The Medical Establishment’s Military Doping

During the war in Vietnam, the use of illicit drugs like marijuana and heroin by U.S. military personnel deployed overseas was no secret, as young men were sent to a strange land where the substances were readily available in the midst of a brutal and traumatic conflict.

A new drug-related issue affects soldiers deployed to combat zones. This time, the “pusher” is not always a foreign drug dealer eager to capitalize on new customers, but rather doctors within the medical establishment back home.  As more and more American service members face longer deployments wherein they are faced with evermore brutal realities, the medical establishment has demonstrated no whims in mass doping.

According to a recent report by The Los Angeles Times, more than 110,000 active-duty Army troops were taking prescription cocktails on a daily basis with ingredients ranging from prescribed antidepressants, narcotics, sedatives, antipsychotics, anti-anxiety drugs and amphetamines. About 8 percent of active duty Army personnel are taking sedatives and 6 percent antidepressants — eight times more than in 2005.

“We have never medicated our troops to the extent we are doing now… And I don’t believe the current increase in suicides and homicides in the military are a coincidence,” said Bart Billings, a former military psychologist who hosts an annual conference on combat stress.

When service members break under psychological stress and commit suicide or go on shooting rampages, defense lawyers often argue the the soldiers have become the victim of major stress and improper medication.  The most recent case is that of Sgt. Robert Bales, the soldier accused of 17 counts of premeditated murder resulting from a nighttime shooting rampage in Afghanistan. Bale’s lawyer recently told The Associated Press that his client had been under treatment for severe anxiety and depression and dealt with pains from past physical injuries for which he also received medication.

Some critics of medicating U.S. service members to the extent that the Defense Department is allowing in order to hold on to manpower as wars perpetuate, say it is being done at high cost to the troops. Suicides compounded by about 80 percent among troops between 2004 and 2008, and a rise in addiction to narcotics is also a growing concern.

Black Panthers Want Blood, Battles

Racial tension in the United States has remained heightened on the heels of the shooting of Trayvon Martin and the emotionally charged and often inaccurate reporting of the still enigmatic incident by the mainstream media.

During the coverage of the Martin case, mainstream media repeatedly aired video of New Black Panther Party members, one of whom, Mikhail Muhammad, even claimed that the NBPP had placed a $10,000 bounty on Martin’s shooter, George Zimmerman.  When asked whether he was inciting violence, Muhammad proclaimed: “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”

The group also called for the mobilization of 10,000 black men to capture the Hispanic Zimmerman.

On Monday, the Party began what is apparently one of a series of national “days of action” that the NBPP in the United States wants to organize. Though the plan of action Monday included peaceful protests and boycotts, there have been cries for violence against nonblack Americans by the organization. NBPP leaders claim they want to completely remove capitalism because they believe it breeds racism.

The leaders say the following in a recent video call to action:

Time to get booted up and suited up for this race war we’re in, the things that are about to happen to these crackers, these honkeys. […]

We gotta go do it, we have to cross the red sea, not some sea in Middle East part of the world, we’re talking about some blood, go through some blood, some battles. There are those who wish they could stand in this hour to see the destruction of the devil’s world, not some dude under the ground with a pitchfork, I’m talking about blond haired, blue eyed sometimes brown eyed Caucasian walking around.

Listen to the full call to action below:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3F3iUk1RrQ&w=560&h=315]
The party also releases a periodical with Black Panther news and updates. The Spring 2012 edition is named after a speech given by activist Malcolm X in 1964, “The Ballot or the Bullet.”

Here is an exerpt from that speech as it is printed in the issue:

You talking about civil rights, ain’t no damn civil rights. The cracka ain’t never been civil and he ain’t never been right. You talking about well, what about human rights. The cracka ain’t human and he ain’t never been right. It’s the year of The Bullet or The Bullet. You either deal or die. You either fight back or get destroyed. You either get on the right side or its genocide. It’s the year of The Bullet or The Bullet.

According to the publication, the next day of action for the NBPP is scheduled for May 19, coinciding with the birthday of Malcom X.

Trayvon Protesters Shut Down Sanford PD

The police department in Sanford, Fla., was forced to close on Monday because of a group of protesters who marched from Daytona Beach to block the department’s doors in protest of the shooting of Trayvon Martin. The 40-mile march took three days.

According to ClickOrlando, none of the 50 members of the group, who call themselves the Dream Defenders, were arrested for blocking the police department entrance.

“The city of Sanford hopes the actions of the students will be as peaceful and orderly as the previous rallies and marches have been,” said Sanford city manager Norton Bonaparte Jr.  “We want to be accommodating to all our visitors proving they act in a manner that is respectful to the people of the city.”

State Attorney Angela Corey who has been assigned as a special prosecutor in the case said on Monday that she will not use a grand jury in investigating whether George Zimmerman acted in self-defense.

Corey reportedly addressed the protesters earlier in the day, asking them for patience and ensuring them that a thorough investigation is underway.

Congress And Its Cyber Crusade

Richard Clarke, former cybersecurity adviser to the liberty-chilling George W. Bush Administration, has an idea for lawmakers who are constantly debating ways to avert cyberattacks: a sort of Internet border patrol.

In a New York Times opinion piece entitled “How China Steals Our Secrets,” Clarke espouses the idea that the biggest threat to the cybersecurity of the Federal government and American business comes from China.

