Ok First off I think I was tripping I heard Brownback say we need to cherish all life but he supports to keep the war in Iraq going which results in deaths of both American soldiers and Iraqi people every day. He needs to stick with a principle and say with it you cant support a principle when you think it suits you.
I would have to say Ron Paul was definitely the most exciting candidate and no one can say he is just a carbon copy of the rest of the candidates. Ron was very candid he pointed out the real reason why the 9/11 hijackers targeted the United States. In case you missed it was because we have been fucking around with their countries for years and we still are. If the United States has a army which I think is unconstitutional except for 2 year stints but that is for another day. Also during the question about the hypothetical question about the terrorist attack I have to give props to Ron for pointing out the rest of the people on that stage wants to take away your rights or other if it does good for the collective.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Friday, May 11, 2007
Why Down with Big Brother?
I figure I should explain why I named my blog "Down With Big Brother". For starters if you have not read 1984 by George Orwell please take some time to read it free Here. The book is fiction but I think we all know fiction can become a fact especially with time. I as a American believe that we are at a fork in the road we can either proceed toward liberty where every person who lives in the States is free to do what they wish as long as they do not harm another person, or to a police state that will make Nazi Germany, and Communist Russia blush. I would like to see the first option prevail but to get freedom personally you and I have to make sacrifices.
What does the statement "Down with big brother" mean to me? It is sort of a rallying cry to say I can make decisions for myself I do not need or want someone looking over my shoulder telling me don't do that or this. People learn the consequences of decisions one of 2 ways.
1. They plunge in make the choice and then have to deal with the consequences. This is learning by making mistakes sort for example I make the decision to touch a hot stove with my hand the consequences are that I will get burnt.
2. Research other people that have made the decision previously and make the choice based on that research. For example I will research what a stove does and what high heat can do to a human body and I make the decision to wear a protective glove before touching the stove the consequences are that I do not get burnt because I took the actions of others before me and added a new variable to the problem.
Big brother is there to make the choices you are just a puppet and Big brother is pulling the strings. I don't know about you but that sounds like slavery to me and I do not want to be a slave.
Now the question is for you. Will you choose to support Big Brother or will you choose to make decisions for yourself only you can make that decision.
What does the statement "Down with big brother" mean to me? It is sort of a rallying cry to say I can make decisions for myself I do not need or want someone looking over my shoulder telling me don't do that or this. People learn the consequences of decisions one of 2 ways.
1. They plunge in make the choice and then have to deal with the consequences. This is learning by making mistakes sort for example I make the decision to touch a hot stove with my hand the consequences are that I will get burnt.
2. Research other people that have made the decision previously and make the choice based on that research. For example I will research what a stove does and what high heat can do to a human body and I make the decision to wear a protective glove before touching the stove the consequences are that I do not get burnt because I took the actions of others before me and added a new variable to the problem.
Big brother is there to make the choices you are just a puppet and Big brother is pulling the strings. I don't know about you but that sounds like slavery to me and I do not want to be a slave.
Now the question is for you. Will you choose to support Big Brother or will you choose to make decisions for yourself only you can make that decision.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
ABC Censored my posts
I made a post on ABC's site last night with a link to my blog here because of the retort I wrote to their story on the "Ron Paul effect."My post was remove within a matter of minutes. I noticed the number of posts drop 10 total posts in 2 minutes. What did ABC expect when they publish a opinion piece on candidate for the office of president of these United States. I don't normally like any politicians but when a politician has proven himself by voting on principle year after year that makes me want to give that politician a extra glance. I actually met Ron Paul this winter in NH just before he announced he was going to run for president and he seemed to be like the NH granite not easily changed.
Back to ABC they brought the shit storm that is going to happen by pissing off a lot of people. I have seen blogs about the censoring of the posts even by people that out right support other presidential candidates. From what I can tell most American people like companies that they get services and products from to listen to the customer, you know the old saying the customer is always right. I do think ABC owns the servers and the code that runs on them and can do what ever they want with that property if they want to allow only racists comments they should be allowed to do that but they should not complain when people find out what they are doing and stop using their services and products. Personally I like the local ABC news channel but I am going to try and not tune in to the network I may break down watch John Stossel but it would have to be a interesting story.
