The Tea Parties

So there has been a lot of reporting on the tea parties. Fox had been hyping it non-stop, and MSNBC had been deriding it just as much. I spent most April 15 getting ready for the Fleet Foxes concert Joel and I worked at the Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco, but the brief chance I had I tried to watch anything about it on tv, funny thing, Fox wasn't reporting anything on it, and MSNBC was.

As usual there's two sides to an issue reported by the media, and they are usually both wrong. The detractors (namely all of MSNBC) argued two points 1. It isn't grass roots because some rich people got involved, thus invalidating it. 2. "Where were they during the Bush years?"

Sparing you the explanation as to how these are both childish and ignorant arguments, I'll just leave it at that.

The other side (Fox, and for God's sake, Sean Hannity)is promoting it as a great rebellion and some sort of reawakening.

Here's the truth, the people doing these tea parties, regardless of their wealth, are Bush lovers who probably voted for Bush 2.0, aka McCain. They're all butthurt about losing, but they're dumb, so they couldn't come up with anything better.

Simultaneously, all the nay saying about the events, declaring them hypocritical, that no "conservatives" did during the Bush administration is just another slap in the face.

Here's what both sides are missing.

Ron Paul was doing this shit back when it mattered.

For the love of God watch this video. Not only does it show true conservatives rejecting the Bush way, it has Ron Paul predicting the economic collapse that would occur a year later.

Ron Paul was called an extremist. He was called insane. He was called every insult under the sun by the likes of Fox News and ESPECIALLY Sean Hannity. I don't want to put up all the videos, just search them if you want.

Few listened to Ron Paul. Most outright insulted him on air for almost 2 years. Who disagrees with him now? His economic policies are all anyone (but the Bush/Obama fail team)is promoting now. His foreign policies mirrored Obama's.

I tried to tell you people back in 2007. Ron Paul was the only shot Republicans had to win the election, but they chose to fucking crucify him.

Please just watch this video, and think about what you were doing in 2007. Think about who the leading candidates were back then (Giuliani and Clinton). You know who you were supporting. As they spat in Ron Paul's face. You had your chance America. There's no turning back. You elected fail for another 4 years. But you won't realize it. You have no idea what's happening, or why it's entirely your fault. You will not learn. The Democrats and Republicans will continue to control you. You don't deserve any better than a Democrat elected on "Change" doing exactly what Bush did, and Republicans who piss on Ron Paul, pretending to care about taxes with their silly tea parties only after ruining their chances at actually changing things. Remember this, everyone who said Ron Paul was "unelectable" also said Giuliani and Clinton were impossible to beat. Things could have been different.



Ron Paul's Tea Party included events across America, including a full re-enactment of the Boston Tea Party at Boston Harbor. It raised over $6 million by pure grassroots efforts. And was relatively ignored by the media.

More of the Same

Looks like Prop 1 is passing. This will give California a high speed rail in 30 years. There couldn't be better thing for this state than being able to move from San Francisco to LA in 2 hours.

What surprises me is Prop 4 got shot down. Maybe it's because it reads "Abortion limits" and "Minor Abortion" in some locations. It actually hasn't a damn thing to do with the legality of abortion. It was only a bill to require that a doctor notify parents if an underage kid wants an abortion (not even ask their permission, just notifying that they're going into surgery). I think it's disgusting that you voted no. But you've voted no before.

I'm glad props 7 and 10 got shot down, but I didn't expect it. 7 would have forced energy companies to use more clean energy, maybe you guys remember 2000 when Enron raped California with energy bills and don't want a return of forced costs. Prop 10 would give rich hippies a rebate for buying energy effecient cars, I can see why you'd vote against that.

WHY DID YOU VOTE NO ON 5???? It would have made possession of a small amount of marijuana an infraction rather than a misdemeanor, which means you'd only get a fine, not go to jail. It also had more options for drug rehab over prison time. What the fuck? Really? Fine, you like overcrowded prisons and the war on drugs, well at least one of those because you also voted no on Prop 6 which would have given more money to law enforcement. This is a strange toss up, you voted to both keep drug users as criminals, but also keep the police for unfunded.

