Tag Archives: government

Help ban crush videos in the US

Crush videos, among other “fetish videos,” feature small live animals, such as kittens, puppies, mice and bunnies, being slowly tortured in the most horrific ways imaginable; including being burnt alive, cut with pruning sheers, nailed to the floor, skinned alive, beaten, stabbed, and having their limbs broken. All of these videos share a common theme: the animals are incrementally crushed by a woman in high heels. Most people view these materials for “sexual gratification”, but these videos are becoming increasingly popular just for their shock value alone. The crush fetish can be also linked to “paraphernalia,” which is an atypical sexual arousal to nonhuman objects and humans alike being caused physical distress. Crush videos are becoming increasingly popular across America, and will escalate to epidemic proportions due to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling to legalize them. It’s not hard to find such sites on the Internet with any search engine-keep in mind it’s now perfectly legal to download and watch. Minors can access these materials with a click of a button. If The Supreme Court says, “Okay fine, It’s free speech,” please first examine the damage it causes both human and nonhuman lives, and society as a whole. Freedom of speech has its limits when it places a society in danger, such as the ban on child pornography as it leads to violence of children. Films that exploit, torture, and kill animals for entertainment purposes also puts society in danger, for it is destructive by inciting violent and antisocial behavior, thereby endangering our citizens. Adults showing their own children these videos can cause emotional damage and lead to Antisocial Personality Disorders. This is not only considered child abuse, but is one of the leading disorders found in serial killers. While there are many factors that contribute to someone becoming a serial killer, the one constant they share is animal abuse. In short, there is nothing socially redeeming about “crush videos” and animal torture videos when used for entertainment and financial purposes. However, relating to educational or for political and sociological purposes, this should be the exception – such as speaking against, or educating the public about the realities of dog fighting or other issues and how it affects a society, such as the making of a violent criminal or serial killer. Sign the petition added by: crystalman

