The Government sent innocent man to Syria to be tortured

January 29, 2007


This guy was deported to Syria and tortured as a terrorist, when he’s a Canadian and could have easily been deported to Canada. Even when it becomes clear he isn’t a terrorist, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales refuses to remove him from the terror watchlists. How hard can it be to clear somebody’s name, yet our Attorney General seems to be just as unconcerned with justice as the rest of our prosecutors across the nation (see: Mike Nifong and the Duke Lacrosse Lynching).

Maybe we need to impeach Gonzales even more so than Bush. Well, actually this shouldn’t be much surprise if you look at Alberto’s record. He has a history of these types of things.

If you care about your liberties, support the impeachment of our Attorney General for overstepping his boundaries and abuse of power.


Lobby group pushing Democrats to ban “Racial Profiling”

January 28, 2007


Well, a lobby group is now trying to influence Congress to ban “Racial Profiling.”

“The repercussions of an airline’s decision to remove a group of imams from a commercial flight in Minneapolis could be heard in Congress this year, with civil rights groups pushing Democratic lawmakers to ban racial profiling.”

These, of course, are the Muslim religious leaders who were acting suspiciously at an airport. They wore traditional Muslim clothes, spoke in Arabic and after boarding the plane together, dispersed all over the plane. Basically, they were acting like some of Osama’s terrorists. After the airlines detained them and they turned out to be innocent, they accused the airlines of “racial profiling.” If you walk into an airport to board a plane acting like you’re about to perform a terrorist attack, shouldn’t you expect to be detained for questioning by the airlines? Apparently, these “imams” have the audacity to think that the airlines should waste anti-terrorism resources on little old ladies, instead of on them. Rather than let them lobby Congress, I’d be putting them on a terror watch list.

“The incident happened in November, made national news and reinvigorated an old proposal that got little attention from the GOP.”

So, this “reinvigorated an old proposal” that the Republicans ignored? What is this proposal, an Amnesty for bin Laden Act or something else?

“Now, a champion of the legislation, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction on the issue. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who sponsored legislation to ban racial profiling in the last Congress, now chairs the Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution.”

Apparently, this is a “racial profiling” ban being proposed by Democrats John Conyers and Russ Feingold. Feingold’s notable as the only senator to oppose the Patriot Act, but he’s nowhere near right on this issue.

“No bill has been introduced so far, but Feingold made it clear the issue will be a priority for him.”

OK, so he’s making it a priority to pass a politically popular piece of legislation? He didn’t take the political stance on the Patriot Act. Well, this legislation, if passed, would encourage crime and terrorism and so it must be defeated.

“Many law-abiding African Americans, Arab Americans, Latino Americans and others live with the fear of being racially profiled as they go about their everyday lives. Although the vast majority of law enforcement officers don’t engage in the practice, some do and it must be addressed.”

These people who supposedly live with a fear of being racially profiled should be angry at the criminals who look like them and make police suspicious of them, rather than the police officers. Maybe then, they’d be able to eliminate street gangs and other criminals from “the hood.”

“I look forward to working with Chairman Conyers in the House as well as others to ensure that no one is judged by how they look or where they worship.”

They aren’t being judged by how they look or where they worship. They are judged for acting suspiciously like a stereotypical criminal. If the hijackers had been detained on September 11th, we’d know them now as racial profiling victims.

“Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP’s Washington office, said he was optimistic a bill could get through Congress.”

The NAACP is optimistic a bill can get through Congress. Well, they should be. It’s a popular, but wrong stance.

“I’m convinced that once the body of evidence of racial profiling occurring in our nation is presented before the U.S. Congress and the American people, that indeed they’ll be compelled to do something about it.”

Why doesn’t he use his time to discourage criminal activity instead?

“Feingold’s last bill would have banned federal, state and local law enforcement officials from “relying, to any degree, on race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion” during investigations.”

The Police and other Security groups have a hard enough time preventing terrorist activities as it is. Why should we restrict them from using everything at their disposal? So Osama can attack us again?

“An exemption would have been made for specific information that links a person of a particular race, ethnicity, national origin, or religion to an identified incident or scheme.”

That still wouldn’t have prevented 9/11. That would require the police to be sure that somebody was a terrorist before they could do anything.

“Some security-oriented groups are gearing up to fight a new version of the bill.”

As well they should.

“It would have the effect of estranging police officers from the community that they serve. It would make them more hesitant to stop people who might well be in violation of the law for fear that they’re going to get written up because of some racial protocol.”
– Jim Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police

That’s 100% correct. If the police aren’t able to try to prevent crimes from escalating, crime will get alot worse. 9/11 Families for a Secure America are also opposed to this legislation.

