Archive for May, 2011

Joel D. Hirst: “Revolutionary Brotherhood” — Nicaragua’s 21st Century Socialism

May 31, 2011

A liberal rag exposes the socialist agenda that their political godfathers are using here in the States:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joel-d-hirst/revolutionary-brotherhood_b_761059.html

Ron Paul against government subsidies and how to move alternate energy along

May 31, 2011

Ron Paul interviewed by the Freakonomics guys, talks about oil and farm subsidies and how to move alternate energy along:

http://www.freakonomics.com/2008/11/20/ron-paul-answers-your-questions-part-two/ The question is: how much? Rather than taking a “sky is falling” approach, I think there are common-sense steps we can take to cut emissions and preserve our environment. I am, after all, a conservative and seek to conserve not just American traditions and our Constitution, but our natural resources as well.

We should start by ending subsidies for oil companies. And we should never, ever go to war to protect our perceived oil interests. If oil were allowed to rise to its natural price, there would be tremendous market incentives to find alternate sources of energy. At the same time, I can’t support government “investment” in alternative sources either, for this is not investment at all.

Government cannot invest, it can only redistribute resources. Just look at the mess government created with ethanol. Congress decided that we needed more biofuels, and the best choice was ethanol from corn. So we subsidized corn farmers at the expense of others, and investment in other types of renewables was crowded out.

Now it turns out that corn ethanol is inefficient, and it actually takes more energy to produce the fuel than you get when you burn it. The most efficient ethanol may come from hemp, but hemp production is illegal and there has been little progress on hemp ethanol. And on top of that, corn is now going into our gas tanks instead of onto our tables or feeding our livestock or dairy cows; so food prices have been driven up. This is what happens when we allow government to make choices instead of the market; I hope we avoid those mistakes moving forward.

Tea party and subsidies: but remember there’s only ONE Congressmen that votes against every one!

May 31, 2011

The real Boston Tea Party was a protest against the British Parliament imposed tea tax they had imposed on the colonists, which is why the colonists had refused to let them unload the cargo.

IT was an actions imposed by a government to favor their own East India Tea Company, sure, blatant crony capitalism, but a true free-market-respecting government would have told the company where to go, down there with all the other self-interest groups that want the government to guarantee their pig slop.

Everybody that truly really understands the real world knows that corporations do not magically bite the bullet and just swallow tax increases, anybody with the sense of a slug, including good economists and plenty of them, knows that corporations just figure them into the cost of doing business, which goes into their accounting calculations, where public corporations BY LAW have to exercise due proper diligence to maximize the profits for the stockholders.

Every CPA in the country that does their job ethically tries their best to minimize the tax burden on their clients. This is not hypocrisy, it’s due diligence.

Now we have some people that want to be identified with the tea party who are getting subsidies. This puts in great big bold letters THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT’S WRONG WITH ALL GOVERNMENT SUBSIDES. It’s a blatant BRIBE to them, using taxpayer’s own money to bribe them into doing what the dictators want.

It takes some political courage by a maverick to Just Say No! to$2 billion –$2,000,000,000!– dollars of federal money for a high-speed rail line. He sent it back to Washington.

But we can see the arrogance of DC hegemony in the fact that some of the banks who refused TARP money were forced to take it.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/02/16/2069844/florida-gov-rick-scott-rejects.html

The ONLY one with any length of time in Congress that has ALWAYS EVERY TIME voted against EVERY federal subsidy to ANYBODY is Ron Paul. He ALWAYS votes against agricultural subsidies, always, even though he is from an agricultural district. And he is a tea party champion and stalwart, and there are others coming around, and Rand Paul looks like he’s another.

I will never contribute to my company’s PAC even if I buy shares of it, because they stated that one thing they wanted was federal money to purchase some electric and hybrid trucks to participate in some program done jointly by some California counties, et.al.

But when the government puts their hand on the scales in favor of the private parties, be they companies or individuals, that receive their subtle monetary baits, it’s not a fair playing field for the ones that want to do right.

Socialist – defined

May 30, 2011

“Socialists love subsidies for some pet projects, like “clean energy”, while totally trying to ignore the new energy science that has enormous potential for almost unlimited energy.”—
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fabian+socialism

From http://www.thefreedictionary.com/socialistic:
so·cial·is·tic (ssh-lstk) adj. Of, advocating, or tending toward socialism.

