Monthly Archives: November 2011

The Right is Wrong on Same Sex Marriage and Ron Paul is the Best Candidate on Social Issues

Much has been said over the course of the last several decades regarding the rights of same sex couples to marry. On the side of the evangelical right wing, you’ll find the nauseating views of Rick Santorum, a despicable and hateful person who has advocated in public his belief that same sex marriage undermines the American society.

“In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality.”

My thoughts on Slick Rick are fairly simple, he’s an enemy of liberty and he’s such a toxic person the EPA is seeking appropriate guidance should they ever have to oversee his disposal.

But I’m curious which the evangelical right finds more offensive?

This heterosexual woman?

or:

Zach Wahls, a man who by all accounts would make one hell of a better candidate for the GOP than Lord Frothiness.

The reality is the fabric of the American family has been undermined by growing divorce rates and an overall lack of understanding society-wide in what it takes to make a marriage work. Who knows why it’s taken this long to become pervasive, but at some point, marriage in America was done … better.

I’ve been married and I’ve been on lengthy military deployments. If homosexual people really want access to both, I’m not going to object. Sometimes you have to experience something in order to realize how truly miserable it can be, sort of like spinach.

This is the real strength of Ron Paul’s candidacy. He doesn’t want the government involved in marriage at all, but if the states decide they want to legalize it, they can. Can you really argue that the fabric of the American society has been undermined by homosexuality? On the list of issues negatively effecting American society, I would place homosexuality somewhere north of Family Guy but south of Jersey Shore.

It’s time to get moving folks. The Blue Republican movement needs to hammer down in the next week. If you are any party of voter, register Republican immediately tomorrow in order to vote in the primaries. We have to take advantage of the opportunity to stop choosing between the lesser of two evils and finally vote for a man who is qualified and deserving of the office.

The military deserves better commanders-in-chief than we’ve given them, the nation needs a true leader unafraid of taking on the establishment that has railroaded us to the brink of collapse and we are in desperate need of a strong voice willing to shut down the bankers and corporations who have destroyed the economy with the help of Congress and the Federal Reserve.

Occupy Wall St.? Time to occupy the White House via Dr. No and his loyal band of dedicated Constitutional adherents.

Follow me on Twitter @sjstern

Like my Facebook page here

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under National Politics, Republican Primary, Ron Paul

Nancy Pelosi, Spencer Bachus and John Boehner Providing Further Proof the U.S. is Becoming a Banana Republic

Assume for the moment you’re a stock investor in several companies. You’re told one day of a pending announcement that will immediately decrease the value of your stock in one of these companies. As a civilian, if you sell your stock, you’ve just made yourself vulnerable to prosecution and – as Martha Stewart is well aware – will likely serve jail time if the evidence manages to end up in the hands of the authorities.

In any other facet of life, protecting your money with such information would seem logical and reasonable. However, on Wall St., such behavior is prosecuted as “insider trading.” The intent of insider trading laws is to keep trading fair, i.e. publicly traded stock investment and sales must be kept fair. If you trade public stock based on private or secret information and either profit or protect yourself from a loss you otherwise would have suffered (which is the equivalent of profit), the system is no longer equal and becomes prone to rampant corruption.

However, what happens when the very people responsible for writing the rule book, insulate themselves from such prosecution? Well, in the cases of Nancy Pelosi, D-CA; Spencer Bachus, R-AL; and John Boehner, R-OH; as well as multiple other elected representatives, it means they have unlimited access to non-public information and will not hesitate to use the information to pad their bottom lines and personal fortunes.

Peter Schweizer, author of the book Throw Them All Out (a sentiment with which I wholeheartedly agree), exposed the trades made by various members of Congress who were in positions of authority on committees such as Bachus’ seat as Chair of the House Financial Services Committee. Pelosi and Boehner as minority and majority leaders were privy to virtually all information passing into the House and allegedly made moves as well.

