Figure 3

Jon Stewart is BRILLIANT!

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Conservative Libertarian
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

BECK IS A SERPENT

You know, there has been, "us and them" throughout history. The “have's and have not's”, the “educated and the uneducated”, the “working and the not working”, the “employed and the self-employed”, the “stupid and the smart”, but Beck has created his own little "us and them".. You see Beck's "us" is anyone who follows him. They are the "real Americans with honor and integrity". (even though Beck has neither, he's milking the "useful idiots" for all they're worth).

He's a megalomaniac who told people a miracle was going to happen today (yesterday now) and that God would be speaking through him. Since the bible says that if a man could speak "his" words it would be in tongues, I fully expected Beck to fall to the ground and roll around speaking in tongues. So you have the "us", the good Christians who Beck says needs to fear "them", that would be everyone who doesn't listen to or follow Beck, i.e. the un-American Americans. The heathens and peace loving Christians who you must guard against because they want to take away your way of life. They want to wipe Christianity out of history (a huge lie but suckers will believe it and watch him in order to find how to protect themselves from "them". Just like suckers will believe that Iran said they want to wipe Israel off of the face of the earth. A big lie. Look it up.).

Beck is an anti-Christ. He breeds fear and hatred of "them" on every show I've watched him do. He's an evil man because he knows what he's doing. He knows he has the power to manipulate millions of people to be his little army if he ever wants one. After that last Beck-nut who had a shoot out with the cops on his way to kill people at the Tides Foundation, an organization that Beck has demonized over and over again on his show, Beck started saying, "do it non-violently". I’ll be looking at his ratings since he started with this nonviolent meme because he is still setting the fires, but now he says, "rise up and kill them till nary a heathen is left standing" before he says, "but don't get violent".

He's a very good snake oil salesman. He's a serpent. Who better to make that sale? His fans don't notice the schizophrenia because they have short memories. They don't recall Beck embracing Imam Rauf in 2006 as the voice of moderation (2006 segment from ABC's "Good Morning America) . Now Beck says, (audio http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201008180027) "after you've killed 3,000 people you're going to now build your mosque?", and that it's "a blow America up mosque". He was sitting right at the table with Imam Rauf telling him what a great guy he was and how wonderful it was that he was trying to bring Muslims and Christians together. What a fake. Like all these right-wing talking heads. All fucking fakes. Whatever gets their party in power. They're cynical and the suckers fall for their lines every damned time.
Shelley

Here are ten common sense principles to frame the New Economy that we the people must now bring forth:

1. The proper purpose of an economy is to secure just, sustainable, and joyful livelihoods for all. This may come as something of a shock to Wall Street financiers who profit from financial bubbles, securities fraud, low wages, unemployment, foreign sweatshops, tax evasion, public subsidies, and monopoly pricing.
2. GDP is a measure of the economic cost of producing a given level of human well-being and happiness. In the economy, as in any well-run business, the goal should be to minimize cost, not maximize it.
3. A rational reallocation of real resources can reduce the human burden on the Earth’s biosphere and simultaneously improve the health and happiness of all. The Wall Street economy wastes enormous resources on things that actually reduce the quality of our lives—war, automobile dependence, suburban sprawl, energy-inefficient buildings, financial speculation, advertising, incarceration for minor, victimless crimes. The most important step toward bringing ourselves into balance with the biosphere is to eliminate the things that are bad for our health and happiness.
4. Markets allocate efficiently only within a framework of appropriate rules to maintain competition, cost internalization, balanced trade, domestic investment, and equality. These are essential conditions for efficient market function. Without rules, a market economy quickly morphs into a system of corporate monopolies engaged in suppressing wages, exporting jobs, collecting public subsidies, poisoning air, land, and water, expropriating resources, corrupting democracy, and a host of other activities that represent an egregiously inefficient and unjust distribution of resources.
5. A proper money system roots the power to create and allocate money in people and communities in order to facilitate the creation of livelihoods and ecologically balanced community wealth. Money properly serves life, not the reverse. Wall Street uses money to consolidate its power to expropriate the real wealth of the rest of the society. Main Street uses money to connect underutilized resources with unmet needs. Public policy properly favors Main Street.

