Obamacare Survives. Why?

PictureBack In February, this news site explained exactly what would happen and why. It is also no great surprise that three of the justices are so bitter and out of touch that they could not recognize hate and incompetence—even when it smacks them in the face with a two-by-four. You would think that if you were looking to destroy Obamacare that the highly paid legal team of the American Enterprise Institute could find just four plaintiffs that were actually harmed in some way by the law.

Now the question arises what is ObamaCare, it is the patient protection act came into effect from 2010. It not only covers the health insurance but it is more than that what American thinks. To take the advantage of ObamaCare one can enroll for this health care exchange from 1st November 2018 and the last date of enrolment is 15th December 2018. The most interesting part of this act is you have to have the health insurance for at least up to nine months. The critics of President Obama created this to reform the health care sector and named it.

If you already have a health insurance it must provide all the ten health benefits and the insurance company can’t ignore the pre-existing health coverage.  Even the parents can include their kids in this plan. For the people who can not effort to buy health insurance, the Medicaid was extended for them. Not all the states had this privilege of extended Medicaid even after federal government subsidies. People with too much Medicaid will receive a tax credit, as the poverty level increases every year to keep p with the inflation. The five factors which determine the cost of Obamacare are age, where you live, which plan you choose, family size. To learn more about ObamaCare click Crypto CFD Trader System.

But no, that was a task beyond those fat cats. As the country hurls towards an oligarchy, with the full backing of the Supreme Court – the only thing that might cause this march towards oblivion, is the sheer overwhelming stupidity of the vehicle being used to crash down the gates of democracy – The Stupidparty. We just hope the voters can figure this out in time, before it is too late.

Welcome to a new way to promote facts to the American people in order to inoculate us all from all the deadly myths that threaten us all.

Now please read on…for the full story.

Stupidparty Myth #1—USA has the best healthcare system; thus, why reform?

Stupidparty Healthcare Expertise.

“Shortly before the Missouri primary, Santorum—arguing against Barack Obama’s healthcare law—made some rather startling claims about the medical system in the Netherlands, claiming that 1 in 20 deaths in the country were caused by forced euthanasia, and that elderly Dutch wear bracelets that say ‘do not euthanize me’ and ‘don’t go to the hospital, they go to another country, because they’re afraid because of budget purposes that they will not come out of that hospital if they go into it with sickness.’

The euthanasia act came into existence in the year 2002 in the Netherlands. It is an assisted suicide and not a punishment. the physical assists to patents request to end life depending on his or her health conditions and consultation with another physician . to know more about Euthanasia Act click on the link Crypto Code software

“When asked by a Dutch reporter where the candidate had gotten these alarming facts, a campaign spokeswoman would only say, ‘It’s a matter of what’s in his heart.’”http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/04/10/our_favorite_rick_santorum_moments

Are you ready for the Facts? Can you handle the Truth? Time to swallow the blue pill

Are you ready, hey, are you ready for this?
Are you hanging on the edge of your seat?
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
To the sound of the beat

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another one bites the dust
Hey, I’m gonna get you, too
Another one bites the dust

Stupidparty Myth #1—USA has the best healthcare system; thus, why reform?

This is what Stupidparty does not want to reform—USA #46 out of #48:

Picture

http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-an-worst/most-efficient-health-care-countries  *since crafting this Graphic – Bloomberg has posted updated info, putting the USA at #46. This slight improvement likely due to increasing impact of Obamacare.

As you can see, not only is the system lousy; it is far more expensive—with the only exception being Switzerland, which comes in at #9. In terms of percentage of GDP, the USA is in a class of its own.

Picture

                                                 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/most-efficient-healthcare_n_3825477.html  Picture
 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/International_Comparison_-_Healthcare_spending_as_%25_GDP.png

There are several key problems with the U.S. healthcare system, one being that even though 49.9m Americans (in 2010) did not have coverage, the rest of us still pay about 50% more than we should.  Absent reform (i.e., Stupidparty plan), the number of Americans without insurance was projected to grow to 67m by 2020 as premiums doubled. This number a) assumes that Stupidparty states stop their attacks on public workers (i.e., no more Stupidparty) and b) does not factor in the ever-decreasing coverage actually provided by most employer-sponsored plans. http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/politics/btn-health-care/index.html

Stupidparty states relative to Blue States in % uninsured.

Picture

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance_coverage_in_the_United_States#Estimates_of_the_number_uninsured

 The rest of us still pay about 50% more for healthcare than we should.

 So how did the U.S. end up being 50% more expensive than necessary—in addition to ignoring the needs of the people who cannot afford such usurious pricing? It is all in the History and the Myth.

The History.

Winning the Second World War opened up a Pandora’s box for the Allies. Europe went broke fighting the Nazis, and the biggest concern was social unrest, leading to more and more countries falling under the spine-tingling shadow of Stalin. The American economy was in better shape, having benefitted from Keynesian medicine during a deflationary environment—i.e., the investment in the war effort, on top of the New Deal, put America ahead, and Americans were willing to provide loans (the Marshall Plan) to Europe (debt for Europe) to help mitigate unrest.

Churchill dreaded the implication of millions of people who had put their lives on the line coming home to no jobs, no hope. Stupidparty philosophy would say people without jobs should starve (even veterans), but Churchill had never heard of Stupidparty and was in fact destined to die about thirty years before its birth. So he had another idea. Winston Churchill, a Conservative icon in the USA and Britain, initiated what is now called the welfare state. This included the national health system. The prime motivation was simply to help people who needed help get people back on their feet, and create social stability.

The birth of healthcare in the USA was somewhat different. Its birth has been captured on audiotape. You can hear it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmHTte8jRLk. When policy advisers introduced the concept to President Richard Nixon, he was initially aghast. But when it was explained that insurance would provide the coverage and that plenty of profits could be made, well, he was immediately on board.

The USA started on a more suspect foundation, but how does it remain so far behind the other developed nations? Because of various

The Myths.

Myth #1.Picture

The USA is the best. See charts above.

Myth #2 Obamacare.

Actually, it is the Affordable Care Act—built on old GOP philosophy and enacted by Romney as governor of Massachusetts, the state that now has the lowest number of uninsured and ranks at the top or near the top in various categories of health, as will be illustrated.

Myth #3 Europeans have to pay higher Taxes.

Even when the U.S. mainstream media attempts to do objective analysis, they fall into this trap. When Dr. Sanjay Gupta of CNN did his earnest and heartfelt analysis comparing the USA to other countries, all his efforts came crumbling down—because he said Europeans pay more taxes, a point you can only make if you put it into perspective. This tax argument implies that Americans are getting healthcare free (since it is often part of a person’s benefit package). At the end of the day, an American is paying 50% more—so calling the European system a tax is just playing with words. If an American company were not responsible for your healthcare and the associated administrative costs, these fees (taxes), that they would no longer have to pay could simply go back into the employee’s paycheck.

Myth #4 Obamacare is a government takeover.

No, it is not.

Myth #5 The public option is a government takeover.

Since the Stupidparty failed to change the title in an Orwellian fashion, to the “public death panel option” (as they tried to!!!!!! with the Affordable Care Act), it is really a mystery how Stupidparty Disciples can get so confused. Well, maybe not such a mystery when one considers the massive amount of misinformation put out by lobbyists, Stupidparty reps, and their Benefactors.

The public option is in fact remarkably simple. You would merely have the option of buying insurance from the government. Nobody is forcing you to opt out of your current plans. The Stupidparty feared the public option because they realized that mathematical logic would over time drive consumers eagerly to reevaluating the single-payer approach (an approach that could still allow people to buy healthcare from the private market). The reform we ended up with, while vital, is far less satisfactory and far more complex—all in order to keep Benefactors well fed. Math was mainly overpowered by Myth.

Sometimes I hear businessmen complaining about Obamacare. But unless they advocated for the public option or the single payer, these businessmen deserve no sympathy, this is their fault. However Business should not be forced to do this task. It is a tremendous waste of their resources.

So why is the U.S. system so inefficient?

  • Insurance companies can only pay out about $65 for every $100 in premium.
  • Individual insurance companies have less clout to bring down costs of medicine and medical care.
  • Doctors’ offices employ an array of people and systems to figure out coverage and co-insurance issues, chase down the disputes, the nonpayers, liaising with multiple insurance companies, each with its own rules, etc.
  • Hospitals likewise devote massive resources to coverage issues, disputes and chasing nonpayers, and dealing with people with no resources.
  • Because so many people do not have coverage, they cannot get preventive measures; thus, by the time they’re up in the emergency room, their condition is more severe, making more it difficult to get back to work, to look after kids or other family members or save their own business.
  • The U.S. health system has another major drawback, which hurts not only people without coverage but also those with coverage or those who may be owed money by others……

Bankruptcy—barely an issue in Europe. As many as 62% of bankruptcies were caused by medical costs, according to a Harvard study. Close to three out of four health-cost related bankruptcies are filed by people who had insurance—just not good enough insurance enough to cover the high costs of modern medical care. “I may see a $100,000 bill covered by insurance—but it comes with a $20,000 co-pay,” Rose said. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/american_journal_of_medicine_09.pdf

Myth #6.

Bankruptcy no big deal, only 1% a year.

Actually, 1% is a big deal when you put this number in its proper perspective, Assume someone has a working career of thirty-five years; this would mean that person has a 35% chance of going bankrupt. Are you happy with those odds?

Myth #? (no number, as it is not an obvious myth): cancer-survivor rates.

So now Stupidparty Disciples fall back onto one rather dubious argument, that U.S. cancer-survival rates are better. But this is highly dubious.

While it appears that U.S. rates are generally better than in Europe (only if you are insured), Dr. Otis Brawley, the chief medical officer and executive vice president at the American Cancer Society (in commenting on a paper written by Tomas Philipson, of the University of Chicago, with others), said that it “has a huge fatal flaw in it. . . . When you look at survival from time of diagnosis to time of death and you have a screened population that has a lot of diagnoses, you’re filling that population with people who don’t need treatment and because they are over-diagnosed, they have very long survival,” he added. http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/04/09/cancer-care-costs-higher-in-us-than-europe-but-survival-longer

But even with that caution in mind, survival rates in Canada, Japan, Australia, and Cuba were all comparable to or higher than U.S. rates on all types of cancer except for prostate. The prostrate-cancer exception is also likely due to aggressive screening picking up cases that actually never need to be treated (and unnecessary treatment comes with its own problems)—thus, one is not comparing apples to apples.

Dr. Marie Diener-West, a professor of biostatistics at Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, told us that it would be a stretch to draw too many conclusions from comparing survival rates. “Part of the problem with the comparison is that it might not actually be comparable populations,” she said. “It could be [one is] an older population, it could be they have more comorbidities [other conditions] that are affecting their survival in addition to cancer, there could be occupational differences. There are many different factors that could be playing a role.”http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/cancer-rates-and-unjustified-conclusions/

How does one explain such massive levels of confusion? The Stupidparty strategically just wants to destroy Obama. They do not really care how. The method is misrepresentation; the driving force is the money from the Benefactors, and the conduits are Fox “news,” non-sport talk radio (what many people refer to as hate radio), and paid-off congressmen. All of this will be properly illustrated in later chapters.

Personally, and outside of satellite radio and NPR, I have yet to come across, on a regular basis, any talk radio that actually benignly cultivates the mind. From my experience, it invariably cultivates fear, zero objectivity, questionable information—creating fertile ground for increased fundamentalism and bigotry. Because of this, I rarely listen to terrestrial talk radio anymore. This may explain why there will no chapter devoted to the characters that dominate that media.

Curtain Call. – -Oh alright, just one more time:

Are you ready, hey, are you ready for this?
Are you hanging on the edge of your seat?
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
To the sound of the beat

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another one bites the dust
Hey, I’m gonna get you, too
Another one bites the dust

Bernard “Bernie” Sanders: The Political Foresight Champion

“[After Clinton’s introduction] Introducing second, from the progressive corner, weighing 200 pounds—he hails from Brooklyn, New York, and was rated, by many, as the best vote-for-vote politician in Washington, with one no-vote on Iraq, a prediction of the Great Recession 10 years before it occurred, and a 100% approval rating from the Human Rights Campaign, the former Mayor of Burlington, Member of the House, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veteran’s Affairs, and current United States Senator from Vermont, Bernie ‘I Support the Middle Class’ Saaaannnnnddderrrrrrrrrrrs!” Picture

Bernie Sanders has just stepped into the boxing match known as the Democratic primary— bouncing up and down, punching his gloves together, with his head held high. Bernie is ready for a knock-down, drag-out fight against the establishment. Waiting in the other corner is a political titan, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Hillary has done it all: she was First Lady, served as Governor of New York, ran for the Democratic nomination in 2008, and most recently, was handpicked by Barack Obama to serve as the Secretary of State. And moreover, Hillary’s political positions aren’t that far off from what Bernie is propagating. However, there lies one key difference: Bernie’s political foresight makes Nostradamus look like a Medieval street prophet.

How so? Bernie has the upper hand on Hillary with regard to three specific issues: the War in Iraq, the financial crisis, and pro-LGBT positions. Let’s start with the War in Iraq, a conflict that Bernie opposed from the outset.

“I am concerned about the problems of so-called unintended consequences. Who will govern Iraq when Saddam Hussein is removed and what role will the U.S. play in ensuing a civil war that could develop in that country?”

Bernie didn’t authorize the Bush Administration to conduct operations in Iraq. Instead of pandering to the financial elite by supporting false pretexts for war, conjured up by Saruman Cheney (an incredibly nerdy LOTR reference, I know), Bernie had the mental wherewithal to comprehend the difficulties of controlling a post-invasion Iraq, whereby he predicted the creation of a power vacuum that would foster an environment of extremism.

