Anonymous wages war against Copywrong

This is some funny shit.

Is it wrong? Criminal? Well I suppose that depends on your definition of wrong and criminal. Wrong is suing poor grandmothers for an absurd amount of money for downloading a song. Criminal is G. Dubya Bush, but I digress. Plenty of people get away with wrong and criminal actions all the time. Got money? Got a good lawyer? You too can get away with shit.

Poor? No lawyer? 1/2 ounce of pot? Go to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200!

I never thought of Anonymous as being leverage against stupid corporate shit, but maybe it could be. Except, I don't think they do enough. And they probably aren't organized enough. And are most of them even in this country? Do they all share similar goals? Probably not on both of those counts. That's probably all that keeps corporations from being under constant attack by them. Or maybe they have better things to do? Hard to say.

What pisses me off, is that the laws of this country, our Constitution, etc. were designed to protect individuals, not Corporations. Copyright law was intended so that individuals would not be stolen from. And individual musicians, they don't get shit from the behemoth that is the record industry. The majority of the profit goes to the industry, not to the musician. Maybe the big name ones get advertising gigs and that's how they wind up with a lot of money, but the small time musicians rely on their concerts and personally selling their CDs at said concerts to generate income. So, the industry is not suing on behalf of the musician. They're suing to protect their own profits.

Is being sympathetic to Anonymous a way of promoting anarchy? Maybe. But socialism, communism and capitalism don't work. Why not try anarchy for a while? I'm kidding. Aren't I? The problem with any form of government, is that the greedy always worm their way into power, and then use their power to rewrite whatever laws they want in order to line their pockets. That's the way it always is. The only way it won't be like that, is if greedy people cease to be. And that probably ain't happening any time in the next ten millenia.


"If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth--certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter-friction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn." --Henry David Thoreau

It should be a rule of the internet...

...if it isn't already that you never mess with Anonymous. For those of you not too hip on the intertubez, just keep on surfing LOL

I'm amused that they've issued a warning to the Westboro Baptist Church, props to Joe My God, I haven't read anything this funny in a while. Indeed, I haven't read much of anything in a while, because it merely infuriates me and 'teh stupid' just keeps on rolling whether I write about it or not.

I'm hoping they ignore Anonymous like I think they will, and hilarity ensues.

A Nutritious Belief

Belief. It's an interesting thing. I once naively thought that it was only in religion that one found this thing we called belief. It seems however that belief extends to other categories of thought where it really has very little business being, like politics, science and nutrition. Unlike the intangible, these are subjects where FACTS should speak for themselves, leaving no room for belief.

That people can be shown concrete, scientific evidence to the contrary of what they think is true, and not change their mind, is to put it mildly, absolutely mind-boggling.

I used to think that eating fat would raise your cholesterol and give you a heart attack. I believed it because that's what organizations like the American Heart Association tell you, and well, you would think that scientific research in the 20th (and now 21st) century was high enough that they really did know what they were talking about. Unfortunately, they don't know what they're talking about, and it is almost unbelievable to say that an absolute fraud has been perpetrated not only on the American people, but the people of this entire planet. I suppose that it's irony that they chose to represent what we should eat by a pyramid, appropriate in that it surpasses the ponzi scheme carried out by Bernie Madoff by light years. And it's worse than that though, because whereas Bernie swindled people out of their money, the AHA and others have swindled people out of their lives.

I just got through reading a book by a Swedish doctor named Uffe Ravnskov called "Fat and Cholesterol are Good for You". He had written another that is now out of print ten years ago that I missed, and is now expensive to buy, called "The Cholesterol Myths." I already knew that they had the diet we should be eating all wrong thanks to Gary Taubes, who I personally think deserves a Nobel Prize.

The "research", and I use that term very lightly, carried out on the effects of cholesterol on the human body, is blatantly unscientific and in some of the studies seems to be an outright scam by the pharmaceutical companies so they can sell you expensive statin drugs.

So why am I writing about this on a blog dedicated to the absolute madness that politics and religion cause on otherwise seemingly rational people? Well, that same madness extends to other areas of our life as well. It goes back to belief. People have been indoctrinated to believe that fat is bad for them. They have been brainwashed to believe that high cholesterol will kill them. And then they're confronted with the fact that none of what they've been told is true, and only a few change their minds! Most stick their heads in the proverbial sand, for whatever reason, and continue believing what they've always believed. I'm sure most of the researchers do this because if they published literature to the contrary, they'd lose their soft funding from the food and pharmaceutical industries.