Clarke’s piece was published just days after a Congressional panel heard testimony about a 10-year, $1 billion research program that was copied by hackers in a single night. U.S. Cyber Command Chief Gen. Keith B. Alexander called the crime at the time “the greatest transfer of wealth in history.”

Clarke contends that bigger attacks are on the way and warns that hackers handing secrets to the Chinese jeopardizes the Nation’s global “competitive edge.” Many private firms are already unknowingly being hacked by outside users with unauthorized access, and the next major cybercrime could already be on the horizon, according to his writing.

The author seemingly goes on to suggest that recent wildly unpopular cybersecurity bills proposed by Congress failed because of lawmaker inaction, but fails to mention the widespread public outcry against the measures. Since Congress has not moved forward with any measures, Clarke believes that the Administration of Barack Obama should step in. He urges the Administration to toss aside fears of “a negative reaction from privacy-rights and Internet-freedom advocates who do not want the government scanning Internet traffic.”

Clarke lays out a plan as follows:

Under Customs authority, the Department of Homeland Security could inspect what enters and exits the United States in cyberspace. Customs already looks online for child pornography crossing our virtual borders. And under the Intelligence Act, the president could issue a finding that would authorize agencies to scan Internet traffic outside the United States and seize sensitive files stolen from within our borders.

The author contends that privacy rights would be protected if the initiative were carried out in such a way because the President could appoint an “empowered privacy advocate” to keep DHS from abusing the power.

Clarke’s idea is still a suggestion to lawmakers at this point. But Congress is already working on several initiatives to further entwine government intelligence and the Internet.

A bill currently gaining Congressional support called CISPA, or the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (H.R. 3523), would give government officials the power to pry into the personal correspondence of anyone they choose.

The bill, introduced in the House in 2011 by Representative Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), broadly defines information that can be snooped by government agencies with the help of service providers as “information directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to a system or network.” The Electronic Freedom Foundation contends that the bill essentially hands the Internet over to the military intelligence community.

Another House cyber security bill — The Precise Act (H.R 3674), sponsored by Representative Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) — has also raised concerns among some Internet privacy advocates. Though Lungren’s initiative more narrowly defines what activities could be considered threatening, it calls for Internet service providers to monitor their subscribers’ communications.

The House has designated the week of April 23 “cyber security week,” and may vote on both aforementioned bills.

Similar bills are also currently in the Senate. One introduced in February by Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) — The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 (S. 2105) — would direct DHS to snoop information on the Internet in the same way that CISPA does. In March, Senator John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) Strengthening and Enhancing Cybersecurity by Using Research, Education, Information, and Technology Act of 2012 (S. 2151) was also introduced to the Senate. It contains cybersecurity proposals similar to the other bills mentioned.  The Senate is expected to vote on the bills in May.

The latest round of cybersecurity legislation initiatives haven’t received as much negative attention as SOPA and PIPA did earlier in the year, but technology privacy experts warn that they are just as dangerous to online privacy.

“[If] you look at most of these bills closely, you’ll see that there are extraordinarily complex civil liberties problems in virtually every one of these bills,” said Leslie Harris, president and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology.

Arby’s Has A Beef With Rush Limbaugh

What do roast beef sandwiches and politics have in common?

Nothing actually, but that has not stopped Hala Moddelmog the president of Arby’s Group, which operates the Arby’s fast-food chain, from bringing the two together. Arby’s announced last week that it would join Coca-Cola Co. in giving in to liberals’ complaints about the companies having any affiliation with conservative groups.

While Coca-Cola Co. opted to withdraw support of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a group that promotes voter ID and “stand your ground” laws, Arby’s took to Twitter to say the company would not advertise on Rush Limbaugh’s conservative talk radio show. Limbaugh reportedly claims that the company never actually was a supporter of his show.

Arby’s announcement set the wheels in motion for a conservative Twitter backlash. The restaurant’s response to the criticism was to simply block conservative tweeters, which begs the question: Does Arby’s believe that only the liberal customer is always right?

In a recent article, The Right Sphere notes that Moddelmog made campaign contributions to John Edwards, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama during the 2008 election cycle.

Walking While White: Elderly Man Beaten After Saying ‘Remember Trayvon’

Dallas Watts, a 78-year-old veteran from Toledo, Ohio, did not allow weapons in his house while his children were growing up, so he doesn’t own a firearm . But, after being beaten by six juveniles aged 11 to 17 last Saturday in the name of Trayvon Martin, he says he will buy a gun and obtain a permit.

Watts’ story is a bit ironic.

According to the Toledo Blade, the elderly man was on his way home from a convenience store at about 4:45 p.m. on Saturday with not skittles and iced tea, but two bags of pork rinds that he planned to feed his dogs for treats. It was then that he was approached by a group of  six boys, some of whom were white and some black.

Watts recounted that one of the youths pointed at him and ordered the others to “take him down,” to which Watts said he replied, “Why me? Remember Trayvon! Remember Trayvon!”

“I meant it as a peaceful way,” Watts said. “What happened to Trayvon, I was not responsible for, I live 1,000 miles away! But they kept saying, ‘Kill him! Kill Him! Kill him!’ because I’m a white man.”

The elderly man’s remark reportedly set the youths into a rage as one punched him in the back of the head knocking him to the ground, at which point he was drop-kicked in the chest. One of the boys then allegedly placed his foot on the back of Watts’ neck as another shouted, “Kill him.”