Years later, Iraq has become a breeding ground for radical jihadists seeking to construct a Muslim caliphate. Thanks to George “Dumbya” Bush, and his pro-defense inner circle, the Middle East has reached a dangerous crossroads, one between moderate Muslims, and those who seek to distort the Koran to fit their morally backwards religious objectives, such as, oh, you know, banning the breeding of pigeons, as they fly over head and expose their genitals to unsuspecting civilians. Apparently, Middle Eastern pigeons are as well-endowed as Ron Jeremy, or, breeders supplement their diets with Cialis…

But back to my point, Bernie’s astute argument also sheds light on America’s future role in post-invasion Iraq—the underlying inferences being: 1) how long will conflict last, 2) the level of engagement required, and 3) the role to which the US will play in dictating domestic Iraqi affairs. Factors the Bush Administration, Republicans, and duped Democrats refused or naively disregarded. Bernie’s cautious calculations and tamed foreign policy objectives demonstrate his lucid political foresight.

The democratic socialist, from the great state of Ben and Jerry’s, also predicted the 2008 Financial Crisis in a Congressional hearing on financial bailouts, ten years before the financial collapse.

The financial crisis of 2008 is also known as the global financial crisis. It is considered as one of the worst financial crisis after 1930. The global economy is still recovering from its impact. It is said that banks are responsible for these worst financial condition, as it created too much money to push the housing prices. To know more about financial crisis click Bitcoin Trader software

In sum, Bernie Sanders calls out trickle-down economics, wealth inequality, hedging, Federal Reserve bailouts, economic cronyism, and has hinted at these policies culminating in an unsustainable system that would contribute to financial turmoil. Bear in mind, the economy at the tail-end of the previous century was booming, so Bernie’s statement may have fallen upon deaf ears. Nonetheless, Bernie’s refusal to mollycoddle the financial elite was a political standpoint that has become mainstream ever since the financial collapse. And while one can’t tie Hillary to these policies—as she was the First Lady at the time—her husband, with the benefit of hindsight, was perhaps a bit too comfortable with the now faded icon, Alan Greenspan, who created an economic paradigm that justified massive wealth accumulation by financial giants, shady derivatives schemes, and white collar gambling on Wall Street. The untouchable Greenspan Ayn Randian unfettered capitalism dream that was fated once again to lead to economic Armageddon. Once again, Bernie’s political foresight brings credibility to his consistent moral convictions.

I will concede, hPictureowever, that a few individuals on the Right, like Ron Paul, predicted the financial meltdown, but Paul’s solutions to the problem would have exacerbated the crisis. For one, Paul has consistently advocated for the radical roll back of the government regulatory scheme, but what he fails to realize is that deregulation and a lack of oversight were a couple of the primary factors behind the economic collapse. To be more specific, certain regulations were weakly enforced and sufficient safeguards were not instituted, despite warnings signs of an impending financial collapse starting in 2007. So, while Ron Paul’s prediction is accurate, his economic proposals, assuming they had been adopted, would have only deepened the crisis,

PictureIncidentally, Bernie, in 1979, wrote about the potential issues associated with the privatization of television networks. One excerpt that stands out is his reference to the TV industry’s objective—due to it being mostly owned by private corporations—of intentionally stupefying American television viewers in order to drive advertising profits. Essentially, according to Bernie, television content that lacked intellectual subject matter would become commonplace: a prediction that has panned out. I mean, have you watched Fox News lately? Viewers of this jingoistic propaganda machine are less informed than individuals who don’t watch news at all. Bernie’s prognosticating is surely eerie, especially when one considers that  90% of the American media is owned by 6 corporations.

In my opinion, Bernie’s unwavering backing of LGBT rights draws another distinction between the two Democratic frontrunners. Remember, Hillary Clinton, in the 2008 Democratic Primary, ran on an anti-gay marriage platform; a possible consequence of public sentiment regarding same-sex marriage not hovering at, or over 50%–a position made out of political convenience, rather than doing what’s right. My criticism isn’t only confined to Hillary Clinton: Barack Obama played the same “my opinion evolved” card, acting as if they never favored same-sex marriage in the first place. And while a presidential candidate’s opinions typically reflect party preferences, Democrats, as a coalition, have supported same-sex marriage by a majority for years—so why the wait?

On the other hand, Bernie Sanders was in favor of same-sex marriage when it was largely unpopular: he voted against numerous anti-gay marriage measures and received a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign—he never had to “evolve” his opinion. Bernie unquestionably recognized marriage as a right which should be granted to all American citizens, regardless of sexual orientation. Public opinion is peripheral to Bernie’s support of human rights: understanding the immorality of legally suppressive measures, even if supported by a majority, is key to becoming a morally upstanding leader. Bernie’s acceptance of same-sex marriage is, to some degree, analogous to Civil Rights leaders such as Martin Luther King, as they were able to differentiate between just and unjust laws regardless of restrictive social mores.

Political foresight is a skill limited to a few intuitive politicians—Bernie being one of them. His entrance into the race, whether or not he dethrones Clinton, forces Clinton to accept more left-leaning positions, especially in regards to foreign policy, financial markets, and civil rights. Moreover, Clinton substantially benefits from a strong primary challenge, as it prepares her for the grueling and hyper-scrutinized general election. Thankfully, the Democratic nominee will be running against circus clowns, who tend to have the mental capacity of domestic Turkeys—an animal known to get frightened and, in a state of panic, continuously run into a corner until a Turkey mountain is created, which suffocates those stuck on the bottom.

In the end, Bernie’s heightened political foresight and adherence to moral convictions can set the standard for what Americans expect from their elected leaders: an ability to think critically, and a strong, “stable,” moral character.

How Not to Fight Terrorism or Gun Violence: See the Republican Party

In this extremely powerful piece Brian discusses issues that also drive me crazy. To watch a genuine statesman like President Obama constantly stymied by a nation who does not come close to measuring up to his abilities—is like watching a Greek tragedy unfold. He is way too constrained, as he must be, to really explain how absurd society has become. The issues are prioritized just defies belief. One would have thought that after the 9/11 attacks that th2353366.jpge US would spend more than a nano second in introspection. But no, even though the world really wanted to join with America in it’s grief, the Country was doomed to double down in Stupid. Since being elected Obama has had to operate against an opposition that has become totally dependent on its Stupidparty bigot base. America has an infantile Gun culture, we all know this, yet we are all held hostage by the NRA, a thoroughly insidious organisation that should exiled—them and Fox etc, how else do people get so much false information, so much hatred—and unlike Brian I was horrified by the actions of the Boston police as the events reached their climax…. to be continued as postscript to this excellent piece of reporting:

How Not to Fight Terrorism or Gun Violence: See the Republican Party

Gun violence in the USA is the major area of concern for the government; it results in thousands of deaths in the country. 2013 alone has seen 73505 firearm injuries and 33636 deaths.  These deaths happened because of homicide, suicide and negligent use of firearms.  To know read more about gun violence click Crypto VIP Club review

By Brian E. Frydenborg (LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter @bfry1981) June 20th, 2015

I wrote, but never published, the below piece in the weeks after the Tsarnaev brothers carried out their horrific lone wolf terrorist attack on the city of Boston at the finish-line for the Boston Marathon on April 15th, 2013.  The points I raised then are just as relevant now.  When President Obama addressed the nation on the recent white-supremacist terrorist Charleston shooting, it was a sobering, depressing moment.  His tone, his body language, screamed defeat and resignation, resignation that anything could or would be done in response to this act of terror.  The contrast between this Obama and the Obama who took office—who was full of hope and enthusiasm and belief in the American people and system—was crushing to see.  I have hardly seen all of Obama’s press conferences, but this was the most dejected I had ever seen him.  There was an undercurrent of anger in him too, but more than anything, Obama conveyed a sense of hopeless frustration in that press conference:

Tintinb622Until the investigation is complete, I’m necessarily constrained in terms of talking about the details of the case.  But I don’t need to be constrained about the emotions that tragedies like this raise. I’ve had to make statements like this too many times.  Communities like this have had to endure tragedies like this too many time.  We don’t have all the facts, but we do know that once again innocent people were killed in part because someone who wanted to inflict harm had no trouble getting their hands on a gun.  Now is the time for mourning and healing, but let’s be clear: at some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries.  It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.  And it is in our power to do something about it. I say that recognizing the politics in this town foreclose a lot of those avenues right now. But it would be wrong for us not to acknowledge it. And at some point it’s going to be important for the American people to come to grips with it, and for us to be able to shift how we think about the issue of gun violence collectively.

At some point, but not now, and not during my presidency, because I am powerless as things stand now to do anything about this,” Obama seemed to silently be thinking.  This was before Obama’s big week at the Supreme Court, and his singing of Amazing Grace and his eulogy in Charleston.

Comedian Jon Stewart—ironically, and, over his long career as host of The Daily Show, hardly for the first time—outdid the president  in deliveing an even more searing, relevant, and necessary message on the Charleston shooting.  The day of the shooting, Stewart chose to forego comedy completely and to deliver an impassioned monologue about our inability to confront either racial issues or domestic gun violence, and our superability to freak out about foreign people killing Americans but to just nihilistically shrug away the far more frequent violence of Americans killing other Americans:

I honestly have nothing other than just sadness once again that we have to peer into the abyss of the depraved violence that we do to each other and the nexus of a just gaping racial wound that will not heal, yet we pretend doesn’t exist. And I’m confident, though, that by acknowledging it, by staring into that and seeing it for what it is, we still won’t do jack shit. Yeah. That’s us.

And that’s the part that blows my mind. I don’t want to get into the political argument of the guns and things. But what blows my mind is the disparity of response between when we think people that are foreign are going to kill us, and us killing ourselves.

If this had been what we thought was Islamic terrorism, it would fit into our — we invaded two countries and spent trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives and now fly unmanned death machines over five or six different countries, all to keep Americans safe. We got to do whatever we can. We’ll torture people. We gotta do whatever we can to keep Americans safe.

Nine people shot in a church. What about that? “Hey, what are you gonna do? Crazy is as crazy is, right?” That’s the part that I cannot, for the life of me, wrap my head around, and you know it. You know that it’s going to go down the same path. “This is a terrible tragedy.” They’re already using the nuanced language of lack of effort for this. This is a terrorist attack. This is a violent attack on the Emanuel Church in South Carolina, which is a symbol for the black community. It has stood in that part of Charleston for 100 and some years and has been attacked viciously many times, as many black churches have.

He concludes his monologue by noting that “We’re bringing it on ourselves. And that’s the thing—al Qaeda, ISIS, they’re not shit compared to the damage we can do to ourselves on a regular basis.” Picture

The truth of Stewart’s concluding statement is something very few major American political leaders even attempt to acknowledge, let along discuss.  The Department of Homeland Security itself is equally (and in some ways more) concerned about domestic right-wing terrorist attacks than attacks by Islamic extremists.  And this perspective and Stewart’s are completely in line with American history and facts because since the 9/11 attacks, 48 people were killed by non-Muslims in terrorist attacks in America, compared to only 26 people being killed by Muslim terrorists on American soil.  In the era before 2001, most notably, white anti-government extremist Timothy McVeigh carried out the biggest terrorist attack in American history before 9/11, killing 168 people and injuring hundreds more in Oklahoma City in 1995.  But domestic terrorism stretched back much earlier: between 1882 and 1968, over 4,700 Americans were killed by extremist lynch mobs, often involving the terrorist Ku Klux Klan.  And especially in the years of Reconstruction (1865-1877) at the end of the Civil War in 1865, Ku Klux Klan terrorists and other terrorists murdered thousands of freed former slaves and their white allies in a terrorist guerilla insurgency against Federal troops and the new state governments they had set up that provided freedom for former slaves, an insurgency which succeeded and paved the way for the institutionalized mass oppression backed by terror that was the Jim Crow and segregation era.  The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries saw a spate of anarchist terrorism, including the assassination of President William McKinley in 1901.

In the wake of the Charleston shootings, I now present my thoughts from over two years ago about how the threat of Islamic terrorism needs to be put in a healthy. proportional perspective and that we need to take much (but most certainly not all!) of the energy devoted to combatting that threat and devote it to dealing with more serious, deadly, and pressing issues here at home.

How Not to Stop a Terrorist 

A nineteen-year-old amateur terrorist on the run does not even come close to warranting a citywide shutdown.  That it did happen should scare us all.

By Brian E. Frydenborg- May 20th 2013

Firstly, I want to begin by making clear that the Boston Police Department, the Watertown Police Department, Boston’s first responders, the National Guard, the FBI, the ATF, and other city, local, state, and federal workers did a great job helping the wounded, saving lives, keeping the Boston metro area safe, and bringing justice to one of the perpetrators of the horrific attacks in Boston and apprehending the other.  The people of Boston, for responding to so well under attack and pressure, also deserve a lot of credit.

Having said that, the scene that unfolded on CNN live over the course of these events should deeply disturb all Americans for reasons that very few American commentators or pundits have even discussed.  And I have to admit I am deeply disturbed that I am, apparently, one of the few people I know who feel this way.

I admit, I have hardly been able to see or read all commentary on the internet or watch every TV news program, but so far I’ve only come across three pundits who have expressed my views or views similar to them: Harvard’s Stephen Walt, writing several pieces for Foreign Policy, Michael Cohen, writing for Britain’s The Observer, and Michael Shapira, writing for the The Washington Times (and yes, I am troubled that I agree with The Washington Times).  Those commentators on major TV networks or writing for most major publications, not so much.  It honestly makes me feel very alone and isolated, and that, as much as I love my country, I feel at times as if I cannot identify with it or feel a part of it.  This feeling has been creeping into me over the last decade, but after these recent events, it has never been more profound or more disturbing.

