The Republican Plague...Antidotes are Available

Here's something that might pique your interest. I've talked about it before here:

http://freadommeadows.blogspot.com/2007/09/defense-of-marriage.html

In Oregon, a group called The Defense of Marriage Again has just delivered over 60,000 signatures to the Secretary of State to get two gay rights amendments back on the ballot. They want to overturn the same-sex unions and also the anti-discrimination bill that passed last year.

What is wrong with these people?

Are they so insecure that they have to bash people who don't have sex with the opposite gender in order to make them feel better? Are they so homophobic that they have to put down gays in order to bring themselves up? This is facism in its purest form: denying rights to people based on who they have sex with. You know who also did this: Hitler. Now, I'm not comparing the two, per se, because these people have absolutely no chance of getting political power (that matters), but the fact that they are fighting an anti-discrimination bill is just beyond me.

This goes beyond what is considered moral by the Republican Party (yes, this is a right-wing nut group). This goes beyond what we as Americans think is moral. In the 1950's, we still had laws banning interracial marriage. This, in turn, was deemed unconstitutional. What's the difference with gay marriage?

People will cite the so-called "snowball effect." "If we let gays marry, what's to stop people from marrying their dogs?" What a crock of s**t. This argument has no basis in reality, because dogs are not people. And you know what? If you really want to marry your dog, there are places in Vegas that will let you do that. Are these marriages legal? Of course not. Do the people in these marriages know that? Of course they do. Is that affecting how we live our daily lives? No. So there's that argument shot down.

The current marriage laws state that marriage is between one man and one woman. In the 1800's, voting laws were "white males 21 and older, who hold property." (paraphrase, of course) So, if you were black but had property, you couldn't vote. If you were a woman, you couldn't vote. If you didn't own land, you couldn't vote. But all that changed, right? Why can't these laws change? The truth is that the Republican party is afraid of change. But change is good. Progressivism is good. We saw that in the 1920's, and the 50's, and 60's, and 70's. The parlence of our times is changing rapidly.

And, the most basic principle: these are human beings. They are American citizens. End of story.

-Anteaus

Voting on the Vote

Sorry about the lack of posts, I've been a bit busy.

Anyway, here's something. You've all heard about the new Voter ID law that's going up now? There's been huge debate on the subject, whether or not people should be required to have a "Voter ID Card" before they vote on the ballots. How idiotic is this?

First off, we already have voter ID's and stuff. You need to register to vote, right? So that, in turn, signifies that you are a citizen (because they do check that, you know), you're over 18, and you're not a complete idiot. But even if you are a Republican, you still have the right to vote. The vote is the one symbol of democracy that will never falter. When we lose the vote, we have lost our democracy.

Voting is a right, not a priveledge. And by a right, I mean that you have the obligation to vote. These are the people who, in essence, run your life. You read their platforms and you listen to their beliefs, and if they conform with your beliefs--or come reasonably close--you vote for them. Ignorance has no place in politics.

This is a true statement. Voter suppression has been going on in this country ever since the inception of the Articles of Confederation! Let's take a look: poll taxes, literacy tests, disenfranchisement, grandfather clauses (ruled unconstitutional, but still)...the list goes on and on. These are tactics used by conservatives throughout history to keep the voting rights in the hands of the few. This is why we have the electoral college. We have proven that we no longer need it, because with the advances in technology we have the ability to count votes on the night of the elections!

But with the advancement of technology comes the advancement of political agenda. Let's take the recent electronic voting scandals involving Diebold. Now, with one simple flick of a switch or push of a button, you can make the readout say whatever you want and vote for whichever candidate you want them to say. This is simple...they've proven it.

Now, there is a simple solution to all of this: absentee ballots. Washington State has adopted a completely absentee ballot system, and guess what: it works! It's cheap, it's easy, people can vote at their leisure, and voter turnout has never been higher. Why? Because people can sit in front of the fireplace, with a cup of coffee in their hand, and vote for their next governor, or their state representatives, or their congressmen, or different ballot measures. It's quick and painless, and the voting instructions are not marred by stupid punch-holes or complicated electronic machines. It's simple: here's what you're going to vote for, here's what it does, and if you like it, fill in the "yes" box. If you don't, fill in the "no" box. When you're all done, seal it and send it back. Problem solved.