According to a police report, the boys then began kicking him ruthlessly and repeatedly and shouting, “[Get] that white [man]. This is for Trayvon … Trayvon lives, white [man]. Kill that white [man].”

When a bystander shouted at the boys, they reportedly ran away.

Of the remark about Trayvon Martin, Watts said he was simply trying to reason with the boys before they beat him.

“All I meant by saying ‘remember Trayvon’ is to remember what happened to him, don’t duplicate it here,” Watts told Toledo Blade. “The only reason I mentioned Trayvon, that was my defense, don’t pick on me. I am not your enemy.”

Only three of the juveniles have been charged in relation to the case. The 11-year-old and 17-year-old are charged with robbery and are being held by authorities. According to Fox Toledo, the third was charged with disorderly conduct. The 17-year-old was facing a previous felony assault charge stemming from a shooting that occurred March 18, according to reports. Local police are still investigating the incident.

“You don’t pick somebody’s body up off the sidewalk and let somebody else give him a lick to kick the ribs,” Watts said. “That was malicious intent. That was a hate crime and I want them punished for it!”

Watts, who is battered but expected to make a full recovery, has reportedly contacted a lawyer and is working to file hate charges with the U.S. Attorney General’s office. Toledo detectives on Wednesday, however, said that they do not believe the attack was racially motivated despite Watt’s allegations that the youths repeatedly made verbal references to his being white, according to reports.

An interview with Watts from Fox Toledo:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lmh4i-F3oZs&w=420&h=315]
 
A recent article penned by the Southern Poverty Law Center discussing the Trayvon Martin controversy declares, “Walking while black — merely being black — still seems to be a crime in this country.” And, “Black youth are seen as bad kids — ‘combatants,’ in the words of one police chief whose officers routinely mace school children as a means of discipline.”

According to Watts’ account of his ordeal, walking while white—merely being white—was his crime in the eyes of the youths who beat him. And, according to his account, for being white he was viewed as racist. But the police say “case closed” on the possibility of hate being the motivation in the attack.

It has been said by scholars who study race relations that the term “reverse racism” means nothing, as racism is racism. Perhaps in light of the recent heavy focus on race in the Nation, they should re-examine the term for a new meaning: Being viewed as a racist for simply not belonging to a minority race. Regarding the case of Martin, many people have pondered whether the story would have so captivated—and in some circles, enraged— the Nation if George Zimmerman had been portrayed as a man of white and Hispanic descent rather than simply white in initial media reports.

White, frail, elderly, bald, sporting a long beard—or as one clever commenter to an online story put it: looking nothing like Barack Obama’s could-be son—Watts will likely get little support for his hate crime charge from the same type of people who are so adamantly seeking justice for  Martin. Justice may well be blind, but often the people who demand and administer justice in America certainly are not.

Technologically Stupefied

Some recent reports about Google’s impressive and ever-evolving technology make it seem like human beings are in danger of forgetting how to do some very basic tasks using their own brainpower.

The classical Greek philosopher Socrates is said to have had a disdain for writing, because he believed that it weakened the mind’s ability to process knowledge. This form of “technology” made the tradition of passing stories down through the generations orally unnecessary. What would Socrates think about our Google-reliant society?

The Internet has undoubtedly made many people more well-informed about the world around them, but the wealth of information at the fingertips has come at a price. A recent article by Slate describes how the autocomplete features on search engines are making people increasingly worse at spelling.  And pretty soon, the tech company will have perfected a similar feature for your word processer. Gone are the days of writers slumping over mechanical typewriters and thumbing through dictionaries; pretty soon they may only have to type the first three letters or so in every word.

It isn’t just human ability to spell that is being affected by technology. Google recently released a video that highlights a set of glasses with the capability to give users directions, snap photos, log their location, talk on the phone, video chat, text message and a number of other things. The glasses almost appear to take away any need for cognition while walking around: Remember having to know how to read a map, use a camera, dial a telephone number and ask a stranger for directions, among other basic tasks, without mobile Internet? The glasses are still in the development phase.

Here is the Google ad:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c6W4CCU9M4&w=560&h=315]
 
Google has also recently released details about a car that can be operated without a driver:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdgQpa1pUUE&w=560&h=315]
 
Technology has many uses, and has made modern life extremely convenient and easy. Preppers, however, are likely wary of the consequences of people becoming too reliant on technology because of the extreme fragility of the power grid. By using technology while it’s available by collecting information on websites like Personal Liberty Digest™ and also making sure they are able to do things that many people find archaic (read a map, use a compass, communicate via radio equipment), preppers can achieve a happy balance. With the grid down, Google’s map glasses and self-driving cars would likely become spare parts in a survival scenario.

Trayvon Martin And An American Tragedy

The entire Nation is a victim in the death of Trayvon Martin.

The emotionally charged national conversation that has followed the tragic killing of Martin has turned what was the story of two individuals who crossed paths and were involved in an altercation that resulted in a death into a speculative hate-fest. The obvious surviving victims — Martin’s family and the man who pulled the trigger, George Zimmerman — might have had a chance to work out exactly what happened on the night of Feb. 26 in a Sanford, Fla., suburb without the racially charged media frenzy. That will never happen now, and every citizen of the United States, regardless of race, has become a victim in the tragedy.