Before getting into what specifically I had problems with, let’s go through a few basic facts.  Firstly, two brothers, who it seems acted alone, planted two pressure cooker bombs on a major street in Boston at the finish line for the Boston Marathon on the afternoon of April 15th and exploded them during said marathon.  Three people were killed by the bombs and 264 wounded, some of them grievously so.  Before the authorities had any real suspects, a massive security presence arrived in Boston: state and local police, National Guard troops, FBI, ATF, and others.  When photos of two suspects were released on the early evening of April 18th, only a few hours later authorities were able to identify them even as they proceeded to attack and kill an MIT Police Officer, stole a car and took the owner hostage. Later, in the early hours of April 19th, a firefight ensued between authorities and the brothers in Watertown, resulting in the wounding, capture, and later the death of the older brother while the younger brother escaped. At dawn, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick then issued a call for all Boston area residents to “shelter in place,” what was essentially a non-legally-binding request to lock down the entire Boston metropolitan area. Not only Boston was shutdown but also its suburbs: people were told not to come into work and most businesses were shutdown, the subway, Amtrak, almost all taxis and public transportation were shutdown, and all this on a weekday.  In effect, the Boston metropolitan area ceased to function for over a day.  Ironically, only after the lockdown request was rescinded was the other brother found by a Watertown resident who was out and about on his property, out and about precisely because the order had been lifted.  Soon after authorities apprehending the suspect.  Overall, a good win for law enforcement and authorities, bad guys caught or dead.  But the issue of the lockdown is something else entirely, and I am going to single that out from what I feel was otherwise a good job on the part of government officials.

PictureAnd here is where I depart company with my fellow Americans and am part of some sort of extremely tiny minority:  I think this massive lockdown was a shockingly over-the-top, ridiculously unnecessary, and disturbingly unprecedented action.  And I want this in particular to be clear to my readers: never in this history of terrorist attacks has an entire city, an entire metro area, been shut down in such a near total way in response to an attack or attacks.  They say never say never, well, I am saying this never, ever happened in the history of terrorism until the authorities in Boston made that call.  Anyone who doubts the scale of the lockdown needs only to look at these pictures posted by Boston-area residents.  As a student of politics and public policy, of terrorism and history, of comparative policy and human behavior, I can tell you that major cities have been dealing with terrorism for over a century.  There were anarchist bombings all over the country early in the twentieth century.  Jewish terrorists used bombings against British forces in Mandate Palestine, and Palestinians and Lebanese have used terrorist bombings against Israeli forces and sometimes civilians.  Europe has had to deal with terrorist bombings from a variety of groups, from the Red Brigades to the Irish Republican Army to Basque separatists.  The Tamil Tigers regularly hit targets in Sri Lanka.  In the last decade and then some, terrorist attacks hit London, Madrid, Mumbai, Jerusalem, Moscow, cities in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, more recently Libya and Syria and many other places.  Some of these cities routinely deal with terrorist attacks, cities like London, Jerusalem, Baghdad, and Kabul.  In Western/developed countries in particular, most of the counterterrorist operations are successful, the perpetrators caught or killed, further immediate attacks stopped or prevented.  These countries are able to more or less tactically successfully deal with these incidents, and they all have one thing in common: they never, ever shut-down an entire city in response to a few bombings.  In fact, many of these incidents were far more deadly than the bombings in Boston.  So why the near-total city shutdown in Boston, when competent, successful, prudent, and experienced counterterrorist officials in places like London, Madrid, and Jerusalem never even came close to making such a call?  What was so different about Boston’s incident that warranted such an unprecedented, massive shutdown compared with far deadlier attacks in Barcelona, Berlin, Baghdad, Belfast, Beirut, Bersheeva, or any of many other places?

Seen in the context of other similar—or worse—incidents and what the general (at least in developed countries quite often more or less successful) responses to them were, the shutdown of the Boston metro area makes no sense and is beyond the definition of overkill.  Of course it is natural for people to overreact.  And it is natural for a place like Boston which is so unused to such attacks to overreact.  But public policy is not supposed to be about giving in to immediate emotion.  Policymakers have a responsibility to coolly assess the situation, and make decisions based on looking at how successful responses have worked in similar situations, prudently using an appropriate level of time, effort, energy and resources.  And, simply stated, there is nothing in the history of counterterrorism which even remotely suggested that the necessary response was one of such a massive proportion as Boston’s response, a response in which a major metropolitan area in the U.S. was shut down in order to track down one remaining suspect who was a nineteen-year old kid (and an amateur, at that) whose picture was already on every television screen in America.  If one crazy punk can cause an entire major U.S. city to shut-down, then we are doing something wrong and the terrorists are winning.  Maybe they have even already won.  Osama bin Laden’s goal with the 9/11 attacks was to draw the U.S. into a long, costly, bloody war that would drain our treasure, international standing, and our will to fight overseas, make the U.S. pull back our support for the non-Islamic regimes in the Middle East and South and Central Asia, and use such a conflict to draw recruits to al-Qaeda from all over the world.  While we hesitated putting a massive presence on the ground in Afghanistan, with Iraq, gave him exactly what we wanted.  It took a few years, but the sickening truth is that bin Laden played us like a harp.  Now, it seems, we are at an even more extreme progression of bin Laden’s trap: the point where we can let one nineteen-year-old kid shut down a whole city and paralyze the lives of millions.

Let’s go through the typical responses I hear when I raise this issue:

“But the authorities didn’t know if there were other attackers or sleeper cells.” Yeah, and neither do any authorities after any terrorist attack in any city, but they don’t shut down a whole city.

“Any cost is worth saving lives.”  Really?  If one American citizen was taken hostage in, say, North Korea, do we then invade that country?  When shooting sprees and murders take place in the U.S., do we shut down whole towns and cities to catch the perpetrators and protect people?  Or do authorities take a more limited approach, not shut down a whole city and disrupt the lives of millions, and target their efforts in a more limited but relatively reasonably cost-effective response?  As Stephen Walt points out, not long before Boston, there was a heavily armed police officer with military training who was killing people in L.A., but L.A. wasn’t shut down.  The DC-area sniper-team a few years back killed people over a much longer period of time, and DC was not shut down.  London had a much worse attack a few years back which killed far more people, and the Brits did not shut London down.  The point is, lives can still be saved, killers and terrorists still stopped, without shutting down whole cities and disrupting the lives of millions (what terrorists generally want, right?), and the estimates of the costs of shutting Boston down for a day have ranged from several hundred million to a billion dollars.  And, again, I want to re-emphasize this was to chase down a single remaining suspect.  It cannot cost us hundreds of millions of dollars every time a terrorist strikes, there is no way that that kind of loss and/or expenditure is necessary, let alone sustainable, and that kind of inefficiency of application of resources is—and should always be viewed as—unacceptable.  If anything, it encourages would-be-terrorists who seek that kind of massive overreaction.

“Maybe he would have gotten away if the city hadn’t been shut down!” Not likely.  Again, if these other cities like London and Jerusalem are good at catching these terrorists without shutting down an entire city, why can’t we be as good and as efficient as they are?  And it was only after the request to stay indoors was lifted that a local resident left his house and found the suspect.

“Well, it was different in Boston.”  Was it really?  As I pointed out, many other attacks have been far worse, and deadlier, and involved more terrorists and multiple cells.  If anything, Boston was different in that the attack was small, using low-grade explosives that only killed three people, and with just two lone-wolves involved.

“Well Boston isn’t used to this kind of stuff, so it’s understandable.”  Again, government officials are supposed to transcend visceral gut reactions and emotion.  So, no, it’s not understandable form a public policy perspective.

It seems like it is asking for a lot these days, but I just want my country to be competent and measured in the way I see other modern, developed countries often conduct themselves.  I want us not to be the overreacting, Incredible-Hulk-meets-Daffy-Duck of nations.  And I want us to have a healthy perspective and sense of proportionality.  I must be naïve, and Walt laments this, too, when he wrote that

The more I think about the events that transfixed Boston and the nation last week, the more troubled I am. Not by what it says about the dangers we face from violent extremists (aka “terrorism”), but for what it says about our collective inability to keep these dangers in perspective and to respond to them sensibly. I am beginning to wonder if our political and social system is even capable of a rational response to events of this kind.

…The grossly disproportionate reaction to the Marathon attacks tells me that our political system is increasingly incapable of weighing dangers intelligently and allocating resources in a sensible manner. Unless we get better at evaluating dangers and responding to them appropriately, we are going to focus too much time and attention on a few bad things because they happen to be particularly vivid, and not enough on the problems on which many more lives ultimately depend.

He points out that far more people were killed while the Boston drama was underway by a factory explosion in Texas on April 17th, and links to Michael Cohen’s article.  Cohen notes that the plant which exploded had not been inspected by federal government Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspectors since 1985, and that the Republicans want to cut that agency’s funding even more.  He notes that far more people are killed by non-terrorist gun violence in the U.S. (as I have pointed out), and that while the Boston incident and aftermath unfolded, the Republicans killed the legislation on background checks that had an overwhelming majority of Americans supporting it.  As he concludes.

It is a surreal and difficult-to-explain dynamic. Americans seemingly place an inordinate fear on violence that is random and unexplainable and can be blamed on “others” – jihadists, terrorists, evil-doers etc. But the lurking dangers all around us – the guns, our unhealthy diets, the workplaces that kill 14 Americans every single day – these are just accepted as part of life, the price of freedom, if you will. And so the violence goes, with more Americans dying preventable deaths. But hey, look on the bright side – we got those sons of bitches who blew up the marathon.

Since 1980, there have been more than 900,000 U.S. gun deaths, but less than 3,000 terrorist-caused deaths in America since 1970. In an amazing level of hypocrisy, Republicans continually make the argument that, as far as mass shootings go and general gun violence goes, well, “stuff (sh*t, if you will) happens,” and there’s little we can do about such things, but when it comes to anything involving terrorism, or what they consider terrorism, they will move heaven and earth and spare no expense, will literally bankrupt the nation, to address this threat.  Laissez-faire for any kind of a threat that is frequent and can be expected, but activist for the rare, freakishly-low probability event.  Vote Republican for protection from something that almost never happens at the expense of protection from common occurrences.  This is a governing philosophy which appeals to raw emotion and fear of “outsiders,” “others,” “non-Americans” and (GASP!) Muslims, and that wholly relies on a total lack of perspective and introspection.  It plays to the alpha-male, jingoistic types who want to blame all of America’s ills on foreigners, immigrants, globalization, outside influence, and the “turning” of America away from its “traditional values” and its “true self.”  It appeals to people who want to do anything but look at what America does wrong, what needs to be fixed at America’s core, and who refuse to learn from the rest of the world; it seeks solutions by going after external threats in order to avoid any self-reflection or national self-examination whatsoever, and claims facts that do not support its simplistic, “America: love it or leave it” worldview as concoctions of a non-existent elite liberal media/academic industrial complex.  One Republican State Senator from Tennessee even joked that we need to ban pressure cookers, the devices used in the bombings in Boston, to draw attention to what he thought were outrageous attempts to ban assault weapons, in what is perhaps the most obvious example of the sickness in our society that ties those two issues together and exposes our national myopia.

Let’s embrace this myopia, Republicans seem to say.  Sandy Hook, a number of other recent mass shootings, thousands incidents every year that see thousands of Americans killed by gun violence, a Texas fertilizer plant that exploded and killed 14 people and had not been inspected by a (now gutted) federal agency since the 1980s, and a whole host of other problems, deserve little or no attention and cannot be solved, so, do not dare suggest any further funding or attention to these issues from government, but terrorism?  Let’s spend trillions combating an issue that barely affects any Americans year in and year out, let’s invade two countries in response to 9.11, one of which had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, and let’s focus on the wrong country between those two at the expense of getting the guy who did attack us so that it takes ten years, millions of dead, wounded, and displaced, and trillions of dollars, but when it comes to passing universal background checks for gun purchases, let’s filibuster legislation that is filled with loopholes anyway so that not even the lowest common denominator, no-brainer safeguard can become law.

Let’s focus on the hysterical and sensational and forget about the substantive and every-day problems, spend money fighting a war(s?) against a tactic (and how do you defeat a tactic like “terror” anyway?) in far-away lands but do almost nothing in the war against poverty in our own country.  Let’s watch our children sink in educational achievement, and our workers get paid less than and less as inflation lowers our salaries that have stagnated since the 1970s, let’s not pave our roads or maintain our bridges or rail networks, let’s keep putting off every big domestic issue in favor of chasing around the globe a few thousand loosely-affiliated, brainwashed, murderous fools who can never do as much damage to us as we can do to ourselves and forget that any other issues exist or are deserving of marshalling our collective national effort and will.

This myopia seems to be our current default.  And I’m with Walt in wondering if we are even capable of doing better and with Cohen in wondering why other—dare I say more important—Issues don’t get the same or even more attention.

I am not saying there is never going to be a reason to shut down a whole city.  WMD or a massive number or attackers would be a different story.  But now, have we set a precedent where total city shutdowns are to be the expected norm for incidents like this?  Will there be no end to the hysteria at the policy planning level?  It’s bad enough that two wars have greatly sapped our resources with our international terrorism response, let’s try to make sure our domestic counterterrorism policies don’t do the same.  The 9/11 attacks were horrible, and scarred the New York City area especially.  But the response to 9/11 is not more important that education, that being safe from routine crime, than our heath, than our national infrastructure, than our future.  But looking at what we’ve put our money behind for the last ten years, you would think that avenging 9/11 was practically all that mattered.

Terrorists can’t defeat us.  But they can goad us into defeating ourselves.  And right now, I am worried about whether or not we are losing by beating ourselves.  Because that’s how the terrorists win.  And that is unacceptable.