It's easier than paying your bills, and postage is free. What a concept, huh?

But the Republican party isn't keen on nation-wide absentee ballots. In fact, they want to keep the electronic voting machines simply because they're a hassle and easy to tamper. If you can't stop people from voting by making is severely complicated, then just change the vote altogether. It's sick, and it's wrong. We need to stand up and take back the vote.

-Anteaus

The Man of the Hour

Iranian president Mahmoud (?) Ahmadenijad (?)...we'll call him "the President," for purposes of this article...wants to go visit ground zero. And the entire media is in an uproar. Sorry, Fox News (Faux News) is in an uproar. Everyone else is too busy following O.J. to the Palms Casino to care. And no one is happy.

There have been many, many people interviewed by Faux News--you know, survivors of the 9/11 attacks, siblings of people who died in the towers, Mitt Romney--who don't want him to come. They see him as a wholly evil person who we can never deal with, ever.

I, however, see things a bit differently. The president of Iran is a human being. He might not be nice, but he is human. And he is the leader of a country that we have continuously slandered and looked down upon. This is due to the fact that he is purportedly seeking to build a nuclear weapon. However, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), who have been working hard in Iran, differ. They have no evidence to support the Bush administration's allegations that Tehran is seeking to build a nuclear weapon. But that's beside the point.

This visit could prove to be a stepping stone to strengthening relations with Iran. If Bush wants Tehran to get out of Iraq (an allegation that has proven fact), he's going to have to talk with the Iranian president about it. Now, if these two could come to an agreement about various topics; i.e nuclear proliferation, the war in Iraq, etc. This could be the turning point in our relations with Iran, and, subsequently, the Middle East in general.

Now, I'm not saying that anything will come of this. It could very well end up as a political fiasco for both parties (Bush and Tehran), but at the same time we cannot deny him entrance into the country. Last time I checked, the United States was open to all tourists, and the Iranian president wants to tour ground zero. What's wrong with that?

-Anteaus

Condoleeza At It Again

The Bush administration is officially retarded. Not that they weren't before, mind you, but now they have gone a step too far. In a statement yesterday, Condoleeza Rice stated that the IAEA should butt out of Iran, stating that the IAEA is "not in the business of diplomacy." Here's the story on CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/09/19/rice.iran/index.html

The IAEA has been speaking with Iran, and Tehran has cooperated with the U.N. agency thus far. However, Rice, while stating that cooperation between the two entities is a good thing, "this would not be the first time the Iranians made an agreement just to break it."

Now, this is true, in a sense. But let's not forget that her position as Secretary of State is to communicate to different countries and maintain and forge alliances. She's our foreign diplomat, for God's sake! And she deliberately slanders the Iranians, calling them basically a pack of liars who are known for not cooperating. The Bush administration has accused Tehran of attempting to build a nuclear weapon, despite the fact that the IAEA has not confirmed this.

This sounds like classic warmongering. Let's look at the Bush track record for just one moment:

He pulled out of verious U.N. and other world-wide treaties, including Kyoto;
He invaded Iraq without the consent of the U.N., with no consequence;
And now he's talking about taking away Iran's nuclear capabilities, without the IAEA telling him that they either are or are not.

This is absolute madness. The entire point of the United Nations is to facilitate peace between nations and use force to stop a country from agressive actions against another nation. That's what they do. But the U.N. needs to grow some balls and acknowledge the fact that the U.S. is sidestepping them at every turn, flaunting the power of the United States in the U.N.'s face, and making sure that the U.N. takes a backseat to the United States.

Bush has facilitated all of this. Now, another meeting between the U.N. and U.S., plus the other members of the U.N. Security Council (and Germany) is scheduled for Friday, with talks going into next week.

