Hope n' Change

A Short Neurological Test

A Short Neurological Test

1- Find the C below..

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

2- If you already found the C, now find the 6 below.

99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
69999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

3 - Now find the N below. It's a little more difficult.

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMNMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM


This is NOT a joke. If you were able to pass these 3 tests, you can cancel
your annual visit to your neurologist. Your brain is great and you're far
from having a close relationship with Alzheimer.

Congratulations!

eonvrye that can raed this rsaie your hnad.

If you can read the following paragraph, you are just awsome.

Only great minds can read this

This is weird, but interesting!

If you can raed this, you have a sgtrane mnid too

Can you raed this? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.

I cdnuolt blveiee that I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd what I was rdanieg. The
phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde
Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in what oerdr the ltteres in a word are, the
olny iproamtnt tihng is that the frsit and last ltteer be in the rghit
pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can still raed it whotuit a
pboerlm. This is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by
istlef, but the word as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot
slpeling was ipmorantt! If you can raed this forwrad it

Adam Carolla Explains the OWS movement

The search for intelligent life doesn't stop in Kansas

It was a simple cartoon, no outstanding graphics, looks like it could have been drawn by a 10th grader.

But what it said spoke volumes...




What this cartoon said was how ignorant of economics the artist, Lee Judge of the Kansas City Star is,

The premise, of course, is that the federal government is wasting money that could be used to feed hungry children. The reality, and something that Mr. Judge just doesn't get, is when NASA, or any government agency, or any corporation, or any small business spends money, that money actually goes somewhere, to someone. It isn't stuffed into mattresses, buried in mason jars in the backyard, or hidden behind walls. People actually earn it. In NASAs case, we have directors, engineers, scientists, and programmers. We also have Janitors, cafeteria cooks, dishwashers, landscapers, maintenance personnel and secretaries. In other words, we have thousands of people earning a living, paying their bills, feeding their children.

Mr. Judge seems to think that it would be better to not pay people those wages, rather to give this money to people that don't earn it, because those people are more deserving than the workers.

I'm supposing that Mr. Judge feels that we would all be better off it the Kansas City Star decided to stop paying him so they could give away his salary to someone. I mean, do we really need a cartoonist? Couldn't we go on without them?

I'm sure that he could fine others on the paper's staff that he believes we can live without, Who actually reads those daily corrections anyway? Who would notice if they weren't there? That's more money that could go to people that don't work for it.  

The more we continue toward this notion that people who earn money aren't as deserving as those who don't, the more we slide into Socialism. Think Greece.

Prediction: The OWS movement will be forgotten about by this time next year.

Not much else to say, just posting this so I can give all y'all a big, fat, "told ya" next Thanksgiving.

Movie Heroes

Just give me three & a half days with the precious OWS children

Women have to prove harassment? That's sexist!

In 1991, Anita hill moved to the forefront of the American scene during the Clarence Thomas hearings when an interview by the FBI was leaked. During that interview, she accused Thomas of making inappropriate comments to her. Immediately, women's groups all over this nations rushed to back her, and when her character was called into question, condemned those who would dare suggest that she was delusional or seeking revenge on Thomas.


Now it's happening again, four women have accused Herman Cain of harassment, and when investigated, one of the women has been found to have some skeletons in her closet and it has been suggested that she might have an underlying agenda.


I'm not writing this to defend either Cain or Thomas, if they did what they did, they should be punished accordingly. My concern is with the women who unilaterally back another woman who claims harassment without hearing all of the facts. This seems to be one area of our justice system where the accused (the man) is "guilty until proven innocent". Of course, since one cannot prove a negative, the man is often toast. 


In a letter to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) today, one woman wrote: "Women who complain lose their jobs and often are not believed. If the accusations are made against a famous man, the woman is accused of seeking publicity and money. Every aspect of her life is under scrutiny...This is a “he said/she said” crime, with the burden of proof on the woman. Many of these men literally hold a woman’s livelihood in their hands. They are serial abusers."

Read the part again: "the burden of proof on the woman". To me this sounds like this person wants to be able to accuse someone, then sit back and not have to actually prove her allegations. Then the phrase "They are serial abusers": Does this writer offer proof of this? No, women shouldn't have to prove harassment, it's the man's job to disprove it.

Imagine this in other areas of justice. A person is accused of robbing a a bank, The prosecution has no burden of proof, the accused has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they didn't do it.

Yes, there are men (and women) out there who sexually abuse their employees, but to allow people to accuse them without having to prove anything is un-American.

Herman Cain new campaign ad

New Obama Presidential Library

From Theo Spark:

Concealed Carry Handgun Class -- Texas Style!

Makes me wish I lived in Texas...


From Libertarian Republican



Down in the Lone Star State they know how to handle Terrorists

From Eric Dondero:

This is an actual radio ad. This is not a spoof. Y'all will want to listen to the whole thing, beginning to end. It gets really, really good towards the end.