Without a Revolution, Americans Are History

The United States is running out of time to get its budget and trade deficits under control. Despite the urgency of the situation, 2010 has been wasted in hype about a non-existent recovery. As recently as August 2 Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner penned a New York Times column, “Welcome to the Recovery.” As John Williams (shadowstats.com) has made clear on many occasions, an appearance of recovery was created by over-counting employment and undercounting inflation. Warnings by Williams, Gerald Celente, and myself have gone unheeded, but our warnings recently had echoes from Boston University professor Laurence Kotlikoff and from David Stockman, who excoriated the Republican Party for becoming big-spending Democrats. It is encouraging to see some realization that, this time, Washington cannot spend the economy out of recession. The deficits are already too large for the dollar to survive as reserve currency, and deficit spending cannot put Americans back to work in jobs that have been moved offshore. However, the solutions offered by those who are beginning to recognize that there is a problem are discouraging. Kotlikoff thinks the solution is savage Social Security and Medicare cuts or equally savage tax increases or hyperinflation to destroy the vast debts. Perhaps economists lack imagination, or perhaps they don’t want to be cut off from Wall Street and corporate subsidies, but Social Security and Medicare are insufficient at their present levels, especially considering the erosion of private pensions by the dot com, derivative and real estate bubbles. Cuts in Social Security and Medicare, for which people have paid 15 per cent of their earnings all their lives, would result in starvation and deaths from curable diseases. Tax increases make even less sense. It is widely acknowledged that the majority of households cannot survive on one job. Both husband and wife work and often one of the partners has two jobs in order to make ends meet. Raising taxes makes it harder to make ends meet–thus more foreclosures, more food stamps, more homelessness. What kind of economist or humane person thinks this is a solution? Ah, but we will tax the rich. The rich have enough money. They will simply stop earning. Let’s get real. Here is what the government is likely to do. Once Washington realize that the dollar is at risk and that they can no longer finance their wars by borrowing abroad, the government will either levy a tax on private pensions on the grounds that the pensions have accumulated tax-deferred, or the government will require pension fund managers to purchase Treasury debt with our pensions. This will buy the government a bit more time while pension accounts are loaded up with worthless paper. The last Bush budget deficit (2008) was in the $400-500 billion range, about the size of the Chinese, Japanese, and OPEC trade surpluses with the US. Traditionally, these trade surpluses have been recycled to the US and finance the federal budget deficit. In 2009 and 2010 the federal deficit jumped to $1,400 billion, a back-to-back trillion dollar increase. There are not sufficient trade surpluses to finance a deficit this large. From where comes the money? The answer is from individuals fleeing the stock market into “safe” Treasury bonds and from the bankster bailout, not so much the TARP money as the Federal Reserve’s exchange of bank reserves for questionable financial paper such as subprime derivatives. The banks used their excess reserves to purchase Treasury debt. These financing maneuvers are one-time tricks. Once people have fled stocks, that movement into Treasuries is over. The opposition to the bankster bailout likely precludes another. So where does the money come from the next time? The Treasury was able to unload a lot of debt thanks to “the Greek crisis,” which the New York banksters and hedge funds multiplied into “the euro crisis.” The financial press served as a financing arm for the US Treasury by creating panic about European debt and the euro. Central banks and individuals who had taken refuge from the dollar in euros were panicked out of their euros, and they rushed into dollars by purchasing US Treasury debt. This movement from euros to dollars weakened the alternative reserve currency to the dollar, halted the dollar’s decline, and financed the US budget deficit a while longer. Possibly the game can be replayed with Spanish debt, Irish debt, and whatever unlucky country is eswept in by the thoughtless expansion of the European Union. But when no countries remain that can be destabilized by Wall Street investment banksters and hedge funds, what then finances the US budget deficit? The only remaining financier is the Federal Reserve. When Treasury bonds brought to auction do not sell, the Federal Reserve must purchase them. The Federal Reserve purchases the bonds by creating new demand deposits, or checking accounts, for the Treasury. As the Treasury spends the proceeds of the new debt sales, the US money supply expands by the amount of the Federal Reserve’s purchase of Treasury debt. Do goods and services expand by the same amount? Imports will increase as US jobs have been offshored and given to foreigners, thus worsening the trade deficit. When the Federal Reserve purchases the Treasury’s new debt issues, the money supply will increase by more than the supply of domestically produced goods and services. Prices are likely to rise. How high will they rise? The longer money is created in order that government can pay its bills, the more likely hyperinflation will be the result. The economy has not recovered. By the end of this year it will be obvious that the collapsing economy means a larger than $1.4 trillion budget deficit to finance. Will it be $2 trillion? Higher? Whatever the size, the rest of the world will see that the dollar is being printed in such quantities that it cannot serve as reserve currency. At that point wholesale dumping of dollars will result as foreign central banks try to unload a worthless currency. Continued at: http://www.prisonplanet.com/without-a-revolution-americans-are-history.html added by: Dagum