I was personally against the veterans bond because it sought to give what veterans are supposedly already guaranteed. It puts up a bunch of tax payer dollars to help give loans to veterans for homes or farms. This doesn't sit right with me because A. There's already the VA Home Loan Guarantee and B. Loans forced by the government are what caused the current economic collapse. What's a poor veteran going to do with a loan for a house from the state? Get a house. Sure that's nice, but nobody hires veterans, and the state isn't GIVING this money away, it's still a loan. Basically you voted for a bill that seeks to profit off of poor veterans. Because you know damn well the state will get it's money back with interest. All this bill will do is fuck over veterans. Even if it was written well and fair, it still ends up being the state profitting on veterans. How is that good? Well anyway you guys passed it.

And last but most importantly, YOU FUCKERS REALLY FUCKING HATE GAYS DON'T YOU! Prop 8 looks like it's passing.

As for the presidency

I found it interesting looking up some of the old elections. Most of the key players today have been around forever. Sure tonights election ended the Bush/Clinton reign that wanted to go on for a few more decades, but there's more than them if you go back to '88, the last election year before the Bush/Clinton era took hold. Back then, Bush was only a VP. Bush ran, Bob Dole ran, Donald Rumsfeld ran, Joe Biden ran, Jesse Jackson ran, Al Gore ran, MIND YOU THIS IS 20 YEARS AGO, and of course Saint Ron Paul ran, on the anti bailout of communists, and anti foreign drug war ticket which are 2 big distinctions from him and Reagan, who was actually the perpetrator of communist bailouts and secret drug murderings in foreign nations.

Notable events in the election include the Democrats accusing Quayle of not being experienced enough (only being in Congress 12 years) Quayle compared himself in this way to Kennedy who was also inexperienced (only 14 years in Congress) and Dukakis (the eventual Dem ticket winner) famously responded "Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy." Of course he was right, Quayle was inexperienced, and the Democrats went on to run campaign ads saying this inexperienced man was "just a heartbeat away" from the presidency (note the Democrats did the same thing this year with Palin, except that Obama has almost zero years experience himself so ridiculously so that his inexperience makes a mockery of everything the Democrats have ever stood for and even trumps their own mockery of Palin, but in a good Communist faith, you can use doublespeak, and actually believe two things at the same time, that's what Democrats did this election year)

Another thing to note is that in '88 Jesse Jackson did extremely well. He barely got beat out by Dukakis, he had won 11 contests and a majority of delegates and votes until right at the end. (I would think that election proved a black man could win, all things considered, but apparently people are fucking morons and completely forgot that Jesse Jackson did better then than even Hillary did this year). Gore did well too but fell short. Joe Biden dropped out in disgrace when ads were ran against him showing he had been giving speeches written by a British politician almost word for word. Although he had credited the writer several times, the implications that he had plagarized persisted.

So Biden dropped out in disgrace, but is our next VP.

Obama has no experience at all. About 1/6th the experience of an "inexperienced" politician, but got elected under the party that set the standard for shitting on the "inexperienced".

1992 would mark the end of the open elections. Certainly there was already a Bush in Power, and this was the begining of a legacy, but at the time it was one of the freest elections in the 20th Century. Things were looking up.

