Just the facts as I see it

April 28, 2014

Why are we still doing this today

Filed under: Politics — truth_seeker @ 3:41 pm

This is sad in this day and age. In a time where marriage equality and the basic rights that we as heterosexuals take for granted is being hard fought for (and won) in the courts, I can not say my view of the gay man or lesbian has changed much over the last 10yrs. Now before you try to tar and feather me for being insensitive let me explain. I used to be 200% against homosexuality. That has changed over the years. It has changed to the point that I now welcome same sex marriage and will support it just has hard as I support the fight against racism and sexism. But I’ve noticed over the last few years more and more gay characters on TV, and just like with the black community they all play the same stereotype (more on that in a later post). With men they are mostly frilly, impeccably dressed, sex crazy, girly, effeminate, loud through my gayness in your face and you’ll like it types. In other words the primary type of gay man that most straight men hate. Whn I think of this type I cant help but to think of Miss Jay (I think thats his name) from Americas next top model as a real life version. Now I will admit that over years hollywood has toned down that image. But are shows like Queer eye for the straight guy really doing anything positive for your movement. Now we have (in my opinion) the most famous TV gay couple. Cam & Mitchell from Modern family. Sadly this is the bases that I and most other Straight Americans have to go off of for gay men. Both into the blatant stereotypes mentioned above with the exception of a few. How can you expect America to accept gay marriage when all you display the very type of gay man that scares most heterosexual men. This is all most of us have to go on. I cant say for sure I know any men who are gay. I have my suspicions about some but once again they are based off of what Hollywood has taught me. If you want us to accept you then show us the other side. Show us the office worker who is just like us, the guy that likes sports, beer, guys night out, normal man that just so happens to be gay.

Also just putting this out there dont fight for all of us to welcome you with open arms. I am sick and tired of being told that because I dont like the sight of 2 men kissing that I’m homophobic. I dont like that sight. I’m a straight man, there is nothing attractive about it. I want to gag when ever I see it. Does that make me wrong, No. Here’s why, Despite those feelings I want you to be able to get married. I want you to have all the same rights and privileges I have as a straight man. I just think its disgusting. That does not make me wrong, or homophobic. It makes me my own person. I dont like cauliflower but I dont discriminate against those that eat it. Same thing here. So stop trying to change that aspect. That will only serve to hurt you in the long run.

April 13, 2012

Drugs should be made legal. Part 1

Filed under: Politics — truth_seeker @ 4:57 pm

That’s right you heard me.I thing drugs, all drugs should be made legal. Marijuana, Cocaine, Heroin, Ecstasy, LSD (Acid), etc…… All of it. Even crack, yes crack. I know some of you are saying I have lost my damn mind, but I assure you I have not. The war on drugs has lasted for 40yrs. 40 years and we (the American Government) has accomplished nothing. Yes every now and then they will show a huge drug bust but for that 100lbs of pot they caught, 5000lbs more make it into the country. Its easier than ever to get drugs now. For all the laws they have in place, if  I want pot I can walk down the street and buy it. Same goes for any type of drug. If I don’t know where to get it I know someone who does. This goes for 95% of the American population. I know all the arguments on why drugs should be made illegal. They kill, they cause violence, they cause crime, they destroy families, They cause the body harm, They fund terrorism activities Well lets look at these.

  1. They kill you/cause the body harm – Is this not the same for smoking, excessive drinking, over eating? This argument can used for anything. I want to ban skateboarding it causes harm to the body.
  2. They cause violence/crime – Once again this can be applied to more than one legal substance. How many people have you heard were drunk when they commented a crime or beat the hell out of his wife.
  3. They destroy families – And again, this can also be said about alcohol. Personally my family was destroyed by this. So why is alcohol any different.
  4. They fund terrorism activities – Yes they do now but if they were legal we would not have to worry about that. The Government would have oversight on that.

While these are all valid arguments they don’t hold up when challenged. Look at what happened when the government did prohibition, we ended with the likes of Al Capone. Suddenly violence skyrocketed Prohibition was from 1919-1933. Here is a quote from the first day of prohibition by the Reverend Billy Sunday;

“The reign of tears is over. The slums will soon be a memory. We will turn our prisons into factories and our jails into storehouses and corncribs. Men will walk upright now, women will smile and children will laugh. Hell will be forever for rent.”

