fought together for the freedom of the blacks. This is not to say that racism is not an issue, but slavery, as a practice of the U.S. government, has ended.
Native Americans have their own governments and laws because this is their homeland. For the rest of us our freedom are our reparation. Whites homeland is in Europe and blacks in Africa. We do not need money, we need freedom. Why is it that some african-American's can not accept an apology given in words and instead request it be given in money? Freedom is the only repayment for a moral injustice by society against any group.
The people of America were oppressed by the British. The Revolution gave independance and freedom to the whites. They did not demand the British also pay money in return. The only payment was freedom. The blacks had their freedom granted in the civil war when whites and blacks fought together for the freedom of the blacks. This is not to say that racism is not an issue, but slavery, as a practice of the U.S. government, has ended.
Native Americans have their own governments and laws because this is their homeland. For the rest of us our freedom are our reparation. Whites homeland is in Europe and blacks in Africa. We do not need money, we need freedom. Why is it that some african-American's can not accept an apology given in words and instead request it be given in money? Freedom is the only repayment for a moral injustice by society against any group.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
North Korea's Counterfeit
In the 1990s North Korea was one of the largest, and best producers of counterfeit technology and used it to counterfeit U.S. dollars. Problem is they still do that. However a news story from Italy where several people were arrested for holding 160 Billion dollars in bonds has caught my attention. Only 4 nations in the world hold more than 160 Billion dollars of United States debt. This means no person could possibly have that amount of bonds in their posession.
Two possibilities for this incident are they are real and countries are trying to get rid of their bonds in fear of a deflated U.S. dollar, or they are counterfeit. An expert has said only a country could counterfeit the bonds due to the required resources to do so. North Korea seems to be, for a nation with extreme poverty, doing a lot with its military - and seemingly only its military. Such policies are expensive. So, how would they be able to afford it? Just print the money or the bonds apparently. I am not saying it is North Korea behind the bonds, but it seems likely to me.
Two possibilities for this incident are they are real and countries are trying to get rid of their bonds in fear of a deflated U.S. dollar, or they are counterfeit. An expert has said only a country could counterfeit the bonds due to the required resources to do so. North Korea seems to be, for a nation with extreme poverty, doing a lot with its military - and seemingly only its military. Such policies are expensive. So, how would they be able to afford it? Just print the money or the bonds apparently. I am not saying it is North Korea behind the bonds, but it seems likely to me.
North Korea AND A Question Not Asked
First I will update the North Korean situation. It appears that North Korea is preparing a long-range missile launch for early July that will be aimed at Hawaii. It will fall 500 miles short after flying over Japan if it indeed does go forward. To those who say "500 miles short. Not important." You are wrong. Think of the Pacific Ocean, North Korea could aim it in any direction but it is preparing to aim straight line for Hawaii. The missile would be of the Taepodong-2 brand.
In response officials in the U.S. have said it will be 3 years before the West Coast will face a serious threat from North Korea. This means we will still have Barack Obama as president when the crunch time comes in. Do we let them become a threat? I say no but hey, three years is plenty of time to be proven wrong or right. We shall see.
However a ship, the Kang Nam, is suspected of carrying nuclear and missile weapons. It is a North Korean ship that left port Wednesday from North Korea. Here is where the question isn't being asked. In the reports we can't board it because the UN Resolution requires us to be granted access on board by North Korea. I don't see that happening. Yet, nobody is asking where the ship was going.
This is where it becomes crucial. It has left North Korean waters. The U.S. navy is tracking it of course and rightfully so. Will it go to the port as planned? If it has nuclear material and the ship was heading for Iran, we know something is going on with the alliance that I laid out on this blog way back when nobody cared. Well, seems like nobody cares now because nobody asked where it was going in the news reports.
Finally a new cog of the alliance. I listed Myanmar (Burma) in the list of nations against us. The affiliation wasn't clear. Now it is. Burma and North Korea have been connected by the trade-off by Burma of getting North Korean help in building underground structures in exchange for giving food aid and other materials to North Korea.