Though Bachus is taking on a PR campaign accusing Schweizer of damaging his reputation recklessly (personally I’m not sure there’s a better insult at present than calling someone either Republican or Democrat) with frivolous information, however, Schweizer’s supporting information appears fairly solid.

He appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe this morning, take a look.

I can’t put into words how much I appreciate a member of the press antagonizing Pelosi & Bachus. This is further proof the inmates are running the asylum. There really can’t be any further doubt about this hypocrisy as many members of Congress should be prosecuted criminally for these actions and it’s bound to be swept under the rug.

And speaking of politically connected criminals getting away with fraud, theft, embezzling and other acts of felonious behavior, John Corzine’s MF Global leadership, which lost $600 million in investor money, will somehow manage escape prosecution as Corzine, former governor of New Jersey, is highly connected with the DNC.

What exactly is going on with the U.S.? By all accounts Congress responded to the unintended consequences of their interference with the free market by decriminalizing fraud, then giving billions of tax dollars borrowed from the future taxpayers to the banks who for all intents and purposes wrote the legislation Congress passed to allow them to trade in fiat assets. Mortgage derivatives and securities were the direct result of Congressional pandering to Wall St., as was the lending behavior of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Where is the outrage? Occupy Wall St. is losing momentum all over the country and they completely failed to hold the legislators accountable. Instead directing their anger toward those who were smart enough to recognize the obstacle to exponentially increasing their income was prison. So what did they do? They bribed Congress into removing the obstacle. Yet somehow Wall St. is the problem? No!

Only he who has the power to destroy something truly controls it. Well Congress? It appears you all are not only the puppets of Wall St., but the co-conspirators. In the meantime, the two parties are distracting the population with discussions of tax increases and spending cuts, when in reality you’ll not take the only path likely to resolve the problem of compounding debt, massive spending cuts to every facet of the federal budget with an across the board tax increase.

CBS’ 60 Minutes Segment on the entire scandal is below.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Democrats, National Politics

Don’t Tell the Press, but After CBS News Snubbed Ron Paul, he tied Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney & Herman Cain in an Iowa Poll

This past weekend witnessed the 482nd debate between the GOP candidates for 2012. Though the focus of the debate, foreign policy, would seemingly give the moderators the opportunity to expose Ron Paul as a quack completely out-of-step with his party (he is, and quite frankly many Americans are grateful to have someone with a rational voice in the argument), the moderators and CBS gave Paul a whopping 89-seconds to respond to questions throughout the evening.

Color me shocked.

There’s been little explanation for the media’s shunning of Ron Paul.

Just yesterday this poll showed Paul in a statistical tie in Iowa with Romney, Cain & Gingrich, but Fox News, propaganda arm of the GOP, gave significantly more credence to a Public Policy poll that allowed them to laud Gingrich for crawling his way back into the race with surging poll numbers.

So why the continued ostracizing of Ron Paul?

DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz attempted to portray him as a far right nutjob who turns off most of the country after the Iowa debate in August, but then, DWS managed to elicit some tremendous venom from Dylan Ratigan regarding healthcare reform, witness the head of the DNC provoking an MSNBC host into a Mt. St. Helens-like eruption.

I’m not so sure the DNC is the voice of reason regarding the GOP debates. In fact, I would suggest the DNC wants someone like Romney to run against Zero as the majority of Independent, Undecided, Unaffiliated and minor party voters won’t be able to form a discernible opinion on what separates Romney’s flip-flopping from Zero’s agenda of mediocrity.

Regardless of how the DNC views the GOP candidates, the reality is the issues of choosing presidents are no longer red or blue but, rather, green. I have utterly no delusions about the Republican Party’s feelings toward Ron Paul as a possible president. Truth be told, the entity of the party would rather see the current president reelected and preserving the power structure, specifically the overseas wars and Federal Reserve autonomy, than run the risk of having a Ron Paul presidency interfere with their half of the choke hold on the power.