If you think your site or another would be a good place for this content please do not hesitate to reach out to me! Please feel free to share and repost on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter (you can follow me there at @bfry1981)

PostScript… continuation from Introduction:

As we prove, Guns do not make you safer, and having an apposing opinion is not acceptable. You do not get be wrong when your ignorance costs lives. Brian discusses domestic stupidparty terrorism, all of which we additionally Mathematically substantiate here. The causes, the issues that lead to South Carolina, have also been explained here and here – in manner not done by the regular media who still have to pander to their audience. We do not pander, we are not interested in opinion. Brian below explains the massive over reaction of the Boston authorities in the aftermath of the Boston bombing. But he misses one point that I feel extremely strongly about. No – the Boston police force behavior was absolutely not acceptable, and indicative of a culture that wants to take us back to 1850. Having surrounded the second perpetrator, who was hiding in a boat, evidently unable to do further damage – it is not acceptable to re enact the final scene of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Yes the Boston police are no more evolved than the Bolivian police circa 1850. One little detail that seems to escape virtually every one—no body knew whether this attack was part of a bigger conspiracy and you have just one living potential lead. But this gun crazy country just does not think like that, just does think. Just make my day punk!

America desperately need a noble, intelligent and self-aware agenda, or as Robert Burns wrote:

Oh, that God would give us the very smallest of gifts
To be able to see ourselves as others see us
It would save us from many mistakes
and foolish thoughts
We would change the way we look and gesture
and to how and what we apply our time and attention

Had enough vacuous non news from standard outlets? Keep on reading

From Tulsa to Baltimore: “Racism is Not Dead”

In this article below Jason Newell discusses the history of racism. He starts off by quoting a Stupidparty rep who declares the that racism is over, citing the election of Obama as proof. This piece provides historical context to the data that we have provided about what lead up to Baltimore and the back ground analysis we provide on Ferguson and another piece comparing the populations of Ferguson and now Baltimore with the Israel’s problems in the Middle East. If after this article, you have any doubt that this is a problem that must be understood, confronted and dealt with— then allow me to provide a jolt back into present day realities by  providing a postscript at the end of this piece.

So now to Jason’s piece:

Racism is dead—that is, according to some delusional conservatives. Check out this doozy from Republican Nevada Assembly member Michele Fiore (advocating for stringent voter ID laws):Tintina553

We’re in 2015 and we have a black president, in case anyone didn’t notice. And, at what point, do we stop dividing by design? And what point do we stop using the race card? We will stop when discrimination stops.”

Representative Fiore was responding to a question by a member of the NAACP, who asked her to provide a factual instance of voter fraud occurring within the State of Nevada—tongue tied, Fiore was quick to segue into a racial argument seeking to disregard the reality of structural and individual racism. Apparently, the election of an African-American president has ended all racial tensions in the United States: right now, both African-Americans and Caucasians are holding hands, imbibing, and engaging in conversations that lack any political subject matter. Racism is dead.

Now, anyone with a relatively unbiased perspective would see past my facetious scenario—what can be best described as a conservative wet dream—and be able to understand the contemporary realities of American race relations: racism is alive and well. But before delving into the events in Baltimore, I find it necessary to discuss some of the primary causes of African-American disenfranchisement, starting with the early years of the United States.

Slavery, prior to the legal implementation of white suffrage, was an economic system that enslaved both whites and blacks. More specifically, white indentured servants, white slaves, and African slaves shared a similar legal standing— all three groups didn’t have the ability to vote: this right was limited to white property owners (i.e., old white men with hideous wigs). Life in the early Colonial Era between the subjugated groups, was, in a way, less contentious: after a day’s work, the pub was a place to unwind and discuss personal gripes—“white consciousness” within the United States, when compared to the way we perceive it today, had not yet come to fruition. Then came the 1790 White Male Suffrage Acts passed in numerous states. At this moment, free blacks were no longer permitted to vote, while their enslaved counterparts were enfranchised and thus had the capacity to improve their social standing.

From this point on, the majority of whites became unified against African-American slaves. For another seventy-eight years, the majority of African-Americans were kept in chains and considered the property of their masters. What’s more, the nation had to fracture before mainstream political entities took notice of the danger that the “slavery issue” posed to the stability of the relatively new nation. As we all know, slavery officially ended with the passage of the 13th Amendment, but not after a brutal civil war. Incidentally, to their convenience, contemporary Republicans idealize their party’s role in dismantling the institutional of slavery—which I can concede is a verifiable fact—but what they don’t seem to realize is the role progressive thought had in the movement. Republicanism of the Civil War period is not analogous to the current era, and comparing the two does a disservice to history. Progressive Republicans helped topple the immoral institution of slavery.

Furthermore, the Republican Party, years later, fractured with the split between competing factions: the Bull Moose Party, led by Teddy Roosevelt, came to be as a result of an ideological schism within the Republican Party due to progressives becoming disappointed with Taft’s catering to more conservative elements. By the 1930s, the progressives joined the New Deal Coalition—contemporary Republicans seem to forget this significant ideological split. Dear Republican Party, just stop trying to take credit for something your party no longer stands for. Thank you.

All the while, African-Americans, although technically free, were terrorized by the KKK (America’s first terrorist organization), forced into sharecropping (a peonage system), segregated, and had limited voting rights. And even more troubling, white riots, in response to black migration to industrial cities—known as the Great Migration—brought turmoil to newly settled African-American communities: one such community being Tulsa, Oklahoma, aptly named the Black Wall Street. Tulsa’s African-American community consisted of doctors, lawyers, financiers, and a thriving business class, but this “dream city” came to an end with one factually dubious event. White Tulsans, for days, believing that a white girl had been raped by a black man in an elevator—an unsubstantiated claim—completely annihilated Black Wall Street. With no property insurance, African-Americans (who were also being massacred at the time) were forced to evacuate and had their properties quickly bought up by ravenous racists.

The Destruction of Black Wall Street

Often forgotten, Tulsa brings one important perspective to the table: mob behavior is not confined to any particular racial demographic. By the way, I’m not condoning the aggressive mischief that transpired in Baltimore, but contrary to arguments mentioned on social media, the notion that rioting is a uniquely African-American genetic trait is an outwardly racist assertion. In addition, there lies one key difference between the African-American riots of the last sixty years and white race riots (such as what occurred in Tulsa): white objectives, were, for the most part, motivated by an explicit hatred of the color of a person’s skin, while the more recent African-American riots are a result of excessive police force, extreme poverty, white flight, gentrification, racially restricted covenants, and institutionalized racism—all causes for concern.

Nonetheless, the conservative media, and their zombie-like followers, in their coverage of Baltimore were focused on burning buildings, looting, and adolescent mischief—what they failed to see were community leaders protesting peacefully and bringing order to their community. And what was lost in all of this? The tragic death of Freddie Gray. The sensationalist media, with high ratings prioritized over more balanced coverage and objective journalism, were fixated on the destruction of Baltimore rather than the systemic social and economic issues plaguing the city.

The death of Freddie Gray, however, is just one example of injustices perpetrated against the African-American community: names like Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin, Levar Jones, Walter L. Scott, or Eric Courtney are but a sample of young African-American men shot for 1) petty, non-violent crimes or 2) no reason at all. And while the facts of some of these cases may be in dispute, one thing isn’t: police departments, in numerous cities across the United States, are systematically targeting African-Americans (see the DOJ report of Ferguson), or individuals employed by these police departments harbor racist sentiments.

Baltimore Riots 2015

Sadly, all too often, conservatives center on African-American crime rates—rates inflated by the failed war on drugs—and assume that blacks victimized by police officers “deserve what is coming to them.” There are even those who are quick to invoke the red herring argument of “well, they’re just killing themselves [referring to gang violence] in the inner city anyway, so why bother?” Why bother? It’s simple: police officers who kill unarmed African-American men are held to a higher moral standard than a gang banging criminal. Does a criminal swear an oath to protect the public? No, but a cop does:

“On my honor,
I will never betray my badge,
            my integrity, my character, 
            or the public trust.
I will always have
the courage to hold myself
and others accountable for our actions.
I will always uphold the constitution
my community and the agency I serve.”

Is a cop required to abide by a set of constitutional guidelines when pursuing a suspect or making an arrest? Yes. The U.S. Constitution mandates it. So please, don’t spew the bullshit argument that police brutality should be considered a “peripheral issue” due to African-American gangs murdering each other on a daily basis.

Remember that perspectives matter. As a young, privileged white male, my opinion is secondary to the everyday struggles of the African-American community—and while I’m informed and sympathetic to the societal issues plaguing this subjugated group, I still have one eye closed. My generation in particular—i.e., the future leaders of America—needs to see racial issues from competing lenses in order to draw a more balanced interpretation of the African-American struggle: every community has issues—some being more severe, and some less so—but if you believe that the African-American community’s troubles are solely due to an issue of morality, liberal policies, and “hip hop culture,” you’re surely misguided. Systemic racism is real, it’s here, and it’s continuing to marginalize a demographic that has been beaten down, both figuratively and literally, too many times.

In the end, it’s crucial to analyze the African-American struggle from a broader historical context—a few sensationalist media stories barely scratches the surface of the primary casual factors behind systemic racism.

Slavery may have ended, but racism never did.

 

Tintina845Postscript by Patrick Andendall:

We have now accumulated overwhelming data in other stories to prove that racism is a huge issue. It is tough to find any evidence of racism amongst Democratic leaders, but there was some evidence of it  amongst some Democratic voters, (especially in more rural districts of the “Redder” states) in the 2008 primary race between Obama and Hillary Clinton. Reverse racism is silly – and invariably promoted by individuals totally oblivious to what racism is, how it occurs and why it is such a massive issue. Since voter fraud is mathematically irrelevant Voter suppression efforts are therefore rooted in Racism, “Birtherism” is rooted in racism, Only 22% of Stupidparty voters believe that the problems in Ferguson where connected with Race. Endless absurd Obama Conspiracy theories, the latest being the talk of the Army at Obama’s bidding, invading Texas – like right now.  Obama for no rational reason is accused of being born in Kenya, a Socialist, Jihad supporter – countless other forms of hogwash. Confederates still argue that the Civil War was not about race, it was evidently about States Rights (to have slaves), The Supreme Court has revealed it’s true Colors in its naive comments about race. I explain why I believe Donald Trump is a racist as he knowingly trumps false information to inflame racism – and for me that is enough to qualify one as racist. Various pillars of the Stupidparty inflame such nonsense to such epic levels, that one can actually begin to ask if the Stupid party is becoming a hate group

Jeb Bush: His Horrendously Horrible Histories part 1

Barbara Bush really hoped this day would never come. Powerful forces are taking a big risk, but the potential returns are evidently worth it. By Jeb running – we all get one last shot at finding out the secrets and lies – that are what make the Bush Dynasty. 
Patrick Andendall

Bush Family Dynasty

How do the Bush kids get what ever their hearts desire. How does a disgraced Texas Guard alumni with no piloting ability get to dress up and act out his Tom Cruise fantasy having launched an illegal War – all so that he could play being commander in Chief. How does W. get to hide his past misdeeds and his total lack of business acumen – his failure at everything he touches. How does Joe Jeb get to play “let’s be a business man” or “I want to be Governor”. How does Joe Jeb get to build a resume out of thin air.It all boils down to big Daddy. Other clownish Stupidparty contenders can always receive virtually unlimited funds from the likes of Koch or Sheldon Adelson -in return for being willing to obliviously substitute their vacuous intellect and fill that void with myth based propaganda. Such tooled propaganda machines designed to mold the electorate into virtual slave labor, free of any consumer protections, labor protections or voter rights protections. Molded to be used for the sole purpose of enriching the asset strippers. The day of Joe the plumber has arrived, the very same pathetic Joe that is so concerned about a tax bracket that only impacts the top 0.5% of the population. But Joe the Jebster need not fret about competing with the clowns. Unlike the Joe the Plumber -he does not even have to invent his false reality—as this has all been created for him already. Daddy’s net work is so massive that his offspring need not worry about having to pander to the Oligarchs, or worry about anything for that matter, assuming that the few Journalists who are actually competent, can be marginalized.


Joe Jeb  does not need to pander to the Koch empire. No Bush needs to – not since the 1950’s – When George Bush Sr. joined his Yale Skull and Bones chums, both inside and out side the Texas Oil baron financed CIA. From the the Iranian coup of 1953—leading to the  installation of a CIA sponsored puppet, the fortuitous (for big Oil) JFK  assassination, even Watergate (Nixon may well have been setup) then the Iranian hostage crisis.  Bush later CIA head (no one at the time realizing that he had been a CIA operative for decades), then VP, VP and President, having secured the power protectorate of the Saudi Royal family, nurturing Al Qaeda, assisting Pakistan in acquiring the Bomb, the Bush Jr. cover ups including the invented religious conversion—no the Bush dynasty through their contacts have as many resources as they need. But if you are really paying attention – the ghosts keep emerging from the deeply buried past. This is because the Bush kids are pretty dimwitted.

Skulls And Bones Bush Family

The Bush family – more than any family has been a friend of big Oil – and American foreign policy has been dictated by oil interests ever since. JFK trying to stop the “Yale’s” running the CIA, unceremoniously firing the head of the CIA—only later to be taken out by an individual who had been “minded” by several CIA operatives over a long period of time. I strongly suspect that only one group of individuals would had the financing and sophisticated set of tools  to pull off such a brilliantly planned and executed event and the all the subsequent elaborate red herrings.