We won't spoil it for ya!

Against bicyclists? or against wasting taxpayer money? You decide

The left sees this as being "against bicyclists", Libertarians see it as not taking taxpayer's money to fund something they can't use.

A Libertarian would solicit donations to build the paths.

From AlterNet:

What Do Republicans Have Against Biking and Walking?
In these antagonistic political times, bikers and walkers are now targets of controversy for some members of Congress.
October 28, 2011 |

This story first appeared on Shareable.

How in the the world can biking and walking be controversial?

They’re good exercise, fun to do and—as an alternative to driving everywhere—help us save money and the environment. Both biking and walking are increasingly popular for transportation and recreation today, thanks in large part to a recent flowering of federally-funded trails, bikeways and pathways that make getting around on two wheels and two feet safer and more convenient.

But in these antagonistic political times, bikers and walkers are now targets of controversy for some members of Congress. In September, Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn proposed stripping all designated federal funding for bike and pedestrian projects from the pending Transportation Bill. After an outpouring of opposition from citizens coast-to-coast, Coburn withdrew his amendment.

Now bicyclists and pedestrians are under attack again, this time in an amendment from Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. He wants to redirect every last penny of money dedicated to bicycling and walking to bridge repair instead.

His proposal is scheduled for a vote next Tuesday. (Here's how to contact your Senators and Representatives to save federal bike and walk programs.)

Now we all agree that safe bridges are important. Look at the tragic bridge collapse four years ago in Minneapolis that took 17 lives.

But safety for the millions of kids and adults that bike and walk every day is important, too. Since 2007, 2,800 cyclists and 20,000 pedestrians have died on America’s roads—many due to the lack of sidewalks, bike lanes and other safety measures that federal funds provide.

We shouldn’t have to choose between safe bridges and safe streets. Here’s why.
First of all, Senator Paul’s amendment will not even come close to fixing America’s bridges. Biking, walking and other so-called “transportation enhancements” that Paul wants to kill account for less than two percent of the total Transportation Bill. It would take 80 years using money saved from scrapping these programs to finance the backlog of current bridge repairs—not to mention future needs.
States are not spending the money already allocated for bridge repairs. Last year, they returned $530 million to the federal government. That represents a big chunk of total bike and pedestrian projects.
Federal money to make biking and walking safer and more convenient is a great investment in America’s future that pays off in safer streets, reduced environmental damage, greater energy security, improved public health and more resilient, neighborly, pleasurable communities.

State Department Buys $70K Worth Of Obama Books

By who's order was this? 


Have we done similarly with other presidents?

By Jim McElhatton, The Washington Times

The U.S. Department of State has bought more than $70,000 worth of books authored by President Obama, sending out copies as Christmas gratuities and stocking “key libraries” around the world with “Dreams from My Father” more than a decade after its release.

The U.S. embassy in Egypt, for instance, spent $28,636 in August 2009 for copies of Mr. Obama’s bestselling 1995 memoir. Six weeks earlier, the embassy had placed another order with the same book seller, Kalemat Arabia, for more than $9,000 for copies of the same book, federal purchasing records show.

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/10/25/state-department-buys-70k-worth-obama-books#ixzz1bzd9SkLO

Republicans: The party of bigger Government

"Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival..."

These words, from Loving v. Virginia, in 1967, set aside anti-miscegenation laws in the United States. What politician would openly refute those words? All of them, it seems. While they would never indicate an intention to roll back laws allowing people of different races to marry, query them about people of the same sex marrying.

No, I am not gay, I am straight male, happily married (to a woman). But I cannot see in any way how allowing two homosexual people to marry would impact my marriage in any way. The Republican-backed "Defense of Marriage Act" (DOMA) purports that the very act of two people of the same sex marrying would cause damage the institute of marriage.

Republicans call themselves the "Party of smaller Government". Please someone explain to me how the DOMA is "Smaller Government".

I still like this guy... Ron Paul: Let's kill Fed student loans

It seems like Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidate to truly embrace freedom and smaller government.
Cain at one time looked like he was, but now with his pro-government control over our morals, I can't continue to support him.



Ron Paul: Let's Kill Federal Student Loans
SAYS GOVERNMENT'S DRIVING UP COLLEGE TUITION, NEEDS TO GET OUT OF LENDING BUSINESS

By the Associated Press

Posted Oct 23, 2011 12:34 PM CDT



AP) – Republican presidential contender Ron Paul said today he wants to end federal student loans, calling it a failed program that has put students $1 trillion in debt when there are no jobs and when the quality of education has deteriorated. Paul unveiled a plan last week to cut $1 trillion from the federal budget that would eliminate five Cabinet departments, including education. He's also wants young workers to be able to opt out of Social Security.