This connection began following the Rangoon bombing in which 18 South Korean officials visiting Burma were killed. North Korea held negotiations with Myanmar (Burma) in order to release the ones responsible for the bombing. While the prisoners were not extradited to North Korea, exchanges of military supplies from North Korea to keep the military juntas in power in exchange for food, rubber, and other items from the generals.
According to this article: http://www.rfa.org/english/news/burma/burmatunnels-06182009131301.html
Yes, according to the long linked article the generals traded raw materials because they didn't have money. Now the trade offs continue in which tunnels designed for the Burmese officials to hide and operate the government underground (in the event of air attack or even uprising) is exchanged for food.
Now there is an interesting part in which it mentions North Korea has been making numerous port calls with Burma. This means its ships have been going to port. They are officially called "friendship delegations" but the article explains the arrivals are for business. This is where it ties into the ship with the nuclear and missile materials the navy is tracking. We need to know where the ship was intended to go so we can form a clearer picture of the alliance. The ships location, if a nation not in the list of the current alliances, will be quite surprising to me and force me to research even deeper into the web of the alliances that we have.
There is a little extra note in this alliance that seems rather repetitive. Burma is accused of seeking a nuclear program. The list of nations in this alliance seeking, accused of, or having a nuclear program are as follows:
Iran
North Korea
Venezuela
Ecuador
Bolivia
Libya
Russia
Burma
Syria
Peru
Cuba
Pakistan (Who is, I believe, now a neutral power, although it will choose a side, I am not sure which anymore)
So with this information the alliances have a pattern of getting aid for nuclear technology from the Russians, who aid the triple alliance of Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea which are the champions of anti-Americanism in the world. Subsequently you have North Korea helping Syria and Burma with their programs. Iran and Venezuela working together to get Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru their own programs and Cuba is of course aided by Venezuela. The alliance is there. We need our leaders to realize this before it is too late.
This paragraph is my third post edit because today the info is coming out of the wood work. The U.N. Atomic Energy Chief, Mohamed Elbaradei, said Iran is seeking nuclear weapons technology. I really want to know where that ship was heading. I really do. I think you do to. Look in the news, see if you can see the alliances I see and let me know if you disagree.
In response officials in the U.S. have said it will be 3 years before the West Coast will face a serious threat from North Korea. This means we will still have Barack Obama as president when the crunch time comes in. Do we let them become a threat? I say no but hey, three years is plenty of time to be proven wrong or right. We shall see.
However a ship, the Kang Nam, is suspected of carrying nuclear and missile weapons. It is a North Korean ship that left port Wednesday from North Korea. Here is where the question isn't being asked. In the reports we can't board it because the UN Resolution requires us to be granted access on board by North Korea. I don't see that happening. Yet, nobody is asking where the ship was going.
This is where it becomes crucial. It has left North Korean waters. The U.S. navy is tracking it of course and rightfully so. Will it go to the port as planned? If it has nuclear material and the ship was heading for Iran, we know something is going on with the alliance that I laid out on this blog way back when nobody cared. Well, seems like nobody cares now because nobody asked where it was going in the news reports.
Finally a new cog of the alliance. I listed Myanmar (Burma) in the list of nations against us. The affiliation wasn't clear. Now it is. Burma and North Korea have been connected by the trade-off by Burma of getting North Korean help in building underground structures in exchange for giving food aid and other materials to North Korea.
This connection began following the Rangoon bombing in which 18 South Korean officials visiting Burma were killed. North Korea held negotiations with Myanmar (Burma) in order to release the ones responsible for the bombing. While the prisoners were not extradited to North Korea, exchanges of military supplies from North Korea to keep the military juntas in power in exchange for food, rubber, and other items from the generals.