More

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This article is a lesson in reality. please pass this on to anyone who thinks they known what they're voting for when they vote republican. Republicans have never worked for the average person. They have always worked for the aristocracy and they lie to get average JOE'S to vote for them.
They can't sell the following platform, which has been their platform since feudalism was all the rage, so they use abortion, guns, god, gays, and hate/fear of brown people to get elected and once elected they work against the very people who elect them. Here is what republicans really are.:

http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/55

"Cheap-labor conservative" is a moniker they will never shake, and never live down. Because it's exactly what they are. You see, cheap-labor conservatives are defenders of corporate America – whose fortunes depend on labor. The larger the labor supply, the cheaper it is. The more desperately you need a job, the cheaper you'll work, and the more power those "corporate lords" have over you. If you are a wealthy elite – or a "wannabe" like most dittoheads – your wealth, power and privilege is enhanced by a labor pool, forced to work cheap.

Don't believe me. Well, let's apply this principle, and see how many right-wing positions become instantly understandable.

• Cheap-labor conservatives don't like social spending or our "safety net". Why. Because when you're unemployed and desperate, corporations can pay you whatever they feel like – which is inevitably next to nothing. You see, they want you "over a barrel" and in a position to "work cheap or starve".
• Cheap-labor conservatives don't like the minimum wage, or other improvements in wages and working conditions. Why. These reforms undo all of their efforts to keep you "over a barrel".
• Cheap-labor conservatives like "free trade", NAFTA, GATT, etc. Why. Because there is a huge supply of desperately poor people in the third world, who are "over a barrel", and will work cheap.
• Cheap-labor conservatives oppose a woman's right to choose. Why. Unwanted children are an economic burden that put poor women "over a barrel", forcing them to work cheap.
• Cheap-labor conservatives don't like unions. Why. Because when labor "sticks together", wages go up. That's why workers unionize. Seems workers don't like being "over a barrel".
• Cheap-labor conservatives constantly bray about "morality", "virtue", "respect for authority", "hard work" and other "values". Why. So they can blame your being "over a barrel" on your own "immorality", lack of "values" and "poor choices".
• Cheap-labor conservatives encourage racism, misogyny, homophobia and other forms of bigotry. Why? Bigotry among wage earners distracts them, and keeps them from recognizing their common interests as wage earners.

The Cheap-Labor Conservative "Dirty Secret" : They Don't Really Like Prosperity

---

Maybe you don't believe that cheap-labor conservatives like unemployment, poverty and "cheap labor". Consider these facts.

Unemployment was 23 percent when FDR took office in 1933. It dropped to 2.5 percent by time the next Republican was in the White House in 1953. It climbed back to 6.5 percent by the end of the Eisenhower administration. It dropped to 3.5 percent by the time LBJ left office. It climbed over 5 percent shortly after Nixon took office, and stayed there for 27 years, until Clinton brought it down to 4.5 percent early in his second term.

That same period – especially from the late forties into the early seventies – was the "golden age" of the United States. We sent men to the moon. We built our Interstate Highway system. We ended segregation in the South and established Medicare. In those days, a single wage earner could support an entire family on his wages. I grew up then, and I will tell you that life was good – at least for the many Americans insulated from the tragedy in Vietnam, as I was.

These facts provide a nice background to evaluate cheap-labor conservative claims like "liberals are destroying America." In fact, cheap-labor conservatives have howled with outrage and indignation against New Deal liberalism from its inception in the 1930's all the way to the present. You can go to "Free Republic" or Hannity's forum right now, and find a cheap-labor conservative comparing New Deal Liberalism to "Stalinism".

