Why Dennis Kucinich Should Be the next President

In the mid 1800s with slavery at it’s peak few actively spoke out against it. Now we consider the Quakers, John Brown, and others who championed the cause of captive peoples as heroes. Their simple ideology was that all people are equal. Dennis Kucinich embraces these same views of equality and he is unafraid to speak up about it. Read more

Why Mike Gravel Should be the next President

With these elections, it is necesary that people carefully consider all of the candidates, even though the media likes to thin out the field of candidates for us before a single vote is even cast. Do not discount any candidate immediately: it is your duty as a citizen and voter of the United States to evaluate any and all candidates to decide which one best represents you. Dispel any qualms about Gravel’s electibility: the fact of the matter is that if everyone believes that a candidate is electable, then they will be electable, while if everyone believes that a candidate is not electable, then they are not. People should vote for whom they truly agree with in the primaries, so maybe then they won’t be presented with two bad choices in the general election (and then complain about that fact). So, here, in order to inform the population, I’ve written an article detailing the aspects of Former Senator Mike Gravel’s illustrious life and his positions on various policies and issues.

Read more

Why Barack Obama should be the next President

On February 10, 2007 Barack Obama stood in Springfield,Illinois in front of 15,000 supporters and announced that he would seek the Democratic nomination for the President of the United States. With this announcement came much excitement for Barack Obama and his campaign. He promised a different type of campaign, and this message set well with a lot of voters. Obama jumped ahead of the pack in the polls and became second to only Hillary Clinton. The Obama camp has run a strong campaign, and I’ve supported them the whole way because I thoroughly believe that Barack Obama should be the next President. Read more

Government Funded Missionary Work

(image credit to gruntzooki)

I saw an advertisement on television recently that made me laugh, but then it made me worry. The advertisement was on during Pat Robertson’s show The 700 Club (nothing else was on, and I was in the mood for something scary). I believe the ad was for Robertson’s charity organization Operation Blessing. The ad went something like this. Read more

Tues. November 20th Live Podcast: Is Joe Biden Right?

Barack Obama’s 4 point lead over Hillary…But the margin of error is, uh, 4 points!

“Joe Biden is right” says all 2008 frontrunners.

A new Sal Mohamed ad is uncovered from the internet’s darkest and deepest corner AKA the soul of Johnny Camacho.

Co-hosted by Danny Solis, Johnny Camacho, Jeffrey Pritchard, Tommy Senecal, and Jordana Stearns.

[Download MP3]

Congress Finally Does Some Good

The Democrats realized something recently. They control the congress. Sure, it took them about a year to realize, but they’ve realized it. They have control, and they are finally starting to make that clear to the president. Read more

In support of the Fair Tax

There are two main progressive systems of taxation: an income tax (which is what we have now) and a sales tax. Some people, particularly presidential candidates, are discussing which tax system would be best for the United States. With the income tax, you’re taxed on what you earn; with the sales tax, you’re taxed on what you spend. To learn more about these tax systems and to decide for myself which one is better for America at this point in time, I decided to apply, to both tax systems, the three requirements that a tax system needs to ensure fairness: total transparency, no exceptions, and simplicity. Read more

Impeachment: the biggest research subject ever

A big issue right now is the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, and I think it’s time we role up our shirtsleeves and do some heavy investigating into their political careers. Read more

Get Military Recruitment out of our schools

The other day at school during lunch, my small group and I were approached by a navy recruiter. He thought he would be able to relate to us more by telling Chuck Norris jokes. “Did you know Chuck Norris’ tears can cure cancer? Too bad he doesn’t cry,” the guy quipped. After listening to a handful of more Chuck Norris jokes that I’ve already heard, I asked him “If Chuck Norris is so great, can he end the war?” Some people reading this might perceive that as rude. But what is more rude is that the military is actively recruiting young adults while still in high school. Read more

America For Sale

George Bush has been the only president to cut taxes in a time of a war. Consequently the US has a record deficit. And here we have Fred Thompson using a text book example of failed Reaganomics. He wants to cut taxes and increase military spending.