What cracks me up the most is that the IAEA and their director, ElBaradei, won the Nobel Peace Price in 2005 for their efforts to stop nuclear proliferation. This administration is taking the front stage in dealing with world issues, but the problem is is that they don't know how! It's completely asinine to think that this administration has their head on straight about Iran, Iraq, or any other country for that matter. Here's proof:

Where the f**k is Osama bin Laden? Oh, that's right...in PAKISTAN! We know, the Pakistani government has said that he's there somewhere, but they don't want to go searching because it would be a massive failure. Which is a bunch of crap, if you ask me. And the Bush administration won't go searching for him because Pakistan is our ally and they don't want to break their sovereignty. Which, again, is a bunch of sh*t.

Any other president would have been committed to catching that son of a bitch as soon as humanly possible. They wouldn't have gotten lost in the Tora Bora caves in 2003. They wouldn't have led us into Iraq to get slaughtered like cattle; and they sure as sh*t wouldn't have waited four years to catch the biggest terrorist this world has ever seen. It's like he doesn't care if Americans die, as long as he gets to play in the big boy's chair. It's sick. It's wrong. And it sure as hell is not what America is all about.

It's time for America to take a stand. We need to send a message to this administration to stop meddling, and send a message to Congress to grow some balls and serve some subpoenas that are backed by the DOJ.

I don't know. You decide.

-Anteaus

And the Taser Goes To...

Have you heard about the kid who was tasered for asking a question? Here's the full video at Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE

So, here we have a Q&A forum with Senator John Kerry (D-MA), and when it was his turn he asked a question regarding the 2004 election, impeachment of George W. Bush, and if he and Bush were members of the secretive Skull & Bones society at Yale. But, campus officials thought he talked just a bit too long, and was forced away from the podium.

This is where it gets hazy. I must admit, this guy was kind of an a**hole. Check out the video at the link above and you'll see what I mean. But, at the end of the video, he keeps saying "What did I do man?" and "Don't tase me bro!" Now, there are four or five different private security officers around this guy, he's not resisting anymore, and out of nowhere these security people taser this guy and he starts screaming in pain. This is classic police brutality.

Again, for the most part, this guy was...kind of...resisting arrest. That in and of itself is questionable. Why didn't the police just escort him out of the building and prevent him from coming back in? At any public place I've been, where there's security, if a person is being rowdy they grab his ass and chuck him out, no questions asked.

But instead of doing that, they throw him on the ground at the back of the venue, in the venue still, and proceed to try and arrest him. I'm sorry, you get him out of the venue first. That's classic training. You don't let a whole gaggle of people watch as you assault and attempt to arrest this man. And after all that, he says he'll leave if they just let him up. They clearly have a firm grasp on him, I mean they're holding him down aren't they? So why didn't they let him up?

And after this, he pleads with them "don't tase me bro!" and they proceed to anyway. That was unnecessary force at its finest. That's like the freaking Rodney King beatings. Absolutely ridiculous. This is, again, classic police brutality. Forcing this guy down for asking a question? That's not cool by any standards. That was not necessary force, which is the defense that the security force is going to put up.

Now, he was resisting arrest, I will give you that. But at the same time, these people wouldn't just escort him out. They take him to the back and taser him. Taser him, when he's already down and not a threat to anyone. He's screaming, sure, but that's the first rule of crowd control: take the dissenter out of public view. Come on, man, it's basic. Freaking BASIC! These security people are class A morons, through and through. They don't know how to arrest somebody...that guy was half the size of half of those people! Why didn't they just throw him on the ground, chuck him in cuffs and escort him from the building?

I dunno about you, but this just incenses me. I am livid pissed right now. If there's not a lawsuit from the kid, and those security people get away with this, then there is something seriously wrong with the justice system of this country.

I don't know. But until next time...

-Anteaus

Squeeze Some More OJ Out Of That Glove!

Oh, man, what a wierd day. So they finally get OJ for something other than the murder of his wife...which, by the by, he probably (nay, definitely) did. He gets off of those charges, and now he's going back to court to defend himself against some good old-fashioned looting! Where's this going to end?