Those who are at the heart of making race the central issue in the Martin case have seemingly thrown aside any semblance of fact in their discussions of why Zimmerman used lethal force against the teenager. Reporter Rene Stutzman of The Orlando Sentinel pointed this out in a recent article.

When the mainstream media initially released a picture of Martin, they chose to release a dated photo of the young man when he was of a much smaller stature. This sparked the claim: It is absurd that Zimmerman needed to use deadly force against a teenager he outweighed by 100 pounds.

Stutzman retorts: “A Sanford police incident report says Trayvon was 6 feet tall and weighed 160 pounds. A spokesman for the family’s lawyers gave a slightly different set of numbers: 6 feet 1 and 150 pounds. Zimmerman is 5 feet 9 inches tall, according to the police report, but it is silent about his weight. A family member says he currently weighs about 190 pounds. Zimmerman used to be far heavier. A 2005 police report put his weight at 250 pounds, but security camera video released last week by Sanford police show him to be much trimmer.”

Given the reporter’s information, there is little question that Martin could have inflicted the injuries visible on Zimmerman’s head and face in a recently released police surveillance video.

The reporter also addresses allegations that the Justice Department is investigating the Sanford Police Department for a long history of civil rights violations, making it plausible that the officers would have no problem letting individuals get away with hate crimes.

She writes: “Not so. Since Trayvon’s death Feb. 26, the NAACP and others have alleged widespread and long-standing civil rights abuses by the department and asked for a broad investigation. But last week, DOJ spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa and FBI spokesman Dave Couvertier told the Los Angeles Times that there’s only one civil rights investigation under way: whether Zimmerman violated Trayvon’s rights when he shot him.”

Why might a reporter in Orlando be attempting to make readers examine the facts rather than jump on the racially driven hate wagon with those who want Zimmerman hanged? Perhaps she wants to do her part to avert the widespread racial violence that is liable to break out if emotional rhetoric outweighs logical consideration of fact.

In a recent visit to the area, Jesse Jackson told protesters that Martin was shot in the back of his head. Martin was shot in the chest. And Al Sharpton also said this: “Sanford is a beautiful city. It’s on the side of the water, has great potential for tourism. You are risking going down as the Birmingham or Selma of the 21st Century.”

In Birmingham and Selma, Ala., during the struggle for civil rights in the United States, a church was bombed, killing four girls; peaceful protesters were sprayed with fire hoses and brutally beaten by police; Americans were made to use segregated facilities based on race; and the leaders of the civil rights movement were arrested and thrown in jail.

In fact, while jailed, civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. wrote “A Letter from a Birmingham Jail.” In one portion of the letter, King, to justify the actions of civil rights protestors in Birmingham at the time, writes:

In any nonviolent campaign there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self purification; and direct action. We have gone through all these steps in Birmingham.

Sharpton and his fellow race provocateurs have skipped directly to direct action in screaming injustice in the case of Martin’s death.

As the story continues to unfold, Zimmerman, who has minority heritage himself, doesn’t look like the racist he is being painted as.

 A recent article in The Daily Caller says that Zimmerman has been active in fighting injustice against minorities in the past. He reportedly was one of very few people in his community to get involved and speak out against the Sanford Police when the white son of an officer brutally beat a black homeless man and went uncharged until community members, including Zimmerman, demanded that he be held accountable.

Reason published a list of questions that people concerned about the case would be asking if race were laid aside: Who started the fight? Did Zimmerman shoot Martin “in cold blood?” Is Florida’s “stand your ground” law the reason Zimmerman has not been arrested?

The answers to those questions from people who want race to be the central issue of the case are already defined: Zimmerman started the fight. Yes, he killed Martin “in cold blood” (explaining Jackson’s erroneous claim that he was shot in the back of the head). And, the stand your ground law is acting as a get-out-of-jail -free card for a man who committed a hate crime.

The race baiters have ignored one very important fact, however. Zimmerman has not been charged in Martin’s death, though he is already long into a trial in the court of public opinion.

If race determines how the justice system will handle the case, political correctness has sealed the fate of any American who is forced to use deadly force in self-defense. Zimmerman has been forced into hiding and his life is changed forever due to the unfortunate incident. Unless you want the same fate to befall you, if you ever must use deadly force in self-defense, be sure you are of the same race as your attacker, he/she is white or you have witnesses. If not, you may become the next George Zimmerman.

Welfare, The American Dream

Government payouts — including Social Security, Medicare and unemployment checks — account for more than one-third of total wages and salaries in the United States. The Department of Agriculture reports that 43.6 million Americans are on food stamps.

The United States has effectively become a welfare Nation, with more Americans than ever before opting to completely drop out of the workforce and live on the public dole. The percentage of the Nation’s populace relying on social welfare as a primary source of income has risen from 21 percent to 35 percent in little more than a decade. In 1960, only 10 percent of Americans depended on welfare programs to survive.

While no statement can be made to define all recipients of social welfare in America, there is a growing and alarming trend among the dependent class: Living like a parasite on the public’s back has somehow become glamorized among some segments of American society.

Last month, Alexandria Pelosi (daughter of California Democratic Representative Nancy Pelosi) produced a video for HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” wherein she interviewed multiple welfare recipients in New York City. The clip, entitled “Freeloading Welfare Queen,” offers perspective about the mindset of at least some individuals who survive only as a result of the hard work of American taxpayers. Pelosi said that she did not have to go very far in New York in order to locate “freeloading welfare queens.”