Of course this description fits even if self-identified liberals would oppose sending Jews to concentration camps, and many of them –but not all– will oppose shipping off Christians to camps later on:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1141684/posts

No liberals arent’ Nazi’s but it’s telling that control freaks are the ones who push socialist ideas, calling them “liberal” for Americans and trying to play off the sincere sympathies that Americans feel for the underdog, while fattening their pockets and their power with every increase in taxes, and every increase in regulation and every other thing they say is for “good”.

But “liberal policies” have decimated the economic situation for American Indians, but true to form, even with more than a hundred federal programs set up to help the ancient occupants of North America, they are the most impoverished group in the land, except for the tribes that never got federal recognition.

From http://www.thefreedictionary.com/socialistic:
so·cial·is·tic (ssh-lstk) adj. Of, advocating, or tending toward socialism.

Is it true? Republicans – including tea party caucus ? – vote unanimousely for oil subsidies? Get perspective

May 30, 2011

More spinning from the Left for their religiously faithful and gullible:

Republicans – including tea party caucus ? – vote unanimousely for oil subsidiesWith Big Oil raking in record profits, House Democrats offered a Motion to Recommit to the House Republican short-term spending bill this afternoon making a responsible cut to the budget: putting an end to taxpayer-funded subsidies to large oil companies. Repealing these subsidies would save taxpayers tens of billions over the next decade and even ex-Shell CEO John Hofmeister agrees saying “with high oil prices, such subsidies are not necessary.”

Rep. William Keating (D-MA) offered the motion on the House floor saying “let’s stop sending taxpayers’ money to the most profitable companies in the world.”

Republicans voted unanimously against the motion, defeating it by a vote of 176-249.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/0…-oil-subsidies


Why did they hide the house bill number, so a person could find out what this is really about?

It took a bit of poking around to find the truth, which leaked out even from this usnew.com liberal source:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/05/17/big-oil-tax-break-vote-could-hurt-vulnerable-republicans

Turns out this “subsidy” is NOT a subsidy, it is a tax deduction, one of the zillions that Congress has accumulated throughout the years (besides the actual genuine subsidies, of which this one is not), most of which the leftists in Congress have no problem with, whether they call themselves by the L-word (“liberals”) or not.

That’s a dirty trick, straight out of of George Orwell’s book warning against all the psy-war pages of Orwell’s 1984, controlling the people by controlling their language.

I personally am in favor of applying all corporate tax rates evenly against all corporations, although talking about taxes in a whole subject itself.

But school vouchers illustrate the difference. I’m against the present de facto regime of discrimination against all religious views except the official ones, which is that children must be taught as if God had nothing to do with anything in the real world. A transitional phase to the best of worlds might be a voucher program which is certainly better than the present one, in which our rulers have the schools using our tax dollars to indoctrinate school kids with a world view in which God has nothing at all to do with anything in the real world, a view which deceived me for many years even through most of college.

If there were a more fair tax rate in which even plutocrat George Soros and gang would have to pay for every dollar they laid on the backs of American consumers and poor through his political proxies, then tax deductions to parents for every penny spent on schooling their child would release academic achievements to take off like a rocket and at the same time would restore parental protections for their children and respect for the religious and varied non-conformist views of the population. Therein lies the diversity that gave strength in unity to the US throughout most of its history and its loss has been part of the general decline in the economy and in the spiritual backbone of its body politic.

Media balance and omissions

May 30, 2011

Lefitst spin new sources do what they can to increase audience. If Fox pays places to put on their broadcasts, it is certain that they other players do too. We already know that George Soros has paid $1.8 million to NPR to hire political reporters across the country, and we also know for certain there’s an understanding that these will be friendly to the causes Soros and government-dependent institutions like NPR support.

It’s just that a lot of people feel less insulted with Fox that with MSNBC and their ilk, and the leftists they bring onto all their shows are easier to listen to since it’s not left propaganda all the time insulting our intelligence and hiding some things we would not otherwise know.

I know that especially CNN, but the rest of them too, played lies after lies after lies on the situation that I did know a LOT about and that was Honduras in 2009. The ONLY news source that played it somewhat fairly was Fox News. Greten was the ONLY news show that gave any air time at all to the truth.

Even Fox News relayed the lies that AP was vomiting about Honduras on its web site, one after the other.

And that was why the administration revoked the visas to visit here of the defenders of Honduran constitutional government. It was because they would be sought by local news programs for interviews, where there is less of the control of the top-down government-media complex.