Back to ABC they brought the shit storm that is going to happen by pissing off a lot of people. I have seen blogs about the censoring of the posts even by people that out right support other presidential candidates. From what I can tell most American people like companies that they get services and products from to listen to the customer, you know the old saying the customer is always right. I do think ABC owns the servers and the code that runs on them and can do what ever they want with that property if they want to allow only racists comments they should be allowed to do that but they should not complain when people find out what they are doing and stop using their services and products. Personally I like the local ABC news channel but I am going to try and not tune in to the network I may break down watch John Stossel but it would have to be a interesting story.
Monday, May 7, 2007
Is Big Brother using the government as a puppet?
OK I guess I should relate my blog posts to the title of my blog.
This is not a conspiracy theory but something is not smelling right in Denmark. According to ABC article about the "Ron Paul Effect". From what I can get out of that article it sounds like ABC believes that the online poll at MSNBC was bogus and was manipulated. I personally voted at that poll and I know that I was only able to vote once so it appeared to me that the poll was not easily exploitable. I did not dig in and try to exploit it being a Information Technology professional I know there is always a way to change 1's and 0's. Back to the article they make a guess that a group of people or even 1 person could have manipulated the poll, like I said this is possible but you need to look at who would be behind this conspiracy and the group that is very vocal for Ron Paul is Libertarians and the mainstream media did any checking about libertarians they would find out that fraud is against the libertarian principles which is at the core of the beliefs. So thinking about that I am really questioning ABC's conspiracy.
Now if ABC is going to create a conspiracy they need to cover a few more bases. The conspiracy needs to have a leader saying libertarians is like saying black people. They need a reason why the group would do this i.e. money, power, or sex.
Lets talk about money? Libertarian's what to keep their money and be able to make profits by providing customers with a product or service.
Lets talk about power? Libertarian's want the people to have the power to choose for themselves what to do with their body, property, and time.
Lets talk about sex? This is just a insane idea that Ron Paul would get the group sex at all. Well maybe since libertarians think you can do with your body what you want as long as it is not hurting someone else there could be more group sex. <--- That was a joke
So saying that I can't see ABC's conspiracy getting any traction even with the American people listening to their "news" broadcasts. (I put "news" in quotations because I cant call something like Anna Nicole Smith's death news.)
This is not a conspiracy theory but something is not smelling right in Denmark. According to ABC article about the "Ron Paul Effect". From what I can get out of that article it sounds like ABC believes that the online poll at MSNBC was bogus and was manipulated. I personally voted at that poll and I know that I was only able to vote once so it appeared to me that the poll was not easily exploitable. I did not dig in and try to exploit it being a Information Technology professional I know there is always a way to change 1's and 0's. Back to the article they make a guess that a group of people or even 1 person could have manipulated the poll, like I said this is possible but you need to look at who would be behind this conspiracy and the group that is very vocal for Ron Paul is Libertarians and the mainstream media did any checking about libertarians they would find out that fraud is against the libertarian principles which is at the core of the beliefs. So thinking about that I am really questioning ABC's conspiracy.
Now if ABC is going to create a conspiracy they need to cover a few more bases. The conspiracy needs to have a leader saying libertarians is like saying black people. They need a reason why the group would do this i.e. money, power, or sex.
Lets talk about money? Libertarian's what to keep their money and be able to make profits by providing customers with a product or service.
Lets talk about power? Libertarian's want the people to have the power to choose for themselves what to do with their body, property, and time.
Lets talk about sex? This is just a insane idea that Ron Paul would get the group sex at all. Well maybe since libertarians think you can do with your body what you want as long as it is not hurting someone else there could be more group sex. <--- That was a joke
So saying that I can't see ABC's conspiracy getting any traction even with the American people listening to their "news" broadcasts. (I put "news" in quotations because I cant call something like Anna Nicole Smith's death news.)
Friday, May 4, 2007
GOP Debate - 08
Disclaimer - I am not a republican, I am not a democrat, nor affiliated with any other political party!!
Now to my thoughts. I was watching the GOP debate last night because it was commercial free and I was playing a computer game and wanted something to listen to. After the debate finally got started and Chris Mathews stopped explaining the rules to the audience. I got the feeling that all the people on the stage wanted to distance themselves from the current president.
The first time I stopped playing my game was when Congressman Ron Paul spoke for the first time he was asked about his vote against the Iraq war which was a inaccurate question because no matter how many times people say we are at war congress never declared war and congress has not declared war since WWII. Ron Paul got my attention and kept it for the entire time he was speaking actually when he finished his answer I was clapping my hands. Ron's answer to the question was straight to the point and displayed his thought process.