If you read the news and look into some of the studies they quote about nutrition, you will find that in a lot of them they use no control group. Or they don't isolate one variable, they have five or more variables and yet they pick the one they want and go with it. I'm not even a scientist, and from my limited science classes in college, even I know that this is bad science! And the research is equally bad, something I know a bit more about. When you write about something, you really ought to present opposing viewpoints, even if it's only a small mention in your paper, especially on subjects where things are really controversial. But these researchers who write up reports on these studies choose only the ones that agree with what they want to say, and ignore anything else. They also ignore the numbers. They'll dump out half a study and only use the part of it that they like if necessary. What kind of science is that? The answer is, it isn't science. It's fraud is what it is.

And our government, that is supposed to protect us from snake-oil salesmen, has been suckered in to buy up all that snake-oil as well. Our representatives, like our doctors, get told by the pharmaceutical companies what drugs are good for us, and what kind of research (on their terms) needs to be done, and that's how it goes. Your doctor doesn't know jack about the real effects of medication on you. S/he's too busy running a practice and keeping up with paperwork to read any journals. Reps from the pharmaceutical company come by the office and tell him or her how their drugs are so good for you, the patient. And they buy it, hook, line and sinker and then prescribe it to you. Maybe that's okay for short-term medications, like something you take to clear up an infection. But we're talking long-term drug use here, and without any really long-term studies. Most of the studies were for five years. The pharmaceuticals are advocating that everyone, even children, be on statins. Besides the fact that in almost all of their studies more people died in the treatment group than in the control group, and besides that fact that people (especially women) with higher cholesterol live longer, what are the effects of shutting down a normal biological process in people starting at a young age? No one really knows because no such study has been done, but I daresay it probably isn't a good outcome.

Cholesterol is important. It repairs damage. Fat, especially saturated fat, is important for brain development and function. Did you ever wonder why there has been an increase in ADHD? Or an increase in obesity? The correlation is inverse with the low-fat diet craze. But that's another post.

"This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes." --Morpheus, The Matrix

Life is Stranger than Fiction

They just identified the 9 year old girl who was shot today at the Gabrielle Giffords event as Christina Taylor Green. The irony of it is she was born on 9/11/2001 and died today 1/8/2011 (1+8=9) at the hands of an insane terrorist. I suppose all terrorists are insane to some degree. No sane person would fly a plane into a building, or shoot a 9 year old girl.



Such senseless violence, and for why? Because a psychopath was upset with our government? Even if the government is flawed is that any reason to kill people? I feel so sorry for the neighbor who invited her to attend the event, I'm sure they blame themselves in a way even though it isn't their fault.

It was only a matter of time...

...unfortunately.

I'm sure most of you have heard that Gabrielle Giffords (Democrat Rep from Arizona) was shot at point blank range by some deranged motherfucker at an Arizona Safeway. She was having an open meeting with her constituents and a gunman walked up and shot her in the head, and then open fired on the crowd. According to news reports a 9 year old child and a federal judge, John Roll, are dead, in addition to others. The person arrested for the shooting, (if this had been in Texas, he'd have gotten one shot off before someone in the crowd took him out, just sayin') was Jared Lee Loughner, who it was reported left paranoid rants online about the government, a North American currency (which has been a conspiracy since before I was born probably), and immigrants who don't speak English.

What with the Tea Party crazies and Sarah Palin's ilk inciting violence, is it any wonder? What sort of nation are we when we can't have political discourse without crazy people assassinating (or attempting to) our Representatives? This isn't happening in a vacuum! Giffords had her headquarters vandalized and the federal judge who is dead had received death threats! There are nutcases online everyday ranting about how terrible our government is. So like I said, it was only a matter of time before something like this happened. I hope Glenn Beck is pleased with himself. It's people like him who are responsible for urging on these paranoid people. Maybe he's paranoid himself, I don't know. This is why we need state hospitals. Paranoid, psychotic people should be committed, not left to wander around shooting people because they think Big Brother is out to get them.

BTW, the link to the article about John Roll from Politics Daily, I just want to say that Politics Daily has the right idea about comments, that they can't be personal attacks and they are all read before being published. Too bad Yahoo News won't do that. The comments on their news stories rival youtube for the inanity, insensitivity and overall crassness. I'm all for free speech, but not when it's trollish or inciting violence (we see where that leads don't we?).