Top 10 Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories

A compilation of the 10 most popular conspiracy theories currently circulating on the radical right and, increasingly, on points of the political spectrum much too close to the center for comfort. Scholars continue to debate the psychological and sociological origins of conspiracy theories, but there is no arguing that these theories have seen a revival on the extreme right in recent years. Over the last two decades, a far-right conspiracy culture of self-proclaimed “Patriots” has emerged in which the United States government itself is viewed as a mortal threat to everything from constitutional democracy to the survival of the human race. This conspiracy revival — which has been accompanied by the explosive growth of Patriot groups over the last year and a half — kicked into overdrive with the 2008 election of President Barack Obama, who is seen by Patriots as a foreign-born Manchurian candidate sent by forces of the so-called “New World Order” to destroy American sovereignty and institute one-world socialist government. —————————————————– 1. – Chemtrails the belief that air and water vapor contrails that form in the wake of high-altitude aircraft are really clouds of toxic soup being deliberately sprayed by hundreds, if not thousands, of secret government planes executing the designs of the New World Order. —————————————————— 2. – Martial Law Today, hundreds of Patriot groups around the country are actively preparing for the declaration of martial law, some of them by mapping wilderness areas, learning how to set booby traps, studying and practicing guerrilla warfare tactics, and setting up short-wave radio communications systems. The question is not if, but when, the New World Order will come crashing down. ——————————————————– 3. – FEMA Concentration Camps Sending Patriot militias to internment camps run by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which most Patriot groups consider to be “the executive arm of the coming police state.” ——————————————————– 4. – Foreign Troops on U.S. Soil government officials are colluding with other governments to suppress Americans with the use of foreign troops. Patriots believe this foreign assistance will be necessary due to the patriotism of America's own troops. ——————————————————– 5. – 'Door-to-Door' Gun Confiscations Patriots believe it inevitable that NWO forces in black masks and jackboots — and possibly UN blue helmets — will one day be sent door to door to take away their weapons by force. ——————————————————– 6. – 9/11 as Goverment plot On the far left, the reason seen for attacking the American people was to justify a perpetual state of war; on the far right, it provided an excuse for the government to, at long last, institute a police state. ——————————————————– 7. – Population control For the conspiracy-minded, there is no such thing as an accidental tragedy or historical caprice. Each epidemic, mass industrial poisoning and medical advance (vaccinations, in particular) is just another highly suspicious example of the latest technologies being employed to further the agenda of hidden New World Order forces. ——————————————————— 8. – HAARP This is the “Death Star” of the Patriot conspiracy galaxy, around which so many other conspiracies orbit and often intersect. To the conspiracy-minded, HAARP is a government program tasked with creating secret directed-energy weapons, instruments for weather and mind control, and even potent new methods to cause earthquakes. ——————————————————— 9. – The Federal Reserve Conspiracy It wasn't long after its creation under Woodrow Wilson that the Federal Reserve System became a central fixture in the world of right-wing conspiracy. It was seen, rightly, as introducing European-style central banking into the United States. It was also seen, this time wrongly, as the latest form of spreading Jewish and banker control over every aspect of American life. ———————————————————- 10. – The North American Union Since the passage of NAFTA in 1993, fears of economic dislocation and loss of sovereignty have animated both sides of the political spectrum. On the left, these fears are centered on the growth of transnational corporate power at the expense of U.S. labor and national policy. In some circles on the right, the trade bill is seen as the beginning of the so-called “North American Union” (NAU), the goal of a secret plan to merge the United States with Mexico and Canada and, in the process, eliminate sovereign government for each country. It is also a dominant conspiracy theory animating the hard-line anti-immigration movement, which overlaps heavily with Patriot territory. ———————————————————- More Detailed description of each conspiracy at site http://www.alternet.org/news/147851/top_10_right-wing_conspiracy_theories/?page=… added by: Stoneyroad

Couple of The Year Award Winners

Couple of The Year Award Winners added by: poojam

‘Craigslist Killer’ commits suicide in Boston jail

Accused “Craigslist Killer” Philip Markoff committed suicide at the Nashua Street Jail in Boston, where he was being held awaiting trial in the slaying of Julissa Brisman, according to Steven Tompkins, spokesman for the Suffolk County Sheriff's Office. Markoff, 24, was pronounced dead at 10:17 this morning. He was found suffocated with a plastic bag over his head, according to a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation. While authorities are still investigating, Markoff was alone in his cell and all evidence collected so far indicates that it was a suicide, said a statement released by Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis and Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley. http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/08/accused_craigsl_2.html added by: Stoneyroad