Here’s a scenario to ponder, the Republican Party contacts the major media outlets and says, in no uncertain terms, we cannot guarantee how much money we will have to spend on advertising revenue with your channel should Ron Paul win the nomination for the party. It’s going to take nearly a billion dollars in fund raising to win the general election, and if he wins, we just won’t have the ability to purchase that much ad revenue from you as our primary contributors would benefit more from the current president staying in office.

Is that scenario difficult to believe at all? If so, how about the media deciding the funding is the issue on their own? Is that anymore legitimate an act by the so-called fourth estate? My understanding, admittedly, I’m a Journalism major so all I know is theory, but I’m relatively certain they’re supposed to report the facts. The primary season is supposed to allow the candidates the opportunity to bare their souls for the people to see.

Which souls are the media supporting? Well, I already felt the reality was Mitt Romney was sans-soul, a thought he’s done little to change as he changes positions more often than an epileptic crackhead trout swimming in a triple-espresso in the midst of an Earthquake atop a stand resting on a J-ello mold. Consistency in advocacy? Mitt’s about as consistent as a schizophrenic with Tourette’s. And that’s an insult to both schizophrenics and those suffering from Tourette’s. Behold, the Romney advocacy:

Lest we forget, the media has also given increased coverage to Herman Cain, a business man, former member of the Federal Reserve board of Kansas City, recently we learned of past questions regarding appropriate behavior in the workplace and of course, 9-9-9. But, don’t think for an instant the Godfather may not know what he’s talking about. He’s absolutely determined to carefully and cautiously mine his way to the center of any question asked by the press before giving his lucid and reasoned response. As a great man once said, “Give me ten men like [Cain] and I could destroy the world.”

Wow Herman. One has to believe at this point, were you to find yourself in the White House, it would take three and a half weeks to explain your responsibilities should you need to use the bathroom.

Then there’s this week’s front runner and media darling Newt Gingrich. I can’t help but shake my head with both the support he’s gaining in the polls and the coverage he’s receiving in the media. Never mind his philandering whilst impeaching Bill Clinton for doing the very same thing; but haven’t we had enough of the neocon warmongering already? The majority of the country is tired of war and Newt’s among the several advocating further intervention in Iran. Oy.

Iran and North Korea? Newt’s comments about the tension existing since 1979, however, the problems in Iran started in 1953 when the CIA assisted the Shah in overthrowing their democratically elected Prime Minister who had nationalized the oil reserves. The Shah was overthrown by the Ayatollah’s the theocracy presently in charge. Never mind the Iran/Iraq War of the 1980s, that only led to the debacle we’re currently mired in around the Middle East.

But still Ron Paul gets little to no coverage from the media and the only possible answer to such an effective and efficient blacking out of a candidate’s message, is money. Someone stands to lose a fortune if Ron Paul attains a legitimate presence among national politicians.

Personally? I’ve had enough of party before platform. The entire GOP field, minus Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, represents a continuation of the path of the two party system as currently designed. Things have gotten systemically worse economically and for individual freedoms under these two parties, yet we’re told, again, that the “electable” candidates are those who represent the status quo. I, for one, have had enough. I will not be forced to choose between two party candidates who have no dedication to principles outside of election and reelection. Mitt Romney is no more dedicated to making things better for America than he is to disproving Mormonism.

Unfortunately, this is the type of candidate the two parties have shoveled onto our plates for the last 80 years.

We can do better than the Clint Webb’s of the Republican Party.

Leave a comment

Filed under Democrats, Foreign Policy, National Politics, Republican Primary, Ron Paul

Ron Paul Upsets Fox News’ Foolish Five & Real Time Gets Real Stupid

This past weekend Ron Paul talked to Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. Paul, as usual, was quite candid with his answers and explained in several areas why he doesn’t support the present design of the federal government, particularly the bureaucracy. Wallace was mostly respectful and gave Paul the change to answer his questions without taking on much of the nauseating Bill O’Reilly tactic of belligerent interruptions and flippant disregard for any explanation of context.