A woman ran as VP, you already had Jesse Jackson prove a black man could win, Ralph Nader began his campaign - but he didn't run, he only promoted people vote "None of the above" though people still voted for him, interestingly enough, more Republicans voted for Nader in '92 than Democrats. Truly these were good times for democracy. The front runner up until June was an Independent. That's right. Can you imagine this fantasy world where almost come election time someone who WASN'T DEM OR REP was the leader in the polls? Ross Perot was the man, and he was proving America still kicked ass, but then he dropped out. I remember when that happened. My Mom was pissed. She still ended up voting for him, but she thought it was dishonest to drop out, and when Perot can back, many people called him a coward, and his popularity plumeted, so in '92, it was an independ's shit baggery that lead to the end of America. It sealed the fate, as no one from then on would even have a shot, unless they were a Dem or a Rep, and if they were named Clinton or Bush, or were the VP of either. Bush began to take the lead, but a failing economy, and the constant ads saying "Read my lips, no new taxes" ( I remember those ads, even I at age 10 was pissed at Bush for that) So Clinton won, kind of like how the economic collapse right near this election sealed the fate for McCain, except where Perot would have been a third wheel, Ron Paul, having lost faith in the possibility of anyone in a 3rd party having a shot, due partially to his own '88 run, due partially to Perot's run, and due mostly to the Bush/Clinton reign, Ron Paul who would have been the perfect 3rd party man, with supporters from both sides, instead went Republican, and this took him out of the game in the primaries. Back in '92 Clinton was the "new" guy. The nobody third string player, all the big Dems had chosen not to go up against Bush who was supposed to win. Clinton won, but with only 43% of the vote. Bush got 37.7% and Perot got 18.9%

Basically, all the front runners and their buddies were the same people 20 years ago. Nothing new. Only Barry is the new guy instead of Clinton, so if Barry wins 4 years from now too, it will be a complete repeat, especially if the Republicans put up a loser like Bob Dole was, loser in '76, loser in '88, loser in '96, so if the predictions are right, it could easily be Palin, loser '08, loser '12.

I guess what also surprised me was finding how much none of this crap is new. A woman ran as VP 20 years ago. Jesse Jackson came very close to winning twice 16 and 20 years ago. A black woman, Shirley Chisholm, ran as a Democrat in '72, and a woman also ran as a VP that year, Tonie Nathan, Libertarian Party, who became the first woman in history to get an electoral vote. I would like to point out at this time that the Libertarian Party was founded almost entirely because of Ayn Rand, though it wasn't directly, all the founders of the Libertarian Party were fans of Ayn Rand, and only later grew apart, as many drifted into various political ideals including Anarcho-Capitalism branching off of Libertarianism, and Anarcho-Capitalism itself splitting off in two major ways.





In conclusion, you can suck my ass California for voting for stupid shit.

You can suck my ass America for electing more of the same.

You got what you deserved McCain, you think you're so hip for crapping all over Ron Paul and picking Palin. Fuck that, Palin voiced her support for Ron Paul long before you rolled into mediocrity. McCain only won the nomination by default, the other candidates had much bigger bases, but McCain just hummed along as they knocked each other out. And though you may have thought you were hip with your Palin, Ayn Rand's children had already broke down that barrier with a woman in the 70s, and the closest we had this year to an Ayn Rand supporter was Ron Paul. It should have been Ron Paul / Sarah Palin, or my dream election Ron Paul / Arnold Schwarzenegger. But Arnold wasn't born in America. Which brings me to my next rant.

Fuck you Obama, America deserves you. They want inexperience, they got you. They don't want inexperience, they got you. You're almost an American too, you were born in what some consider America, and although you were raised in Pacific islands and far away Muslim controlled countries, and half your family was illegal immigrants and Africans, hey, you're somewhat American. Hell, maybe you've spent as many years in America as Schwarzenegger has, he came here in the late 60s, wait, you didn't move to America until about 1980. Ok nevermind. But I suppose you beat out McCain who was born in Panama, and spent his youth trying to get away from America.



So here you are America. You all voted this time around. All branches of the government are controlled by lefties. I hope you socialists shut the fuck up for at least the next 2 years. And god be praised if the Republican Party completely collapses in its own hypocrisy.

The Housing Crisis; Today’s Market Crash

It's funny that I was pissed enough about the Mortgage/Housing Crisis that I ranted about it, and now today, the stock market has crashed, and more HUGE long time Wall Street businesses are bankrupt due to the housing and mortgage collapse. Premier Bush was quick to announce that his Dictatorship will not stand for businesses losing money, so he announced he will snap the backs of the American people to pay off the debts of these failed companies.