Anyway, the most important thing here is this: my condolences go out to all the people affected by this senseless act of violence.


~~~~~~~

This is totally off topic, but Huffington post had a picture of Obama reacting to the shooting and my thought was, 'I want a room like this in my house!' I know, it's like the White House, but it looks so cool...

I Have a Bridge in Brooklyn to Sell You...

...if you believe the latest story about the leaked diplomatic memos, that a single army private was responsible for them.

The young Army Pfc. suspected of stealing the diplomatic memos, many of them classified, and feeding them to WikiLeaks may have defeated Pentagon security systems using little more than a Lady Gaga CD and a portable computer memory stick.

The soldier, Bradley Manning has not been charged in the latest release of internal U.S. government documents. But officials said he is the prime suspect partly because of his own description of how he pulled off a staggering heist of classified and restricted material.

If it sounds like bullshit, it probably is. What I really want to know is, where is the classified information? I mean, most of what I've read so far sounds like stuff that either I already knew, or comes as no surprise whatsoever. Among the "top ten revelations" is that Putin gave Berlusconi (of Italy) gifts. Um, heads of state often give each other gifts. Another big one is that Gadafi is traveling with a hot blonde Ukranian nurse! I mean, really? I can't help but Lulz a bit at that. And here is another shocker, Saudi Arabia doesn't like Iran. I know, you'd have no idea about that huh? I suppose most average Americans don't, since all Muslim countries get lumped into the "hated other" category by most mainstream press.

What is also a bit disconcerting is the number of posters at yahoo!news that are calling for the execution of anyone involved in the leak, because they think it's "treason." I'd like to think my fellow Americans aren't so blood thirsty over a bit of gossip, but I guess not. So far, I've not seen anything that looks like it could endanger anyone's life, like the disclosure of troop movements or something, or the security plan at a base in Afghanistan. If it were something like that, I would agree it's serious. But this, this is like a bunch of old women talking about who's screwing who in the neighborhood.

As an aside, in my opinion, I think that this has been published and completely blown out of proportion to cover up something. I don't know what that something might be, but I wouldn't be surprised at all.

The Food Police

I always say it's a slippery slope when you start having the government or any other organization tell us what we should be doing, believing, wearing, etc. Well, how do you like being told what you should eat? The city of San Francisco is moving toward banning toys in childrens' meals at restaurants, if they don't conform to a certain "standard", because truly, as a parent, you aren't fit to make decisions for your children. I think it's an appalling situation when a small group of people can take all the fun out of life. I suppose that's what happens when you found a country with Puritans. If it tastes or feels good or is fun, then by god it must be bad for you and you must be saved from yourself!

I suppose on the face of it, urging children to eat "healthier" sounds like a good thing. Except you have one problem. And that is that the government's current suggestions for how to eat healthy are anything but. Read Gary Taubes book "Good Calories, Bad Calories", if you dare, and you will see why. It is a book that will make you so angry you won't be able to see straight. These "scientists", (and I use that term very loosely), researchers, dietitians, and doctors have had evidence for the entire last century that sugar is what makes you fat and causes diabetes, and that fat is what we should mostly be eating, but since Ancel Keys decided to publish his absolutely skewed results that fat is bad for you and causes heart attacks people have cut back on the fat and increased consumption of carbohydrates, and have gotten heavier because of it.

In fact, hunter-gatherer type people who do not consume sugar and carbohydrates, and get most of their food from animal sources, have no evidence of heart disease, diabetes, or get this, cavities. I knew that ages ago and wondered why. I remember reading that paleolithic people didn't have cavities, or dental caries, but that agricultural people who ate grains did. And people knew this a hundred years ago! And if you think about it, it makes sense. Ten thousand years ago, what do you think people ate? They ate meat most of the time. They didn't have refrigerators or grocery stores. They didn't wander down to the market and buy leafy greens and fruit. They only ate vegetables and fruit when it was in season, well, actually, IF it was ever in season.

In 1908, a man named Vilhjalmur Stefansson spent ten years living with the Inuit* who did not eat anything but meat (because they had nothing else) and they were all very healthy people. When he returned to New York the doctors didn't believe him. He spent an entire year eating nothing but meat under observation to prove that it was healthy. There are also various accounts of doctors who lived among native populations in Africa and South America, who saw that the native populations did not have any evidence of any of the "Diseases of Civilization" (meaning heart disease, diabetes, etc) until they adopted a western diet high in sugar and refined carbohydrates.