Now, you wouldn’t think this would be a major issue. Paul, after all, is the voice of consistency in D.C. for the last 30 years, in fact, he resigned at the height of the Reagan administration because the rhetoric didn’t match the results.

But, apparently the GOP leadership got in touch with personalities or Rupert Murdoch himself, or producers for the atrocious Fox News show, The Five. Parroting the general sentiments of Fox News as the propaganda arm of the GOP, The Five absolutely tore into Paul for saying in essence his principles and the Constitution are more important to him than the party.

You all consider yourselves the voice of reason? Andrea Tantaros, a model with a hosting gig on The Five, espoused her brilliant opinion (heavy sarcasm lest you think I support this crap) that if Ron Paul wasn’t going to support the nominee, the Republican Party should pull him from the debates. Please, GOP, by all means do this. The exposure that move would generate for Ron Paul’s message would absolutely detonate the internet.

The GOP and by proxy Fox News, need to recognize the fact the primary system is broken. Primaries are badly designed in general, Republicans and Democrats voting for the nominee they would most likely vote for; but that concept makes no sense when the general election results come into the picture.

Republican and Democrat voters do not decide general elections. Independents, voters from other parties and undecided voters determine the election. Roughly equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats vote for their nominee regardless. Thus, the Republican Party is running a real risk of losing this election because of their total disregard for Ron Paul and his supporters.

Roughly 13 percent of the GOP are dedicated strongly to Paul, his numbers have only climbed. Meaning no matter what quote the media takes out of context to attempt to portray him as a kook, his followers recognize the tactic and give the finger right back to the media by generating content for the internet to demonstrate their fallacious claims.

For instance:

Chris Matthews is about as unreasonable a personality you would find on the street, but at MSNBC he’s considered a moderate. In this clip he claims Paul’s views don’t hold up to scrutiny and runs through the litany of federal services that would fall apart without present tax rates. He identifies the FAA, now, this falling under “infrastructure” this is technically within the purview of government, however, there’s no reason the airlines couldn’t operate a functional replacement that would be significantly more efficient and would cost nothing.

Roads/Highways/Interstates, Chris wants libertarianism to be the death knell of society, but he’s flat wrong. Ron Paul wants to reduce the federal government’s spending and focus, there is no conceivable reason the states couldn’t do just as good, if not a significantly better job, than the feds.

Food safety. The FDA/USDA didn’t prevent the listeria outbreak last month and are universally behind the chain of events when something bad happens. If the FDA/USDA went away, would the product decrease in quality or safety? Of course not, but just in case, the courts are there to allow lawsuits to settle these issues, but without the cost and inefficiency of bureaucracy. It’s pure silliness.

Then we have Bill Maher. Outspoken liberal, mostly delusional and completely irrational when it comes to firearms ownership, Bill asked for suggestions to Constitutional changes his panel would like to see.  Ugh.

Alex Wagner has roughly the Constitutional IQ of a grape nut. Issa gives a mostly accurate response, but when Bill Maher responds saying its a fantasy to think modern firearms would ever be protection against tyranny because the federal military has nuclear weapons, etc., Issa doesn’t take the opportunity to point out the absurdity of the idea of a US president deploying nuclear weapons inside the US.

I trust the federal government short of the distance from my eye to the end of my nose, but to think any president in any situation would use nukes is absurd. Conventional bombs in conventional aircraft, yes, in another civil war this would definitely happen. But nukes? Give me a break Bill. You do best when you stick to comedy. Leave the Constitution to Ron Paul.

Like my page on Facebook here

Follow me on Twitter @sjstern

1 Comment

Filed under Democrats, Foreign Policy, Gun Control, National Politics, Republican Primary, Ron Paul