Thompson said Tuesday he wants a military ground force that includes 775,000 in the Army and 225,000 Marines. That would be 23,000 more Marines than the Pentagon currently is seeking.

Thompson didn’t say how he would pay for or recruit those forces. He did say that military spending should be set at 4.5 percent of the value of the goods and services the nation creates, or gross domestic product. His campaign later said that would be the equivalent of increasing current military spending by up to $150 billion a year, but that increases would be phased in and depend on economic growth.

This is fine for the selfish baby boomer generation. They get to use social security, receive tax cuts, wage wars for cheaper oil… and the best thing for them: they don’t have to pay a cent. The current administration is leaving a precarious financial situation for future generations, because the kids, teens, and young adults of today will be paying for their parents deficit.

But Fred Thompson wants to increase the ground forces of Americas military to 1,000,000 men. The Republican presidential contenders are all working to beat each other in claims of increasing military size. These tax cuts and wars mostly benefit the rich (especially the FairTax because it leaves the wealthy with a large amount of untaxed income) and corporations.

Iraq sits on $30 trillion worth of oil, and the only reason America is still fighting a costly war is because the Iraqi Parliament still hasn’t ceded it’s oil fields to American companies. As soon as such legislation is passed troop reductions (and consequently the war bill) will drop. But of course the Iraqis don’t want to hand $30 trillion to the US, so we continue to fight for Big Oil, and give Big Oil tax breaks.

I’m glad Obama was honest and said we need to raise Social Security tax, because anyone else who won’t raise taxes is buying the vote with your tax dollars. But Americans are selfish people, and ideas like Hilary’s $5000 “baby bond” cash giveaway, and the Republicans tax cuts are ways for them to buy the American democracy. And once they do that they’ll sell it to the corporate interests who will buy them.

Corporate Censorship

You may or may not know that Former Alaskan Senator and current 2008 presidential candidate for the Democratic nomination, Mike Gravel, has been excluded from the October 30th MSNBC Democratic debate and will be excluded from the November 15th CNN debate. He met all of the arbitrary requirements for the November 15th debate, except for one: he has not raised $1 million dollars. This only serves to further the corruption and influence of money in our politics, which is ridiculous considering that most Americans believe that there is already an inordinate emphasis on money in politics. (For example, Chris Dodd has about the same amount of support levels as Mike Gravel, and yet Dodd has raised over $13 million total? How is that possible?)

So, Gravel is holding an Alternative debate on November 15th (which will be able to be seen on Ustream.tv). But I am not writing here to simply rally support against Gravel’s censorship. It is my duty to address the full scope of the problem, so I would also like to note the problem of censorship by the media in general, and its implications for our society.

Gravel is certainly not the first candidate to have been censored by the media. Ralph Nader (who I defend against accusations that he is the reason that Al Gore lost in 2000), Dennis Kucinich, and countless others who don’t quite fit the mainstream media’s ideas, or who are not corrupt and don’t take money from special interests and corporations, have been censored or are in danger of being censored.

Because, you see, if a candidate is not in the pocket of the corporation that owns the media, then it is against the self-interest of the corporation to allow that candidate to speak out on the media outlets that the corporation controls. This works vice-versa, as well. Candidates who are in the pockets of the corporations that own the media will be allowed to speak on the media outlets that the corporation owns.

This corporate influence in our media only serves to make sure that the candidates that we elect to our highest offices in the land are the most corrupt candidates. It serves to make sure that the candidates with the most integrity are silenced. It’s no wonder that we have such a sorry bunch of representatives in Washington. It’s no wonder that we have a man like George W. Bush as president. Unfortunately, their lack of integrity is why they win.

It is very dangerous to allow the corporate media to have this kind of power over us, to thin out the field of candidates before a single vote is even cast. It undermines the values which our democracy was founded upon, and it undermines our democratic elections. Are we really such a democracy after all, when the rich and powerful alone decides who runs our government? Our government is not of the people, by the people, and for the people, it is of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations.