CIA or Central Intelligence Agency is the foreign intelligence service of American government. Its primary purpose is to provide acquiring, processing and examining the national security information from all over the world. The agency provides intelligence on global basis for the changing social, economic and political scenario. To know more about CIA click here Bitcoin Loophole

George Bush Sr. had already built up massive network of influence as a CIA operative since the 1950’s and his closeness to the adversaries of JFK, his fickle and fake loyalty to Nixon – meant that he was always going to have the inside track to the Presidency. The whole ethos of the Yale Skull and Bones Illuminati and their vast network of connected business and media buddies*— was to scratch each others back.
(*including the Washington Post and Bob Woodward)
Virtually all today’s foreign policy problems, and the threat to the Global Environment has a root in the Bush family mini Oligarchy within its secret self. Jeb is part of that family, it’s corrosive legacy and he is minded by the same power network:As other Republicans travel the country laying the groundwork for 2016 presidential campaigns, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush is raising private-equity funds for oil and gas ventures.Joe Jeb, whose family made much of its fortune in Texas oil, teamed with former Credit Suisse Group AG and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. bankers to create an investment firm based in Coral Gables, Florida, according to regulatory filings disclosed last month.


Pawel Kuczynski

One under-explored avenue of Bush’s business dealings has been the China connection. Given that Bush may soon be vying to be commander-in-chief, it seems untoward that he would be close to the country that is our greatest economic rival, but that’s exactly what the former Florida governor has done. As a part of his possible quest for the White House, he has resigned from a slew of corporate and nonprofit boards, which served as a platform over the past seven years to make him filthy rich……    In 2013, Bush’s private equity business Britton Hill Holdings invested in BH Logistics, which last spring raised $26 million from a variety of investors including HNA group, which is based in Hainan. It also operates 500 jets as part of a subsidiary, Hainan Airlines.“For the Chinese, the Bush name and the Bush connections to energy are a natural marriage,” China business scholar Derek Scissors told BloombergPolitics. “This is a classic example of the way sophisticated Chinese firms work. They don’t want to get involved directly in a U.S. start-up that’s involved in shale, so they’ll take a minority stake to keep a lower profile. They’re looking for political protection, and the Bush name legitimizes the investment and makes him a perfect partner.”

The Bush family have Oil for Blood, and more than any other family they are responsible for the two Iraq Wars, the Oil wealth of our Middle Eastern enemies, the consequent radicalization of of Islam, financing both sides of the unnecessary Oil Wars we fight, the refusal to acknowledge Global warming. Bush Sr. and his Skull and Bones CIA buddies connections to the bay of pigs fiasco, likely leading to the JFK assassination – was to re emerge 30 years years later and have an impact on Joe Jeb’s disastrous business activities:


Joe Jeb used to full advantage the fact that Bush Sr & Jr occupied the White House or the Vice Presidential position for 20 years in the Period 1980 though 2008.  This power base gets refortified with each Bush accession to power. In return the Bush babies can get anything their little spoilt hearts desire. Eventfully such easy access to power is bound to soil the abilities of the recipients of such largess. Less and less talent is actually required.

Definition of Insanity

The New York Times reports the stream of requests to the White House from Jeb Bush, a young but well-connected Republican leader in South Florida, ranged from the weighty and urgent to the parochial and mundane.In 1985, he sent an emotional letter pressing his father, Vice President George Bush, to investigate the detention of Cuban children in Texas, asking, “Shouldn’t there be some compassion?” (The vice president’s reply: “Heartbreaking.”)

In 1989, after his father became president, Mr. Bush offered his recommendation for the next Supreme Court opening. (“Your suggestion will be given thoughtful consideration,” a senior aide responded.)

In 1990, Mr. Bush lobbied the White House to meet with executives of the telecommunications giant Motorola — fostering a relationship that would later aid his own political ambitions. (The chief of staff did meet with Motorola, as did President Bush.)

For the 12 years that his father held national elective office, Mr. Bush used his unique access to the highest reaches of government to seek favors for Republican allies, push his views and burnish his political profile in his home state, a review of presidential library records shows. In the process, Mr. Bush carefully constructed an elaborate and enduring network of relationships in Florida that helped lead to his election as governor in 1998 and, now, to his place as a top contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

Everything Joe Jeb gets is handed to him on a platter forged out of blood money. 

After graduating from Texas University, Jeb Bush served a short apprenticeship at the Venezuelan branch of Texas Commerce Bank in Caracas before settling in Miami, in 1980, to work on his father’s unsuccessful primary bid against Ronald Reagan. Campaigning for Dad was hardly a paying job. But Jeb was about to learn that being one of George Bush’s sons means never having to circulate a résumé.

In the next few years, financial support flowed to Jeb through Miami’s right-wing Cuban community. Republican party politics and a series of business scandals — including Medicaid fraud and shady S&L deals — were inextricably intertwined. A former federal prosecutor told Mother Jones that, when he looked into Jeb’s lucrative business dealings with a now-fugitive Cuban, he considered two possibilities — Jeb was either crooked or stupid. At the time, he concluded Jeb was merely stupid.

And it is not like the Bush kids are not warned – Being the Presidents son’s the kids get Secret Service protection— the Secret Service keep tabs on potential problem areas. “The agent slumped back in his chair and sighed. “We warn them,” he said in a whisper. “But that’s all we can do. We can’t stop these kids from associating with someone they want to be with. All we can do after warning them is to sweep these guys with metal detectors when they come around.”


Bay of Pigs Life Cover

By 1984, Jeb had been made chairman of the Dade County Republican party, and it was as Republican party chief that he nuzzled up to con man Camilo Padreda. Padreda was serving as Dade County GOP finance chairman and had raised money for the party from Miami’s Cuban community. (He had also been a counterintelligence officer for deposed Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista.) Padreda made his living as a developer who specialized in deals with the corrupt Department of Housing and Urban Development. In 1986, he hired Jeb as the leasing agent for a vacant commercial-office building, which Padreda had built with $1.4 million in federal loans — loans approved by HUD officials, oddly enough, even though they knew there was already a glut of vacant office space in Miami.Like so many of those who would attach themselves to the Bush sons over the years, Padreda brought some hefty luggage with him. In 1982, four years before teaming up with Jeb, Padreda, along with another right-wing Cuban exile, Hernandez Cartaya, was indicted and accused of looting Jefferson Savings and Loan Association in McAllen, Texas. The federal indictment charged that the pair had embezzled over $500,000 from the thrift. (Cartaya was also charged with drug smuggling, money laundering, and gun running.) But the Jefferson Savings case would never go to trial.

Soon after the indictment, FBI officials got a call from someone at the CIA warning the agents that Cartaya was one of their own — a veteran of the failed Bay of Pigs invasion — according to a prosecutor who worked on the case. In short order, the charges against Padreda were dropped and the charges against Cartaya were reduced to a single count of tax evasion. (Assistant U.S. Attorney Jerome Sanford was furious and filed a demand with the CIA, under the Freedom of Information Act, for all documents relating to the agency’s interference in his case. The CIA, citing national-security reasons, denied Sanford’s request.)


Jeb Bush Skeletons In Closet

In 1985 Joe set up shop in Miami and established strong ties to the right wing Cuban exile community. He was quickly brought under the wing of Armando Codina, a real estate developer and longtime political supporter of the family and its staunch backing of the Cuba embargo; Jeb got a 40% share of the real estate Company’s profits with out investing in the firm. The duo were bailed out for a loan default with taxpayers footing the bill, in excess of $3m.In 1986 Jeb was involved in yet another Cuban CIA fraught scandal -this time the individual is Miguel Recarey who was running a fast growing HMO racket in Florida -and in spite of efforts to investigate – the CIA would always stone wall and threaten any one asking too many questions:

IMC was run by Cuban-American Miguel Recarey, a character with a host of idiosyncrasies. He carried a 9-mm Heckler & Koch semiautomatic pistol under his suit coat and kept a small arsenal of AR-15 and Uzi assault rifles at his Miami estate, where his bedroom was protected by bullet-proof windows and a steel door. It apparently wasn’t his enemies Recarey feared so much as his friends. He had a long-standing relationship with Miami Mafia godfather Santo Trafficante, Jr., and had participated in the illfated, CIA-inspired mob assassination plot against Fidel Castro in the early 1960s. (Associates of Recarey add that Trafficante was the money behind Recarey’s business ventures.)

Recarey’s brother, Jorge, also had ties to the CIA. So it was no surprise that IMC crawled with former spooks. Employee résumés were studded with references to the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the Cuban Intelligence agency; there was even a fellow who claimed to have been a KGB agent, An agent with the U.S. Office of Labor Racketeering in Miami would later describe IMC as a company in which “a criminal enterprise interfaced with intelligence operations.”


Rick Scott Jeb Bush Koch Brothers Scandal

Recarey also surrounded himself with those who could influence the political system. He hired Jeb Bush as IMC’s “real-estate consultant.” Though Jeb would never close a single real-estate deal, his contract called for him to earn up to $250,000 (he actually received $75,000). Jeb’s real value to Recarey was not in real estate but in his help in facilitating the largest HMO Medicare fraud in U.S. history.More about Joe Jeb’s business acumen, simplistic moral code and shockingly Palinesque foreign policy aptitude will be discussed in Part 2.

But when I say that Bush does not need the Oligarchs, that does not mean that he has not been in their pockets. Since the Bush family as a whole have done more damage to the environment than any one can imagine – it might interesting to connect some dots that do not pertain oil.

Joe Jeb has been working on beefing up his Green credentials. But we need to put these efforts into perspective. The average land elevation in Florida is six feet, so ignoring Global warning while being Governor of Florida would not only make you an certifiable idiot, but also I would only hope—criminally negligent. (Talking of Idiots, the present day Governor of Florida and fellow Koch Industry lackey Rick Scott, who used to deny global warming , will now not talk about it.)


Georgia-Pacific Pulp and Paper Mill

Joe Jeb was Governor of Florida 1999 -2007. Paper Mills have been big business in Florida since the Great Depression. One of the big players—Georgia Pacific was acquired by Koch Industries in 2005 . The Governor gets to pick who heads the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (the FDEP). Jeb Bush’s FDEP head would eventually leave to take a top position with another transnational paper company, International Paper. Now hold on – wouldn’t that be like putting a alcoholic in charge of a brewery. Worse still—wouldn’t that be like George W Bush and Dick Chaney formulating US Energy policy by only inviting Oil Industry Executives to their extremely secretive meetings.“In the first half of Jeb Bush’s first term, higher level staff of the FDEP worked closely behind closed doors with Georgia-Pacific to outline how it could best win approval for a pipeline to transfer the Georgia-Pacific paper mill’s point of discharge from Rice Creek to the St. Johns River. This is the “dilution is the solution to pollution” mode of conduct preferred by industry, which would rather not recycle and treat the discharges on land when discharging into a water body will produce cost-savings.”

Well, you do not have to be a rockets scientist to figure out what happens next

“Tons of toxic waste is being dumped into St. Johns River, daily, by the Koch Brothers company, Georgia-Pacific. Aspects of the deal allowing Georgia Pacific to massively assault the environment, were misleading, sometimes illegal, and unbeknownst to the local citizens. Florida Governor Rick Scott and former Governor (and Republican presidential hopeful), Jeb Bush, are also involved.”


Florida Flooded

But beware the Bush family are masters of re invention, spin, and red herrings. 
Bush 2 had to cover up his past drunkenness, business failures, abandonment a pregnant girl friend—never seeing her again after an abortion crisis, and not being able to safely pilot a fighter jet. This was all done by pretending to be reborn, pretending to land that fighter plane during that staged Mission Accomplished fiasco, pretending to be a Cowboy (buying that ghastly Texas non ranch, ranch) and bury all his dirty laundry – which his Dad, is the world’s leading master at.So now Joe Jeb will be doing much the same. He will shed all his corporate and non-profit board memberships, given to him as an investment in anticipated power pay back.  In order to distance himself from all the oil blood money that runs through his veins he will, I predict, cause a distraction by becoming the first Stupidparty leader to acknowledge Global Warming. This will piss off many of the Oligarchs, but Joe Jeb does not need them and in fact by creating such a frisson he will reinvent himself as the Champion of the Oligarch killers. A gladiator for the people. Quite rich since his brethren have effectively been running US foreign policy for their own profit since 1953.

JFK Assassination Associated Murder Statistics

So as Joe Jeb gears up – so must we to. We must make Barbara Bush’s worst nightmare come true. We must not just go after Joe Jeb -we need to go after the whole Bush dynasty – so that their true agenda can no longer darken the hallways of power again  – and their net work gets neutered once and for all. The fact is that Jeb has earned nothing on his own name, but everything on the Bush name—cashing in countless chips, even those chips that surely needed to remain in the Bush family netherworld. But Jeb was such a dope, so greedy, so spoilt— in going after all that low hanging fruit to enrich himself, the Bush’s so complacent in their apparent success in covering up so much – means we the people have both the right and the opportunity to actually find out more about the Bush family – specifically all leading back to George Bush Sr. the most Machiavellian politician is US history.Joe Jeb is worse than the clowns and as bad as the other Oligarchs in waiting.

Jeb Bush is a very unimpressive individual – like the Romney kids but with benefit of being allowed to drink alcohol – thus making him far from dull. But this void in talent means that what must fill that void must be the main concern. A combination of a great deal of relatively new pieces of fact checked investigative Journalism, death bed revelations and more information in the public domain—(thus carrying more weight than older research) and now Jeb probably seeking the top Job—means that we can get closer to the truth than ever. We can start by looking at wondering why Bill O’Reilly was so anxious to lie in his recent book – and after that we can allow the Math, the new found facts, all the connecting dots, to do the talking. America needs to confront and learn from it’s past, so that we can all pave a brighter future. Its not simply the slogan “we are all American’s” – that is simply not good enough. “We are all mankind”—and mankind desperately needs a noble and intelligent America. Obama has successfully and against all odds clawed back some respect— but those wins can be undone in a jiffy, if we don’t beat up and look around the Bush.