• Cheap-labor conservatives opposed virtually all of the New Deal, including every improvement in wages and working conditions.
• Cheap-labor conservatives have a long and sorry history of opposing virtually every advancement in this country's development going right back to the American revolution.
• Cheap-labor conservatives have hated Social Security and Medicare since their inception.
• Many cheap-labor conservatives are hostile to public education. They think it should be privatized. But why are we surprised. Cheap-labor conservatives opposed universal public education in its early days. School vouchers are just a backdoor method to "resegregate" the public schools.
• Cheap-labor conservatives hate the progressive income tax like the devil hates holy water.
• Cheap-labor conservatives like budget deficits and a huge national debt for two reasons. A bankrupt government has a harder time doing any "social spending" – which cheap-labor conservatives oppose, and . . .
• Wealthy cheap-labor conservatives like say, George W. Bush, buy the bonds and then earn tax free interest on the money they lend the government.[Check out Dubya's financial disclosures. The son of a bitch is a big holder of the T-bills that finance the deficit he is helping to expand.] The deficit created by cheap-labor conservatives while they posture as being "fiscally conservative" – may count as the biggest con job in American history.
• "Free Trade", globalization, NAFTA and especially GATT are intended to create a world-wide "corporate playground" where national governments serve the interests of corporations – which means "cheap labor".

The ugly truth is that cheap-labor conservatives just don't like working people. They don't like "bottom up" prosperity, and the reason for it is very simple. lords have a harder time kicking them around. Once you understand this about the cheap-labor conservatives, the real motivation for their policies makes perfect sense. Remember, cheap-labor conservatives believe in social hierarchy and privilege, so the only prosperity they want is limited to them. They want to see absolutely nothing that benefits the guy – or more often the woman – who works for an hourly wage.

So there you have it, in one easy-to-remember phrase. See how easy it is to understand these cheap-labor conservatives. The more ignorant and destitute people there are – desperate for any job they can get – the cheaper the cheap-labor conservatives can get them to work.

Try it. Every time you respond to a cheap-labor conservative in letters to the editor, or an online discussion forum, look for the "cheap labor" angle. Trust me, you'll find it. I can even show you the "cheap labor" angle in things like the "war on drugs", and the absurd conservative opposition to alternative energy.

Next, make that moniker – cheap-labor conservatives – your "standard reference" to the other side. One of the last revisions I made to this article was to find every reference to "conservatives", "Republicans", "right-wingers", and "righties", and replace it with "cheap-labor conservatives". In fact, if you're a cheap-labor conservative reading this, you should be getting sick of that phrase right about now. Exxxxcellent.

If enough people will "get with the program", it won't be long before you can't look at an editorial page, listen to the radio, turn on the TV, or log onto your favorite message board without seeing the phrase "cheap labor conservatives" – and have plenty of examples to reinforce the message. By election day of 2004, every politically sentient American should understand exactly what a "cheap labor conservative" is, and what he stands for.

Now if you stop right here, you will have enough ammunition to hold your own with a cheap-labor conservative, in any public debate. You have your catch phrase, and you have some of the facts and history to give that phrase meaning.

But if you really want to rip the heart out of cheap-labor conservative ideology, you may want to invest just a little bit more effort. It still isn't all that complicated, though it is a bit more detailed than what we have covered so far.

To explore that detail, just click one of the links below.

Less Government and Cheap Labor.

The Public Sector and Private Fortunes.

Personal Responsibility and Wages.

For more detailed theoretical understanding, check out The Mythology of Wealth, or just browse through some of the articles in the sidebar.

Now go find some cheap labor conservatives, and pin that scarlet moniker on them.

LESS GOVERNMENT AND CHEAP LABOR

---

“Less Government” is the central defining right-wing slogan. And yes, it’s all about “cheap labor”.

Included within the slogan “less government” is the whole conservative set of assumptions about the nature of the “free market” and government’s role in that market.. In fact, the whole “public sector/private sector” distinction is an invention of the cheap-labor conservatives. They say that the “private sector” exists outside and independently of the “public sector”. The public sector, according to cheap-labor ideology, can only “interfere” with the “private sector”, and that such “interference” is “inefficient” and “unprincipled”

Using this ideology, the cheap-labor ideologue paints himself as a defender of “freedom” against “big government tyranny”. In fact, the whole idea that the “private sector” is independent of the public sector is totally bogus. In fact, “the market” is created by public laws, public institutions and public infrastructure.