The individuals interviewed for the video — most of whom appear to be able-bodied and aged between 20 and 40 — said things like, “I’m here to get some Obama bucks” and said that they could not find work because of criminal history. When asked if they were looking for work, most of the people interviewed said they were not.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2kGPdxkofo&w=560&h=315]

The people interviewed in the video who appear to be completely happy living on the government dole, even wearing their ability to get welfare as a badge of honor, may also explain a more recent welfare news item. A nightclub in Montgomery, Ala., recently announced that it would be hosting a “Food Stamp Friday” event, allowing patrons on food stamps to attend a rap concert at a discounted price. Public outcry since news of the event broke has made the nightclub’s owner encourage Young, Black & GettinMoney Promotions and No Lunch Promotions, to rename the planned event.

The idea of food stamps being used for fun is actually not the brainchild of the enterprising promoters of the event in Alabama, as Republicans in the House of Representatives only recently worked to enact legislation that would ban the use of welfare money at strip clubs and casinos throughout the Nation.

If freeloaders bragging at the welfare office and “Food Stamp Friday” are not convincing enough evidence that the United States is becoming an entitlement society, consider recent stories about some more grandiose welfare recipients. Nadya Suleman ( aka Octomom), who — despite already having six children and financial problems — decided to be implanted with embryos which resulted in her giving birth to eight more children, has applied for food stamps in the State of California. Suleman will receive about $2,000 per month in taxpayer funding to feed her children.

There are also a number of reports of lottery winners throughout the country continuing to draw welfare benefits after receiving big winnings. Michigan resident Amanda Clayton sparked an outcry in her State after winning a $1 million jackpot and continuing to draw welfare benefits.

“I thought that they would cut me off, but since they didn’t I thought maybe it was OK because I’m not working. I feel that it’s OK because I have no income, and I have bills to pay. I have two houses,” she explained to a reporter.

Michigan officials have since cut Clayton off the public dole. Her case, however, may offer credence to what many critics of welfare have said for decades: Entitlement perpetuates poverty by removing initiative from the equation. Despite winning a large lottery jackpot and having the opportunity to create a new life for herself, Clayton saw no stigma associated with being a parasite to American taxpayers and continued to feel entitled to her food stamps.

The bulwark of American social welfare programs was put into place as a result of the hard times of the Great Depression. According to Jerry D. Marx, Ph.D., a professor at University of New Hampshire Social Work Department, social welfare programs that were created by the Federal government were largely put into place by a bureaucracy that feared joblessness and widespread poverty would spark a revolution in the country.  Social welfare made citizens of the United States more comfortable, and anger at the government subsided. Now, more than 80 years later, social welfare has become a way of life for many Americans while large factions of groups like Occupy Wall Street are calling for more government assistance. Everybody wants to live the leisurely life of the Freeloading Welfare Queen, and politicians like President Barack Obama will give the people what they want. Anything to keep them fat, happy and subservient.

Michelle Obama Tells Kids To Campaign

First lady Michelle Obama spends a great deal of time pushing healthy eating and her Let’s Move campaign on American children by making appearances on commercials and television shows aimed at younger audiences. Now she has a new message for youngsters: Get out and tell your grandparents to vote for my husband.

According to Breitbart.com, the first lady was speaking at a $500 per ticket fundraising event at San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park when she said:

I mean, I can’t tell you in the last election how many grandparents I ran into who said, I wasn’t going to vote for Barack Obama until my grandson talked to me, until my great-grandson talked to me, and talked about the future he wanted for this country.

You can get out there with your parents. You guys can knock on doors. I had one young lady who brought me a petition — she’s already working. You can convince wrong people. Sometimes we don’t listen to ourselves, but we will listen to our children.

Obama Calls GOP Budget ‘Social Darwinism’

President Barack Obama criticized House Republicans and Representative Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) for the GOP budget proposal that the President likened to Social Darwinism.

“It’s nothing but thinly veiled Social Darwinism. It’s antithetical to our entire history as a land of opportunity and upward mobility for everyone who’s willing to work for it, a place where prosperity doesn’t trickle down from the top, but grows outward from the heart of the middle class.”

The President also called the budget a “Trojan horse” that would be used to force radical change in the United States.

Ryan’s budget passed in the House last Thursday in a 228-191 party-line vote, setting the stage for an election-year battle with Democrats on spending and the debt. The budget aims to cut $5 trillion more than Obama’s budget proposal and would create a “premium support” option for future Medicare recipients.

 
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivUX2v7-W_4&w=420&h=315]

Paul: Republicans Need To Be Saved From Themselves

Republicans and Democrats seemingly have very little ideological difference when it comes to the destruction of liberties in the United States, at least according to GOP Presidential candidate Ron Paul.

Appearing on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday, Paul made it clear that he believes that Republicans are destroying their own party by adopting the same big government ideals as Democrats when it comes to babysitting the world and stealing away individual liberty in the name of safety.

“The truth is, I’m trying to save the Republican Party from themselves because they want perpetual wars; they don’t care about Presidents who assassinate American citizens; they don’t care about searching our houses without search warrants,” Paul said.

A recent poll conducted by The New York Times and CBS makes it appear as though many voters agree with Paul when it comes to disdain for the continual war and world policing policies that have been adopted by Republicans and Democrats alike. The poll found that opposition to the war in Afghanistan has jumped from 53 percent four months ago to 69 percent today.