This is what happened during prohibition;

  • Police funding: INCREASED $11.4 Million
  • Arrests for Prohibition Las Violations: INCREASED 102+%
  • Arrests for Drunkenness and Disorderly Conduct: INCREASED 41%
  • Arrests of Drunken Drivers: INCREASED 81%
  • Thefts and Burglaries: INCREASED 9%
  • Homicides, Assault, and Battery: INCREASED 13%
  • Number of Federal Convicts: INCREASED 561%
  • Federal Prison Population: INCREASED 366%
  • Total Federal Expenditures on Penal Institutions: INCREASED 1,000%


Things got worse during that time, way worse than anyone thought. Now this ended in the 30’s The one thing we learned during this 14yr fuck up is that people want to and will get fucked up. See Prohibition had the reverse effect that was intended, While drinking fell off in the first year or 2 it sharply rose to over 60% the pre-prohibition level. That means 60% more people started drinking during that time. Now it seems to me that you made a substance illegal and more people started using it. Also this caused a sharp increase in organized crime, and corruption. The Government had created a black market practically overnight.

The “war on drugs started in 1972. Have we not learned our lesson from Prohibition. Since 1972 we have spent 1 Trillion dollars that’s $1,000,000,000,000 That money could have easily helped in so many other places. Nixon started this war with a budget of $100 million budget now it sits at $15 Billion per year. Here’s how that trillion breaks down over the past 40yrs;

  •  $20 billion to fight the drug gangs in their home countries. In Colombia, for example, the United States spent more than $6 billion, while coca cultivation increased and trafficking moved to Mexico — and the violence along with it.
  •  $33 billion in marketing “Just Say No”-style messages to America’s youth and other prevention programs. High school students report the same rates of illegal drug use as they did in 1970, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says drug overdoses have “risen steadily” since the early 1970s to more than 20,000 last year.
  • $49 billion for law enforcement along America’s borders to cut off the flow of illegal drugs. This year, 25 million Americans will snort, swallow, inject and smoke illicit drugs, about 10 million more than in 1970, with the bulk of those drugs imported from Mexico.
  • $121 billion to arrest more than 37 million nonviolent drug offenders, about 10 million of them for possession of marijuana. Studies show that jail time tends to increase drug abuse.
  • $450 billion to lock those people up in federal prisons alone. Last year, half of all federal prisoners in the U.S. were serving sentences for drug offenses.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/13/ap-impact-years-trillion-war-drugs-failed-meet-goals/#ixzz1rxRwA5rz

The next article will show why I believe all drugs should be legal and the damage that the war on drugs has caused.

February 21, 2012

Obama: Why you should vote him in for a second term. Part 2


Now I was not going to cover Santorum, I thought he was a lost cause. But his recent surge in the polls dictates that I include him the list. So with out any further fanfare here it is.

Rick Santorum. Lets start with some quotes that this man has said.

“A lesbian woman came up to me and said, ‘why are you denying me my right?’ I said, ‘well, because it’s not a right.’ It’s a privilege that society recognizes because society sees intrinsic value to that relationship over any other relationship.”

– Rick Santorum on gay adoption, 5/3/11

So Rick I ask you, If society deemed it wrong that interracial straight couples could not not adopt, does that mean you would be fine with it. Remember it wasn’t not very long ago that interracial couples would not allowed to marry (1967). It wasn’t until very recently that interracial couples stopped having a hard time adopting kids period. So what your saying is that the rights of the minority should be left to the majority. Is this how you feel about Civil rights?

“The reason Social Security is in big trouble is we don’t have enough workers to support the retirees. A third of all the young people in America are not in America today because of abortion, because one in three pregnancies end in abortion.”

– Rick Santorum on how abortion is responsible for Social Security’s problems, 3/29/11

There are currently 311,591,917 people in the US. So what you saying is that 103,863,972 abortions have happened. Now this is since the US started keping offical count after the Row vs Wade verdict in 1973. Now when I do the math as of right now there are approx 1.3million abortions per year in the US. Now if we assume that that number was constant since 1973 we come to a total of 52 million abortions since 1973. This is a huge number. (I had to recheck the facts because I didnt believe it) But it is still a far cry from the 103 million that you claim. you basiclly doubled the number. Now as of 2009 there were 425,000 kids in foster care and we cant find enough parents for them. What are we going to do with and extra 52 million children. Oh I know force the parents to keep them. Ummm hows that working now with the children who are born. I dont see to many of these 52 million kids working to pay into Social Security.