Socialist Obama, and McCain (who Ron Paul proved doesn't know crap about economics, see video below) have already condemned Bush's policies, but note that McCain won't actually name Bush as the problem, and Obama is still a Socialist. These aren't the men with solutions, and I don't mean to say that a president should be an expert on every subject, that's absurd, but the president must know the basics, and if they aren't experts, get experts, not opinions. There is a solution to this problem. In fact there are many solutions, but you have to have a solid, rational philosophy about how you will approach the problem.

Mixed economies can't work. You can't act like it's a free market, and then bail people out with tax payer money, you can't have a controlled economy, and then allow small businesses to fail. A company CEO won't know what to do. Sometimes America decides you're too successful, and you get split, like Microsoft. Sometimes America decides you're not allowed to break down, and they dump billions of tax-payer dollars to bail you out, but your ship will only sink more slowly, like the airlines. And sometimes America decides that they want to be bigger and so they buy out failing businesses making them federal property like they did with the previous mortgage collapsed companies Fannie and Freddie. But there are few rules. There is no all encompassing official policy, the first example was under Clinton, and the other two were executed by Bush, but many years in the making. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were both invented by the government, and have always known that if they were to fail in their ventures, their contracts promised the American taxpayer would bail them out. Even when companies illegally screw over America, sometimes they get punished, and sometimes they don't, look at Enron. They robbed California blind when power deregulation hit and we had rolling black-outs. Just two years later, after having reported company record setting profits, they declared bankruptcy, the heads of Enron, took their money and ran. And I'm not saying they took their earnings and ran, I mean they gouged California, lied about their profits, and TOOK EVERYTHING. They cashed in their stocks, they screwed over all their employees. Did America do anything? No. Maybe they should go back to Microsoft and fine them some more to make up the costs. Do you see? You can't argue that both acts were just, either you're hands on, or you're hands off, but look how it plays out, Microsoft, who never did any bad, only good, was destroyed by the government. Enron, who lied and stole, no punishment.

I don't want to blame any president for a bad economy. It should not be the president's job, nor should the president have the authority to control the economy, but I can tell you, meddling with the economy can have negative consequences. Bush wants to bail out these companies. SOMEBODY has to pay. Who do you think it will be?

There are of course many more issues, and I'm sure I don't understand half of them. One obvious issue is the budget and taxes. Bush promised to lower taxes, and he did, but then he spent even more money than Clinton! Because it is impossible to force money into existence by decree, the cost had to come from somewhere, obviously the government is over spending without paying back, so who is paying for it? One direct result of spending money that doesn't exist is a "national debt" basically it's the government spending more than it owns, so it's in debt to itself. Since it is a constantly moving system, the debt doesn't just collect somewhere waiting to be paid, it is taken from the economy, the value of the dollar goes down, compared to other nations. Because the dollar is worth less, companies can't sell their products overseas for the same profits, and individuals can't buy foreign products with the same money. So we are paying for the debt, it's worse than just raising the taxes, but nowhere near as good as lowering taxes and having a government not overspend. And it's just like those bad debts people get into on their own, if we don't pay it off, if we don't budget, we can't just let it pay itself out. We will only get deeper and deeper in debt.

There are piles of problems, just give a google search and let the economists all over the internet give you a crash course on any number of issues and their history. Neither candidate is talking about these issues. Not really. So don't expect either to solve any of these issues, not really.