There are some of the other issues they’ve played fairly. Judge Napolitano is the ONLY guy I know of that constantly brings the abuses of the Patriot Act front and center, Stossel too but his emphasis is on mostly economic abuses by both the capitalists and government agencies.

Politifact (Politi-notsomuch) says Fox lies about cap and trade. We know that cap and trade is a Trojan horse with false packaging that won’t do anything to cut carbon (as if plants don’t know how to breathe CO2) or AGW but will kill a lot of jobs, hurting the poor and middle class most.

Fox News makes plenty of mistakes, but when I watch them I’ve seen CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of them make bigger ones. Fox News provides some voices that resonate with obviously most of the cable news audience believes, while the others censor them out and shut them up. No way that can be called balanced.

Almost every FNC and FBN program brings on a parade of leftists to say their piece. John Stossel for example invited six “think tanks” to present their case, including a “progressive” think tank that refused. The others were two “conservative”, one of those actually libertarian, two liberal, and another that called itself bipartisan. He treats all his guests with respect, lets them say their piece, and he asked the audience to please stop booing the liberal.

The biggest lies about cap and trade come from the enviro-left and Climategate science whores who get their money from guaranteed taxpayer sources and plutocrat-socialist foundations, who know full well that what global warming there is has little to do with humans and everything to do with solar activity, especially sunspots.

Where is the big news about even the Climategate liars confessing up that the world has been cooling for the last decade or so as the sunspot cycle has been in its dormant stage?

Politifact is not reliable either. Kind of like Snopes, founded by Democrat Party activists who easily see what fits their confirmation bias and socialistic paradigm but treat contrary evidence as irrelevant or inconsequential.

Here’s a gem from the left:

Live Desk: “Dems and Unions Push to Kill Workers’ Right to Secret Ballot.” During a report on the Employee Free Choice Act on the March 11 edition of The Live Desk, Fox aired a chyron stating, “Dems and Unions Push to Kill Workers’ Right to Secret Ballot.” In fact, the legislation would not eliminate employees’ right to a secret ballot; as The New York Times reported, “Business groups have attacked the legislation because it would take away employers’ right to insist on holding a secret-ballot election to determine whether workers favored unionization” [emphasis added]. Indeed, as The Christian Science Monitor has noted, “[t]he proposed law gives workers a choice of forming a union through majority sign-up (‘card check’) or an election by secret ballot.”


That’s another example of a lie that is not a lie, and the liars are the ones who say that union carding protects the right to a secret ballot. Why does the Constitution stipulate secret ballots? Because open balloting like the carding “option” the union bosses are pushing are NOT fair elections, and such methods promote corruption. intimidation. Secret ballot makes the buying of votes a no-starter.

The legislation DOES kill the “right to a secret ballot” because it provides a way that “union organizers” can avoid having to let them vote secretly. The right of a secret ballot is the guarantee that no one can thereby be intimidated into signing something, AND unions should push for eliminating the card check method so when they win a vote they can say they didn’t win by threats or intimidation.

History shows that they are not above it, and that union bosses have worked together with the Mob in the past often.

Fox’s Garrett deceptively cropped Obama remark on judicial role. On May 1, saying it was a “description of how the president hopes his nominee will interpret the law,” congressional correspondent Major Garrett aired a clip in which Obama stated: “I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people’s hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes.” Garrett then said: “That aggravates those who believe justices should follow the Constitution and legislative intent.” But Garrett omitted Obama’s very next sentence, in which he stated: “I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role.”


So Obama contradicted himself. The first part of the comments, which have nothing at all to do with constitutionality and its application, show in fact a self-contradiction in and of itself because any judge that rules based on “identifying with people’s hopes and struggles” is going to arrive at UNJUST decisions unless they follow the rule of the law.

And the use of “constitutional traditions” instead of “constitution” exposes the naked unclothed emperor, too. Ask the New Haven residents that were dispossessed of their property because the Supreme Court ruled that the town could get rid of them for a mall developer. We now have a “constitutional tradition” that says any government body can kick you off your property because somebody’s buddy wants it or because they don’t like you or like what you say.

Special Report packs in health care falsehoods. In an August 24 report on how, in the words of Baier, “Republicans are trying to position themselves as the party looking out for seniors’ well-being,” Rosen advanced the conservative talking point that Democrats plan to cut Medicare benefits for seniors and presented the widely debunked “death panel” falsehood as a he said/she said. Rosen also advanced the smear that Veterans Health Administration officials are referring veterans to a booklet that encourages them to end their lives prematurely.