US Government Threatens Iceland and US Supporters of Wikileaks

The Obama administration has asked Britain, Germany, Australia, and other allies to consider criminal charges against Julian Assange for his Afghan war leaks. Philip Shenon reports. The Obama administration is pressing Britain, Germany, Australia, and other allied Western governments to consider opening criminal investigations of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and to severely limit his nomadic travels across international borders, American officials say. Officials tell The Daily Beast that the U.S. effort reflects a growing belief that WikiLeaks and organizations like it threaten grave damage to American national security, as well as a growing suspicion in Washington that Assange has damaged his own standing with foreign governments and organizations that might otherwise be sympathetic to his anti-censorship cause. American officials confirmed last month that the Justice Department was weighing a range of criminal charges against Assange and others as a result of the massive leaking of classified U.S. military reports from the war in Afghanistan, including potential violations of the Espionage Act by Bradley Manning, the Army intelligence analyst in Iraq accused of providing the documents to WikiLeaks. Now, the officials say, they want other foreign governments to consider the same sorts of criminal charges. “It’s not just our troops that are put in jeopardy by this leaking,” said an American diplomatic official who is involved in responding to the aftermath of the release of more than 70,000 Afghanistan war logs—and WikiLeaks’ threat to reveal 15,000 more of the classified reports. “It’s U.K. troops, it’s German troops, it’s Australian troops—all of the NATO troops and foreign forces working together in Afghanistan,” he said. Their governments, he said, should follow the lead of the Justice Department and “review whether the actions of WikiLeaks could constitute crimes under their own national-security laws.” Last month, a prominent pro-military group in Australia suggested that Assange may have violated Australian law through the release of the Afghan war logs, given the threat the leak may have posed to the lives of Australian troops serving in the NATO-led force. The Obama administration was heartened by the call this week by Amnesty International and four other human-rights groups for WikiLeaks to be far more careful in editing classified material from the war in Afghanistan to be sure that its public release does not endanger innocent Afghans who may be identified in the documents. “It’s amazing how Assange has overplayed his hand,” a Defense Department official marveled. “Now, he’s alienating the sort of people who you’d normally think would be his biggest supporters.” The initial document dump by WikiLeaks last month is reported to have disclosed the names of hundreds of Afghan civilians who have cooperated with NATO forces; the Taliban has threatened to hunt down the civilians named in the documents, a threat that human-rights organizations say WikiLeaks should take seriously. “It’s amazing how Assange has overplayed his hand,” a Defense Department official marveled. “Now, he’s alienating the sort of people who you’d normally think would be his biggest supporters.” The joint letter by the five groups, first revealed by The Wall Street Journal, was met by a tart response from Assange, who communicates with the outside world largely through the social-networking Internet tool Twitter. He appeared to suggest that news organizations and human-rights groups, notably Amnesty International, should help him underwrite his cost of the editing and release of more of the Afghan war documents—but that they were instead refusing to provide assistance. “Pentagon wants to bankrupt us by refusing to assist review,” he tweeted on Monday, referring to the effort by WikiLeaks to convince the Defense Department to join in reviewing the additional 15,000 documents to remove the names of Afghan civilians and others who might be placed in danger by its release. “Media won’t take responsibility. Amnesty won’t. What to do?” In a separate posting on Twitter, Assange estimated the cost of the “harm minimization review”—a reference, apparently, to the effort to edit the 15,000 documents to remove informants’ names—at $700,000. It was not clear how he arrived at that figure. The Australian-born Assange travels constantly and is said to have no real home, living instead in the homes of friends and supporters around the world. He was reported as recently as last week to be in the U.K., although he has spent significant time this year in Australia, Iceland, and the U.S. He has said he is postponing future travel to the U.S. because of fear that he faces legal sanctions here. Through diplomatic and military channels, the Obama administration is hoping to convince Britain, Germany, and Australia, among other allied governments that Assange should not be welcome on their shores, either, given the danger that his group poses to their troops stationed in Afghanistan, American officials say. They say severe limitations on Assange’s travels might serve as a useful warning to his followers that their own freedom is now at risk. A prominent American volunteer for WikiLeaks reported last month that he was subjected to hours of questioning and had his laptop and cellphones seized by American border agents on returning to the U.S. from Europe late last month. An American military official tells The Daily Beast that Washington may also want to closely review its relations with Iceland in the wake of the release of the Afghan war logs. Assange and his followers have been successful in pressing the government of Iceland, in the wake of the collapse of the country’s banking system, to reinvent itself as a haven for free speech, creating a potential home for WikiLeaks and other organizations that may violate the laws of the U.S. and other nations through the release of classified documents. added by: toyotabedzrock

Indian Idol 5 Winner, Grand Finale Video

Indian Idol 5 winner is the thing on everyone’s mind in South Asia as the finale of the greatest Indian singing show draws near. The finale of the Indian Idol 5 is to be aired today and everyone is simply buzzing about who the winner is going to be. http://www.click4newz.com/indian-idol-5-winner-finale-video/ added by: akiarojas

Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food

Update: Since the story first broke, a lot has happened. One reason for this could be that food is being poisoned. Collecting rainwater is now illegal in many states. Your intake is being controlled. For more information, visit the following articles as well: “Raiding organic food stores. A sign of new times?” at: http://www.firetown.com/blog/2010/08/05/raiding-organic-food-stores-a-sign-of-ne… “Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water.” at: http://www.theworldsprophecy.com/collecting-rainwater-now-illegal-in-many-states… “Why do people in America refuse to take active interest in their future?” at http://www.firetown.com/blog/2010/08/03/why-do-people-in-america-refuse-to-take-… ———————————————————————————————————— S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US. It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money. “If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God.” ~Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food. Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto’s Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create — without judicial review — if it passes. S 510 would give Monsanto unlimited power over all US seed, food supplements, food and farming. History In the 1990s, Bill Clinton introduced HACCP (Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points) purportedly to deal with contamination in the meat industry. Clinton’s HACCP delighted the offending corporate (World Trade Organization “WTO”) meat packers since it allowed them to inspect themselves, eliminated thousands of local food processors (with no history of contamination), and centralized meat into their control. Monsanto promoted HACCP. In 2008, Hillary Clinton, urged a powerful centralized food safety agency as part of her campaign for president. Her advisor was Mark Penn, CEO of Burson Marsteller*, a giant PR firm representing Monsanto. Clinton lost, but Clinton friends such as Rosa DeLauro, whose husband’s firm lists Monsanto as a progressive client and globalization as an area of expertise, introduced early versions of S 510. S 510 fails on moral, social, economic, political, constitutional, and human survival grounds. 1. It puts all US food and all US farms under Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, in the event of contamination or an ill-defined emergency. It resembles the Kissinger Plan. 2. It would end US sovereignty over its own food supply by insisting on compliance with the WTO, thus threatening national security. It would end the Uruguay Round Agreement Act of 1994, which put US sovereignty and US law under perfect protection. Instead, S 510 says: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS. Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party. 3. It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into “the United States.” Since under that law, the US is a corporate entity and not a location, “entry of food into the US” covers food produced anywhere within the land mass of this country and “entering into” it by virtue of being produced It imposes Codex Alimentarius on the US, a global system of control over food. It allows the United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the WTO to take control of every food on earth and remove access to natural food supplements. Its bizarre history and its expected impact in limiting access to adequate nutrition (while mandating GM food, GM animals, pesticides, hormones, irradiation of food, etc.) threatens all safe and organic food and health itself, since the world knows now it needs vitamins to survive, not just to treat illnesses. 5. It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening US security. See Seeds – How to criminalize them, for more details. 6. It includes NAIS, an animal traceability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals. The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease. Biodiversity in farm animals is being wiped out to substitute genetically engineered animals on which corporations hold patents. Animal diseases can be falsely declared. S 510 includes the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite its corrupt involvement in the H1N1 scandal, which is now said to have been concocted by the corporations. Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad) 7. It extends a failed and destructive HACCP to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production – put it in corporate hands and worsen food safety. 8. It deconstructs what is left of the American economy. It takes agriculture and food, which are the cornerstone of all economies, out of the hands of the citizenry, and puts them under the total control of multinational corporations influencing the UN, WHO, FAO and WTO, with HHS, and CDC, acting as agents, with Homeland Security as the enforcer. The chance to rebuild the economy based on farming, ranching, gardens, food production, natural health, and all the jobs, tools and connected occupations would be eliminated. 9. It would allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and GMOs. This would industrialize every farm in the US, eliminate local organic farming, greatly increase global warming from increased use of oil-based products and long-distance delivery of foods, and make food even more unsafe. The five items listed — the Five Pillars of Food Safety — are precisely the items in the food supply which are the primary source of its danger. 10. It uses food crimes as the entry into police state power and control. The bill postpones defining all the regulations to be imposed; postpones defining crimes to be punished, postpones defining penalties to be applied. It removes fundamental constitutional protections from all citizens in the country, making them subject to a corporate tribunal with unlimited power and penalties, and without judicial review. It is (similar to C-6 in Canada) the end of Rule of Law in the US. … Continued at http://www.theworldsprophecy.com/senate-bill-s510-makes-it-illegal-to-grow-share… http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr360/ourhomeremedies/NaturalCureHomeRemedies… added by: Dagum