Some of my feelings from the other candidates is that McCain is a warmonger and Mathews gave him too much leeway and more questions then the other candidates. Huckabee has a face like Nixon but none of Nixon's charisma. The rest of the lineup seemed like they were all clones and they did not impress me at all and some made me ill.
I think Ron Paul was given a softball with the question asking if he would eliminate the IRS. Ron took that softball and hit it out of the park. Getting rid of the IRS is a issue that will resonate with every American and who wants to fill out the forms before April 15th. Ron said multiple times he is not in favor of the Iraq war and that the foreign policy needs to be changed. The US is not the police of the world and the US should not be.
The abortion item is a issue I personally do not have feelings about this has been my stance since I heard about the topic. I think I have no say what goes on in another person's body and I would like the same respect. I can see the argument from both sides but as I look at the issues that come up with the war on drugs I see what happens when the government prohibits something but I think if people in a town do not want abortions going on in their town they can make a law that says that but the people of the town will have to bear the responsibility. From what I have been able to find Ron Paul would not make a law prohibiting it but leave the decision up to the community as the 10th amendment says.
Now to my thoughts. I was watching the GOP debate last night because it was commercial free and I was playing a computer game and wanted something to listen to. After the debate finally got started and Chris Mathews stopped explaining the rules to the audience. I got the feeling that all the people on the stage wanted to distance themselves from the current president.
The first time I stopped playing my game was when Congressman Ron Paul spoke for the first time he was asked about his vote against the Iraq war which was a inaccurate question because no matter how many times people say we are at war congress never declared war and congress has not declared war since WWII. Ron Paul got my attention and kept it for the entire time he was speaking actually when he finished his answer I was clapping my hands. Ron's answer to the question was straight to the point and displayed his thought process.
Some of my feelings from the other candidates is that McCain is a warmonger and Mathews gave him too much leeway and more questions then the other candidates. Huckabee has a face like Nixon but none of Nixon's charisma. The rest of the lineup seemed like they were all clones and they did not impress me at all and some made me ill.
I think Ron Paul was given a softball with the question asking if he would eliminate the IRS. Ron took that softball and hit it out of the park. Getting rid of the IRS is a issue that will resonate with every American and who wants to fill out the forms before April 15th. Ron said multiple times he is not in favor of the Iraq war and that the foreign policy needs to be changed. The US is not the police of the world and the US should not be.
The abortion item is a issue I personally do not have feelings about this has been my stance since I heard about the topic. I think I have no say what goes on in another person's body and I would like the same respect. I can see the argument from both sides but as I look at the issues that come up with the war on drugs I see what happens when the government prohibits something but I think if people in a town do not want abortions going on in their town they can make a law that says that but the people of the town will have to bear the responsibility. From what I have been able to find Ron Paul would not make a law prohibiting it but leave the decision up to the community as the 10th amendment says.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Bill of rights myths and truth
OK I have explained what the bill of right is to a few people and I think this needs to be addressed. I am no constitutional scholar but I think I understand a little more then the average person.
Myth #1 The bill of rights are the rights American citizens have.
Truth: The Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution) is there to tell the government how far they can go in infringing on your rights. For example the 1st amendment says to the government that they can not pass laws against types of speech.
Myth #2 You can exercise your rights anywhere in the United State.
Truth: You can not exercise your rights on private property unless the owner gives you permission. For example I cannot come in to your home and begin yelling about how Adolf Hitler was correct in killing people.
Myth #3 You can only use the 5th amendment when you are in court.
Truth: You have the right not to incriminate yourself all the time. This right is very important especially if you get pulled over by the police. The first question the officer is going to ask is is "Do you know why I pulled you over?" This is a trick question the officer is attempting to get you to incriminate yourself by saying something like "I didn't use my turning signal."
Myth #4 The right to speech only means that you can speak.
Truth: The right to speech also includes the right not to speak. We will use the example from above where the officer asks you "Do you know why I pulled you over?" You do not have to answer the question you can stay silent or better yet exercise your rights and let the officer know you are aware that you do not have to answer him by saying "I do not feel comfortable answering any questions without my attorney present." If you are going to exercise your rights you need to stay silent (which can be hard if the officer keeps tying to get you to speak.
Myth #5 You should let the police search your car.