Whose side are you on – the people of Baltimore or the forces empowering a militarized police?

THE THREE FACTORS THAT EXPLAIN BALTIMORE

1) Gun Culture: And the recent series of events that have been occurring in the USA.

Virtually every day it seems that there is another black guy being shot by a cop. Are we imagining this? Are the media just doing what they do –dramatizing a narrative to get ratings?  Or is there something seriously insidious going on and if so what is happening and why is it happening.Riots in Baltimore

Let’s look at the numbers: I started by trying to look at the data for European Countries. This proved to be a problem because there appears to be no pattern of such incidences. Evidently British police fired off three bullets in the last year – no apparent deaths or injuries–so perhaps they were officiating at a track meet? There was a death in 2011 and there were headlines about British police being “Trigger Happy”. There may have been some recent European shootings of Terrorists – but beyond that I couldn’t find any pattern and the lack of a pattern is in itself a pattern – that being that fatal police shootings in Europe are not a meaningful issue. I wonder why?

The Rest of the World Compared to the USA. (Gun Ownership)

Gun Ownership Chart

THE THREE FACTORS THAT EXPLAIN BALTIMORE

1) Gun Culture:And the recent series of events that have been occurring in the USA.

So that leads to the USA –and it will not take long to establish a pattern. Before we drill down consider that it is projected that sometime in 2015, Gun Deaths will become more ubiquitous in the USA than Auto fatalities— at over 30,000 lives per year. By way of comparison in the UK automobiles are 1,300% more deadly than guns (using 2011 data). The growing childishness of American gun culture can be seen quite clearly by analyzing school shootings.

US School Shootings Per Year        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States_prior_to_2009

And of course the more Stupidparty the state, the sillier the gun culture gets –with obvious consequences:

Picture

           http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-per-100000/

So Within this context we can now look at Fatal Police Shootings:

What is so remarkable is that there is no reliable data on police shootings—up until very recently at least. Yes the FBI tries and others, but the reporting requirements are suspect and not all precincts report. I guess the reason is that police shooting people has never been a big cause for concern. Well we are damn well concerned right now. Do we have good reason? To answer this we are going to have to be a bit more creative in order to get a true reflection on what is going on.

First it appears that we do have good data on violent crimes – and this is important because this will help put police fatal shootings into a more revealing perspective.

Violent Crimes 1991-2013

Note how violent crimes have halved over the last twenty years. This has occurred for numerous reasons. But this reduction has not occurred because of the presence of more Guns (a myth promoted by the NRA) –we know this myth is claptrap because the number of households owning a gun has not increased, so unless you are John Wayne in the climactic scene of the movie True Grit, one eyed, on a horse, gripping the reins in his mouth, firing off multiple guns at the bad guys—having fifteen guns in your collection will make little difference in your ability to defend yourself, your ability to shoot your irritating neighbor, or offensive spouse. But perhaps your kid’s exposure to an accident might be significantly higher.

Now we need to try and figure out what is happening with regard to fatal police shootings. I have had to access various different data bases – because I really struggled to find consistency, no surprise if no one is keeping tabs. But one would hope that with the police having to contend with half as many violent crimes – that the need to use a gun would also halve.

But what I discovered was that this was far from the case. I seemed to find some consensus on the following 1) Data seems somewhat easier to get in more recent years 2) Everyone seems to agree that the official numbers significantly understate the true numbers 3) Thanks to statistician guru Nate Silver’s Five Thirty Eight website we may actually have credible numbers since May 1, 2013 from a Facebook page titled  Killed by Police

Fatal Police Shootings Per Year

I used three different sources Green US Department of Justice Red the FBI and Blue the Nate Silver recommended Killed by police. As per Mr. Silver’s recommendations, I took the Facebook data and multiplied by .85   I arrived at my 2013 number by increasing the 8 months of data by 50%. I did a similar pro-rated exercise to project a total for 2015 using data at March 18th, 2015

I believe we have established the trends are not only disturbing but far worse than they appear— not only are numbers grossly understated but this is happening against a backdrop of a rapidly declining violent crime environment. An absurd gun culture is clearly evident. It is impossible to have an intelligent conversation about this because the NRA is not capable of acting in good faith, having been hijacked by the extremist nine member “nominating committee” and has become on odious organization as a result.

Want proof?—that the NRA does not give a damn about its members, the general public or law enforcement?

Background Check on Sale of Guns by Gun Demographic

85%-74% of NRA members favor a waiting period for purchase of handguns,

82% of Americans support limiting the sales of military‐style assault weapons,

94% of police chiefs favor requiring a background check for all hand guns sales.

The following statistics rated true by Polifacts:

That poll found that 82 percent of gun owners were in favor of required background checks, including 74 percent of individuals with current or former memberships in the NRA.

PolitiFact identified two other 2013 polls of gun owners. A Pew Research Center poll taken of 1,502 adults from Jan. 9-13, 2013, found 85 percent of some 529 polled gun owners in favor of making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks — nearly identical to the Luntz poll. The gun-owner results had a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. A CBS/New York Times poll conducted of 1,110 adults from Jan. 11-15, 2013, showed that 85 percent of respondents living in a household with an NRA member supported universal background checks.

2) Increasing Bigotry:

Now we need to look closer at the racial question that every one (capable of critical thinking) recognizes is an issue. Because this is done per million, the under-counting problem discussed above is moot for the below graphic.

Fatal Shootings White Black 2010-2012

But surely the Supreme Court just recently indicated that Race was a problem of the past and thus scrubbed laws that prevented states with a history of racism from indulging is racist voter suppression strategies. Voter suppression is born out of racism, because it is promoted on the back of inflaming fears of voter fraud. But since Voter Fraud is Mathematically Irrelevant is mathematically irrelevant, there is no case for voter suppression.

So what is up with the Supremely Stupidparty Court? 

“Chief Justice Supremely SP John Roberts we are seeing a textbook example of the myopia, lack of self-awareness, and narrow-mindedness that can result from attending the non-racially-diverse Roman Catholic grade and boarding schools in 1960s and 1970s small-town, rural, overwhelmingly-white Indiana….”

But if we are in post racial phase – how would the Supremely Stupidparty Court explain the following profile of Stupidparty supporters on issues relating to race. By way of example, if you choose be a birther you are choosing to reveal remarkable ignorance to the point of being a racist. I explain why Donald Trump is racist, since I can show that he himself is not interested in the facts— and that he is just part of inherent racism/bigotry within The Seven Pillars of Stupidparty Hate. Do we have a Party of Hate?

1)  49% Believe Acorn stole 2012 election. PPP 2012. (With no funding, Acorn dissolved in 2010)   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/04/acorn-republican-voters_n_2239298.html

2)  51% Are “birthers.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49554.html

3)  57% Believe Obama is a Muslim.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/03/22/scary-new-gop-poll.html

4)  66% Believe Obama is a socialist.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/03/22/scary-new-gop-poll.html

5)  24% Believe he may be the Antichrist.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/03/americans-believe-obama-anti-christ-global-warming-hoax_n_3008558.html

6)  90% Are oblivious to the fact that 95% of population had tax cuts at time of 2012 election.

7)  Only 22% percent of SP  disciples believe Ferguson raises important racial questions.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/215413-ferguson-divides-public-along- racial-party-lines

8)  68% of Stupidparty voters believe the President should be impeached for????

https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/07/14/one-third-americans-want-impeach-obama/

9)  Only 11% of SP disciples believe Obama loves America. This is a reaction to Giuliani’s sad statements and pitiful record regarding his own “family values” —a man who has many lessons to learn from Obama in that regard Many young people don’t love America

10)  62% of SP disciples believe Obama is secretly trying to take away every ones guns

11)  44% of SP disciples believe that Obama is secretly trying to figure out a way to stay in office beyond 2017.

Racism, or at least the need to excite racists out of their caves, seems to have grown exponentially with Obama as President and the growth of the ultra-silly wing of the Stupidparty especially since 2010. This alongside the increasingly absurd gun culture appears to be leading to more shootings in schools, outside of schools and by the police.  But we are still missing one vital component.

3) The Consequence of absurd Income Discrepancy trends

Back to our police force that operate in and are clearly part of this racist context. Now we know that the Stupidparty loathes unions. But there is an exception –police unions. Historically, they have been in bed with the Stupidparty. The Stupidparty needs the police to enforce law and order. Why?

Stupidparty is totally beholden to the special interests that are determined to maintain the unsustainable income discrepancy trends by giving even more tax breaks to the wealthy whilst funding such tax breaks by cutting social programs. They popularize such measures by appealing to the easily stoked prejudices of their base. Populist politicians promoting poverty.

US Real Average After-Tax Income

Creating an environment that can only lead to more social injustice, an environment where one can always find a justification for a police shooting.

Riots in Baltimore Sean Hannity Stupidparty

Now see how Stupidparty reps distorts the situation and effectively sends the message that shooting someone in the back is OK.

Sean Hannity:

And his record I mentioned earlier — it has nothing to do with — you know, what happened in this case. I assume that it probably was connected to why he ran and his relationship with police at that time. I mean it’s pretty extensive.

You know there’s a simple solution in terms of for other people going forward is: don’t be involved in the sale of drugs, don’t think police are your enemies, don’t run at 8:30 in the morning when you see a cop, and certainly that is a part that he plays in this equation.

Cutting benefits, the safety net—because of the “47% moochers”—harping on about food stamps.  Stupidparty reps love to bring up food stamps –because the Stupidparty base is under the erroneous notion that minorities are the prime beneficiaries and that feeding lazy parasitic blacks is a waste of  taxpayer money. That base is oblivious to the fact that they will not be gaining anything by such actions. Additionally they are wrong on so many levels. It is Red States that are the “Moocher” States – because economic policies designed for the haves (trickle down) simply do not work as well as trickle up:

Conservative State Dependency

The United States is the only country in the world where the struggling class (aka middle class) has been duped into voting against their own economic interests.

Stupidparty Maryland State Delegate Patrick McDonough suggested last week that parents did not deserve to continue receiving food stamps if they refused to stop their children from protesting the death of Freddie Gray in Baltimore. Now let’s dispel some more myths regarding Food Stamps.

Food Stamp Myth BusterSo let’s get this right – whilst we needlessly impoverish huge swathes of the country. Needlessly— you ask. The USA is the best right, the wealthiest country right?

Child Poverty Rankings by Country So whilst the USA needlessly impoverishes huge swathes of the country, it now needs to find ways to “maintain order”. Well the “Stand your Ground” laws introduced and promoted by Who is Alec and Why should we Care (a front for a group of people trying to turn the country into an oligarchy) have effectively legalized the murder of unarmed black kids – as is clearly the case in the The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Now you have the spread of “open carry”- which is clearly a white man’s privilege. At the moment they are mainly accidentally shooting off their own appendages, often the very appendage that houses the Stupidparty brain. But we already have an adult Georgia man flaunts gun at local Little League field intimidating parents and childrens sporting event—and it will not be long before a “biased” referee gets what’s coming to him. This will be a white parent, because any black parent carrying a gun would have already been shot in the back by a police officer. These police officers now being appropriately armed and excused for over reacting in virtually any scenario:

The Stupidparty Praetorian Guards gets special perks:

As the National Review reports: “It’s Time to Take On Police Unions Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/394743/its-time-take-police-unions-lucy-morrow-caldwell, law-enforcement culture has tended to place the interests of unions and officers above those of the community. Police unions have lobbied against greater transparency in day-to-day policing and against internal-review policies or public-records laws that would shine light on complaints filed against officers, among other proposals. Inevitably, the justification given in these cases is “safety of first responders” or the desire to “prevent community unrest.” But in reality, it’s an attempt to reduce the chance that officers, whether malevolent or simply negligent, will be held accountable for their actions.”

It might be a war out there–but these guys were not warriors. All unarmed, all fatally shot by the police, all in one year.

Police Killing Unarmed Black Men

As the New York Times reports: “In recent weeks, Gov. Bruce Rauner of Illinois has traveled the state promoting his proposal for more than $2 billion in cuts to pensions for public employees. All public employees, that is, except police officers and firefighters….. Mr. Rauner was following the lead of other Republican governors in the Midwest who have imposed unwelcome changes on state and local employees in the name of saving money and improving services.

In 2011, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin introduced a bill that would roll back collective bargaining rights for government workers and require them to contribute more toward their own pensions and health coverage. He excluded police officers and firefighters from the legislation, known as Act 10, which he signed the following month.

In 2012, Gov. Rick Snyder of Michigan signed a right-to-work bill, eliminating the requirement that private and public sector workers contribute dues to the unions that represent them, whether or not they are members. The bill included a “carve-out” for police officers and firefighters, which Mr. Snyder supported.

Mother Jones reports: Police use of highly armed SWAT teams has risen by 1,500 percent in the last two decades, and many police departments have cultivated an “us vs. them” mentality toward the public they ostensibly serve.

It would appear that the Police attitudes are getting out of control. The NYPD took umbrage when the Mayor had the audacity to question one of their many questionable actions. In unison, they turned their back on him during a funeral service and then proceeded to refuse to do their jobs via a work slowdown somewhat reminiscent of Great Britain in the 1970’s when the whole country was being held hostage by overzealous trade unions.

Regarding the confusion surrounding how Baltimore victim Freddie Gray died, let us put the police version in its best possible (highly improbable) light. He was not strapped into the ambulance because it is considered too dangerous to strap a “dangerous person” in. So that would imply a known risk factor to the police. If there is such a known risk factor –bring in a risk management specialist to solve the problem. For this reason alone the Baltimore police must surely deservedly face a lawsuit and heads need to role—may this be an abject lesson to all other police forces.

I am telling you this –the police are regularly unnecessarily and extremely foolishly shooting unarmed people all the time. ALL THE TIME.  This must stop.