McCain Attacks Ron Paul, and Ron Paul owns him:

Ron Paul

You don't get to think you know anything about current American politics if you haven't heard Ron Paul speak. His latest speech was at the "Rally For the Republic" which sold out to more than 18,000 people just to see Ron Paul. One man, who represents only himself and the ideal of individuality. It was held near the Republican convention which couldn't pull down those numbers even though they supposedly represent half of America. The one of the nations only 2 political parties; that snubbed Ron Paul, the party that lied about Ron Paul's popularity by supressing the 1.2 million votes he received. The party that insulted him and refused him admittance to their debates. The party that is currently in power in this nation GOT ITS ASS HANDED TO IT BY ONE MAN. RON PAUL BY HIMSELF IS BETTER AND MORE IMPORTANT TO MORE PEOPLE THAN THE ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY EXCLUDING HIM. Does that register? Probably not. You don't get it. If the romantic "you" "got it" then Ron Paul wouldn't be treated like a criminal by the power forces of the media and government. But many individuals support him. More active duty military support Ron Paul than any other candidate. John McCain invoked the name of the military in his convention, but when the military expressed their true support, he SHIT ON THEM AND LIED. Republicans hate the military and have no respect for them. Where Ron Paul supported the new GI Bill to help veterans, John McCain fought against it. Where John McCain had his college education paid by the GI Bill, Ron Paul was already a self made Doctor when he went into the military. Doctor/ Officer/ Congressman for 10 terms/ Ron Paul is more experienced than all the people you've ever met or thought of combined. He's old as hell yet still sharp as a tack. He's Ayn Rand off her period. He's Thomas Jefferson without slaves. He's better than Jesus in every way that matters. And if you think Jesus died for our sins, Ron Paul is fighting for everything good in man, to try to preserve everything humanity has worked for, and if no man can ever surpass Jesus, then Jesus died for nothing.



People follow Ron Paul, because Ron Paul wants you to lead yourself. And if your self isn't worth your time, you don't deserve to live. Other candidates would have you follow them for what they promise to do for others. Ron Paul promises to only do what he must to prevent those others from robbing you of your liberty.



I'm not saying you have to care. I don't think every human should give a crap about politics. But you should at least care about yourself. And I honestly can't understand from the depths of my mind why when election time comes around, it isn't an individualist vs. an individualist. What we have is a man who is telling you how to spend your money, and the money he steals from you. While he passes laws to prevent you from making more money, or obtaining individual goals. And on the other side we have a man who is telling you how to spend your money, and the money he steals from you; while he passes laws to prevent you from making more money, or obtaining individual goals. WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? OH YOU GET TO CHOOSE WHAT IT IS EXACTLY THAT THEY STEAL FROM YOU THIS TIME. YOU GET TO CHOOSE WHERE THE MONEY THEY STOLE FROM YOU WILL BE WASTED. YOU GET TO CHOOSE WHICH MEANINGLESS FUCKING LAWS THEY WILL PASS IN THE NAME OF THEIR GOD VARIANT TO DESTROY YOU IN BOTH BODY AND MIND. THAT IS YOUR CHOICE AMERICA: HOW WILL YOU CHOOSE TO SLOWLY DIE? And the individualist, he's mocked, to the bitter end, by the thieves of your mind. And you mock him too, but your mind is gone. And no one takes you seriously.

Who Did you Vote for With your Wallet?

http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/neighbors.php?type=name&lname


Check it out. You can see every person who donated to every candidate (through legal channels only I suppose). If you type in my name, you will see I donated to Ron Paul. It even gives you the addressed I lived at when I donated! It provides all the information that was asked of me when I donated, that is, name, occupation, industry. You can use the map on the page to see who other people around you donated to.

What blew my mind was how quickly I could see illegal activity. There is a campaign contribution limit, I notice one guy sent the maximum to Hillary, then a week later sent the maximum again, but used a slight variation on his name and occupation, he was at the same address, it was so obvious!

There were $352,872 in donations from my old zip code (92101) which takes up only a portion of downtown San Diego. $70,147 was donated by my current zip code which I think is impressive enough for central Stockton.

Give it a try, you can go find out what your favorite celebrities support. I looked up Ron Paul, he donated $325 to the Republican Party of Texas. Maria Shriver donated $2,452 to Barrack Obama.



Anyway. I think it's cool.