According to this article: http://www.rfa.org/english/news/burma/burmatunnels-06182009131301.html
Yes, according to the long linked article the generals traded raw materials because they didn't have money. Now the trade offs continue in which tunnels designed for the Burmese officials to hide and operate the government underground (in the event of air attack or even uprising) is exchanged for food.
Now there is an interesting part in which it mentions North Korea has been making numerous port calls with Burma. This means its ships have been going to port. They are officially called "friendship delegations" but the article explains the arrivals are for business. This is where it ties into the ship with the nuclear and missile materials the navy is tracking. We need to know where the ship was intended to go so we can form a clearer picture of the alliance. The ships location, if a nation not in the list of the current alliances, will be quite surprising to me and force me to research even deeper into the web of the alliances that we have.
There is a little extra note in this alliance that seems rather repetitive. Burma is accused of seeking a nuclear program. The list of nations in this alliance seeking, accused of, or having a nuclear program are as follows:
Iran
North Korea
Venezuela
Ecuador
Bolivia
Libya
Russia
Burma
Syria
Peru
Cuba
Pakistan (Who is, I believe, now a neutral power, although it will choose a side, I am not sure which anymore)
So with this information the alliances have a pattern of getting aid for nuclear technology from the Russians, who aid the triple alliance of Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea which are the champions of anti-Americanism in the world. Subsequently you have North Korea helping Syria and Burma with their programs. Iran and Venezuela working together to get Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru their own programs and Cuba is of course aided by Venezuela. The alliance is there. We need our leaders to realize this before it is too late.
This paragraph is my third post edit because today the info is coming out of the wood work. The U.N. Atomic Energy Chief, Mohamed Elbaradei, said Iran is seeking nuclear weapons technology. I really want to know where that ship was heading. I really do. I think you do to. Look in the news, see if you can see the alliances I see and let me know if you disagree.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The Green Revolution Toll Rises
The death toll in Iran has risen to 12, perhaps 14. No accurate reporting on the raid at Tehran University has the same toll. However, the victims were stabbed and shot to death. I am calling it the Green Revolution as it seems to be the defining moment of today's protests. The Iranian football (soccer) match against South Korea witnessed several players wearing green wrist bands in the first half. The wrist bands were ordered removed for the second half.
Green is also the color of Mousavi's political party and is the color of the banners of those who support him not only in Iran, but worldwide and in our own United States as well. Whether or not this Green Revolution succeeds and goes down in history as the Green Revolution is still not known.
The reason I chose the Green Revolution is also in continuity with other nation's revolutions lately. The Rose Revolution in Georgia and the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine are prime examples. I urge the support for their freedom to continue and for the world to not lose interest at this crucial moment and to continue to support the freedom of Iranians until this regime is altered in a way that is beneficial to Iran's people and will thus help the world's efforts for peace.
Green is also the color of Mousavi's political party and is the color of the banners of those who support him not only in Iran, but worldwide and in our own United States as well. Whether or not this Green Revolution succeeds and goes down in history as the Green Revolution is still not known.
The reason I chose the Green Revolution is also in continuity with other nation's revolutions lately. The Rose Revolution in Georgia and the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine are prime examples. I urge the support for their freedom to continue and for the world to not lose interest at this crucial moment and to continue to support the freedom of Iranians until this regime is altered in a way that is beneficial to Iran's people and will thus help the world's efforts for peace.
Cyber Warfare Reality
I'm done making warnings about cyber warfare potentials. The underlying force in this Iranian situation is a battle with proxy servers and blockers set up by the Iranian government. The cycle goes on and on back and forth minute by minute.
As someone who researched the use of hacking by the Chinese government against our Pentagon, occuring to this day still, and seeing the Russian Syndicate shut down Georgia's website servers during the Russo-Georgian war I can tell you that cyber warfare is here. With iReports and similar approaches in news networks, to the use of cyber attacks to shut down and plagarize websites from Isreal to Kosovo, to the current reliance on twitter to gain information of an ongoing situation in Iran, we are now seeing the value of cyber warfare and the attempts to use it to expand freedom, as well as shut it down.