Baltimore has arrived and for a week or so the media might pay attention and occasionally they might even ask the right questions. What should those questions be?

1)  Why has the USA gun culture gotten so absurd? – This is a fact and please stop tolerating the following notions:

  1. Guns don’t shoot people
  2. Good guys should have guns
  3. More Guns = More Safety
  4. The NRA is an acceptable organization. (For it is not)

2) Why is Racism still such a huge problem? We need to stop accepting the following notions:

  1. Reverse Racism. People who make this argument are invariably desensitized to racism. If you want to experience racism how about going to an African country and get discriminated for being white —then you might have cause to complain.
  2. That the inherent bigotry with in the Stupidparty is somehow acceptable.
  3. It is OK for police to shoot/kill unarmed people.
  4. It is OK for police forces to not represent the ethnic profile of the people they are policing.
  5. It is OK for the police to cover up their malpractice.
  6. The Supreme Court’s decision: Shelby County v. Holder, must be revisited/challenged. They were clearly wrong and have simply empowered racism. They chose to take the case at a time when they knew that we have a dysfunctional congress. John Roberts may not be a racist but his racial worldview is infantile. So he chose to change the rules knowing that congress would not be capable of acting intelligently.

 3) What is the logical end game if Income Discrepancy Trends continue their present course? Since Rand Paul is running for President now is a good time to ask the following question.

Where else can Ayn Rand unfettered libertarianism/capitalism lead, other than fascism?

The battle between the people (democracy) and the oligarchs is set:

The oligarchs have the Supreme Court (Citizens United, Shelby County v Holder), the paid off Congress and the Stupidparty base with its self-evident and carefully nurtured bigotry for the purpose of creating a false flag adversary, resulting in a mad hatter’s parallel universe determination to vote against their own economic interests.

The people through democracy still have the power to pressure their representative’s to demand campaign finance reform, end voter suppression, end gerrymandering and reverse income discrepancy trends and to stop pandering to bigotry

Whose side are you on – the people of Baltimore or the forces empowering a militarized police?

1% of 1% Control American Political System

Rand Paul’s entrance Motivates Ted Cruz to reveal the Truth

When Rand Paul had the gall to decide to compete against him – Ted “Cruess” decided to go viral by actually seeking the truth about Rand Paul. But in embarking in this exercise, Ted Cruess ends up revealing more about himself than he intended.

Patrick Andendall

Patrick Andendal is a renowned author of the book. Stupid party Math V Myth and who is Jeb are his famous books. He always had interest in politics. In 2004 he helped political parties during elections. He did his schooling from a boarding school and went to Lancing College for his graduation. To know more about him click Crypto Code.

Picture

Dr Ted Cruess is out with a new book inspired by his favorite Author.

“When my friend Rand Paul announced that he thought that he was a better Presidential candidate, I was moved pay my sincerest tribute to him”

Ted Cruess


Picture

Hi I am a Doctor, Doctor Seuss

I maybe old, but I can always Find the Truth.

He really believes I am the real Dr Seuss, but in fact I’m  really Dr.Ted Cruess

In this rather clever charade we can see the truth from a gullible comrade.

Hi my name is Paul, Rand Paul and I do not like the truth

I do not like the Truth at all.

But if you tell the Truth , you might like it—shall we try?

The world is round and rotates  the Sun,

You see facts can be fun

Fun for every one.

I am a libertarian, and I like be free, to be free to lie

This helps me make my case, never limited by the Sky.

Laws I do not like, I do not them at all.

For my name is Rand, but you can call me Paul.

OK Paul, you don’t like the law, not at all.

Regulations and Government and the Poor

You do not like them, not at all

Please help us see what you foresaw.


Picture

Well I believe I should be free to lie and lie to set me free

I like to spread misinformation as a tactic

Lies and Misinformation can get the other side quite frantic.

Lets’s start with my School and how I end up looking a fool.

Hi I am a Doctor, Doctor Zeuss

I maybe old, but I can always Find the Truth.

You say you have two bachelor degrees from Baylor,

But that is not the truth and that is rather Poor

Yes Yes I lied, I lied about that and hate to be an apologist

But I was in a rush to be become an ophthalmologist,

But there are laws for that and I do not like the Law – no not at all

So I Certify myself because I do not accept the law, not me Rand Paul.


Hi I am a Doctor, Doctor Zeuss

I maybe old, but I can always Find the Truth.

I find that rather Sad – as people might get hurt

That might be quite cute for you, but will lead Malpractice law suit or Two

I must admit I am barely an ophthalmologist – I don’t know the foggiest

That’s why I stray to other areas like to abort or not.

No no – the Government must step into untie that Knot

I must be free to stop that  – as no one else can be that free –unless it is me.

Dr Zeus I am just like you but without the Truth.

Bees should be free to pollinate, and so should children not vaccinate

They should be free to get sick and procreate their disease

To wander and integrate with the utmost of ease.


I’m Rand Paul, I do not like the law, here I am fighting martial law – martial law now that is a really scary Law

Picture

Here is my Medical Expertise – we can see it with the greatest of ease:

Picture

Picture

Dr Zeus I am just like you but without the Truth.

People have no right to be protected in sickness and in health

For to do that, might hurt people of wealth

I am well paid to protect them using my tactical stealth.

As for clean water flowing freely to the poorer quarter

That would be like giving Food Stamps to those icky looking tramps.

Water and Food, Food and Water

Must We, Must we, waste it on some losers Daughter


Picture

Hi I am a Doctor, Doctor Zeuss

I maybe old, but I can always Find the Truth.

I find that rather Sad – as people might get hurt

The innocent, the Sick and those who lost their last shirt.

Yes I know that that is sad, and it is rather bad.

But the law is what I deplore – for it is never great

For without the Law I can discriminate.

Against Blacks, Gays, Women and more – I see much hate

I would like to harness that hate and set it free

For I live in the land of Liberty

Where hate is great and Great is hate.

We must be free to discriminate

Hi I am a Doctor, Doctor Zeuss

I maybe old, but I can always Find the Truth.

I find that rather Sad – as people might see through that ruse

No longer free to integrate – they will punch back with  righteous hate

Yes I know that that is sad, and it is rather bad.

But that is why I like the NRA – every one have a Gun – that is what I say

So if you Red – feel free to shoot them Dead

Justice I have found is best served by standing your ground

My name is Paul, Rand Paul and I do not like the truth

I do not like the Truth at all.

I have certified myself as the expert

This seems to work assuming you are not alert.

That is why I can state that I know so much more

So much more I have in store, my resume see it here

It is great I can state – after getting help to create my CV

After I  asked my long lost friend, Walter Mitty.


An Expert on the Constitution I am – do not no where, do not no when, but I am you see, you see that I am. You can not see?  well come to me – I will correct your vision, one two three

Picture

I have certified me as the constitution pro – no President professor can stop my imaginary alter ego

Picture

A Libertarian I am – from Ayn Rand you see, but only when it suits me – me and my money tree.

Picture

Hi I am a Doctor, Doctor Zeuss

I maybe old, but I can always Find the Truth.

You are not an economist  – yet you are an ardent pessimist

Only Capitalism totally unfettered, yet your record is totally peppered.

Well I can not deny that – because that’s a fact

Without Government – the 2008 depression would have become great,

I said no prosperity, no bailout, nothing but austerity

i was ignored, got bored, my solutions seen to be a fraud.

My economic grounding has no sounding – just mishaps that would guarantee a total collapse.

Picture

Picture

Hi I am a Doctor, Doctor Zeuss

I maybe old, but I can always Find the Truth.

Now it is time to figure the bottom line

Who can possibly win, perhaps friends of Koch and his evil Twin.

You are right with that knowing Guess – I will create an almighty mess

Nearly everyone will suffer -barely able to afford their last supper

But we don’t care, because we will be free to live a life with out compare

Free to rape body and mind, as demanded by Goddess Ayn Rand I find

We will create Galts fiefdom and live in the new Gilded Koch Kingdom

We will hand out the occasional kindness to keep the people totally mindless

For it will be our names that will preside over the hunger games


Well Rand Paul I do not like this at all

You think you are bad – but you are not rotten to the Core

People will vote for me because I am like you but much much more

I will say what you still fear – day after day

Our base does like you, but your lies and deceit are still too few

So simply being bad and loud is not enough for today’s Stupidparty Crowd

There is that Black President you see, and you must think like them and me

I will demand to hang draw and quarter, far better then denying them water.

Failing that a good Lynching would be much to their liking

You have seen what I can do using my ways – like wasting $24b in just sixteen days

Closing the Government has it perk, like the mob loving my unfettered work

They love my lies, more than their freedom fries.

They love  my lies about my birth, they love it with much Mirth

Polifacts rate 56% of my statements as untrue – and that is my greatest virtue

Tell the mob the Truth and they see you as uncouth

Repeat a Myth many a time and it always turn out just fine

The more nonsense we talk, it shows we are willing to walk the walk

Right into their cave – showing to them that we are brave

Carrying  a gun, that makes us Fun

They will love us here and they will love us there.

We must indulge their hate, that will make us great

We must buttress their ignorance- thus flattering their incoherence

We must destroy their intellect, so when comes to re elect

They can only see the fool as some body that is incredibly cool.

By empowering sexism and racism we can achieve Ayn Rands Fascism.

The Gilded Kingdom on its shining Hill -being a achieved with a certain skill 

You my friend are toast – for with my wily bile, I will simply coast a while

For while I am on patrol – I will simply be in Cruz control

There Is No Logical Argument Against the Iran Nuclear Deal

Guest Blogger:
If you think your site or another would be a good place for this content please do not hesitate to reach out to me! Please feel free to share and repost on LinkedIn,Facebook, and Twitter (you can follow me there at@bfry1981)
Picture
Picture
Outside of Israel and America’s Republican Party, very few people are against thisemerging Iran nuclear deal, which represents the will of the governments of the UK, France, Germany, Russia, and China, as well as America (sorry, Congress and the opposition party generally don’t make foreign policy in America’s constitutional system) and Iran.

The nuclear deal is the agreement between Islamic Republic of Iran and P5+1 i.e., UK, USA, France, and China plus Germany and European Union. The deal was previously known as the joint comprehensive plan of action says to curb nuclear program of Tehran. To know more about the deal click on Crypto CFD Trader.

And whether the hysterics of Texas Republican Senator (anddelusional 2016 presidential wannabe) Ted Cruz or of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the counterarguments are hollow and myopic, and bear no weight when weighed against the alternatives. In fact, an agreement with Iran is the only realistic option that is even remotely positive; a lack of an agreement means only less transparency and either a stalemate in which Iran and the West will often continue to use the Middle East as a board in a deadly game of chess or some sort of conflict ranging from military strikes and terrorism to all-out war. An agreement does not guarantee that these far more dire scenarios will be avoided, but it is the only realistic way to avoid them. And while both opponents and supporters of an agreement have maintained that no agreement is better than a “bad” agreement, it is hard to look at this just-agreed-upon framework as a “bad” agreement, even if it not perfect. Don’t let the pursuit of the perfect be the enemy of the good, as the saying goes.

Still, none of this stops Republicans, Israel’s right-wing parties and politicians, and others from making specious, short-sighted, and misleading arguments against this agreement, arguments that, if heeded, will only perpetuate and increase conflict, violence, and death. First, let’s look at the detailed framework that was agreed upon Thursday (we won’t be going into the science of nuclear physics and uranium enrichment in this article, but you can read a great short guide to all that here). Below are some highlights:

Iran will reduce the number of uranium-enriching centrifuges by two-thirds, and the remaining third will be older, first-generation technology
Iran will reduce its existing supply of enriched uranium from 10,000 kilograms to just 300, a 97% reduction
Iran’s biggest and main (also underground) nuclear research center will shift much of it attention away and facilities from activities that could result in a weapon and to advanced peaceful research, often medical
Iran will submit to more nuclear inspections that any other country in the world today or in the history of nuclear technology. These inspections will be “robust and intrusive,” to quote President Obama, and he noted too that “If Iran cheats, the world will know it” and that “this deal is not based on trust. It’s based on unprecedented verification.”
Economic sanctions on Iran will be lifted

The agreement will last fifteen years and seriously reduce Iran’s nuclear capabilities, though some restriction will be in place for only ten years. But as far as the U.S., only Congress has the ability to end American sanctions and President Obama has warned Republicans not to destroy the deal.

Now, let’s look at some of the common arguments against this framework.

“Iran can’t be trusted”

Really? Because America, Israel, Iraq, and Syria have all invaded countries here in a big way since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. But Iran has not initiated one single invasion since this regime took power. Yes, it has used terrorism and non-state militia actors to further its interests, but so has pretty much every Middle Eastern country (including American allies like Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia) as well as the United States in recent decades. Iran has also cooperated with the U.S. against the Talbian, al-Qaeda, and, most recently, against ISIS. And Iran’s foreign policy record has been less the unpredictable, dangerous type and more like the Soviet Union’s, with Iran acting fairly predictably, rationally, and in its own interests. And this deal is most certainly in its own interests. Maybe Iran will break the deal, but the U.S. deal with countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Russia, so why not give Iran a chance?
Picture
“Iran sponsors terrorism with Hezbollah! Enough said!”