The opposition comes from both sides of the political spectrum. While Republicans are more inclined to support the war, 60 percent say it is going badly and just 30 percent say that American troops should remain in the country.

Paul said in a recent speech to the House of Representatives that if the United States fails to remove troops from Afghanistan by the end of the year, he predicts they will remain for another decade.

In the candidate’s view, Americans who voted for President Barack Obama in hopes of seeing a change in the foreign policy practices of the George W. Bush Administration got fleeced by Obama and are likely to see no change after November even if Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich beat the incumbent.

Paul said that as long as Republicans run on trying to “out-militarize” Democrats, issues facing the Nation such as the soaring national debt are only going to compound.

“I think the Republicans have dug a hole for themselves because they’re trying to out-militarize [the Democrats]. If this is to be an issue, the other Republican candidates offer nothing more than a continuation of the status quo, or actually, increasing the militarism that we have around the world,” he said.

Supreme Court: If You’re Arrested, You Should Be Strip Searched

As bureaucracy in the United States grows, it is becoming harder and harder to avoid a run-in with law enforcement because of some minor infraction; due to a recent Supreme Court ruling, you will likely be strip searched if you do have one.

The Nation’s highest court ruled on Monday by a 5-4 vote that law enforcement officials may strip search any individual who is arrested, regardless of criminal record or severity of offense.

The Justices opined that courts are in no position to scrutinize the judgments of correctional officials who must consider the possibility of smuggled weapons and drugs, identify public health issues and try to collect information about gang affiliations of individuals who are booked.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said it would be “unworkable” to make an exception for people who are arrested for minor offenses because county jails often must process hundreds of new inmates a day.

The case was brought to the Supreme Court by Albert Florence, who was arrested by mistake in 2005 because of a bench warrant issued for a fine he had paid years earlier. Despite having documentation of compliance with the court, a New Jersey state trooper arrested Florence during a routine traffic stop as his wife and child watched. Florence then spent seven days in jail. Florence was reportedly strip searched at two separate jails, despite there being no evidence that he had any contraband or violent behaviors. Florence sued and was granted a summary judgment, but the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s decision.

North Carolina ‘Emergency Powers’ Gun Ban Axed

The Second Amendment Foundation secured a victory in North Carolina for gun rights last week when a Federal judge did away with a rule that gave the State power to ban firearms and ammunition outside the home during a declared emergency.

The case, Bateman v. Purdue, was brought by the Second Amendment Foundation, Grass Roots North Carolina FFE and three individual plaintiffs against Governor Beverly Purdue and Reuben F. Young, secretary of the State’s Department of Crime Control and Public Safety.

Federal Judge Malcolm J. Howard ruled that “the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not strictly limited to the home environment but extends in some form to wherever those activities or needs occur.”

“Under the laws at issue here, citizens are prohibited from engaging, outside their home, in any activities secured by the Second Amendment,” Judge Malcolm wrote in his opinion. “They may not carry defensive weapons outside the home, hunt or engage in firearm related sporting activities. Additionally, although the statutes do not directly regulate the possession of firearms within the home, they effectively prohibit law abiding citizens from purchasing and transporting to their homes firearms and ammunition needed for self-defense. As such, these laws burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment.”  

Hide Your Valuables, The Feds Are Coming

The Administration of Barack Obama recently released the details of an executive order (National Defense Resource Preparedness) that has led some Americans to believe that the President is working to put the final mechanisms in place to enact martial law in the United States.

The order calls for government acquisition of resources and the ability of the government to “foster cooperation between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development and for acquisition of materials, services, components, and equipment to enhance industrial base efficiency and responsiveness” if it is deemed vital to national security interests.

The blog Lonestar Watchdog, in a recent post, raises new concerns about the President’s executive order: Can it be used to confiscate American citizens’ gold, silver and other valuables?

The author writes:

To speak hypothetically of a possible scenario that I would not put past Obama to try to pull. We can see again that the government is going to run out of money. This time congress is less reluctant to give in to the President’s wishes this time around. The dollar might fully collapse at a time they did not plan for in their timetable. It can be a fabricated crisis. Congress can refuse to raise the debt ceiling this time due to public pressure. Anything the President perceives as a national emergency, or does he need the money to fund the wars. He can enact the powers of these executive orders to go after anything.

We can see a phony crisis being concocted to go after the American’s people gold, maybe even silver. He will order people like back when FDR was President to seize all safety deposit boxes and demand American to turn in their gold and silver coins, jewelry and would not surprise me if that be a couple’s wedding rings now required to be surrendered this time around.

It is unknown whether the author is correct in being concerned that the Federal government will use such measures in an outright effort to confiscate individuals’ physical gold and silver investments. What is known is that the elite have been quietly confiscating wealth from hardworking Americans via currency debasement and wealth-redistributing social welfare programs for decades. Bob Livingston has been warning his readers about this for more than 40 years with newsletters (The Bob Livingston Letter™), books and websites. If you are interested in finding out how you can protect your wealth from the Federal government and the elite banksters, you can find a collection of Livingston’s most informative titles here.

Scalia Makes Obamacare Jokes

If his quips during the oral arguments over the Constitutionality of President Barack Obama’s healthcare plan are any indicator, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia likely thinks the whole thing is a ridiculous mess.