After the McGovern committee on the Nutrition Guidelines in 1977, it pretty much became gospel that fat was the cause of heart attacks and any researcher who dare say otherwise was pretty much tossed out on the street. Kilmer S. McCully was one such researcher. He insisted it was an amino acid deficiency that caused heart disease. For his trouble, he was denied tenure and had trouble finding another job because Harvard had blacklisted him.

And another reason the government shouldn't tell us what to eat (as if you need another reason), is because their definition of "obesity" is absurd. Most of us think that people are obese when they're very round, like a woman who weighs say, 300 lbs. Well, the government has a different idea. You're probably considered "obese" if you're a pant size too big. That's because they grade obesity and overweight by the BMI index, which doesn't take into account muscle mass or bone structure. So if you lift weights, you're probably obese too.

What all this boils down to, is that your health is your business. If you want to eat McDonald's every day (and lose weight LOL), that's your prerogative. If your children beg you to go to McDonald's on a regular basis and you cave, it's not the government's responsibility to babysit you as you let your children eat junk. But I suppose that's California for you.** As a commenter on a forum said, and I found it quite amusing, "they don't call it the land of fruits and nuts for nothing." Sorry if you're from there. Really, I am.

*A wacky site I know, but they have posted the original article from Harper's by Stefansson LOL

**My mother-in-law bought a handgun, and it had a warning on it put there by the State of California that "children are naturally drawn to guns". Naturally? Really? Maybe they're drawn to a hot burner on the stove too. Are you going to put warnings on everything? Or should parents teach their children not to touch things they shouldn't. What this is, is an abdication of parenting and the teaching of your children about what is allowed, or not allowed, and what is safe or is not safe. It's also an abdication of common frickin' sense.

Tea Party Schizophrenia: A true mental disease

In a recent poll, it was found that supporters of the Tea Party movement were likely to support the Christian Conservative agenda.

"While the loosely organized Tea Party movement has focused largely on shrinking the size of government and other fiscal issues, its backers are more likely to support government restrictions on gay marriage and other social issues, the Public Religion Research Institute found in its American Values Survey."

This is, in a nutshell, just more proof of how bat-shit crazy these people are. It's not that they want less government, it's not that they want their concept of "moral values" forced upon the citizens of these United States, it's that they want both. They want to have their proverbial cake and eat it too. Except, the cake is a lie. It's always a lie.

They want less government interference in regulating things that keep us safe. They want more government meddling into the private lives of homosexuals, wanting the government to pass laws to keep them from being able to marry or share their partner's insurance benefits, some going so far as to say that laws should be passed making homosexual acts/partnerships illegal. They want less government funding of education (wanting to dismantle the Department of Education and quit funding college loans and grants, because ask any slave master from the 19th century about the best way to keep people as chattel). They want more government interference with the bodies of women, to tell them that they must have children, whether they want them or not, whether they are mentally and emotionally fit to have them or not, whether they've been raped and abused or not.

It's really a complete schizophrenia, to sit there and say that the government should have no influence in the corporate lives of businesses but at the same time that same government should be in our bedrooms telling us what to do, who to be with and forcing women to carry a pregnancy they don't want, or is dangerous to their health, to term. I'll call it for what it is. It's goddamned fascism, pure and bleeding simple. It's so Orwellian, it's almost un-fucking-believable, for these ass-hats to sit there and scream that they are the denizens of freedom and democracy, and at the same time wanting to put their jackboots at the throats of their fellow Americans to make them follow their own twisted version of "morality".

Christian Flag Taken Down in North Carolina

In North Carolina, a flap is going on over the Christian flag flying at a veterans' memorial. The local citizens are upset that the city removed the flag that was flying on public property after a veteran of the war in Afghanistan complained about it.

In response the local citizenry has decided to fly the flag themselves in protest, which of course is their right on private property. They are calling for the flag to be put back up, it being lost on them that, not only is it against the separation of church and state for a single religion to be promoted by the State, but that it's just plain rude and a slap in the face of all those who died so that we would all have the right to believe (or not) whatever we want.