“Is anyone saying same-sex couples can’t love each other? I love my children. I love my friends, my brother. Heck, I even love my mother-in-law. Should we call these relationships marriage, too?”

– Rick Santorum comparing his love for his mother-in-law to the love that same-sex couples share, 5/22/2008

Rick Rick Rick Rick. Yes you love your kids, you love your brother, but are you in love with them them? Do you love them the same way you love your wife?

“I don’t think it works. I think it’s harmful to women, I think it’s harmful to our society to have a society that says that sex outside of marriage is something that should be encouraged or tolerated, particularly among the young. I think it has, as we’ve seen, very harmful long-term consequences for society. So birth control to me enables that and I don’t think it’s a healthy thing for our country.”

–Saying that birth control is harmful to women, society and our country.  CN8′s “Nitebeat with Barry Nolan”, July 28, 2005. Click here to watch the video.

Wow. Birth control is harmful to our society? Your against abortion and birth control? News flash Rick your not going to stop premarital sex. Its not going to happen. Premarital sex has been happening since biblical days. Your not going to stop it. Here is what will happen. Stop all birth control and abortions will go through the roof, both illegal and legal.

“The notion that college education is a cost-effective way to help poor, low-skill, unmarried mothers with high school diplomas or GEDs move up the economic ladder is just wrong.”

–Arguing that poor, unwed mothers don’t really need college educations.  It Takes a Family, Pg. 138, July 2005.

So what your saying is that poor, low-skilled people can not climb the economic ladder with a collage degree. But I do find it interesting that you choose to highlight women in this statement.

“Many women have told me, and surveys have shown, that they find it easier, more “professionally” gratifying, and certainly more socially affirming, to work outside the home than to give up their careers to take care of their children.  Think about that for a moment…Here, we can thank the influence of radical feminism, one of the core philosophies of the village elders.”

–Blaming “radical feminism” for making women want to work outside the home.  It Takes a Family, Pg. 95, July 2005.

Well in my experence both parents need to work to provide for the family. We all are not millionares Rick.

“The elementary error of relativism becomes clear when we look at multiculturalism. Sometime in the 1980s, universities began to champion the importance of “diversity” as a central educational value.”

–Saying the goal of diversity is wrong.  It Takes a Family, Pg. 406, July 2005.

So diversity is not important. What are you saying/ We should all just conform so long as its to your standards? Should people of African American decent not be proud of their heritage? What about a Hispanic or a Jew. We should just forget that the whole Holocaust thing happened right? I mean that is part of their heritage.

“And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold — Griswold was the contraceptive case — and abortion. And now we’re just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you — this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family.”

–On his belief that there is no right to privacy in the U.S. Constitution. In the Griswold case, the U.S. Supreme Court found that married couples had the right to use birth control.

Associated Press interview, April 2003.

Wow. Just Wow. You don’t believe in privacy? Well you know what let me put a camera in your house. Also How the Fuck do you get the courts saying that you have the right to consensual sex at home to adultery. In your own words the right of privacy does not exist.

“Marriage is not about affirming somebody’s love for somebody else. It’s about uniting together to be open to children, to further civilization in our society.”

–Showing his romantic side.
“Fox News Sunday”, Fox News Channel, August 3, 2003.

WHAT?!?!?!?!?!? So should we outlaw marriage for those who don’t want kids. Not to mention, marriage not about love? WTF man. talk about alternitve lifestyles. So you say marriage should be like applying for a job. I’m 6’3″, no serious diseases in my family, Every male in my family has lived till at least 80 and I make good money.

Wow there was a lot on this man. You know I have to say I hope Santorum win the GOP election. You will ensure Obama gets a second term.

“ObamaCare” – Why this is one great law.