In discussions about how the Court could decide which portions of the 2,700-page healthcare document couldn’t stand up to the test of Constitutionality, Scalia told Obama lawyer Edwin Kneedler that making the Justices read the entire document would violate their 8th Amendment rights.

Scalia said, “Mr. Kneedler, what happened to the Eighth Amendment? You really want us to go through these 2,700 pages? And do you really expect the Court to do that? Or do you expect us to — to give this function to our law clerks? Is this not totally unrealistic? That we are going to go through this enormous bill item by item and decide each one?”

Scalia also took on the Administration’s counsel on Tuesday, taking a moment to lecture Obama lawyer Donald Verrilli Jr. about the savvy of American consumers.

The transcript of the exchange:

SCALIA: These people are not stupid. They’re going to buy insurance later. They’re young and need the money now.

VERRILLI: But that’s –

SCALIA: When they think they have a substantial risk of incurring high medical bills, they’ll buy insurance, like the rest of us.

VERRILLI: But that’s — that’s –

SCALIA: — I don’t know why you think that they’re never going to buy it.

VERRILLI: That’s the problem, Justice Scalia. That’s — and that’s exactly the experience that the States had that made the imposition of guaranteed issue and community rating not only be ineffectual but be highly counterproductive. Rates, for example, in New Jersey doubled or tripled, went from 180,000 people covered in this market down to 80,000 people covered in this market. In Kentucky, virtually every insurer left the market.

And the reason for that is because when people have that guarantee of — that they can get insurance, they’re going to make that calculation that they won’t get it until they’re sick and they need it. And so, the pool of people in the insurance market gets smaller and smaller. The rates you have to charge to cover them get higher and higher. It helps fewer and fewer — insurance covers fewer and fewer people until the system ends.

This is not a situation in which you’re conscripting — you’re forcing insurance companies to cover very large numbers of unhealthy people —

SCALIA: You could solve that problem by simply not requiring the insurance company to sell it to somebody who has a — a condition that is going to require medical treatment, or at least not – not require them to sell it to him at a rate that he sells it to healthy people. But you don’t want to do that.

According to SCOTUSblog, the Court will render a decision regarding Obamacare by June 28.

Below is the audio for the Supreme Court’s Obamacare hearings from this week:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS6Snu0qMsw&w=420&h=315]

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze9k20OZc3s&w=560&h=315]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA_RLb7Si_g&w=420&h=315]

In NYC Second Amendment Rights Sell For $340

New York City residents who challenged a policy that requires handgun owners in the city to pay a $340 residential licensing fee as unConstitutional were shot down by a Federal judge on Monday.

Federal Judge John Koeltl ruled that the lawsuit brought by citizens and gun rights advocates, including the New York Rifle & Pistol Association and the Second Amendment Foundation, was void because he believes there is no evidence that the hefty fee has stopped anyone from exercising his rights. The fee must be paid every three years, according to The Associated Press.

“The city defendants contend that the $340 fee is permissible under this standard because it is designed to defray, and does not exceed, the costs of administering New York’s handgun licensing scheme,” Koeltl wrote in his 38-page Opinion and Order. “However, the plaintiffs argue that, to be permissible, a fee must not only be designed to defray administrative costs but must also be a ‘nominal’ amount. According to the plaintiffs, the $340 fee is too high to be nominal.”

The judge cited several appellate court rulings that determined such a fee is considered nominal, according to Courthouse News Service.

“While it is possible to conceive of fees that are impermissible because they are so exorbitant as to deter the exercise of the protected activity … there is no showing that the $340 handgun licensing fee qualifies as such a fee,” Koeltl wrote. “The plaintiffs merely assert that the $340 fee is excessive, which is not sufficient to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding the permissibility of the fee.”

The residential license affords holders the right to have a handgun in their homes; it is not a carry permit.

Paul Campaign Has Organizational Muscle

The political establishment has done everything in its power to negate Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul, but he is still the first of the GOP candidates to have his name on the ballot in all 50 States.

Paul’s campaign filed to appear on the ballot in New Jersey on Tuesday after attaining double the 1,000 signatures required to appear on that State’s ballot. Paul is now the first candidate to have full ballot access throughout the Nation. Mitt Romney is expected to file in New Jersey in the coming days, making his 50-State ballot access likely.

The Paul campaign contends that the candidate’s success in being included in all States before any of the other candidates is a testament to organization and devotion among the supporters.

“Success in accessing ballots no matter a state’s requirements is a barometer for the strength of a campaign organization. Being first to appear on the ballot in all fifty states proves that Ron Paul is the only candidate with the organizational muscle, resources, and stamina to challenge Mitt Romney for the Republican nomination,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Manager John Tate. “In concert with our delegate-attainment strategy, which is working well in states like Iowa, Nevada, Washington, and Missouri, we’re prepared and eager to continue on the long road to Tampa.”

Though Romney is not far behind Paul in having his name listed on every State ballot, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have both failed to meet filing requirements to be on some ballots throughout the primary. Gingrich and Santorum both failed to be listed on Virginia’s ballot for the March 6 vote, and Santorum is not on the ballot for Washington, D.C., where the primary will be held on April 3.

DHS Employees Unsatisfied With Work Environment

Imagine a career that gave you the opportunity to spend each and every day working to thwart a nameless, faceless enemy that you are told by your superiors is an immediate threat to your safety, culture and way of life. Now imagine if much of the population believed that you and your agency were the real threat to the American lifestyle. Welcome to a career at the Department of Homeland Security.