The media's playing it up like it's no big deal. Check out what CNN had to say:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/14/simpson/index.html

This is rediculous. You know he did it. How can you think he didn't? He's breaking into a hotel room to steal his own memorabilia back? Why hadn't we heard of this before? I mean, if someone broke into his house and stole a bunch of his sports stuff, it'd be in the news, right? So, OJ is in trouble again, and there's nothing he can do now, other than rely on his crack defense team that's been working overtime trying to keep him out of the news.

-Anteaus

Petraeus Doesn't Know Jack

General David Petraeus has stated, repeatedly, mind you, that the United States will be able to pull out 30,000 troops by summer '08. This, however, is a bit of a shock, seeing as how THE TROOPS THERE AREN'T GETTING THE JOB DONE! This just boggles my mind. How can a man who wrote the book...quite literally....on insurgency and how to deal with them go against his own advice?

He states in his book that to quell an insurgency, you need to have one soldier for every forty citizens in the country. Now, Iraq has around 26,000,000 people living there. And there about 170,000 U.S/Coalition troops (the words are so interchangeable now it's not even funny). Now, here's the math: there are roughly 150 Iraqis per U.S. troop. That seems a little off, in my opinion.

"It will be a long, hard grind. Right now, I think that grind is making progress."
-Ryan Crocker

This dumbass ambassador to Iraq actually believes that what we're doing in Iraq right now is working. Let me break it down:

The Iraqi government is split along religious lines, Sunni, Shi'a and Kurd (however they're represented);
The surge is an exercise in futility;
The death toll for American troops is rising fast;
At last check, 54% of Iraqis said that the attacks on U.S. troops was justified;
There are no profit-sharing agreements within the country, meaning that the dichotomy between the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor is only getting wider;

The American people do not see progress. I do not see progress. Congress, as dumb as they are, do not see progress. Crocker is right about one thing: it will be a long, hard grind. But there's only so much to grind down. Recruitment levels are down. People don't want to go to Iraq because it's an exercise in futility, one that's costing Americans their lives and sending $11 billion dollars a week down the drain. I don't even know what $1 million looks like, let alone $11 billion!

David Petraeus is a puppet, and the Bush regime is pulling the strings. He's hoping that this gig in Iraq will help him get the presidency. This has been heard by several different key Iraqi officials. This man is a patsy, nothing more. He doesn't know what he's doing in Iraq and all he wants to do is build his political career. Men like that make me sick.

I mean, come on! How do you expect to win a war when you go against your own mandate? That's the real question of the day. To see the full report, check out the link below:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/12/iraq.petraeus/index.html

-Anteaus

American Education System gets a Reform Job

Oh, man, was I in for a shock. I have a video that everyone should watch:

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=17824978

This has to be one of the funniest videos in a long time...and it's all true! See, the problem with the American education system is that it's stuck. No one wants to take the time to really sit down and address the problem with education.

But then again, it's not the education system itself, but rather where exactly the schools are located, you know, in which districts. Take me, for instance. I went to Camas High School, and the district itself had plenty of money. Now, on the other hand, take Flint, MI. Over there, it's very, very poor. There's not a whole lot of money pouring into the schools, so kids are forced to get into the military just to go to college.

Flint, as it happens, was the site of one of the biggest car manufacturing plants in America. But, what, 10 years ago, it folded and moved overseas, single-handedly killing the entire town. Now, Flint is a shadow of its former self, with high unemployment and a ton of military recruiters. These recruiters prey on the kids who have no out, because they can't afford to go to college. Their school relies on NCLB funding, so they don't learn anything important, which only hampers their chances of going to college, and the government just doesn't care about them.

All of those factors are the direct result of the free economy that we have with the rest of the world. The globalized economy let that one factory, which employed thousands of people, pack up shop and move across the globe to a place where they can make cars for a fraction of the cost. This, in turn, killed the city, which in turn killed the education system, which (in turn) led so many kids to join the armed forces.

Welcome to America.

-Anteaus

The Defense of Marriage

In today's society, it's hard to deny anyone anything. If someone wants something, they can go and get it. But when it comes to basic human freedoms, it's a little harder to find what you're looking for.