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , — truth_seeker @ 7:07 pm

The affordable care act or as it has come to be know ObamaCare is a law the President Obama signed into law March 23 2010. This law will provide those who have no health insurence or can’t afford health insurence some form of insurence. Now this bill alone is note worthy. When this law was passed there was an estimated 46 million (46,000,000) people without health insurence with another estimated 36 million under insured. That’s 82 million people or almost 1/3 of the US population this law would directly help, but it doesn’t stop there.
This law also tells insurence companies that they have to accept people that have pre-exsisting conditions. (Why this part was not a law already I don’t know.) This law also states that women should not pay for birth control. (This has people all fired up.) Now what a lot of people don’t understand especially men, is many woman use the pill not only as a form of contraceptive but for a varity of reasons, like heavy bleeding and to reduce other symptoms of their periods.
Now to get into where this law will have a huge effect, the economy. It’s basic economics if you think about it. You have a total of 82 million people that can now go to the hospital/doctor without worry of breaking the bank. Most of these people will go at the first sign of trouble because they can and not wait till their knocking on deaths door. This will cause a healthier population. A healthier population is more productive. Also hospitals/doctors will see an influx of people coming in. This means that they will have to hire more doctors, nurses, x-ray techs, administration personal, janitors, etc. Because of the influx of paperwork coming into the insurence companies will have to hire more workers. Because more people will be going to the doctors the pharmaceutical industry will see an influx of medication being sold so they will have to hire more people. Now that we have hired thousands if not tens of thousands of people that are directly related to these 82 million people. These new hires will have jobs and be able to shop. Then places like Wal-mart, Target, Sears, etc will have to hire people to keep up with the demand. They will also have to order more product. That has to be made and shipped somehow and by someone. Not to mention that the elderly, the ones that have already seen just some of the effects of ObamaCare. Ask any elderly person that is currently on meds and they will tell you that their meds are cheaper. Guess what they do with that money? They pump it back into the economy. Notice all the talk lately about how there are more jobs? So whats wrong with this.

  • Healthier population.
  • More jobs.
  • Better economy

If this is Socialism then sign me up.

February 17, 2012

Why can’t Gays/Lesbians get Married?

Filed under: Politics — truth_seeker @ 11:24 pm

I’ll be the first to tell you, I think homosexuality is disgusting. I dont like it, I dont want to see it (unless it’s women. Still wrong, but fun to watch) and I think its immoral. But, I will fight to my last breath to for a gay man or woman to have the same rights I have as straight man.

I know a lot of people dont like to hear this but here it is. The fight for Gay rights is the same thing as the fight for civil rights. I know its not exactly the same thing but its the same game in a different park. To prove my point how many black folk out there would flip if they said you could no longer get married? Or here is a better example. How about in today’s day and age if they said blacks you can nolonger ride the same bus as us “normal” folk. But because we want to be fair we will create a bus system just for you but it wont be everywhere you go. Would you sit down and take that? I dont think so.
Now I know many of you say say is wrong and that’s final. Well my argument to you is who made you the authority on right and wrong. Now its my belief that homosexuality is some thing that you can’t help. You are simply born that way. There are many studies that back that claim up, but I gather this from one piece of information. Who would volunteer to be part of a sect of humanity that routinely gets treated unfairly and sometimes killed because of what they are. I’ll tell you right now if this were slave times, I look like I’m white, guess who would be a free man. I’d help out on the underground railroad but I ain’t going to be a slave if I can pass as white. But if my say so isn’t good enough then here is a link to a study in the U.K.
http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/01/homosexuality-genetics-usa?cat=world&type=article
Let me guess what your next arguement will be. It just not natural. Well let me tell you something, homosexuality has been around and well documented since the Roman empire. They even talked about homosexuality in the bible. Sodam and Gomora ring any bells. Where do u think we got the word sodomy from. But that doesn’t cover it not being natural. What if I told you it does occur in nature? What you don’t believe me? Take a look.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/magazine/04animals-t.html?pagewanted=all

Now these two links are from wikipedia and the NY times. They show homosexual behavior does occur in the animal kingdom. So the only argument left is the religious one. It goes against the bible. We what if I showed you where the bible said slavery was ok? Would you then say that well I guess slavery was ok. Or how about where the bible says that women should have no authority over men and should know her place. (You can look at my previous posts for that info.)Would you women then agree.