But the cheap-labor conservative isn’t really interested in “freedom”. What the he wants is the “privatized tyranny” of industrial serfdom, the main characteristic of which is – you guessed it – “cheap labor”.

For proof, you need only look at exactly what constitutes “big government tyranny” and what doesn’t. It turns out that cheap-labor conservatives are BIG supporters of the most oppressive and heavy handed actions the government takes.

• Cheap-labor conservatives are consistent supporters of the generous use of capital punishment. They say that “government can’t do anything right” – except apparently, kill people. Indeed, they exhibit classic conservative unconcern for the very possibility that the government might make a mistake and execute the wrong man.
• Cheap-labor conservatives complain about the “Warren Court” “handcuffing the police” and giving “rights to criminals”. It never occurs to them, that our criminal justice system is set up to protect innocent citizens from abuses or just plain mistakes by government officials – you know, the one’s who can’t do anything right.
• Cheap-labor conservatives support the “get tough” and “lock ‘em up” approach to virtually every social problem in the spectrum. In fact, it’s the only approach they support. As for the 2,000,000 people we have in jail today – a higher percentage of our population than any other nation on earth – they say our justice system is “too lenient”.
• Cheap-labor conservative – you know, the ones who believe in “freedom” – say our crime problem is because – get this – we’re too “permissive”. How exactly do you set up a “free” society that isn’t “permissive”?
• Cheap-labor conservatives want all the military force we can stand to pay for and never saw a weapons system they didn’t like.
• Cheap-labor conservatives support every right-wing authoritarian hoodlum in the third world.
• Cheap-labor conservatives support foreign assassinations, covert intervention in foreign countries, and every other “black bag” operation the CIA can dream up, even against constitutional governments, elected by the people of those countries.
• Cheap-labor conservatives support “domestic surveillance” against “subversives” – where “subversive” means “everybody but them”.
• Cheap-labor believers in “freedom” think it’s the government’s business if you smoke a joint or sleep with somebody of your own gender.
• Cheap-labor conservatives support our new concentration camp down at Guantanamo Bay. They also support these “secret tribunals” with “secret evidence” and virtually no judicial review of the trials and sentences. Then they say that liberals are “Stalinists”.
• And let’s not forget this perennial item on the agenda. Cheap-labor conservatives want to “protect our national symbol” from “desecration”. They also support legislation to make the Pledge of Allegiance required by law. Of course, it is they who desecrate the flag every time they wave it to support their cheap-labor agenda. [Ouch! That was one of those “hits” you can hear up in the “nosebleed” seats.]

Sounds to me like the cheap-labor conservatives have a peculiar definition of “freedom”. I mean, just what do these guys consider to be “tyranny”.

That’s easy. Take a look.

• “Social spending” otherwise known as “redistribution”. While they don’t mind tax dollars being used for killing people, using their taxes to feed people is “stealing”.
• Minimum wage laws.
• Every piece of legislation ever proposed to improve working conditions, including the eight hour day, OSHA regulations, and even Child Labor laws.
• Labor unions, who “extort” employers by collectively bargaining.
• Environmental regulations and the EPA.
• Federal support and federal standards for public education.
• Civil rights legislation. There are still cheap-labor conservatives today, who were staunch defenders of “Jim Crow” – including conspicuously Buckley’s “National Review”. Apparently, federal laws ending segregation were “tyranny”, but segregation itself was not.
• Public broadcasting – which is virtually the only source for classical music, opera, traditional theatre, traditional American music, oh yes, and Buckley’s “Firing Line”. This from the people constantly braying about the decay of “the culture”. The average cost of Public Television for each American is a whopping one dollar a year. “Its tyranny I tell you. Enough’s enough!”