But you know what, I have a great idea. Let them put it back up, and then let them put up all other religious flags too, one of every kind the city can find. Because I guarantee that the second a flag with a pentagram or star and crescent goes up there, they'll decide that it's best to not have any religious flags flying there at all.

You have an Idiocracy, if you can keep it...

You may have heard recently that a Pew Forum poll showed that atheist/agnostics scored higher on questions about religion than others. The press has been talking about what it means, etc. yaddy yadda yadda. Well, you know what I think this poll shows? That Americans are stupid. The highest average score (which was among the atheists/agnostics) was a 62%, which when I was in school was a big fat F. That means a bunch of people didn't know crap about religion and few knew a whole lot.

And Diane Winston over at the Huffington Post declares that it's really not important to know these things.

"But really, how important is it to know that Jonathan Edwards was an 18th-century revivalist or that nirvana is the Buddhist experience of freedom from suffering? The focus on factoids obscures a central challenge of the 21st century: negotiating the absolute conflict of multiple religious absolutes."

Well, it's kind of difficult to "negotiate the absolute conflict[s] of multiple religious absolutes" if you don't know shit about any of it. I find that a lot of people in this country are willfully ignorant and make it a point to say that they "don't need to know" anything. Yes, perhaps it is true that you don't need to know any of this stuff to go down to Wal-Mart and go shopping, and stop in at the McDonald's on the way home and stuff your face with a Big Mac and fries (mmmm, fries...). Anyway, it's kinda important when dealing with other people that you have some inkling of what they believe and why and what has happened before now.

In fact, only 2% of people got what would average to an A on it. The questions aren't hard either, they're things that one ought to know from just reading crap on the internet. Or should have learned in a general history/sociology class in college or high school.

You know, you gotta wonder about these things, either that or the intelligence of the people who take them. Only 28% of white evangelicals knew that Protestants teach salvation through faith alone. Only 57% of Jewish people knew that Maimonides was Jewish. I mean, come on, I knew that, he's one of the most important Jewish scholars ever. They did say that the higher the education, the more questions people got right, with college grads getting an average of 20.6 correct while people with a high school diploma or less only got an average of 12.8. Again though, those are averages, and a 20.6 is still an F.

What's funny is only 94% of atheists knew what an atheist is. I mean, that's really, really simple and 6% of self-professed atheists got it wrong. Maybe they just didn't bother reading the questions? I suppose that's a possibility.

The survey also apparently included general knowledge questions. Only 59% of people could name the Vice President. What's scarier than that, is that most of them probably vote...

Let Them Eat Cake

So, on BookTV they're going to be talking about a book, "Generosity Unbound: How American Philanthropy Can Strengthen the Economy and Middle Class". Whenever I hear something that sounds like it's advocating making the filthy rich, richer, alarm bells go off in my head. Now, I obviously have not read the book, and to be honest, probably wouldn't waste my time now that I have looked up who the author is. Or rather, who she's affiliated with. Her name is Claire Gaudiani, and she's a senior fellow at a non-profit, the 'Institute for American Values' (guess who's probably paying her money to say that there should be no regulation of non-profits, you get three guesses). They don't want divorce, they want "traditional values" (again, I say alarm bells go off in my head every time I hear these words), and they have a 'Center for Marriage and Families' that promotes such homophobic people like Maggie Gallagher. They say that gay marriage isn't good for children, and I think, imply that it would be better for a woman to stay with a husband who's beating her "for the sake of the children." Bull shit. Absolute utter tripe.

I don't need to say that the last thing we need to do is make the uber-rich, richer is it? What is this? Serfdom? In America? So that the poor can go and ask for alms at a church service like our ancestors did in Europe seven hundred years ago? What's next, are we going to have to swear fealty to some overlord? Really?

This shit is the antithesis of everything democratic. Making the rich, richer, does NOT strengthen the middle class. A lack of regulation means that those with the money get away with things they shouldn't, and they trod all over the poor. No middle class means no more democracy. No middle class and you have France prior to the French Revolution (gee, how did that turn out for the uber-wealthy?) or Mexico today. And they're trying to pander to the Center and Left by saying that it's "for everyone". Bull shit. I call it a bunch of lies. They can take their right-wing, facist tendencies and shove them where the sun doesn't shine.

When Books Burn...

I'm sure ya'll have heard about the certifiable (as in, insane) pastor in Florida that is planning on burning Korans on 9/11.