Or how about this verse.

John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

Now I’m no scholar on the bible though I do know my far share. Does this verse not say you should not judge anyone unless you your self are free of sin? If you need it put even simpler

Mat 7:1- 2 Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

Are you not judging these people? How can you call yourself a good Christian and still judge them. If this is your belief then you are condemning yourself to the same fate that you say they will get. Now if I was a religious person I would be scared.

Now that brings us to what I feel is the real reason. Once you peel back all the layers this is what you have left. It makes you feel uncomfortable. Well you know what GET OVER IT!!!!! THEIR HERE, THEIR QUEER, GET USED TO IT. It makes me uncomfortable too. I dont like having to explain to my child why 2 men are kissing or why this guy is dressing like a woman. But you know what those are my feeling and just because some thing makes me feel uncomfortable does not give me the right to deny anyone the same rights that I myself have.

Lets look at the some documents that were written by our forefathers:

We the People  of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, doordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Look at the bold words, Secure the Blessings of Liberty. Liberty, does that not mean freedom. Being able to Marry who you want is freedom.

Here is another one:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the the pursuit of Happiness.

There is that word again. Liberty. Hey what about that other line Certain unalienable rights. You know that does mean marriage. Oh and what about the all men are created equal. Oh let me guess they only meant straight men. I don’t think so. You know if they meant that they would have said that. Homosexuality was around and known about in 1776. So what is your reason. What reason do you have to deny another person the same rights and privileges that you as a heterosexual person have now. I sure hope its a good one.

January 20, 2012

Why SOPA in Any Form Will Fail

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , — truth_seeker @ 11:37 pm

The popular subject today seems to be SOPA and PIPA. For those of you who do not know SOPA stands for Stop Online Piracy Act and PIPA stands for Protect IP Act.

This is why I say that in any form SOPA will fail in any form. First lets do a quick overview of these bills.

SOPA – (to see full bill click the link) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204555904577167040770940440.html

SOPA has a noble aim, to stop online piracy. Now I know the majority of us are guilty of this. But it is wrong. How would you like it if you invested millions of dollars in someone hoping that you would at least make your money back, and all the work this person did was stolen downloaded and you didn’t get a dime back. It wouldn’t feel to good would it. But that’s not the whole story but I’ll get to that later. What the RIAA wants you to believe is this bill will stop on-line piracy. Now the impact of this bill. These are direct quotes from the bill

(B) INTERNET SEARCH ENGINES. A provider of an Internet search engine shall take technically feasible and commercially reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, designed to prevent the serving, in response to a query, of a direct hypertext link to the foreign infringing site that is subject to the order, or the portion of such site specified in the order.

This in my opinion is akin to Nazi Germany burning book that they don’t agree with. This is actually telling sites like Google, Yahoo, and MSN not to allow you to information the government deems illegal. Now I will say I have some of these so called “pirate” sites because I wanted ROMs for my phone. This is why we have the safe harbor laws. If I post something on lets say wordpress.com they cannot be held liable for my post.  I could go on a racist hate filled rant using every slur in the book and guess what wordpress will not be held liable for this nor should they. I could say hey go to this site you can get copies of Win7, Photoshop, music….etc They still cannot and should not be held liable for my actions. What this will do is force the search provider to change the way they direct traffic and spend lots of money doing it. Yes I know in other spots it says if it is reasonable, but who determines that.

Another scary part of SOPA:

INTERNET SITE THAT ENDANGERS THE PUBLIC HEALTH. The term “Internet site that endangers the public health means an Internet site that is primarily designed or operated for the purpose of, has only limited purpose or use other than, or is marketed by its operator or another acting in concert with that operator primarily for use in- offering, selling, dispensing, or distributing any prescription medication, and does so regularly without a valid prescription; or offering, selling, dispensing, or distributing any prescription medication that is adulterated or misbranded.

Now yes I know this seems noble, but when was the last time any of you had to buy a reoccurring prescription? I have not but I do have family that does. We are talking about hundreds dollars here every month to three months. How many of you can afford that. Oh insurance you say. Well most elderly people have insurance that will only cover some of that price. They are plenty of American citizens that buy real valid prescription drugs (that they have a prescription for) from other countries such as Canada and Europe. These can be many times cheaper than their American counterparts. SOPA can easily put an end to that. We all know that the pharmaceutical companies would instantly jump on saying that these valid sites would no longer be able to be viewed in America. So SOPA will cause your Grandma to go broke or die because she cant get her meds.