See the pattern? Cheap-labor conservatives support every coercive and oppressive function of government, but call it “tyranny” if government does something for you – using their money, for Chrissake. Even here, cheap-labor conservatives are complete hypocrites. Consider the following expenditures:

• 150 billion dollars a year for corporate subsidies.
• 300 billion dollars a year for interest payments on the national debt – payments that are a direct transfer to wealthy bond holders, and buy us absolutely nothing.
• Who knows how many billions will be paid to American companies to rebuild Iraq – which didn’t need rebuilding 7 years ago.
• That’s all in addition to the Defense budget – large chunks of which go to corporate defense contractors.

Is the pattern becoming clearer? These cheap-labor Republicans have no problem at all opening the public purse for corporate interests. It’s “social spending” on people who actually need assistance that they just “can’t tolerate”.

And now you know why. Destitute people work cheaper, while a harsh police state keeps them suitably terrorized.

For a short primer on the importance of a strong public sector, see:

“The Public Sector and Private Fortunes.“

More Proof That Faux News Lies. As if you needed it.

Proof that faux talking heads are liars and are working intentionally to put fear into their viewers heads in an election year.
last year laura ingraham, a faux sweet heart:
"INGRAHAM: I can’t find many people who really have a problem with it. [Mayor] Bloomberg is for it. Rabbis are saying they don’t have a problem wi...th it. [...] I like what you’re trying to do and Ms. Khan we appreciate it and come on my radio show some time.
KHAN: Yeah, we need the support of people like you seriously.
INGRAHAM: Alright, you take care."
laura ingraham now:
"Well, I say the terrorists have won with how this has
gone down. 600 feet from where thousands of our fellow Americans were
incinerated in the name of political Islam, and we’re supposed to be cheering this?!"
video of her on both occasions:
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/08/16/laura-ingraham-mosque/
you are being manipulated for a reason. red meat election year sensationalism. i'll post again tomorrow if this disappears so you all can get a good look at it.

The floods battered New England, then Nashville, then Arkansas, then Oklahoma — and were followed by a deluge in Pakistan that has upended the lives of 20 million people.

The summer’s heat waves baked the eastern United States, parts of Africa and eastern Asia, and above all Russia, which lost millions of acres of wheat and thousands of lives in a drought worse than any other in the historical record.

Seemingly disconnected, these far-flung disasters are reviving the question of whether global warming is causing more weather extremes.

The collective answer of the scientific community can be boiled down to a single word: probably.

“The climate is changing,” said Jay Lawrimore, chief of climate analysis at the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. “Extreme events are occurring with greater frequency, and in many cases with greater intensity.”

He described excessive heat, in particular, as “consistent with our understanding of how the climate responds to increasing greenhouse gases.”

story

Dauphin Island, Alabama - BP says it is no longer using toxic dispersants to break up the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Gulf Coast residents claim otherwise, and say they have the sicknesses to prove it.

On Aug. 5, Donny Mastler, a commercial fisherman who also works on boats, was at the Dauphin Island Marina.

"I was with my friend Albert, and we were both slammed with exposure," Mastler, told IPS, referring to toxic chemicals he inhaled that he believes are associated with BP's Corexit dispersants. "We both saw the clumps of white bubbles on the surface that we know come from the dispersed oil."

Both of their eyes were watering and their throats were burning, so Albert went to sit in his air-conditioned truck, while Mastler headed home.

"I started to vomit brown, and my pee was brown also," Mastler said. "I kept that up all day. Then I had a night of sweating and non-stop diarrhea unlike anything I've ever experienced."

BP has been using two oil dispersants, Corexit 9500 and Corexit 9527, both of which are banned in Britain. More than 1.9 million gallons of dispersant has been used to date on the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.

Pathways of exposure are inhalation, ingestion, skin, and eye contact. Health impacts include headaches, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pains, dizziness, chest pains and tightness, irritation of eyes, nose, throat and lungs, difficulty breathing, respiratory system damage, skin irrigation and sensitisation, hypertension, central nervous system depression, neurotoxic effects, genetic damage and mutations, cardiac arrhythmia, and cardiovascular damage, among several others.

Not along ago, at the same marina, WKRG News 5 took a water sample to test for dispersants. The sample literally exploded when it was mixed with an organic solvent separating the oil from the water.