“The 9/11 atrocity was committed by 19 young single men from Arab nations. If you want to hand this country over to terrorists, why don’t you say it right out front? We don’t have to worry about 80-year-old ladies with bleach-blonde hair and southern accents.”

Right on the money.

“Steve Mustapha Elturk, an imam in Troy, Mich., said he would welcome a ban on racial profiling. He said U.S. authorities have detained him four times since Sept. 11, 2001 — twice at the Canadian border and twice while traveling by air — even though he has done nothing wrong.”

Shouldn’t the government go after potential terrorists? He should be spending his time condemning Osama and the terrorists, something no Muslim is able to do without being thrown out of their mosque.

“It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated. This is not the country I came to know.”

Yes, you may be interrogated, but it doesn’t violate your rights to make sure you aren’t a terrorist. Be angry at the terrorists instead.

“Eric Blum, a Customs and Border Protection spokesman, said that while he couldn’t comment on specific cases, the agency does not use racial profiling.”

That’s because there is no such thing. Customs is only checking to make sure we aren’t dealing with terrorists.

“However, we will scrutinize cargo and individuals coming from high-risk countries — no matter what your nationality. People can also be detained if their name matches one on a watch list.”

I’m glad they’re checking, because we cannot allow a terrorist to enter the country. I’m not going to criticize any interrogations to protect against terrorism. However, if somebody is jailed when they turn out not to be a terrorist or other criminal, that is unacceptable.

Bush’s Health Care and Energy plans being criticized, for wrong reasons

January 28, 2007


Lets start from the top on this article.

“President Bush brushed aside criticism of his new health care plan as “reflexive” partisanship and urged the Democratic-led Congress to work with him on the issue.”

Of course, this new Health Care plan is appeasement to prevent the liberals from passing Socialized Health Care under the misnomer Universal Health Care. So, who’s criticizing this plan and for what reasons?

“The president’s proposal, to offer tax breaks to people to encourage them to buy health insurance on their own while taxing some with employer-provide health coverage, has received a chilly reception from Democratic lawmakers, labor unions and some consumer groups.”

Well, Democratic lawmakers are liberals. Labor unions are cartels that undermine workers while pretending to be working for them and are often backed by organized crime. Some consumer groups obviously means liberal consumer groups.

“But Bush, who unveiled his plan in his State of the Union address on Tuesday, said that he has spoken to some Senate Democrats who seemed willing to open discussions.”

Well, of course there are Democrats willing to open discussions. Bush’s plan is something a liberal would propose. So what does Bush have to say on the issue?

“While some members gave a reflexive partisan response, I was encouraged that others welcomed this opportunity to reach across the aisle.”

Bush finally has something right. The Democrats who have been talking about “bipartisanship” are nothing more than hypocrites.

“Bush’s proposal would provide a new tax deduction of $15,000 per family and $7,500 for individuals who purchase private health insurance.”

All that amounts to is a further subsidy for the health insurance industry, which is absolutely unacceptable. Insurance is a waste of money. Don’t believe that one? Then, where does the money come from for the Insurance company to pay for your health care? If you never purchase health insurance, you are going to come out ahead in the long run and you won’t take unnecessary visits to the doctor.

“But families with employer-provided health plans that exceed the $15,000 cap would for the first time face a tax on some of their benefits.”

And thats a bad thing, because? How is health insurance untaxed while income, which is of far greater value, is taxed at exorbitant rates?

“The president said the plan would make health insurance more affordable to the 47 million people who lack coverage while discouraging the purchase of “gold-plated” health insurance that drives up costs throughout the system.”

Do those 47 million who don’t have Health Insurance want it? I doubt it. Bush appears to be onto something here. Health Insurance is driving up health care costs and that’s why the medical community wants to subsidize health insurance so much.

“Critics say Bush’s approach would not help enough of the uninsured and would undermine employer-provided coverage that is a mainstay of the U.S. health system.”

One of those is a valid criticism. Bush’s plan will not help any of the uninsured because insurance harms, not helps. However, I want to see it undermine employer-provided coverage. Without health insurance, medical costs would go into a downward spiral. So let’s eliminate Health Insurance in our lifetimes. We might just save lives in the process.

“Bush also used his radio address to pitch another State of the Union initiative — his call for a large increase in the use of renewable fuels over the next decade.”

Bush wants to encourage increased use of overpriced renewable fuels? Has he lost his mind or has he merely joined the Church of Environmentalism? I’m going with the former. Renewable fuels is an “solution” to the non-existant problem of climate change, better known as global warming that the Church of Environmentalism has invented.