How many of you out there have posted videos or Pics on Youtube, Facebook, MySpace, Flicker….etc This could all come to an end. Does your shirt have a logo? Is there a song playing in the background? Are you making fun of a product? Is there a product any product shown? These are all forms of infringement. Do you really think sites like Google and Facebook are going to spend millions to fight on your behalf. No they are going to cave and remove your post.

This is why I say SOPA will fail in any form. Lets look at some other things that the government has done for our “safety” Does the war on drugs ring a bell. Take a look at this article.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/13/ap-impact-years-trillion-war-drugs-failed-meet-goals/

Some excerpts:
After 40 years, the United States war on drugs has cost $1 trillion and hundreds of thousands of lives, and for what? Drug use is rampant and violence even more brutal and widespread. Even U.S. drug czar Gil Kerlikowske concedes the strategy hasn’t worked.”In the grand scheme, it has not been successful” Kerlikowske told The Associated Press. “Forty years later, the concern about drugs and drug problems is, if anything, magnified, intensified.

You read that right 1 Trillion dollars to find out it did not work. This will be SOPA. A useless law that will cause the taxpayers billions, not to mention the shredding of a bit more of the constitution. All this will accomplish is to drive the piracy farther underground and harm the actual law abiding citizens of this country. If this passes maybe we should all just learn Chinese because we you be one more step to being a communist country.

January 12, 2012

Obama: Why you should vote him in for a second term

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , — truth_seeker @ 11:19 pm

I’ve been watching a lot of attacks against Obama as of late. People are saying that he has made the country worse during his time in office, he’s a socialist, communist and the worst thing a MUSLIM (oh my god hide the kids, wash my mouth out with soap, I just said a dirty word) The fact is Obama is none of these, he cares for the underprivileged people of this country. If that’s being a Socialist or Communist then sign me up.

Now lets say he is a Muslim, WHO THE FUCK CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I already know the arguments, “Well Jason Muslims blew up the WTC.” So, was it all Muslims. I don’t remember seeing the muslim that runs the corner store on the news. I saw a small sect of Muslims that fell off the path set by Allah. By the way Christians slaughtered millions if not billions during the crusades and Hitler was a Christian. We all know what he did. I guess the next argument would be well his father was a Muslim that means he is a Muslim. Uhhhhhhh…..Nope wrong again. My father is deadbeat that doesn’t take care of his kids. I’m not. Nor will I ever be. Any way what does it matter what religion the man is? Not liking the man because he might be Muslim is just as bad as not liking him because he’s black.

So I guess it comes down to this. Just the Facts:

1) Job growth This chart says it all, and this only goes up to Nov 2011. Dec was a huge month for job growth. If you want to look at the link here it is. http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-12-07/politics/30485008_1_unemployment-rate-obama-election-day

%20%28Jon%20Terbush%20/%20Business%20Insider%29

2)Unemployment benefits. Under Bush the unemployment benefits lasted 26 weeks. Under Obama they can now last up to 79 weeks depending on where you live. Now the Republicans have fought this at every turn. I understand about fiscal responsibility but come on. How many of you reading this now were or are still receiving unemployment. Now I know it’s not much but could you imagine if it wasn’t there. OK every one say THANK YOU OBAMA.

3) Healthcare or as it is more commonly known as Obamacare. How many people reading this have been stuck at one time or another without insurance? I have. IT SUCKS!!!! When I left to go to school I had no insurance, guess what I got hit by a car while riding my bike. I wasn’t seriously hurt but I had a nasty gash on my leg. I chose to walk to a vet rather than go to a hospital.  A VET!!!! They treat animals at the vet. I paid $20 and got bandaged up and went on my way. Then a month later I was in a car accident and had to go to the hospital. $4000 for a neck brace. They never got paid. Now if I had insurance they would have gotten paid and all would have been fine. Now thanks to Obama this will happen.