Clinton Denies WH Claim That He Intervened in U.S. Senate Race in Pennsylvania

Reigniting a political controversy, former President Bill Clinton this week contradicted the Obama White House, telling a Pennsylvania TV station that he never encouraged U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak to drop out of Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senate race – as the White House claimed in May.   On Tuesday, Aug. 10, as Clinton campaigned for Sestak in Scranton, Pa., a reporter with the NBC affiliate in Wilkes-Barre asked Clinton why he was in Pennsylvania campaigning for Sestak if he had once tried to get him to drop out of the Senate race. “I never tried to get him out of the race,” Clinton  replied . “I’ve never even been accused of that,” he added in response to a follow-up question.   Clinton’s denial on Tuesday represents a third version of events, said Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has been looking into the matter.    “You know the saying there’s three sides to every story — well, now we have it,” Issa said.    In the first version of events, Sestak repeated for months that the White House had offered him an administration job in exchange for dropping his Democratic primary challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter. Specter said such an offer would legally constitute a bribe.    In version two, the White House — after months of refusing to answer questions about what happened — issued a memo in May saying the White House had asked Bill Clinton to talk to Sestak about serving on an unpaid advisory panel while continuing to serve in the House. The memo, written by White House Counsel Robert Bauer, referred to discussions in “June and July of 2009” and said that nothing improper had happened.   Version three came with Clinton’s denial on Tuesday.   “Admiral Sestak has repeatedly said he was offered a ‘job’ in an effort to obtain his withdrawal from the Senate primary,” Issa said on Thursday. “The White House has said ‘efforts were made in June and July’ in said job as well as the admission that they ‘enlisted’ former President Clinton to make the overture. President Clinton says he ‘never tried to get Sestak out of the race.’ Who’s telling the truth?”   As CNSNews.com has  reported , White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs would not say what position Sestak was offered.    After Bauer’s memo was issued in May, Sestak said he believed he was offered a spot on the president’s intelligence advisory board. Regarding his conversation with former President Bill Clinton, Sestak told reporters, “I heard presidential board and I think it was intel.”    Bauer’s one-and-a-half memo explained that former President Bill Clinton, acting on behalf of the Obama administration, had offered Sestak an unpaid role on a presidential advisory board.    According to the Bauer memo, “efforts (plural) were made in June and July of 2009 to determine whether Congressman Sestak would be interested in service on a presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board, which would avoid a divisive Senate primary, allow him to retain his seat in the House, and provide him with an opportunity for additional service to the public in a high-level advisory capacity.”   However, the memo mentions only one conversation between Clinton and Sestak.    The Bauer memo said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel recruited Bill Clinton to offer Sestak an unpaid position on a presidential advisory board while remaining a U.S. congressman.    But as a House member, Sestak could not serve on an executive branch board. As the White House Web site  notes , the president’s intelligence advisory board “consists of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals  who are not employed by the Federal Government .”   (emphasis added)   Sestak faces Republican Pat Toomey, a former congressman, in November. Crossposted at NB sister site CNSNews.com

See original here:
Clinton Denies WH Claim That He Intervened in U.S. Senate Race in Pennsylvania