That’s an old canard but as I’ve explained the LIE is to pretend they’re not starting programs that make it easy for our elderly to kick the bucket early, and to pretend they won’t be looking at the account sheet for cost savings. Obama’s Medicare chief is on record praising the Brit system for refusing medical care procedures to “keep costs down”.

Baier falsely suggests Obama has cited Canada as possible health reform model. On June 29, Baier falsely suggested that Obama has cited Canada’s medical system as a “possible model” for his health care reform plan. In fact, Obama has explicitly rejected a Canadian-style health care system.


How about a link to the exact quote with context?

Obama has said one thing and then another.

Go to the next link and scroll down a bit to get a video where you see Obama before the election, where the original health plan came from, and why they hid the bill right up to the moment they voted on it in Congress:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2009/08/video-proof-obama-wants-single-payer-system

According to Obama’s 2007 comments on record there, this bill was a Trojan horse to push the States to a single-payer plan. They hid it in the devil’s details because they know that Americans distrust big government and IRS agents more than they distrust corporations.

Wallace revives rationing bogeyman. On August 16, Wallace repeatedly advanced the conservative talking point that Democrats’ health care reform proposals would create a system of rationing care, omitting the fact that rationing already happens under the current system. Indeed, Wallace did not acknowledge that rationing already occurs, even after his guest, American Medical Association president J. James Rohack, said, “[T]here’s a myth that rationing doesn’t occur right now. … That’s why this bill’s important. It gets rid of some of the rationing that’s occurring right now.”


An ommission is not a lie, but if you want to call it deceit go ahead, but the lies were big to cover for the congresspeople voting for this thing. It’s designed to put private insurers out of business, they lied about that, it cost insureres and businesses more money immediately, they lied about that, they did a technical lie about talking about how it will cost less money by ommitting some important base parameters in the CBO request, and by front-loading the tax revenue estimates.
The left likes doctors’ quotes when they serve the purpose but hate the fact that most doctors overwhelming hate this socialist takeover of medicine.

I provided a link to where Obama said he would sneak single payer over on Americans but how he would deceive them by setting up a national health care plan as a Trojan horse for it (the architect of the idea said it wasn’t a Trojan horse because it’s so obvious anyway.

Also saying that Beck falsely claimed Van Jones was a “convicted felon” and then mentioning he retracted it shows more integrity than a lot of people, like the wagging tongues that blamed Fox News and right-wing talk shows for the Gifford shooting. I never saw any mea culpa or apology for this false association. When it turned out he was a raving maniac God-hater and hard leftist, though, if anything, they all immediately started calling for “civility”, meaning they didn’t want to get a taste of their own medicine, but immediately abandoned civility anyway.

Beck is on his way out, anyway, and he was getting a bit boring for me and losing viewers, but it may have more to do with his exposing Soros so much and the pressure and blowback, showing how the money for a lot of FNC-bashing leads back to Soros, including Media Matters.

Fox News hosts falsely claimed Holdren called for forced abortion, forced sterilization.

—-
There’s a reason Holdren is not suing Fox for defamation:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/holdren-forced-to-respond-to-controversy-over-totalitarian-population-control-proposals.html

http://www.newshounds.us/2011/05/23/too_big_a_cheering_crowd_fox_news_skips_obamas_ireland_speech.php Imagine they would have let such a Bush reception go unreported? Hardly

—-
The booing at Hillary in New York at a charity event went largely unreported. The Dinosaur Media reported Ann Coulter was cancelled in Canada but didn’t report it was because of the anti-free-speech fury that make them think (so they claimed anyway) that they might not be able to provide for safety.

Here’s one. A friend of mine watched Louis Farrakhan’s I-wish-it-were-a-million-man march in Washington, some channel played it live and he watched CNN coverage later. CNN put on the snip where he said “This march is about ME!” But having seen the speech he knew that Farrakhan had said “Now a lot of people are saying this march is about me! But it’s NOT about me! It’s about YOU!”

That’s what ALL of them did with some David Korresh quotes too. Dad said they put on TV a video of him saying “I’m God!” But I know that what he really said was “These people [might?] think I’m God. But I’m not!”

For ommission ALL the news sources except the “fringe” also left out references to David Korresh’s call to emergency services when they attacked the Davidians. “Why did you all come in just shooting? We would have let you in!” They also left out the fact that the four DEA agents that were killed had been transferred from the Secret Service team that worked with the Clinton presidential campaign. They also left out that the county sherrif had executed search warrants THREE TIMES before looking for the same illegal weapons they had, and had found NOTHING illegal at all. They also omitted the fact that the same sherriff blasted the way they went in shooting, saying it wasn’t necessary, and that “Now they’re going to have to burn the place down to hide the evidence”.