4)Bail out Wallstreet. Now I will admit I didn’t agree with this one but it worked. If not for this bailout the world economy would have been worse. Not just the US the world. We would have gone into a world depression, a major depression.

Now these are just what I say are the top things that he has done. But now lets look at our alternatives.

1) Mitt Romney – This is a man who seemingly prides himself on the fact that he was a CEO of Bain & Company and later co-founded and was the head of  Bain Capital. Now Bain Capital is a private equity investment firm. This company was another company that played a part in the collapse of our economy, not a huge part but it still played a part. Now ask your self do you want a Wallstreet CEO sitting in the Whitehouse, who thinks that corporations are people too.  (yes that is an actual quote from Mitt)

Lets look at some his views.

His health care model was the basis for “Obamacare”. The same thing he is promising to repeal if elected. Isnt this the same as saying the plan I proposed is not good enough. Here is some of his quotes on healthcare.

No FEDERAL individual mandate; but state mandate ok.

ObamaCare waivers on Day One; repeal bill on Day Two.

Now correct me if I’m wrong. Is this not saying the same thing. If your against the mandate then your against the mandate. But wait he not against the mandate. This is from Wikipedia.

The Massachusetts health care insurance reform law, St. 2006, c.58,[1][2], aka Romneycare,[3] enacted in 2006, mandates that nearly every resident of Massachusetts obtain a state-government-regulated minimum level of healthcare insurance coverage

So you are perfectly fine with a mandate. Which one is it Mitt.

He is dead set against Gay/lesbian marriage.

Constitutional amendment defining 1-man-1-woman marriage. This was a failed attempt in March 07

He wants to change the constitution to back same-sex marriage illegal. So some one tell me why Gay/lesbians deserve any less than their straight counterparts. Maybe we should ban interracial marriage too, it does go against some people’s morals.

So in a nutshell we have a candidate that was a CEO of a Wallstreet corp, thinks corporations are people too, wants to take healthcare away from people, and trample over civil rights and tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies. Sounds like a winner to me.

2) Newt Gingrich – What to say about this man. Hear is a man who wants to do away with the child labor laws and thinks that poor people have no work ethic. And I quote:

“Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works,”

“They have no habit of ‘I do this and you give me cash’–unless it’s illegal.”

Almost two weeks ago Gingrich called laws preventing child labor “truly stupid” and suggested students take the jobs of many janitors.

Gingrich added that most successful businesspeople he knows started work “early” and made some kind of money when they were kids, whether it was by babysitting or mowing lawns.

“And I’d pay them as early as is reasonable and practical,” he said Thursday.

OK Newt, I understand about the mowing lawns and babysitting, but that is a far cry from doing janitorial work. Then you don’t even bother to specify an age. So what I’m supposed to have my 9yr old sitting in an office after school. Where does time to be a kid figure into this or how about homework Newt? Also these comments seem to say that only poor people from poor neighborhoods commit crimes. Does the name Bernie Madoff ring a bell, or how about Ted Bundy, Jeffery Domer. These were all rich or middle class people.

Lets look at some more of Newt’s views.

Gingrich told a town hall meeting at a senior center in Plymouth, N.H., that if the NAACP invites him to its annual convention this year, he’d go there and talk about “why the African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps.”

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich said today he is willing to go before the NAACP and urge blacks to demand paychecks, not food stamps.

Gingrich routinely lambasts President Barack Obama as the “best food stamp president in American history.”

Now as a black man from a black neighborhood I do take offence to this. I was out of work for over a month. I needed food stamps and I did demand a paycheck. In a month I sent out well over 100 resumes. My job was to look for a job. I knew plenty of people on food stamps that were not happy to be on food stamps, but guess what, they happy to get food stamps. These comments go to show how out of touch Newt is with the world today. Your telling us (black folk) to demand jobs when there just arent enough jobs to go around. I don’t know anyone who is happy to be poor. Thank God that Obama is the best “foodstamp”president. There are millions out of work and you know Newt we do need to eat.

In my opinion nothing else needs to be said about Newt. If he gets in Office our kids will be in some sort of sweat shop very soon and there will be more starving people in the country because it seems like he wants to get rid of welfare.

Ron Paul – Now I will say some of Ron Paul’s ideas I do agree with, but others are way out there. Lets look at some of his views.