The student loan program is not part of those cuts, but Paul said today on NBC's Meet the Press that he'd kill the loan program eventually if he were president. That could put him at odds with some of his young followers, many of whom are college students. Paul blamed government intervention in the economy for rising tuition. "Just think of all this willingness to want to help every student get a college education," said Paul, a graduate of Gettysburg College and Duke University School of Medicine. "I went to school when we had none of those. I could work my way through college and medical school because it wasn't so expensive." Annual tuition for Gettysburg College is $42,610 for the 2011-2012 academic year. Annual tuition at Duke's medical school runs $46,621.

Ron Paul Student Loans: Federal Government Needs to get Out of Lending Business

Blacks can't seem to criticize Cain without mentioning race

Chauncey DeVega is at it again. He must have some deep down resentment of his color. He's seemingly not able to criticize a black person without calling him an "Uncle Tom", or "minstrel". 


Read the latest race-bating garbage below link below


http://goo.gl/K3koN

Stop Funding College Sports

Though the economic crisis has taken a striking, media-grabbing toll on the federal government, state governments are also scrambling to address budgetary issues. Many states are implementing across-the-board spending cuts, while others are targeting those programs that they believe are most expendable. Whatever their strategy, lawmakers are ripping through budgets, looking for excess fat that can be eliminated to trim down expenditures. Given this political and budgetary climate, it seems remarkable that state lawmakers continue funneling taxpayer dollars toward college and university athletic departments, says A. Barton Hinkle, a columnist at the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
A Bloomberg study found that 46 of the 53 schools examined subsidize their sports programs, supporting a statement by the NCAA that most athletic departments operate in the red.
According to a story in USA Today, six Virginia schools charged each of their students more than $1,000 as an athletics fee for the 2008-2009 school year, constituting between 10 percent and 23 percent of the total tuition and mandatory-fee charges for in-state students.
Using the University of Florida as an example, while the school gained $44 million and $2 million from its profitable football and basketball teams, respectively, it lost $2.8 million on women's basketball, $5.3 million on other men's sports, $10 million on other women's sports, $17.4 million on coaches' salaries, $7.5 million in aid to student athletes and $1.4 million in recruiting.

Given that most athletic departments are net losses for funds, it is time that state lawmakers ask themselves a more fundamental question: how does athletic entertainment further the purpose of universities? While some claim that university athletics programs help to produce better-rounded students, this is only true for those few students who actively participate -- it is difficult to accept the argument that merely watching the game molds character.

This underlines the crux of the issue: universities and the lawmakers who fund them need to revisit the purpose of higher education, and rededicate themselves to attaining it. In a time of budget cuts and belt-fastening, wasteful and unproductive spending should not be allowed to continue.

http://goo.gl/YLYCQ

Source: A. Barton Hinkle, "Stop Funding College Sports," Reason Magazine, October 14, 2011.













Stop Funding College Sports

Keeping Poor People Poor

by John C. Goodman - Townhall

If you live in a middle-class household, you generally expect your needs to be met through the marketplace. You buy or rent housing in the real estate market. When you aren't driving your own car, you catch a taxicab or maybe even hire a limo. You or your employer buy health insurance, and you choose your doctor in the medical marketplace.

For most poor families, the experience is very different. Regulations designed to protect entrenched special interests have succeeded in raising the costs of basic services so much that low-income families have been priced out of the market for many essential services. Middle-class and poor communities differ not just by income. For the middle class, basic needs are met by markets and they benefit from the customer-pleasing innovations that competition produces. All too often, the poor must turn to public programs with all of the customer-pleasing attributes of the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Take housing, for example. The cheapest form of housing is small, prefabricated homes for zero-lot developments. However, zoning regulations in most cities outlaw them — an act that effectively doubles the price of the cheapest housing. There are also other expensive restrictions on new housing, such as forcing builders to build on bigger lots and mandating specific types of materials and construction methods. Regulations vary widely across the United States. In Houston, a less restrictive city, regulatory costs add about $13,200 to the price of an average home. In San Diego, a multitude of regulations add $240,000. These cost-increasing regulations have essentially priced many low-income residents out of the market for a private home, forcing them to turn to public housing instead.

Then there is transportation. Did you know that people in the bottom fifth of income distribution take more taxicab rides than middle-income families? The reason: a lot of poor people don’t own automobiles. Taxi fares are far higher than they need to be, however, because local governments tightly control entry into the taxi market. There is no reason in principle why someone with a van couldn’t pick up workers in a low-income neighborhood and transport them to a jobsite, charging each passenger a few bucks. The problem: Most cities make this activity against the law.

When low-income families are priced out of the market for private transportation, they must turn to public transportation. Since only a few cities have subways, that means turning to buses. Yet, even a simple trip to work or a supermarket can be a logistical nightmare if you have to follow city bus schedules.