They also left out of the reporting that the CSX gas they used had been banned for use in war by a treaty a few months before by the Bush administration as a chemical warfare weapon, and that instead of causing its victims to “grab their babies and run”, it had been used in Vietnam precisely because it knocks people unconscious.

They left out of reporting about the Murrah building that the once foremost explosives expert of the US Army, General Ben Parton, had said it was emphatically impossible for a fertilizer bomb to cause the damage reported.

What about Bush saying in 2006 that capturing Bin Laden is “not a top priority use of
American resources?”

Well, there you may have caught Bush in a lie at that. I didn’t really believe him at that time, I saw the Bush say it, but I thought he must be a liar because it would be too good a coup, or even because it contradicted everything he said about the “war on terror”. Turns out there was a sizeable contingent of CIA activity to run down bin Laden during those years. In fact, click on this link and scroll down a bit to see CNN interview with the CIA bin Laden section chief from Bush years, talking about Libya.

Fox News reporters constantly promoted the Tea Party movement and also lied about coverage of the September Tea Party march on Washington in an ad. The network completely ignored an equally large gay-rights march in October.


The Tea Party movement is historical and of course most FNC viewers think it’s a good thing, lots of us ARE tea party movement after all. And a significant part of the people: 70 percent of Americans reported against the bailouts, against TARP, against the stimulus plan for favored businesses, against runaway spending and against Obamacare, as they showed in the November 2010 elections. We would have only the Internet (for now) for fair coverage otherwise.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html

I don’t care about Gay Privilege Marches, anyway, they get too much coverage already. WHen was the last time CNN asked anybody from Exodus International for an opinion, or from Love Won Out?

Sanger & Planned Parenthood

May 30, 2011

Goebbels would be proud of these propagandists:

Planned Parenthood Federation of America finds these views objectionable and outmoded. Nevertheless, anti-family planning activists continue to attack Sanger, who has been dead for over 30 years, because she is an easier target than the unassailable reputation of PPFA and the contemporary family planning movement. However, attempts to discredit the family planning movement because its early 20th-century founder was not a perfect model of early 21st-century values is like disavowing the Declaration of Independence because its author, Thomas Jefferson, bought and sold slaves.

http://www.plannedparenthoodnj.org/library/topic/contraception/margaret_sanger


Yeah, blah blah. Of course they have to say that.

And of course Sanger not only had to “repudiate the racist exploitation of eugenics” after they became the obvious basis for the most horrible atrocities of the Nazis, and more so when we were obviously getting into a war against them, but Planned Barrenhood cannot, CANNOT deny that she invited the German euguenics minister to speak at one of their conferences.

And they cannot deny the racist content of many of her remarks.

And they cannot deny they push for the easy pickings of taxpayer money to push all manner of depopulation initiatives among the poorest.

http://www.blackgenocide.org/planned.html

Margaret Sanger, Racism, Forced Abortion, and Stealth Sterilization

May 30, 2011

Margaret Sanger may have paid lip service to opposition to abortion, but she still said the best thing a poor family could do for its children was to kill them, and the organization she founded is the biggest and most effective worldwide advocate of abortion.

Plus her interest in contraception was racist to her core and not very subtle at that.

Plus today every single pro-abortion public figure ALWAYS says they don’t like abortion [for whatever reason they claim] like Bill Clinton who said he wanted it to be “safe, legal, and rare” even while arguing in favor of the unquestionable infanticide of partial-birth abortion. And while claiming it was about protecting the mother, he trotted out five women who had eliminated their gestating babies for having “defects” like Down’s Syndrome.

That’s like the ancient Greeks and Romans pre-Christianity who left their “defective” babies to die on the hillsides or sometimes just killed them outright, or the Molech worshippers of the ancient Canaanites who “fed them to the fire”.

Besides when she began pushing her eliminate-the-poor-and-inferior agenda, saying you were for abortion was like saying you were in favor of free heroin today. So her genocide war against the poor and “inferior stock” would have been DOA. She was a eugenicist but she wasn’t stupid.