So do lots of other countries, but we still cooperate with them and get meaningful results. Yes, Iran sponsors Hezbollah, but today’s Hezbollah is not your father’s Hezbollah. Rather than a resistance terrorist movement against the Israeli invasions and occupation of Lebanon, invasions and occupation starting in 1981 and ending in 2000, Hezbollah is now one of the major coalition partners of the Lebanese government and concerns itself with more governing Lebanon for most of these recent years. Minor scuffles with Israel with a few rockets launched here and there have been all that has happened between Israel and Hezbollah since the 2006 flare-up. In general, Hezbollah has been quiet in its actions (if not words) when it comes to Israel, then, for most of the last decade. So a few isolated and sporadic rocket attacks do not characterize Israel’s interaction with Hezbollah since 2006 so much as an uneasy unofficial cease-fire. Besides, Hezbollah had been much more preoccupied the last few years with fighting on behalf of Bashar al-Assad’s Shiite Alawite regime. Hezbollah, Assad and his government, and Iran are all Shiites, and it is natural for them to stick together. Iran has always been the patron and protector of Shiites Muslims facing persecutions against Sunnis, and Iran’s support is pretty much the only major support in the world that Shiites have. We may not like this, but, frankly, Shiites populations have fared pretty poorly under Sunni rule all over the Muslim world, and they face a steady stream of oppressive attacks, which frequently occur in packed Shiite mosques in the middle of a prayers and involve suicide bombers. Shiite funerals, shrines, and religious processions have also been targeted by the likes of Sunni ISIS and Sunni al-Qaeda. Conversely, Iran’s proxy actors like Hezbollah and other Shiite militias, though far from angels, have generally avoided these much more extreme tactics against civilians and places of religious worship. If anything, Hezbollah and other Shiite groups that Iran helps like the Houthis are practicing much more normal military activities, albeit of the rebel and guerilla variety, rather than that which would more fairly be called terrorism these days.

The point here is that Sunni sponsorship of terrorism, particularly from the Gulf countries (including America’s biggest allies there, though not in an official capacity), is a far greater problem than Iran’s sponsorship of Hezbollah, and that Hezbollah, unlike al-Qaeda and ISIS, been pretty restrained in the last decade. So Iran’s relationship with Hezbollah should not make or break this nuclear deal. And, in general, Hezbollah has shied away from the type of terrorist attacks that earned it its notoriety in decades past. Sinn Fein/IRA was once a terrorist group, until it was no longer one at on point, and while Hezbollah still has some distance to travel to be like the next Sinn Fein, it is without question moving in the right direction compared to its earlier incarnation.

“An agreement will keep the U.S. and others from being able to use force to stop Iran’s program”

Not at all. Saddam Hussein agreed to terms to have his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs disarmed to conclude the Gulf War (1990-1991), but when he violated them, that did not stop Bill Clinton from striking Saddam’s regime repeatedly, nor did it stop George W. Bush from taking the massive military action that he (incorrectly) felt was needed. No one cited an agreement that was clearly being violated, or which Saddam Hussein was clearly trying to publicly pretend to violate, as reason to hold back (though in 2003 there were certainly many other good reasons to hold back) at the time of these actions. In other words, it should be made clear that if Iran plays games and violates the agreement, there is nothing stopping the U.S. or other world powers from taking strong action to disarm Iran, an certainly the agreement itself would not stop anything. The agreement will only protect Iran, then, if Iran stays true to the terms.

“This agreement would threaten the very survival of the state of Israel.”

Why? The above is almost a direct quote from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, perhaps the master of short-term-at-the-expense-of-long-term thinking (in other words, a master politician). With no agreement, Iran is free continue its robust nuclear program. With an agreement, this program will be severely limited, reduced, and subjected to intense and powerful inspections by the West. Without an agreement, only military force could possibly succeed and that would be incredibly difficult and not guaranteed, by any means, to succeed. In fact, just about the last thing the Middle East needs right now is a major war in Iran, and whole other books and articles could be written about the spillover effects from such an event. Any war here would almost certainly involve Israel and that would be bad, not good, for Israel’s security. And if Iran and the West come to friendly terms, there will be far more willingness on Iran’s part to reign in Israel’s nuisance, Hezbollah, which I have already explained has been reigning itself in for quite some time anyway. With this agreement, it would be fifteen years before Iran would be able to develop a bomb if this agreement is observed, but this would very likely happen much, much sooner if there is no agreement. How is this bad, then for Israel? One wonders why anyone takes Netanyahu and those who think like him seriously on this point at all.

A Fine Diplomatic achievement:
This is a fine diplomatic achievement of the Obama Administration, President Obama, and Sec. Kerry and their teams, but also of the other Western governments involved and of Iran’s government, as well. There is no guarantee that this will forever keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, but we have fifteen years of majorly slowing Iran down on this path and weakening its overall nuclear program, of having many sets of close eyes on the ground making sure that this is the situation, of preventing wars, and of increasing cooperation between Iran and the West. Just as Peter Beinart writes, it may very well be the thaw in diplomatic relations that might be the biggest achievement here.
Picture
And the alternatives to this agreement are very likely going to involve war, possibly carried out by the U.S. and the West, but there seems to be little appetite for that among Western governments or peoples. It is far more likely to be carried out by an Israel that is more and more isolated because of its positions on and treatment of the Palestinians, and because of the actions of Benjamin Netanyahu in general. The recent fighting in Gaza against non-state terrorist militia Hamas cost dozens of Israeli lives; a fight with Iran, a powerful country with a powerful and well equipped military, would very likely cost thousands of Israeli lives and could see serious destruction all across Israel major cities. There is no guarantee that war would end Iran’s nuclear program, either. Even if there is not a war or military action, the current situation—with very little formal cooperation with Iran and with Iran and the West working against each other on so many issues in the region, from Israel to Yemen to Syria, and with Sunnis in the region increasing their zones of conflict with Shiites–is in no way better than a shot at really working together on these issues and defusing tensions. But Republicans and Netanyahu and the others who seek to sabotage this very necessary deal fail to mention any of this, and provide no alternatives but cold war or hot war.

Time to stop listening these irrational, impractical naysayers and give peace a chance. Yes, the many details still need to be worked out, but we should throw all out support behind making this framework turn into a lasting deal. This deal has a high probability or happening, because why agree to the major framework and then let it fall apart? That would be like announcing a party you are hosting, only not to show up to your own party; it makes you look really bad. War is always an option no matter what, but peace is much more difficult to reach and maintain. While skepticism about all this is understandable, there is much reason to hope this will work and that Iran—a country with a large chunk of it population that is very young, liberal, reform-minded, and pro-Western—and the U.S. could accomplish much good by working together. And with Iran, with which the U.S. has been at odds for so long, it is time to try peace and a normal relationship before we think of war, which should never be a “preferred” option.

The Senate’s Most Powerful Senator on Climate Change, James Inhofe, Is a Delusional Lunatic.

03/20/2015

0 Comments

Introduction:
Patrick Andendall
Guest Blogger Brian Frydenburg nails it again. His article will discuss Inhofe’e religious views. It is time these people relearned the basic tenants of Christianity. They might firstly consider what the Pope has to say on this issue:

“When we exploit Creation, we destroy the sign of God’s love for us. In destroying Creation, we are saying to God, `I don’t like it! This is not good!’ `So what do you like?’ `I like myself!’ Here, this is sin. Do you see?”

Pope Francis is saying that humanity’s destruction e repeat – to destroy the planet is a sinful act. No, the Pope is not ripping America – he is ripping the sandy foundations of the Stupidparty house, that is made of straw – and the big bad Pope has just huffed and puffed and blown that house down. Secondly Senator James Inhofe and his fellow Stupidparty faux Christians – should spend a bit more time getting acquainted with Jesus.

Picture
Why this would be hilarious except for the fact that it is real, he is serious, and he has a lot of power on climate issues.

By Brian E. Frydenborg, March 20th, 2015

If a parody comedy movie were to be made about stupidity and ideological blindness of the cognitive dissonance variety in government, there are number of amusing paths the director and producers could choose to take. Perhaps they could concoct a secretary of defense or a four star general who is a pure pacifist. Or how about a surgeon general who is a Christian Scientist? A Supreme Court justice who is illiterate? A president who is a nihilist or an anarchist? Perhaps an attorney general who only has experience as a personal injury lawyer? A Creationist to run to Department of Education? Maybe an Amish person to run the Department of Energy? OR… what about a climate change denier to chair the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works? Oh boy, that would be hilarious… in a fictional movie…

Except that last one ain’t fiction. It’s reality.

And in that situation, as a major figure in the government most responsible for pollution and global warming issues, that person is not even remotely funny. He is dangerous, a disgrace, and pathetic, as is the system and nation that allows this to take place.

Ladies and gentleman, let me introduce you to Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma (Washington, DC, office: (202) 224-4721), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, all-around indicator of the farce that has become policymaking in the Republican Party and in Washington in general, and Christian warrior against science (just the latest in a long history of powerful Christian figures, beginning with St. Paul himself, who have been part of Christianity’s and religion’s longstanding war against science and philosophy.

To look at Inhofe’s record on climate change is to view a theater of the absurd.
Picture
Inhofe, it should first be acknowledged, gets more money for his campaigns and elections from the oil, gas, and energy industries than any other contributors, and they are the industries that stand to lose the most from any robust actions designed to combat global warming. He has even written a book attacking the whole concept of man-made climate change/global warming, titled: The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future. And while he is a regular fountain of anti-climate-science-nonsense, some of his absurdities are so outlandish that they deserve to be quoted here; in one instance, Inhofe asserted that “Climate is changing, and climate has always changed…There’s archeological evidence of that. There’s biblical evidence of that. There’s historic evidence of that…The hoax is that there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful, they can change climate. Man can’t change climate.” Adding to this, another time he exclaimed that “The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He [God] is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.” He even cites the Bible as evidence against science: “I take my religion seriously…this what a lot of alarmists forget: God is still up there, and He promised to maintain the seasons and that cold and heat would never cease as long as the earth remains…one of my favorite Bible verses” is Genesis 8:22, which reads as follows: “As long as the earth remains/There will be springtime and harvest/Cold and heat, winter and summer.” And who are scientists to dispute Genesis?
PictureNot one SP Member accepts Climate change
Yes, Inhofe and his like-minded anachronisms (including 2016 presidential hopefuls Jeb Bush and Sen. Ted Cruz, as well as the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin) who dominate the Republican Party fancy themselves brave skeptics, holding back the flooding tide of hysterical liberal climate scare activists. But to be skeptical is to demand hard evidence in the absence of such evidence, or to demand more such evidence when that evidence is limited, if you are presented with a claim about something. And this is most definitely not what Inhofe, the Republican party, and those challenging climate science are doing; rather, they are flat out denying heaps and mounds of the very evidence that would more than satisfy any skeptic or skepticism on the issue.

Let’s be clear about what we are talking about here. The overwhelming preponderance of evidence—and by overwhelming, I mean that only 24 out of 13,950 peer-reviewed studies from 1991-2012 and only 2 out of 10,855 in 2013 rejected man-made global warming/climate change as a reality. That’s right, just 26 out of 25,182 peer-reviewed scientific articles in roughly the last quarter-century have outright and clearly rejected the concept that human activity is the driving force behind incredibly rapid and dangerous climate change that could threaten the entire world order and way of life. That’s barely more than 0.1%, or 1 in 1,000. Geologist James Lawrence Powell, whose convincing and very sound methodology gave us these numbers, concludes that this information can tell us that “1. There [is sic] a mountain of scientific evidence in favor of anthropogenic global warming and no convincing evidence against it” and “2. Those who deny anthropogenic global warming have no alternative theory to explain the observed rise in atmospheric CO2 and global temperature.” In other words, there is no debate, just a consensus and a lunatic fringe. And “the inquisition” attacking the sound science behind the realities of man-made global warming/climate change are increasingly being debunked and/or linked to powerful corporate interests, like the oil/gas/energy industry, that face difficulty if world governments do what they need to do to limit greenhouse gas emissions and other activity contributing to these undeniable trends. One meta-study even concluded that, unless policies are changed soon, “ocean life faces mass extinction.” And just this past year of 2014 was the warmest year on record, and this current winter is the warmest winter on record.

This lunatic fringe would not be a problem, then, except that this lunatic fringe has hijacked the leadership of one of the two major parties in American politics to the degree that our legislative branch of government has one of these lunatics running its most powerful body that deals with climate change and global warming. These people appropriating the term skeptic is a disservice to that very term and shows them to be ignorant of its very meaning, and we must call them what they are: climate science deniers, because man-made climate change is undeniably real and undeniably a problem. Until the modern era, only the mass economic activity of ancient Rome was on a scale capable of altering climate, and the contributions to air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from that ancient time period are not in doubt. But from the industrial revolution in the eighteenth century onward, man-made pollution has once again happened on a massive scale and is today occurring on a much, much larger scale than in the Roman period, driving many destructive changes across the world’s climate in the past few decades.

Inhofe’s latest stunt attacking the science behind global warming was to highlight the fact that it was cold in Washington, DC; cold enough for him to bring a snowball from outside the Capitol and throw it on the floor of the U.S. Senate while he was addressing his fellow senators… The mind boggling thing is that he actually seems to think that a cold spell or snow in Washington in (GASP!) winter, of all times, is somehow sufficient proof that a general trend of global warming is not actually happening. See, Republicans like Inhofe seem to continually confuse the concepts of climate and weather, climate being the long-term pattern of weather. A quiet person may scream, yell, and fight once in a while, but on any given day there is a strong chance you will not find him or her engaging in such behavior. Republican approaches to climate science are the equivalent of someone pointing to this quiet person during an out-of-the-ordinary loud outburst and claiming that this is proof that the person is not quiet. Republicans are not even equipped, then, with a basic understanding of the terms or concepts essential to understanding these climate issues.
Picture
The bottom line is that Inhofe would be a farce and a joke if not for the fact that he arguably wields as much power as anyone else in the U.S. government when it comes to the environment and policy related to global warming and climate change. And he has made it clear he will wield this power in any way he can to can to defeat those who want to take action to combat global warming and climate change’s dangerous and catastrophic effects. And, when it comes to this “disturbing” fact, there is nothing funny, nothing to laugh about, at all.