With China and North Korea restricting internet access to government run websites and having a wall for entire nations in Burma, China, and Iran we are seeing that the cyber warfare is not only one way. The proxy servers being provided to Iranians are not an act of war but of revolution. In the past few years we have seen Kosovo, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and now Iran have revolutions against alleged fraud in the election process that makes a Republic an actual Republic.
This may be one of the first revolutions which seems reliant upon the internet and cyber warfare as the main means with which it communicates with its supporters and activists. To spread the message the next best method they have is shouting from their cars during gridlock hours in Tehran. Somehow that method may be better than the one used to end the War of 1812, which had a peace treaty signed more than a week before the final battle in New Orleans took place. Yet, nothing matches the ability to include as many voices as possible as the internet does.
The warnings are over because cyber warfare is here. China is ahead of us and we are the nation with the largest defense budget. I demand as a citizen that we put some of those funds towards creating an encryption-proof closed network for our military system. An internet 3.0 or 4.0 depending on where the university systems are at.
As someone who researched the use of hacking by the Chinese government against our Pentagon, occuring to this day still, and seeing the Russian Syndicate shut down Georgia's website servers during the Russo-Georgian war I can tell you that cyber warfare is here. With iReports and similar approaches in news networks, to the use of cyber attacks to shut down and plagarize websites from Isreal to Kosovo, to the current reliance on twitter to gain information of an ongoing situation in Iran, we are now seeing the value of cyber warfare and the attempts to use it to expand freedom, as well as shut it down.
With China and North Korea restricting internet access to government run websites and having a wall for entire nations in Burma, China, and Iran we are seeing that the cyber warfare is not only one way. The proxy servers being provided to Iranians are not an act of war but of revolution. In the past few years we have seen Kosovo, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and now Iran have revolutions against alleged fraud in the election process that makes a Republic an actual Republic.
This may be one of the first revolutions which seems reliant upon the internet and cyber warfare as the main means with which it communicates with its supporters and activists. To spread the message the next best method they have is shouting from their cars during gridlock hours in Tehran. Somehow that method may be better than the one used to end the War of 1812, which had a peace treaty signed more than a week before the final battle in New Orleans took place. Yet, nothing matches the ability to include as many voices as possible as the internet does.
The warnings are over because cyber warfare is here. China is ahead of us and we are the nation with the largest defense budget. I demand as a citizen that we put some of those funds towards creating an encryption-proof closed network for our military system. An internet 3.0 or 4.0 depending on where the university systems are at.
My Financial Reform
President Obama announced that he is creating a new agency to prevent a financial collapse like the one that has created the current economic recession. I have a new solution, it is simple, and doesn't need a new agency or more money to any agency or program. It may require a person to do some number crunching by a man in an office for about an hour and then giving a green or red light to expansions by the largest companies in any industry. If the company is less than 20% of the industry, let the expansion go forward. If it does not, red light do not approve a merger or office or store. We prevent monopolies in the same way. This will help make sure a company, should it fail, does not have a catastrophic effect on the economy. It prevents the "too big to fail" theory which does not apply to the state of California. Somehow the nation's largest economy and one of the world's top 10 economies is not too big to fail, but a few banks and car makers are. Back to the point, prevent them from being this massive. It will ensure competition and prevent systemic failures. A little oversight to make sure, like the banking industry was, the companies are not reliant upon each other for more than 5% of their operating revenue. What this means is that along the line, the closer the industry gets to your home town the more diverse your choices will be.
Banking industry for example had AIG insuring all the mortgage backed securities. AIG was the mortgage backed security shop essentially. Sure it has insurance for many other things, but for the banks and mortgage backed securities it was AIG. If you limited the connections between the largest industries you would have 20 "AIG" shops for mortgage backed securities. This means that when AIG fails, the banking industry won't collapse.