Bob Naman, the chemist who analysed the sample, told the station, "We think that it most likely happened due to the presence of either methanol or methane gas or the presence of the dispersant Corexit."

As for Mastler's physical reaction to his exposure, Hugh Kaufman, an EPA whistleblower and analyst, has reported this of the effects of the toxic dispersants:

"We have dolphins that are hemorrhaging. People who work near it are hemorrhaging internally. And that's what dispersants are supposed to do…And, for example, in the Exxon Valdez case, people who worked with dispersants, most of them are dead now. The average death age is around 50. It's very dangerous, and it's an… economic protector of BP, not an environmental protector of the public."

Full Story

Kos

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, Democracy Corps, and Campaign for Amerca's Future released a new poll this morning on the economy with a press call featuring pollster Stan Greenberg, Campaign For America's Future's Robert Borosage and MoveOn.org's Nita Chaudhary.

The most salient result from the polling, said Greenberg is that it reflected that the electorate is "remarkably sophisticated about the economic crisis and its causes" and hold the firm belief that the only way to address the deficit long term is with investment in the economy. The survey of 1,000 people who voted in 2008 was conducted at the end of July. Here are the key findings:

• 68 percent said they would oppose making major spending cuts in Social Security and Medicare to reduce the deficit, while 28 percent said they would favor cutting those programs. That included 61 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of independents.
• Strong majorities support progressive solutions for addressing the federal deficit: 63 percent back lifting the Social Security cap on incomes higher than $107,000 a year; 64 percent would favor eliminating tax breaks for corporations that outsource jobs; 62 percent would support a tax on excessive Wall Street bank profits.
• Strong majorities also oppose common conservative proposals for addressing the budget deficit: 65 percent oppose raising the Social Security retirement age to 70; 65 percent oppose replacing Medicare with a private sector voucher; 62 percent oppose a 3 percent federal sales tax; 60 percent oppose raising the Medicare age from 65 to 67.
• More people support a message that embraces the need for both investments in our future and reduce the deficit over time (52 percent) than a message that only stresses cuts in spending (42 percent). Also, almost equal percentages of respondents were favorable toward “a plan to invest in new industries and rebuild the country over the next five years” (60 percent) and “a plan to dramatically reduce the deficit over five years” (61 percent).
• 62 percent of respondents support more federal to states once they understand that the aid comes in the context of states laying off teachers, first responders and other essential workers due to the recession. That includes 55 percent of independents and 48 percent of Republicans.
• 60 percent of those surveyed responded positively to an economic message that said that “we have a budget deficit, but ... we also have a massive public investment deficit” that requires us to “rebuild the infrastructure that is vital to our economy” and to the economic growth that will “generate revenues to help pay down the budget deficit.” This message tests better than any other progressive message on investment as well as more conservative messages focused on spending cuts.

Here's what that looks like:

Click the image to enlarge.

Note two of the hot political debates at the moment: letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire polls at 54 percent, while raising the retirement age to 70 nets 33 percent.

As Bob Borosage said on the call, "Republicans are getting this exactly wrong" politically and in terms of policy when they argue the way out of economic ruin is to slash spending, turn Medicare into a voucher program (Paul Ryan's big "roadmap" idea) and cut Social Security benefits or raise the retirement age. These are highly unpopular. And the average American voter is a lot smarter than the average Republican in Congress, because they understand that the only way to grow out of this economic crisis is with aggressive investment in jobs and infrastructure, and that that is necessary to reduce deficits.