According to reports, morale within the ranks of the Federal government agency designed to protect Americans from perceived threats in a post-9/11 United States has been in bad shape since 2004. That year, a White House-sponsored survey showed that 56 percent of the agency’s employees said they were satisfied with their jobs, compared to 68 percent for government employees overall, according to Federal Computer Week.

Last Thursday, Congress heard testimony from the DHS Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations and Management focused on the ongoing interagency battle with low employee morale. From the testimony lawmakers learned that DHS employees were averagely satisfied with the rate of pay they receive, but had less positive attitudes about the work they do. Subcommittee chairman Representative Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said that while the employees generally believe in their mission, they are unhappy with the leadership within the agency.

The Washington Post reports DHS has put into place a three-pronged strategy to address management and workforce issues, according to Catherine Emerson, DHS’ chief human capital officer. The first aspect mandates that all top officials prioritize employee engagement. The second element promotes better employee communication, training and employee recognition. The third part strengthens the leadership skills among DHS management.

Photo With Gingrich: $50

A few times since the Republican Presidential primary began, people have speculated that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s goal in running was not ever to win the office, but rather to bolster his public presence. A new report may lend credence to the speculation.

According to Daily Mail, at speaking engagements throughout the country, the enterprising Gingrich has taken to charging supporters $50 to snap photos with him as he campaigns. The candidate began asking for a fee for photos of him with supporters during after a speech to Republican County groups in Hockessin, Del.

In defense of the policy, the Gingrich campaign said in a statement:

Did you see reports today we are charging for photos?

Some campaigns make you travel all the way to Wall Street to pay $2,500 for a photo with a candidate.

We are trying out a new tactic and asking our supporters at our rallies for a nominal donation.

And guess what, it is working.

We have over 175,000 donors who contribute on average $50 to $100 at a time.

We also have an online store where supporters can make a donation to receive a hat, a shirt or even a bandana for your dog.

Every dollar and every supporter count and our campaign is propelled forward one small donor at a time.

The most recent financial filings show the Gingrich campaign taking on more debt that it can cover with campaign funds raised. Gingrich told a reporter for The Atlantic that if Mitt Romney has a majority after Utah votes on June 26, he will support the former Massachusetts Governor.

Before the campaign, Gingrich made lucrative career for himself as a professional speaker.

“I did no lobbying of any kind, period,” Gingrich said at a campaign stop in South Carolina last year. “For a practical reason—and I’m going to be really direct, OK? I was charging $60,000 a speech and the number of speeches was going up, not down.”

Occupy Plans Mass Laughter At World Leaders

Remember the scene in the 1976 film “Network” when newsman Howard Beale — played by actor Peter Finch — encourages his viewers to open their windows and exclaim “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore” in response to the constant barrage of bad news? Adbusters, the publication that could be credited with planting the seeds of Occupy Wall Street, is asking people around the world to do something similar on May 18.

In a recent article, the publication concedes that the Federal government’s decision to relocate the G8 summit of powerful world leaders from Chicago to the Presidential compound at Camp David represents government leaders’ fear of the angry masses.

The article says: “Wow! Looks like the specter of 50,000 occupiers ready to swarm with a list of demands has turned the climactic Showdown in Chicago into a humiliating G8 Backdown. Bravo! Splitting the G8 and NATO summits was a deft move… but now we’ve got a major tactical rethink on our hands.”

Adbusters says that protesters must now decide whether they should “follow Mao’s advice (‘when the enemy retreats, we pursue’) or Sun Tzu’s (‘Do not pursue an enemy who simulates flight’)? “ There have reportedly been discussions within the movement of both organizing protests in Chicago and trying to get near Camp David to disrupt the summit.

Comparing the Administration of Barack Obama to regimes toppled elsewhere in the world over the past year, the article calls for people to simply laugh at the White House and G8 en masse on May 18:

When Ben Ali first attacked then tried to hide from his people, he was toppled. When Mubarak refused to negotiate and tried to beat his people back into line, he was deposed. Now the White House and the G8 are repeating the mistakes of last year’s autocrats … first they try to scare us with tough talk of repressive anti-Occupy ordinances, crowd suppression technologies and paramilitary policing, then they make a hasty retreat to the safety of Camp David.

The world’s leaders flee from us … so what do we do? Maybe we just laugh at them?

On May 18, the day the G8 leaders meet in Camp David, why don’t we, the people of the world have a #LAUGHRIOT. Let roars of laughter rise up from towns and cities everywhere at the spectacle of the world’s leaders trying to crisis manage the economy from behind closed doors and razor wire fences.

Laughter is one of the most powerful tactical weapons of memewar … it signals supremacy and loss of fear. So let’s pull off the greatest comedy of howling flash mobs, riotous street parties and hysterical pranks the world has ever seen. May 18 could be a monumental tipping point… an ahahaha! moment when the people of the world have a collective epiphany, and from that point on start thinking differently about how the world should be governed.

Jammers, whatever we do this Spring, let’s float like butterflies and sting like bees! Let’s bend the G8 and NATO to our will with shock tactics and audacious culture jams that capture the imagination of the world. We may be far closer to a Global Spring than any of us has so far dared to imagine …

for the wild,

Culture Jammers HQ

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qgVn-Op7Q&w=560&h=315]