Our so-called “democracy” is currently in a very unfortunate state. It’s time to bring Democracy back.

Manufactured Populism

Let’s play “Guess the candidate!”. I’ll write a few lines about different 2008 presidential candidates (all facts, no opinion, although I am selective about my information), Republican and Democrat, and then you guess who it happens to be. Most of my information comes from whitehouseforsale.org, opensecrets.com, or vote-smart.org (I recommend these websites; you should definitely take a look at them if you would like to know more about the current state of our government).

#1: This first candidate that I will mention has the most money bundlers out of all of the candidates: he or she has 543 money bundlers (or people who funnel large amounts of money to campaigns), one of which is a lobbyist. He or she has raised less than $30 million dollars, but he or she has raised over $8 million of that money from lawyers or law firms.

#2: The second candidate has raised the most from Lobbyists (over $500,000), and he or she has also raised the most from lawyers and law firms as well, at over $9 million dollars. He or she has taken the largest amount from commercial banks ($919,000), the second largest amount from Hedge Funds and Private Equity Firms ($970,000), and the first largest amount from the Pharmaceuticals/Health Products industry ($269,000). He or she has 322 money bundlers, 18 of which are lobbyists.

#3: The third candidate has taken over $70,000 from lobbyists, has taken the second largest amount from the commercial banks ($879,000), has taken the third largest amount from Hedge Funds and Private Equity Firms ($950,000), and has taken the second largest amount from the Pharmaceuticals/Health Products industry ($261,000). He or she has 314 money bundlers, eight of which are lobbyists.

What’s more, none of these three candidates will pledge to have the United States out of the Iraq War by 2013, the end of their first term.

Who are these three candidates? They must be Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain? No, indeed, they are three supposedly “completely different” candidates. They, in order, are John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama. Don’t believe my facts? Check them yourself. Although, to be fair, the Republicans are just as bad (you just expect more out of the Democrats), and, notably, Rudy Giuliani took vastly more money from the Oil and Gas Industry than any other candidate.

It is a direct contradiction if you claim to run a political campaign based on populist values but finance that campaign with the money of businesses and special interests. The supposed populism of the Democratic Party is manufactured populism; it does not really exist, we just percieve it to exist because of how the Democratic Party attempts to present itself. If you broadly survey the two political parties, they look very different, but, if you look closely enough, there are few substansial differences between the Democrats and Republicans when it comes to how they operate: they are all Demoblicans.

The reality of the situation is that, if you want a good candidate the truly represents you, you must not vote solely on the basis of which political party they occupy: you must vote by carefully weighing and examining each candidate’s individual aspects, like a good and informed voter should. You should examine which candidates truly represent the people, not the businesses and special interests, and, in my opinion, the only major presidential candidates (that I know of) who even begin to fit that bill are Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, and Ron Paul.

You may say that “Well, the Democrats are better than the Republicans though, so I vote Democratic.” Our society presents you with a false choice between either Democrats or Republicans. You do have other choices. Not just the Independent candidates, but the Green Party, Populist Party, and countless others as well. The Democrats and Republicans, however, have made such a good effort to stamp out these smaller parties and the Independent candidates that you really see very little of them. An example of this is Georgia’s very unfair ballot access laws.

In conclusion, the Republicans and the Democrats are not so different after all; the Democrats just present us with a manufactured image of populism, while the Republicans usually don’t attempt to do so. The infighting between the Democrats and the Republicans in our society distracts us from the real fight: the struggle between those who have power and those who have none, the struggle between the people and the politicians.

Head of Prison Rehab Ministry Defends Torture

I use to have respect for Chuck Colson, a man connected to the Watergate controversy, jailed, and then freed. He went on to start a non profit that helped to rehab prisoners, take care of prisoners families, and created the Angel Tree project. Sure he was still a prominent conservative, and had ideologies I disagreed with, but at least he was doing a good work.