“Bush set a goal of a five-fold increase in the use of ethanol and said his aim was that by 2017, it would displace about 15 percent of gasoline made from crude oil.”

I don’t think ethanol’s ever going to be adopted, unless there is government coercion to force people to purchase it, instead of the much more affordable gasoline. Apparently, the Church knows this and is preparing to use its favorite tactic, EPA regulations.

“The president’s energy initiatives have been less controversial than the health proposal, but many Democrats have urged stronger action, such as mandatory caps on carbon emissions, to address climate change.”

So, the Dems think he isn’t going far enough? Climate Change does not need to be addressed, because it does not exist. Mandatory caps on carbon emissions would just make cars more expensive. Next time the gas prices increase, make sure you lynch mob the Church of Environmentalism instead of innocent Exxon Mobil.

America about to go to war with Iran

January 27, 2007


Proving they haven’t learned anything from the Iraq Disaster, Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the NeoCons are about to attack Iran. Iran is a larger and more populated nation than Iraq, not to mention one with far superior technology to that 80s scrap that Saddam had. According to the CIA World Factbook, Iraq consists of 437,072 sq km and has a population of 26,783,383. By comparison, Iran consists of 1.648 million sq km with a population of 68,688,433. Iran’s population is concentrated more in men of military age than Iraq (the median age in Iran is 24-25, while its 19-20 in Iraq; also about 70% of Iranians are 14-64, while a mere 50% or so of Iraqi are the same age).

Considering how overstressed our military already is (PBS has reported that they routinely send mentally ill soldiers back to Iraq because of manpower shortages), how can we expect to win in Iran? The obvious answer is that the draft is coming back. Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY15) has repeatedly campaigned (see his Wikipedia page) to bring back the draft. The draft, as should be fairly obvious, is slavery (see this website).

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” – the 13th Amendment

Obviously, the draft is blatantly illegal based on the 13th Amendment. If you’re eligible for the draft, be sure to check out this website. Unlike the NFL draft, this draft is one you don’t want to be selected in.

If Bush and Cheney follow through with their Iran War, Congress should, as the article I linked suggested, impeach both of them immediately. While I don’t really want Mrs. Pelosi to be president, at least we’d no longer have Bush and Cheney and their attempts to stick our nation in the middle of a Holy War between the 2 sects of Islam. If Osama and Ahmadinejad are busy fighting each other, they won’t be able to attack us. That is why we should pull out of the Middle East.

Microsoft’s Competitors whining again

January 26, 2007


You probably remember the Anti-Trust lawsuit against Microsoft about 5 years ago. Well, their competitors are at it again. The Linux companies are whining to the socialist regulatory agencies in Europe about supposedly unfair practices involving Microsoft’s Windows Vista product. For some background, a few years ago, these stupid commies found that Microsoft

“used its dominance to muscle out RealNetworks and other makers of audio and video streaming software and that it made its desktop Windows deliberately incompatible with rivals’ server software.”

Have you ever used RealPlayer? It was this crappy Windows Media Player-like program. Consumers chose Windows Media because it was far superior, which is the dominance they speak of. The other claim, that Windows was incompatible with their server software may well have been true, but it isn’t too difficult to make your program compatible with the operating system. If I make a word processor for Windows, do I have the right to sue Apple because it doesn’t work on a Mac? According to these morons, I would have that right. Well, now let’s consider the new claims.

“The group, which includes IBM, Nokia, Sun Microsystems, Adobe, Oracle and Red Hat, said its complaints made last year are yet to be addressed just days before Vista is due for release.”

Let’s examine some of these companies. IBM is a computer manufacturer, Nokia is a cell phone company, Sun is a maker of Windows rival Linux, Adobe is one of Microsoft’s competitors in the graphics/photography/publishing software industries, Oracle is a competitor of Microsoft’s in the webserver industry, and Red Hat is a Linux maker. These are basically Microsoft’s competitors. However, notice the most notable name not on the list. Apple, makers of the Mac computers, isn’t making such a claim.

“”Microsoft has clearly chosen to ignore the fundamental principles of the Commission’s March 2004 decision,” said Simon Awde, chairman of the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS).”

Now what are those? I didn’t see any “fundamental principles” in that decision. Microsoft wasn’t engaged in organized crime activities. Who is this Simon Awde anyway? It says he’s a chairman of a “European Committee for Interoperable Systems.” I don’t know what that is, but it sounds like a Marxist agency. Now what are they claiming Microsoft is doing?

“Vista is the first step of Microsoft’s strategy to extend its market dominance to the Internet”

OK, so Microsoft is trying to expand its market dominance to the Internet. Isn’t that what a business is supposed to do? How is Microsoft going to achieve this perfectly normal and acceptable goal?