Embryonic stem cell programs not constitutionally authorized

Roe v. Wade decision was harmful to the Constitution.

Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research.

Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime.

Abortion is murder.

Well your against stem cell research. Your against the research that could potentially cure cancer, cure paralysis, MS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, etc….. Let me guess it’s just Gods will. Look at  his voting record on abortion and what he says. Something does not add up. You voted no to make it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime but you say abortion is murder. That does not make sense. Now lets take a look at some of his quotes.

As for Social Security, “we didn’t have it until 1935,” Paul says. “I mean, do you read stories about how many people were laying in the streets and dying and didn’t have medical treatment? . . . Prices were low and the country was productive and families took care of themselves and churches built hospitals and there was no starvation.”

“Is bailing out people who chose to live on the coastline a proper function of the federal government?” he asks. “Why do people in Arizona have to be robbed in order to support the people on the coast?” (Talking about bailing out the people of Katrina)

Wow. Just WOW. Really Ron? Have you heard of a little time called the Great Depression? You know extreme poverty, soup lines, 25% unemployment, government aid….. So you also want to get rid of Social security. You know how many people NEED SS? That is their only income and it looks like you want to get rid of it. But what can I expect from someone who thinks he’s being robbed by helping a victim of a natural disaster.

So lets recap. I covered 3 of the GOP candidates. These seem to be the most likely to win the nomination. So here are your choices. A Wallstreet CEO who wants to take away healthcare. A man so out of touch with the common person that he thinks it OK to have poor kids working as a janitor and thinks that black are perfectly fine with receiving food stamps instead of working. Or the guy who thinks that no one was starving during the great depression and that it fine to let people fend for them selves in a disaster. Hmmmmmm I think I’ll take the Socialist, Communist, Muslim that has created many jobs, helping those who lost their job and trying to make sure no one goes broke while they seek medical treatment.

January 4, 2012

BIRTHERS – ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!!!!!

Filed under: Politics — truth_seeker @ 10:51 pm

I just read the most insane thing. Again people are bringing up the notion that Obama is not elgible to be President because of his birth. Now its to the point that a judge in Georgia (of course) is actually going to hear a a case debating this. Now this is a case to determine if Obama will be on the Ballot in 2012.

For the first time in dozens of court cases challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, a judge has ruled that Obama must, in order to be a candidate on the Georgia ballot for president in 2012, meet the constitutional demands for candidates for the office.

A hearing has been scheduled later this month for evidence on the issue that has plagued Obama and his presidency since long before he took office. At issue is the constitutional requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen.” Some allege he was not born in the U.S. as he has claimed and, therefore, is not eligible.

This is from http://wp.wnd.com/2012/01/court-obama-must-be-constitutionally-eligible/

Are we not past this. Dont you think that before Obama was put up as a canidate in 2008 this was all looked into. Now I’m not one to pull the race card but this truly smells of pure racism. I cant help but to think that that if Obama was white or even looked white this would be a non issue. Hell even the Republicans are shying away from issue. They wont touch it. They are doing things the proper way, attacking his policies. (more on that in another blog) But lets put this issue to rest. Obama’s mother is a citizen therefore Obama is a citizen. Obama was born in Hawaii (a US State for those who do not know) The US grants citizenship to those born in the US automatically. Why do you think so many Mexicans come here to have there children. But wait there’s more.

The 14th Amendment

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 

You see that Bolded part. All persons born or naturalized. Obama was born in Hawaii. Case closed. Oh I forgot you want to hold this one man to a higher standard than any other President. Instead of showing his short form birth cert you want the long form. Even when that’s shown you say its forged. Well lets see what else I can find.

US Code > Title 8 > Chapter 12 > Subchapter III > Part 1 > 1401

Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person

(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.
Check out section D. I bolded for you. So even if Obama was born in Kenya his mother was a citizen and this refers specifically to one parent a citizen and one parent not. I positive that Obama’s mother was present in the country for at-least one year prior to his birth. So once again even if he was born in Kenya this shows he is eligible to become president. So where is the argument now. Let me guess he is a Muslim, his eyes are shaped funny, he has family out of the country, etc…… SHUT UP ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.