A fine example of asshattery

GAINESVILLE, Fla. – The government turned up the pressure Tuesday on the head of a small Florida church who plans to burn copies of the Quran on Sept. 11, warning him that doing so could endanger U.S. troops and Americans everywhere.

But the Rev. Terry Jones insisted he would go ahead with his plans, despite criticism from the top U.S. general in Afghanistan, the White House and the State Department, as well as a host of religious leaders.

Jones, who is known for posting signs proclaiming that Islam is the devil's religion, says the Constitution gives him the right to publicly set fire to the book that Muslims consider the word of God...

First of all, hiding behind the mantra that "the Constitution lets me do it" is a cowardly act. It's in some ways like blaming the devil because you cheated on your spouse. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. One could go and call random black people on the street terrible names, it's a constitutionally protected right after all, but there are consequences. They'd probably get the shit beat out of them, and would anyone be surprised? I think not. So Mr. Asshat here can burn the Koran and piss off a bunch of fundamentalist Muslims. The only problem is, it won't be him getting the beating. It will be some poor bloke, probably some 19 year old kid who enlisted in the military half a world away from home who gets the shit beat out of him because Mr. Asshat is well, an asshat.

We should be outraged that he burns any book at all. Or that anyone burns any book, be it a Bible or Harry Potter. Why you ask? Because this type of sentiment leads to hatred of other human beings. First they burn books, next they burn people. It's happened before, plenty of times. If we're not careful, it can and will happen again. Most of the people of Nazi Germany probably didn't realize the path their country was headed down in 1933 when they vilified Jews and burned Torahs and Synagogues. What path are we on? Vilifying Muslims and burning Korans? The next step will be genocide if no one puts a stop to this crap.

One Nation Under [Her] God

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." --Sinclair Lewis

Reagan bankrupt this country and yet he's still their darling. I curse his memory by the way. Then G.Dubya took his ideology to the extreme and it has plummeted us into another Great Depression. And the fact that she blames the Department of Education for No Child Left Behind crap is moronic at best. It was a bill introduced in congress and signed by their beloved G.Dubya. That's fucking rich that is. Let's just lie, lie, lie, and pretty soon no one will even know the truth. Our education system here sucks, and you know why? Because it's funded by property taxes. The rich get a great education and the poor, as usual, get fucked over. And NCLB has nothing to do with it.

That she would cite Bachmann, means she's crazier than batshit. I guess it takes one to know one.

Americans For Prosperity? One might mistake that they're for the prosperity of Americans, but that would be a mistake. They're for Americans supporting the Corporatocracy. Yes, let's cut taxes for the rich and fuck the People over by refusing to extend the unemployment insurance and by shipping jobs overseas so that CEOs can make more profits. Why don't they just dispense with the pretense and just call it what it is. Americans for the Fascist Corporatocracy. Or maybe The Fascist Corporatocracy for the Support of American Serfs.

I often wonder why politicians who want to be in control of government, pander to the "small government" group, and then when they get in there, they do the same damned thing every other politician has ever done, LIE LIE LIE and back corporate interests in spite of the people they're supposed to be representing. They don't do anything to make the government smaller. They do everything they can to put more and more of our government into the pockets of private business interests.

Border patrol is the job of Immigration and Customs. By advocating that the States should have the right to practice border patrol, means that they are advocating succeeding from the Union, de facto, because that means next they'll be saying they ought then have the ability to issue visas and passports so they can control who comes into their state. Maybe Nevada ought to succeed, and we can ship all the nutty neo-Cons there and they can live in a great utopia of oppression of the lower classes. I suppose the gambling capital of the country will have to go somewhere else (or we'll have to be really rich and go to Monaco to gamble) and I also suppose that we'll have to grant refugee status to anyone from Nevada with a brain and half a thought in their head.

"What caused the problems [with the economy] in the first place"?!?!?!? I can answer that for you Mme. Angle. YOUR PARTY is the cause of the economy collapsing! That's what happens when you deregulate every fucking thing. MORONS. All of them.

*sorry if I've rambled tonight, I blame the beer, it makes my thoughts meander =P

**edit**

SeeingEyeChick pointed out that she looks a lot like "The Chicken Lady" (Sue Lowden, left) who I must have missed (terrible I know)... why does the party of red wear blue, the color of the opposition?

Mazes and Monsters

Too funny! Reminds me of all the people who blame television and games for the "degenerate youth of today." A complaint Pliny the Younger made two thousand years ago.