“(ECIS) said Microsoft’s XAML markup language was “positioned to replace HTML,” the industry standard for publishing documents on the Internet. XAML would be dependent on Windows, and discriminatory against systems such as
Linux, the group said.”

So Microsoft wants to replace the HTML language that is underneath all websites with a new language, XAML? Good for them. If the market decides that this XAML is better than HTML that’s a good thing for consumers. The claim that it will be dependent on Windows is crazy, because all they’d have to do is update their web browsers to read XAML. Well, what other crap are these Marxists claiming?

“It said a so-called “open XML” platform file format, known as OOXML, is designed to run seamlessly only on the Microsoft Office platform. It governs the way a document is formatted and stored.”

Is that so? This OOXML will only run seamlessly on Microsoft Office. Microsoft’s competitors can easily adopt this format for their own programs if consumers choose it. Currently, Word Processors use some format that is highly protected so that it can’t be easily translated. XML is a programming language that is easy to translate for other programs. This OOXML is actually an improvement.

“The end result will be the continued absence of any real consumer choice, years of waiting for Microsoft to improve — or even debug — its monopoly products and of course high prices.”

OK, so Microsoft has a monopoly on computer software and charges high prices. That sure explains the switch en mass from Internet Explorer to Mozilla Firefox and other alternative web browsers when Microsoft didn’t improve or debug Internet Explorer for years. If Microsoft’s products are not adequately improved, consumers will switch or stick with what they have. If Microsoft put the current Microsoft Word in a new box and changed the name, that doesn’t mean that people who already have the current version of Word would buy it. In fact, just the opposite is true. People would realize that it isn’t improved and not buy it. As for claims of high prices, that’s the pot calling the kettle black, when you’ve got Adobe making that claim against Microsoft. Adobe products are priced at hundreds of dollars while the Microsoft products tend to be much more reasonably priced.

“Other complainants in the group include Corel, RealNetworks , Linspire and Opera.”

So the other complainants include the maker of a competing word processor, the maker of a competing music player, a Linux Distributor who previously violated Microsoft’s trademark rights and a competitor in the web browser market. This is sounding more and more like a lynch mobbing.

“On some fronts, however, complaints were resolved. Microsoft announced earlier this month concerns raised by security companies such as Symantec and McAfee had been dealt with.”

So Microsoft resolved concerns of antivirus makers Symantec and McAfee. What were these concerns?

“Those companies had said Vista would deny them access to the heart of the operating system, which they needed to protect it from certain kinds of malicious software. After negotiations, Microsoft said it would provide information the firms needed.”

These companies actually had reasonable concerns, as they do need access to the heart of the operating system for antivirus software. This goes to show you that Microsoft is willing to meet reasonable demands.

“Microsoft has challenged the Commission’s 2004 decision, which included a record fine of nearly 500 million euros ($649.4 million) and orders to change its business practices. It awaits a decision by the EU’s Court of First Instance.”

As well they should. This being a European court case, I have doubts that Microsoft will get justice in this case. Even though there is absolutely no case against them, the lynch mob isn’t going to give up that easy.

My stances on the issues

January 26, 2007

I’m going to use this first post to describe my stances on the issues for background purposes.

Handouts – Absolutely none; they provide an excuse for lazy people not to work and are nothing more than legalized theft

Economic Regulation – No economic regulations; they raise prices and are unneccessary because businesses do not profit from ripping off customers anyways

Health Care Reform – Get the government and employers out of Health Care and cut or eliminate health insurance coverage; prices will drop and more life saving drugs will be brought to the market quicker without the FDA standing in their way

Education Reform – Adopt school vouchers in the short term, privatize all public schools long term, repeal all mandatory school attendance / child labor laws, and remove all homeschooling restrictions; School vouchers will force schools to improve or lose their students, privatizing public schools should eliminate political agendas and allow the schools to focus on education, not spreading liberal, conservative, or green propaganda; allowing children to choose to work instead of going to school will allow the Ben Franklins and Thomas Edisons of the current young generation and future young generations to work as those men did in their childhoods instead of being bored in school and eliminating home schooling restrictions would encourage more parents to educate their own kids, which has been proven time and again achieves better results than any schools, even when the parents don’t know the material

Voting Rights – Drop the voting age to 13; 13 was traditionally regarded as the age of adulthood and 13 years olds only became the stereotypical irresponsible deviants of today when the introduction of high schools in the early 20th century slowed or prevented their maturity.  They’re qualified to make political decisions, especially in a country where 2 parties that agree with each other and pretend to disagree can actually convince most people that they’re opposed to each other.