Throughout American history, the "land of the free" has never truly been free for a lot of people. Only until recently did we allow interracial marriages, or abolished poll taxes, or given a damn about what African Americans and women in this country are truly worth. But now, to replace these two groups, America has decided to scapegoat a new minority: the gay community.

Gay marriage is, by constitutional decree, legal. You cannot deny it, you cannot say that it does not; it is completely and inherently legal, and it says so in the 14th amendment. Due Process and Equal Protection, both of which guarantee the rights of marriage to homosexuals, were written into the Constitution by a man who knew that the only way to be a progressive nation and set an example was to give everyone the same rights, no matter what color they are or which sexual organ they prefer.

Arguments against gay marriage are sketchy at best. The only piece of legislation that contests it is the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, passed by Clinton in 1996. It says that Congress doesn't have to respect marriage certificiates handed out to gay couples and it defines marriage as "union between one man and one woman." The only reason this is still in effect, however, is that the Supreme Court is packed with seven (count them: seven!) republican, Moral Majority justices that seek to bring America back to before the march on Washington.

It's time for true change in this country. Nothing can happen while an entire group of people are left out of the loop. Marriage is not just for tax purposes; it's to profess your love for another human being, to tell the whole world that you love that person more than anything. Civil Unions will never come close to this. It's not about the tax breaks you get. It's about love. True, unadulterated love. How can you deny that to one group of people because they happen to like the same gender?

-Anteaus

Today, we Grant You Your Wings

I know it's been a while, but if you're reading this, congratulations! You've made it to level two.

Recently, a lot of things have been in the news. General Petraeus giving his Iraq report to Congress, the sixth anniversary of the September 11th attacks, just how bad this government truly is. But the thing that we haven't really touched on is the declining middle class. As the world strives to unite under a global economy, some countries benefit, and some don't. America belongs in the latter rather than the former. Sure, prices for clothes and video games are low, and we can buy just about anything we want. But that's not the point. The point is that there is a price for these "luxuries," a price paid in American lives.

I'm not talking about the war in Iraq; I'm talking about the rising number of people in poverty and how it is now harder than ever to escape it. Poverty is a pit that a lot of people are at the bottom of. During the 1950's and '60's, hell, even the '70's, the government was helping people to escape it. Use whatever metaphor you like, but the government was providing many, many jobs to people and as such the economy was bustling. Especially during the 1950's, where unemployment was insanely low. This economy relied on one thing: the middle class.

You know, the people who make a decent living but they don't make so much that they're Donald Trump. They were working-class Americans. These people could save money, buy a house, buy their kids some good Christmas presents, and afford to live comfortably. Now, however, the middle class is virtually gone. The middle class is disappearing faster than angel food cake at a weight-watcher's convention. Now, that's not to say it's not there anymore; no, there is still a middle class...buried underneath the millions of people who have slipped off the deep end into financial trouble, all at the hands of the free market.

This is where we grant you your wings. You see, the economy is turning more and more into a global entity, and slipping away from protecting the people who rely on it to survive. As the economy becomes less and less focused on American people, and more and more on American businesses, the whole country suffers. Those businesses are exploiting the loopholes and the low-to-non-existent tariffs surrounding this country by moving overseas to countries with relatively weak economies. This, in turn, lays off thousands of Americans at a time, while saving the American company a ton of money by exploiting workers overseas.

This is why labor unions were originally created: to stop the exploitation of American workers. Well, thanks to a free market economy, all those companies have done is moved away from America and into a country that they can exploit, whether it be in human lives, resources, or whatever else. Labor, money, greed...it all goes round and round. The free market ideals that this government is pushing on the American people and the rest of the world is appalling. It weakens America by strengthening the dichotomy between the rich and the poor, while at the same time taking away American jobs and sidestepping the laws that govern this society.

Take a moment to try and understand this whole situation. Is the cost in American lives and livelihoods high enough for you to take action? Or is it just low enough to not care and keep buying your cheap clothes at Wal-Mart?

-Anteaus