But today comes news that Chuck Colson, a man who has dedicated his life to helping prisoners, has called torture a noble act. In Newsweek he is quoted as saying:

Centuries of Christian ethical reflection would lead to the answer “no.” Inflicting bodily or psychological harm on a helpless captive would be inconsistent with the Christian understanding of human dignity. But as with all moral obligations, there may be circumstances for exception.

It is well understood in Christian tradition that while we are supposed to obey the law, there may be times when there is a higher obligation (see Aquinas, Augustine, and Martin Luther King). To rescue a drowning person, a Christian would be justified in disobeying a “no trespassing” sign.

So it is with torture; if a competent authority honestly believed that this was the only way to get information that might save the lives of thousands, I believe he would be justified. That is not moral relativism. It is making a difficult decision when human life and dignity will be affected either way. The Greeks called it prudence.

We have to remember that many of these “terrorists” that the CIA takes don’t have the information we need, or even in some cases are not terrorists at all. Because they don’t know anything they can’t answer any questions, and are tortured for something they know nothing about.

By running a prison rehab ministry, Chuck Colson should realize that a lot of what happens inside prisons is responsible for the trap that sends these men back to jail. Compared with the relatively minor horrors of American jail, how do you expect someone to become a normal citizen after being beaten, drowned, and held naked in rooms with below freezing temperatures? That’s enough to encourage a man to create another September 11th.

And how can he use Martin Luther King, one of the worlds most famous peacemakers, as an example to torture someone? The acts of Augustine and King where both crimes that didn’t harm anyone. If I remember correctly, Augustine challenged an alcoholic king to give up his addiction, and since this was the time of monarchy’s challenging a king would have been a crime. And it’s obvious that Kings civil disobedience hurt no one either, but rather challenged corrupt laws.

But at least the right has progressed to realize that what we are doing is torture. The next step is to help them realize that torture is always wrong.

How Could They? Mukasey Gets Confirmed

Mukasey has just been confirmed by the senate as the next attorney general. This is completely absurd. I mean come on. Congress is a joke. That joke isn’t funny anymore. How does Mukasey get confirmed without answering the waterboarding question? His inability to answer is his answer. Waterboarding is torture under United States law. No reasonable person can argue that it isn’t, so Mukasey hasn’t. He is telling America that he will be no different from Alberto (“I don’t recall”) Gonzolez. We deserve different. We deserve better. We should demand it.

It is hard to express my outrage over Congress for both confirming Mukasey and effectively killing Kucinich’s attempt to impeach Cheney in the same week. I just want to shout out “Arrrrrg!” like Charlie Brown.

This is disgusting. What congress has done by confirming Mukasey is effectively tell the President a few things that he is very happy to hear. Congress will not oversee his actions. Congress will not even attempt to control him. Congress approves of waterboarding. The democrats won’t live up to what they promised the American people during the last elections. Where is the democratic party’s passion for democracy and human rights?

Mukasey might have actually been a good candidate for attorney general, but when he decided to stay silent about waterboarding, he became completely unacceptable. With Gonzolez, we didn’t know beforehand that he was for torture. With Mukasey, we learned his stance on torture during the confirmation hearings, but he still got confirmed. How did this happen? Congress has effectively approved torture.

The only reason this could possibly be acceptable is if there is some sort of a compromise. But there isn’t a compromise. Instead congress has just decided to roll over for the President.

There has been talk of a bill that would close loophole in the law that allows waterboarding, but in fact, there isn’t a loophole. It is clearly illegal under the Geneva Conventions. And even then, any bill that would close up whatever supposed loophole Bush is using to claim that his actions are legal won’t be passed. Even if the bill somehow got through both houses of congress, it would be vetoed, and the democrats certainly don’t have the votes to overturn a veto.

Not confirming Mukasey was congress’ only chance to stop, or at least to voice its objection to, the practice of waterboarding. Now we’re stuck. Great job idiots.

Next Page »