It can be applied in other ways but here is a little disclaimer: it won't apply to all industries. Well, it will. The 20% rule should apply across the board. Yet the 5% would be difficult in some industries. Like the diamond industry. There are only so many diamond mines in the world, and none are in the United States. Yet diamond sellers are a different story.
Now lets take a different industry and place it at the local level. I understand small towns won't have the real availability for diversification in store-front options, but I feel enough effect will be felt in even large towns (10,000 +) that it will be recognizable. If you have five farms making the 20% of the industry for farming nationwide, they have to have buyers. McDonald's, Burger King, so on and so forth will buy. The farmers should not rely on more than 5% of sales to McDonalds that way when McDonalds fails (which it probably won't, not making a prediction folks) the farmer hasn't lost his way to survive. It also makes sure that McDonald's can't rely on one farmer for more than 5% of the meat production. It gets difficult here and may probably provide the exception needed because, with some food products, they are one of a kind and may have different tastes depending on where it is grown. This means 5% for McDonald's could lead to inconsistency in taste and be a bad policy for the company. Yet the farmer, by diversifying its purchasers, ensures long term stability of customers and will almost always have a market. This way if one fails, the other customers can fill in the gaps.
The long term effects of this:more businesses and gauranteed market stability. Recessions may occur, but entire industries will not fail catastrophically as they did this time and in 1939.
More businesses means more people being involved in the market. We will see smaller businesses providing a more diverse shopping experience for people in America. The mom-and-pop stores will have a comeback I believe.
Perhaps even having four companies not able to get more than 20% of market share, and then for the last 20% making it so no company can get above 5 or 1% market share would ensure the small business approach which inspires the most innovation and give the local feel of business back to towns in America. That said 1% is still a huge part of the economy. It could be refined for various industries based on the value of that industry in GDP standards. I'm not an expert but I think this is a good idea. If you think so too let me know, and let your representatives, senators, governors, and president know. Otherwise, a good idea may be lost. Final note on the idea, for what companies will be the 20% let the details be hammered out, maybe make it a bit fairer and limit all companies to 5% of market share or 1% even (especially in retail chains, restaurant chains, fast food, and banking industries.)
The best part is the American dream still exists, and you can become wealthy. You just won't be able to have your business become large enough that if you fail, you won't be hurting the nation. It will also allow the American dream to be more possible for everyone because the need for more businesses to make sure the market share is filled will make more Americans and even non-citizens a better chance at meeting the American Dream. It also will have no government run operations. We do not need Amtrak expanded to other industries. I think that much is obvious.
I feel regulation can be used as an alternative to taxes in order to make the country more financially equal. While everyone wishes the world was perfect and everyone was equal, I disagree with doing it by taking and giving. Taxes create resentment. Regulation is better because it also doesn't require the government to make the decisions for the businesses. It only makes sure the field of play is fair for everyone.
Analogy time!
The government regulations are like the referee in a soccer game. Before the game the referee can check to make sure the field is to standard, so that both teams have the same field to play on. This is the opportunity to succeed in this nation. The referee keeping score is just the government doing the census. When one of the players goes beyond regulation, the team faces a penalty kick. The regulations in the economy prevent these fouls. The giving of the penalty kick is like the government taxing and giving the taxes to those who are at disadvantage. By using government regulation to make sure no one is at a disadvantage, I believe the need to tax and give to the disadvantaged will be gone. Those who fail will have failed because they simply are not up to the job of doing what others do.
This has been another episode of the ravings of a madman. Due to the realization that I am rambling here, I have decided to stop myself and return to the topic at another time. Thank you for reading. And let me know what you think!
P.S. I mean what you think, not what you feel. If you hate me and think I hate poor people, or am betraying my Republican values, spare me. Lets discuss the issues on their merit and realistic possiblities.
Banking industry for example had AIG insuring all the mortgage backed securities. AIG was the mortgage backed security shop essentially. Sure it has insurance for many other things, but for the banks and mortgage backed securities it was AIG. If you limited the connections between the largest industries you would have 20 "AIG" shops for mortgage backed securities. This means that when AIG fails, the banking industry won't collapse.