Why We Are Really In Afghanistan

According to wikileaks documents on the Afghan war, we are killing a lot more civilians than we are letting on about. I keep hearing about deaths in Kandahar. Kandahar is right in the path of the Trans Afghan Pakistan pipeline. It would be interesting to see where these all of these civilians are being killed. Below is a map of the path of the Trans Afghan pipeline is going to go through Afghanistan.
A little wiki-blob about the pipeline (Why we are really in Afghanistan. It has nothing to do with Al Qaeda or BinLadin. That's all a lie.) This article starts long before 2002 but i just clipped the most recent developments to post here. If you would like to see the history of thie pipeline go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline
"The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan. In 2005, the Asian Development Bank submitted the final version of a feasibility study designed by British company Penspen. ‘Since the US-led offensive that ousted the Taliban from power,’ reported Forbes in 2005, "the project has been revived and drawn strong US support" as it would allow the Central Asian republics to export energy to Western markets "without relying on Russian routes". Then-US Ambassador to Turkmenistan Ann Jacobsen noted that: "We are seriously looking at the project, and it is quite possible that American companies will join it." Due to increasing instability, the project has essentially stalled; construction of the Turkmen part was supposed to start in 2006, but the overall feasibility is questionable since the southern part of the Afghan section runs through territory which continues to be under de facto Taliban control."
(where most of the killing is going on.)

World Wide Military Presence

We aren't making up stories about nuclear weapons because Iran has them. we're making those stories up because we have no control over Iran. It is one of the only countries in the world we do not have a presence in and the only country in the world with the second largest reserves of oil in the world. Our corporations want control over that oil and they will make up any lie to get it. We fight for corporate profits. Our corporations own our government and our government does what they want. If they want diamonds in Africa, we subdue the people by putting in a blood thirsty tyrant and arming his thugs to keep popular resistance quashed. We do what our corporations demand we do, nothing more. The days of noble wars (oxymoron in the first place.) are over forever.






Why is America shaking it's paper tiger at Iran? You see that little white patch between Iraq and Afghanistan? No military presence in that white spot. That is Iran.

Republicans are lying about the stimulus and unemployment. Things are getting better.

(if these pictures are too small to see, go to the links i've provided for them.)

Republicans keep saying that the stimulus didn't work and that obama promised that if we passed the stimulus the unemployment rate shouldn't go over 8%.. They also keep saying that the stimulus has had no effect. So let's look at the unemployment rate from 2008 until now.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf



Obama signed the stimulus bill on Feb. 17th 2009. Note the climbing line in the chart showing the unemployment rate going ever and ever higher month after terrible month from Jun. 08 until Sep. 09. In Sept. 09, the stimulus money began to be meted out among the various states and from that moment on, the unemployment rate started falling and never reached that height again. The right wing media kept screeching that OBAMA PROMISED THAT THE RATE WOULDN'T GO OVER 8% IF HE GOT HIS STIMULUS, but you can see that it was heading straight up unless something were done. In the media they keep saying it's hard to convince voters that unemployment would have been worse without the stimulus. Just show them this and get a chalk board like beck does to spell it out for the slow kids in the class.
Today the unemployment rate is 9.5% and as you can see that's the lowest it's been since about june of 09. Blaming Obama for the high unemployment rate is like blaming Obama for the deficit we find ourselves in. Bush's last fiscal year was between october 08 and sept. 09. that's when the greatest amount of money that's been spent since Obama became president, was spent. After next year, the cbo expects to see the size of the deficit start to shrink. It it projected go from nearly $2 trillion in Bush's last fiscal year to about $535 billion in 2014. No matter how you spell that it says, reduced deficit and republicans are crapping their pants about it. They are throwing every road block they can in this president's way to stop him from succeeding after their 8 disgraceful years of looting our revenue without paying it back. Hypocrites.
Here on pages 26 and 27 you can see how Bush started with a surplus and how it started turning into a deficit after 1 year of drunken spending and tax cuts for the rich and continued until Obama took office.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy10/pdf/hist.pdf


These charts give you the projections until 2014. and as you can see, if the deficit keeps getting smaller at the same rate it is in these charts, there would be another surplus withing another couple of years. Just our luck the retards who cheer for the drunken sailor republicans will win the 2016 election and throw us back into deficit spending again. They're so stupid, they never learn. Only the rich benefit from republican rule, and they know it. Too bad the teabagging retards don't.

Why Some Republicans Want to ‘Restore’ the 13th Amendment No, it’s not about slavery; like so much of our politics these days, it’s about Barack Obama

Story

Allies relied on 'poor' intelligence on Iraq, says Blix

By Andy McSmith