But never fear, technology to the rescue, and we will see advocates that cry “choice” in the USA pushing for this, genetically modified corn that enhances sterility in women:

http://www.indyinasia.com/2011/05/gm-corn-designed-for-human-depopulation/

One long-standing project of the US Government has been to perfect a genetically-modified variety of corn, the diet staple in Mexico and many other Latin American countries. The corn has been field tested in tests financed by the US Department of Agriculture along with a small California bio-tech company named Epicyte. Announcing his success at a 2001 press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants, announced, “We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies.”

Who would have thought it? In the USA our FDA, another government agency that is supposed to be a watchdog against abuses, has put an outright BAN on labeling GMO (genetically modified organism) labels on food in the supermarket.

We also have NO PROTEST AT ALL from Margaret Sanger’s spiritual heirs over the arbitrary sterilizations of poor women going on as we speak right now without their consent or even knowledge. It’s common knowledge in Honduras and other Latin countries, kind of an open secret. In Peru some years ago hospital directors were protesting female sterilization quotas they were getting from their government bosses, interviewed on Univision.

Are we for choice, or for eugenics and depopulation?

Human rights or totalitarianism?

Margaret Sanger, Racism, Forced Abortion, and Stealth Sterilization

May 30, 2011

Margaret Sanger may have paid lip service to opposition to abortion, but she still said the best thing a poor family could do for its children was to kill them, and the organization she founded is the biggest and most effective worldwide advocate of abortion.

Plus her interest in contraception was racist to her core and not very subtle at that.

Plus today every single pro-abortion public figure ALWAYS says they don’t like abortion [for whatever reason they claim] like Bill Clinton who said he wanted it to be “safe, legal, and rare” even while arguing in favor of the unquestionable infanticide of partial-birth abortion. And while claiming it was about protecting the mother, he trotted out five women who had eliminated their gestating babies for having “defects” like Down’s Syndrome.

That’s like the ancient Greeks and Romans pre-Christianity who left their “defective” babies to die on the hillsides or sometimes just killed them outright, or the Molech worshippers of the ancient Canaanites who “fed them to the fire”.

Besides when she began pushing her eliminate-the-poor-and-inferior agenda, saying you were for abortion was like saying you were in favor of free heroin today. So her genocide war against the poor and “inferior stock” would have been DOA. She was a eugenicist but she wasn’t stupid.

But never fear, technology to the rescue, and we will see advocates that cry “choice” in the USA pushing for this, genetically modified corn that enhances sterility in women:

http://www.indyinasia.com/2011/05/gm-corn-designed-for-human-depopulation/

One long-standing project of the US Government has been to perfect a genetically-modified variety of corn, the diet staple in Mexico and many other Latin American countries. The corn has been field tested in tests financed by the US Department of Agriculture along with a small California bio-tech company named Epicyte. Announcing his success at a 2001 press conference, the president of Epicyte, Mitch Hein, pointing to his GMO corn plants, announced, “We have a hothouse filled with corn plants that make anti-sperm antibodies.”

Who would have thought it? In the USA our FDA, another government agency that is supposed to be a watchdog against abuses, has put an outright BAN on labeling GMO (genetically modified organism) labels on food in the supermarket.

We also have NO PROTEST AT ALL from Margaret Sanger’s spiritual heirs over the arbitrary sterilizations of poor women going on as we speak right now without their consent or even knowledge. It’s common knowledge in Honduras and other Latin countries, kind of an open secret. In Peru some years ago hospital directors were protesting female sterilization quotas they were getting from their government bosses, interviewed on Univision.

Are we for choice, or for eugenics and depopulation?

Human rights or totalitarianism?

War on Poverty

May 30, 2011

The people who have received help directly from welfare and entitlement programs OF COURSE have benefited directly from them without question. You can pull out millions of such needy cases and OF COURSE I know we as kids were beneficiaries. Does that mean there’s nothing better? No.

But then when Bill Clinton put some Republican ideas to ground and reformed the welfare system, lots and lots of folks ALSO benefited when they was kicked off welfare:

http://www.urbancure.org/starparker.asp

It’s an emotional thing, which is one of the tricks. With more people getting net actual dollar-value material benefit from the federal government than the ones paying in, the ones who get the benefit naturally feel indebted to such programs.

That’s part of the plan. Creates lots of folks who feel indebted. They don’t have to worry about their mortgage anymore. Kind of like GE not having to worry about taxes anymore.

But there are thousands of people who have started their own businesses after losing their jobs, and they’re thriving.

But it takes taxes and debt to finance it, because the government does not create a single job without either reducing the money in the wild that could create a productive job, or taking it from the next generation of youngsters. Meaning you can’t create a government entitlement without reducing a job somewhere.