It can be applied in other ways but here is a little disclaimer: it won't apply to all industries. Well, it will. The 20% rule should apply across the board. Yet the 5% would be difficult in some industries. Like the diamond industry. There are only so many diamond mines in the world, and none are in the United States. Yet diamond sellers are a different story.
Now lets take a different industry and place it at the local level. I understand small towns won't have the real availability for diversification in store-front options, but I feel enough effect will be felt in even large towns (10,000 +) that it will be recognizable. If you have five farms making the 20% of the industry for farming nationwide, they have to have buyers. McDonald's, Burger King, so on and so forth will buy. The farmers should not rely on more than 5% of sales to McDonalds that way when McDonalds fails (which it probably won't, not making a prediction folks) the farmer hasn't lost his way to survive. It also makes sure that McDonald's can't rely on one farmer for more than 5% of the meat production. It gets difficult here and may probably provide the exception needed because, with some food products, they are one of a kind and may have different tastes depending on where it is grown. This means 5% for McDonald's could lead to inconsistency in taste and be a bad policy for the company. Yet the farmer, by diversifying its purchasers, ensures long term stability of customers and will almost always have a market. This way if one fails, the other customers can fill in the gaps.
The long term effects of this:more businesses and gauranteed market stability. Recessions may occur, but entire industries will not fail catastrophically as they did this time and in 1939.
More businesses means more people being involved in the market. We will see smaller businesses providing a more diverse shopping experience for people in America. The mom-and-pop stores will have a comeback I believe.
Perhaps even having four companies not able to get more than 20% of market share, and then for the last 20% making it so no company can get above 5 or 1% market share would ensure the small business approach which inspires the most innovation and give the local feel of business back to towns in America. That said 1% is still a huge part of the economy. It could be refined for various industries based on the value of that industry in GDP standards. I'm not an expert but I think this is a good idea. If you think so too let me know, and let your representatives, senators, governors, and president know. Otherwise, a good idea may be lost. Final note on the idea, for what companies will be the 20% let the details be hammered out, maybe make it a bit fairer and limit all companies to 5% of market share or 1% even (especially in retail chains, restaurant chains, fast food, and banking industries.)
The best part is the American dream still exists, and you can become wealthy. You just won't be able to have your business become large enough that if you fail, you won't be hurting the nation. It will also allow the American dream to be more possible for everyone because the need for more businesses to make sure the market share is filled will make more Americans and even non-citizens a better chance at meeting the American Dream. It also will have no government run operations. We do not need Amtrak expanded to other industries. I think that much is obvious.
I feel regulation can be used as an alternative to taxes in order to make the country more financially equal. While everyone wishes the world was perfect and everyone was equal, I disagree with doing it by taking and giving. Taxes create resentment. Regulation is better because it also doesn't require the government to make the decisions for the businesses. It only makes sure the field of play is fair for everyone.
Analogy time!
The government regulations are like the referee in a soccer game. Before the game the referee can check to make sure the field is to standard, so that both teams have the same field to play on. This is the opportunity to succeed in this nation. The referee keeping score is just the government doing the census. When one of the players goes beyond regulation, the team faces a penalty kick. The regulations in the economy prevent these fouls. The giving of the penalty kick is like the government taxing and giving the taxes to those who are at disadvantage. By using government regulation to make sure no one is at a disadvantage, I believe the need to tax and give to the disadvantaged will be gone. Those who fail will have failed because they simply are not up to the job of doing what others do.
This has been another episode of the ravings of a madman. Due to the realization that I am rambling here, I have decided to stop myself and return to the topic at another time. Thank you for reading. And let me know what you think!
P.S. I mean what you think, not what you feel. If you hate me and think I hate poor people, or am betraying my Republican values, spare me. Lets discuss the issues on their merit and realistic possiblities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