Discrimination – Eliminate all forms of discrimination, including “affirmative action” and “equal opportunity” laws; people should be judged solely by their ability and nothing else should be considered, employers who discriminate will lose a better employee as a result.

Immigration – Protect our borders, but eliminate quotas on legal immigration; Because of a century of incompetant presidents, we’ve made many enemies overseas.  A free people cannot allow socialists, Islamists, fascists, and other anti-freedom groups to immigrate, so we should have an immigration board that allows all freedom-loving immigrants to come to America, while turning away all of those who would take out freedom.

Iraq – The Iraq War is just another failed attempt by a Western leader to take over the (Middle) East and we should pull out and let the Sunnis and Shias kill each other.  We should find some way to utilize our military for our defense, rather than nation building.

National Debt – Pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution along with a National Debt amendment requiring that the debt (currently at about $30,000 a person) be paid back in 15 years.

Taxes – Eliminate the income tax gradually, eliminate death and employment taxes immediately and ensure that no future taxes discriminate against the wealthy; By eliminating the IRS-run income tax over 15 years, the National Debt can be paid off.  Death taxes are highly immoral as it is rephrehensible to tax the deceased.  Employment taxes are a hidden tax which is paid by everybody who is employed and their employer.  The employment tax either depresses wages or increases prices, perpetuating poverty.  The Income tax and other so-called “Progressive” taxes discriminate against the wealthy by overbilling them.  It is wrong to tax a poor person 15% while you tax a wealthy person 55%.  An amendment would be neccesary to repeal the 16th Amendment (better known as the Income Tax Amendment) and it should include a ban on “Progressive” tax schemes as well as repealing the income tax.

Drug Policy – End the War on Drugs and legalize all drugs, but tax them heavily just like alcohol and tobacco; The War on Drugs is as big of a failure as Prohibition was.  It has made criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens and enables organized crime groups such as street gangs and the Mafia to survive.  By legalizing and taxing, drug addicts would be able to continue their habits without creating crime, leaving everybody else alone.   Government will never reform the drug addicts, so its a waste of time to try to do so.

Sexuality – Repeal laws regarding consensual sex; What people do in their bedrooms should be their own business, not the government’s.  Laws against forced sex should remain on the books and be enforced, provided that it can be proven.  Statutory Rape laws should be modified to allow for a defense of consent.

Crime – Require the victim’s permission to prosecute criminal cases; Except in cases of murder, the victim should be able to decide whether or not to press charges.  In cases of murder, the victim’s family should be given the choice of whether to press charges, unless the victim has no family, in which case, the police would be allowed to make the decision.

Junk Lawsuits – Fine people who file frivolous lawsuits that have no realistic chance of success; Such junk lawsuits waste the court’s time and drive up costs.  The Medical industry is particularly hit hard by such junk lawsuits.  The Entertainment industry is the other popular victim.  Junk lawsuits blaming corporations for a crime some idiot commits are as big a waste as “Medical Malpractice” crap.

Censorship – Eliminate all censorship immediately; If somebody doesn’t like it, they don’t have to look.  If enough people are offended, the supposedly objectionable work will be eliminated economically.

Separation of Church and State – Protect the separation of Church and State, while prohibiting stupid anti-10 Commandments lawsuits; The Separation of Church and State means that the government cannot name an official religion or prohibit a religion.  This principle should be used equally against Christian Extremists who want to make their selective interpretation of the Bible into law and anti-Christian Atheists who want to eliminate 10 Commandment monuments and Nativity Scenes.

Global Warming – No Government Intervention; Global Warming is an unproven claim made by a lobby (Environmentalism) that is known for its dishonesty (see the anti-DDT Crusade which is now acknowledged to be fraudulent and the 70s Global Cooling panic) and should not be taken seriously.  If there is such a thing as global warming, it is a natural event.  1000 years ago, the Medieval Warm Period started and the Little Ice Age started 500 years ago, so its probably just a Modern Warm Period.  Al Gore and other alarmists are free to start a corporation if they feel something must be done about global warming.

Environmental Regulations – Repeal all EPA regulations, eliminate endangered species lists, and repeal all “Open Space” laws; Environmental regulations slow the economy, endangered species laws protect creatures that damage crops from being controlled, and “Open Space” laws drive up housing prices.

Property Rights – Strengthen property rights by repealing zoning laws and restricting eminent domain; Zoning laws violate the right to property (which, along with life and liberty, is one of the 3 basic rights as defined by Locke) by restricting what one may do with that which is theirs and eminent domain is an excuse for the government to cheat landowners and should be highly restricted (only for legitimate government use and the owner should recieve the appraised value of their property).