Civil Discourse is Overrated

So Matt Lewis writes a column decrying, I think,  the Political climate’s nastiness . I say, I think, because after reading it, I’m not quite sure what he’s saying. Matt brings up two pieces of evidence: Matt Yglesias saying that lying is okay was one distressing example. Well, duh. Yglesias is a liberal and I have yet to read a liberal blogger who doesn’t believe the ends justify the means. There is no true objective truth, after all. And, really, lying is fine, if a greater truth is served yada yada. This is not new. Nor is it shocking. Everything from science (Al Gore and global warming) to social science (single mothering is as good as dual-parent families) to religion (Christianists!) to media coverage is manipulated to serve the statist i.e. Democratic good . And to make the arguments, lying isn’t just recommended, it’s necessary. Matt then notes a poll by  John Hawkins at Right Wing News  about the worst Americans in history. Well, that’s rather vague, right? Full disclosure: John invited me to participate and talked to me about the poll. Two things prevented me from answering: my internet went out for two days. Also, upon consideration, I was thinking about all the evil Americans and realized my scope and grasp of American history wasn’t broad enough. Who, for example, was the dumbass who convinced people that DDT was worse than dying from malaria and by extension participated in the deaths of over 25 million African children? That’s pretty evil (good intentions be damned) in my book. I don’t know the answer off-hand and immediately. Ugh, I’d have to go look. Also, is a dude who buried grandma and 20 bodies in the backyard more evil? How about Will Duranty who facilitated Stalin? And on and on. Well, this is how my mind works, which is why I fatigue myself and I realized I didn’t have the time or lack of laziness to do the poll. As it turns out, most of the people taking the poll,  Ed Morrissey included (though he didn’t participate), figured it was worst  American politicians  in history. Okay. Well fine. I looked at the list of what everyone came up with and rolled my eyes (with all do respect to the fine people who answered). It was just too modern-heavy. History and evil did not begin in the 1930s. But again, I had no desire to go sifting through American’s past and taking the time to consider measuring evil acts against one another. I suspect that my fellow busy bloggers felt the same way so went with what they knew. Fine. Ultimately, the poll was not some serious scholarly exercise, anyway. It was a fun diversion and interesting-inevitably, I wonder who chose whom and why. Sure, there were a lot of Democrats on there. I figure that conservative bloggers weren’t paying attention to the intention, but to the outcome of the actions taken. Thus, some beloved Democrat sacred cows made the list. Whatever. I don’t see either of the examples as evidence pointing to devastation of political discourse. I’m also not someone who has over-emphasized civility either. Civility ultimately serves the Left because they play by nasty dirty rules. They’ve got less game and so they only survive by cheap shots. I’ve played basketball with guys like these. And there’s two ways to go: Be so skilled that you annihilate them with pure awesome skill; and/or, elbow them in the mouth, hard, and let them know they will suffer pain if they try to hurt you. Think I’m base and crass? Well, I’ve been blind-picked and nearly knocked out. I’ve nearly had my nose broken. I’ve been clothes-lined. Nice does not always win. Some opponents only understand direct, hard, physical contact. And there are times when a foul is not only warranted but absolutely necessary. Sometimes fouls are required to win the game. And, by definition, a foul is breaking a rule. Ack! We’re conservatives. We should be goody goodies! My land! My heavens! A hard foul would be, why, it would be wrong! Not to mention uncivilized. Eek! And the political discourse! It will degrade. Oh phooey! As long as it’s legal and it’s the truth, a good punch can be extremely productive. Hard hits just must be used with intelligence and not serve as the whole game. The best players have great game. They win with skill and finesse and strength. They also know how to send a message-both psychologically and physically-and aren’t afraid to do it when necessary. Since when did opponents speak in honey hues and debate melodiously? Please. And as for  sounding  more moderate, I give you Christopher Hitchens who, with his acerbic wit and fierce intelligence can sound positively delightful while he’s eviscerating his opponent. The guy on the other side doesn’t even realize he’s holding his own entrails until he feels the last of his life drain out of him. Too many on my own side emphasize form over substance. They’ll watch a game that is played technically perfectly and then be astonished when a less skilled, but more fierce team wins. To make this post even unnecessarily longer, I’ll extend the basketball metaphor. Back in the day, Michael Jordan’s Bulls did not win the NBA championship. Jordan, without question, was incredibly skilled. He didn’t quite grasp teamwork. He also suffered a weakness: Dennis Rodman could get inside his head. Easily. The Pistons had a great team, to be sure. Great shooting. Great teamwork. Incredible defense. But their skill wasn’t their only weapon. Bill Lambeer talked more smack than anyone, used cheap shots effectively, and was a flopper-drawing phantom fouls that enraged opponents. Combine Lambeer with Dennis Rodman, and Michael Jordan was overwhelmed and non-stop frustrated. As a Detroit fan, it was beautiful to behold. As Jordan matured, he recognized that the game was more than spectacular, individual talent and gravity-defying finesse. Here’s another thing: In basketball, there is a winner and a loser. There are two teams. Some politicians and pundits get all mushed up and confused. They act as though we’re in a system where getting along means winning. No, it doesn’t. Getting along means Democrats winning, because getting along means compromising on government programs which, by definition, expands the size, scope and reach of the government. When compromise wins, government wins. People lose. So no. Time for decisive victory…for the American people. And I have bad news for those decrying the civility in the political discourse. Wait until the Democrats have obviously and completely lost. They will get crazier. These last two years have been the apex, the absolute zenith of big-government policies. When they lose, there will be a great gnashing of teeth. And in their impotence, there will be rage. Also, another warning. The Republicans have not quite found their soul yet. Time may demonstrate that they do not, in fact have a soul. As the Republicans fight for core values-you know, crazy, edgy stuff like fiscal discipline in contrast to “refining” programs-it will get nastier rhetorically. These primaries have been brutal. And memories are long. And there are those who will want revenge. Let’s hope the terror of unfettered Democrats keeps the Republicans focused. But I doubt it will. So expect more incivility on our own side. Politics ain’t beanbag. It’s a bloodsport. And it ain’t civilized. All the way back, I don’t see any evidence that Democracy has ever been a chummy process. It’s adversarial. Why? Because the debate is over ideas and the ideas drive policies and the policies do affect us. It’s  personal . Sometimes, that means it’s uncivilized. Crossposted at Liberty Pundits  

Visit link:
Civil Discourse is Overrated