Truth: This could be a bad idea!!!! If you let the officer search your car it could be torn apart and you have to put it back together. When you allow the officer to search your car you are telling them that you wave your 4th amendment rights. If the officer has a warrant to search you SHOULD NOT stop them. If they have a warrant you have bigger problems and should get a lawyer and keep your mouth shut. If the warrant is not valid or was obtained without probable cause your lawyer can get it thrown out including anything they find.
This is enough myths and truth for now I will explain more in future posts. I am not a lawyer and am not giving any legal advice just explaining things as I see them.
Myth #1 The bill of rights are the rights American citizens have.
Truth: The Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution) is there to tell the government how far they can go in infringing on your rights. For example the 1st amendment says to the government that they can not pass laws against types of speech.
Myth #2 You can exercise your rights anywhere in the United State.
Truth: You can not exercise your rights on private property unless the owner gives you permission. For example I cannot come in to your home and begin yelling about how Adolf Hitler was correct in killing people.
Myth #3 You can only use the 5th amendment when you are in court.
Truth: You have the right not to incriminate yourself all the time. This right is very important especially if you get pulled over by the police. The first question the officer is going to ask is is "Do you know why I pulled you over?" This is a trick question the officer is attempting to get you to incriminate yourself by saying something like "I didn't use my turning signal."
Myth #4 The right to speech only means that you can speak.
Truth: The right to speech also includes the right not to speak. We will use the example from above where the officer asks you "Do you know why I pulled you over?" You do not have to answer the question you can stay silent or better yet exercise your rights and let the officer know you are aware that you do not have to answer him by saying "I do not feel comfortable answering any questions without my attorney present." If you are going to exercise your rights you need to stay silent (which can be hard if the officer keeps tying to get you to speak.
Myth #5 You should let the police search your car.
Truth: This could be a bad idea!!!! If you let the officer search your car it could be torn apart and you have to put it back together. When you allow the officer to search your car you are telling them that you wave your 4th amendment rights. If the officer has a warrant to search you SHOULD NOT stop them. If they have a warrant you have bigger problems and should get a lawyer and keep your mouth shut. If the warrant is not valid or was obtained without probable cause your lawyer can get it thrown out including anything they find.
This is enough myths and truth for now I will explain more in future posts. I am not a lawyer and am not giving any legal advice just explaining things as I see them.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Home raided because of tomato plants
I found this story at http://www.kndo.com/Global/story.asp?S=6336522&nav=menu484_2 which to me looks to be a fairly reputable news source. This man had his home invaded because the landlord said he saw marijuana being grown. OK lets say that the landlord did not know what marijuana looks like because he may not have seen a marijuana leaf which if you look around the Internet or watch a couple of cheech and chong movies. My question is why didn't the landlord tell his tenants that marijuana cultivation is not permitted in the apartment/house. I bet if the landlord would have said that they would have told him that it was tomato plants and probably would offer him a tomato or two when they were ripe (I have grown tomatoes and I know that even a few plants produce a lot of tomatoes I gave bushels away just to get rid of them). I really feel sorry for the tenants who I bet are looking for a new place with a landlord that would not call the cops on them for growing something in their home.
What really tweaks my nipples is that the police did not even question the landlord because the first question would be what did the plants look like and what kind of leaves did they have maybe the second question would be has he ever seen the tenants use any drugs with those answers I would question the landlords statement.
The police did not need to break in to these peoples sanctuary. It is not described in the article I read but I bet they broke the door also we all know cops like to get the high from breaking in a door a treating the people inside the home as if they were Al Capone.
This is just one more failure of the War on Drugs and not even a failure that is even questioned. No government bureaucrat will be held responsible for the violation of the tenants 4th amendment rights and the tenants property rights. These people have suffered a invasion of their privacy.
Did the media question this? Nope they were too busy talking about a old fart on the radio saying something of color and who was the father of some woman that was in playboy.
What really tweaks my nipples is that the police did not even question the landlord because the first question would be what did the plants look like and what kind of leaves did they have maybe the second question would be has he ever seen the tenants use any drugs with those answers I would question the landlords statement.
The police did not need to break in to these peoples sanctuary. It is not described in the article I read but I bet they broke the door also we all know cops like to get the high from breaking in a door a treating the people inside the home as if they were Al Capone.
This is just one more failure of the War on Drugs and not even a failure that is even questioned. No government bureaucrat will be held responsible for the violation of the tenants 4th amendment rights and the tenants property rights. These people have suffered a invasion of their privacy.
Did the media question this? Nope they were too busy talking about a old fart on the radio saying something of color and who was the father of some woman that was in playboy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)