And consider health care. Sad to say, but the paramedics who treat our soldiers on the battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan are not allowed to provide the same services back home for people who can’t afford, and perhaps don’t need, the attention of a physician. Although the restrictions differ from state to state, laws everywhere “protect” patients from care delivered by anyone other than a physician. This is despite studies showing that non-physician clinicians can competently provide from 60 percent to 90 percent of all primary care.

In some parts of the country, walk-in clinics in shopping malls allow nurses to give flu shots, take temperatures, prescribe antibiotics and deliver other timely, inexpensive care. But even these innovative services are often saddled with burdensome regulations. For example, in Massachusetts, regulations for clinics have such cost-increasing requirements as a separate entrance for patients, minimum size requirements for exam rooms, and a separate reception desk. When low-income families find they cannot afford private care, what’s the alternative? Community health centers and the emergency rooms of safety net hospitals. Yet these care sites often involve crowding and waiting, which limits access to care.

Child care is another basic service needed by many low-income families. In fact, low-income families spend about a third of their income on child care, as much as a typical middle-income family might spend on a home. In recent years, state and local governments have been making child care ever more costly, however. All manner of regulations are emerging, including the licensing of day care workers. Did you know that in most places, it’s illegal for a neighbor down the street to oversee children from the neighborhood for pay? Again, what’s the alternative? Low-income mothers must seriously consider abandoning the labor market altogether and rely solely on the welfare state.

Even a basic activity like keeping the neighborhood safe runs into regulatory barriers. In response to inadequate public police protection, an increasingly popular alternative is private police. In the United States, private security guards actually outnumber public police officers by a ratio of three to one; and they can perform most, if not all, of the necessary law enforcement tasks. Yet, government regulation has created substantial barriers for would-be security firms, including criminal background checks, examinations, training requirements, and insurance and bonding minimums.

A task force report produced by the National Center for Policy analysis calls for an end to these senseless policies, and advocates allowing our lowest-income citizens access to the benefits of the free market. I’ll write about it in a future column.


Keeping Poor People Poor - Page 1 - John C. Goodman - Townhall Conservative

Herman Cain no longer for freedom

Herman Cain Exclusive: Tells Brody File He Will Support Constitutional Amendments on Life and Marriage

In an exclusive interview with The Brody File, GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain says he would support a pro-life amendment to the constitution and would use the bully pulpit to push pro-life legislation. He also said he now supports a federal marriage amendment to the constitution.



Reed full details at:

Herman Cain Exclusive: Tells Brody File He Will Support Constitutional Amendments on Life and Marriage

Corporate greed

"Stolen" from Theo Spark

Proof:the Wall Street Protesters aren't really anti-corporation

Here you see a group of the Wall Street protesters, and their "shop". You can see at least 5 or 6 laptops , with one, maybe three made by Apple. This is a company that made almost 25% profit last year. if these idiots were really against the big, bad corporations, they wouldn't be using their products.



The fact is, these people don't have a clue what they're protesting against. Sure, they have catchy slogans ("Take back America", "Stop corporate crime", "Heal America", etc.), but go up and ask one and you'll probably get some gobbledygook punctuated with a dozen or so "like"s: "You know, like, man, we're, like protesting, like, the greedy fat cats on, like Wall Street, who, like are bringing the country, like down you know."

Plus, who's supporting them financially? 10 to 1 they're probably living with their parents, sucking up their groceries (bought from the greedy corporate grocery chains), all the while moaning and groaning about "taxing the corporations out of business".

They think they're imitating the youth anti-establishment movement of the sixties, when in fact, they're protesting against those very people. Ask any 60-year old executive what his political views were in the 60s and you'll probably find that he was as left-wing as these protesters are.

If they put as much time and effort in productive society as they are here, maybe it would kick start our economy.  

Are these people protesting others investing in the companies they work for?

Labor Movement Rolls Into Wall Street Occupation | Economy | AlterNet

When is political indoctrinating of children not bad? When it's Republican indoctrination of children.

OK, my guess is that Republicans will loooooove this idea of Beck indoctrinating children in conservative ideals, while they protest President Obama giving a speech to school children.

You won't hear Hannity of Limbaugh preaching against this.

Glenn Beck Launches Children's Show 'Liberty Treehouse' on GBTV

Halloween in UK: witches dressed in black & fairies in pink = RAAAACIST!!!

Who needs Marx when you’ve got the Thought Police? The strongest chains that bind the slaves are the ones they forge themselves and wear with pride. 

Dress witches in pink and avoid white paper to prevent racism in nuseries, expert says

Teachers should censor the toy box to replace witches’ black hats with a pink ones and dress fairies in darker shades, according to a consultant who has issued advice to local authorities.

From the Wicked Witch of the West in the Wizard of Oz to Meg, the good witch from the Meg and Mog children’s books, witches have always dressed in black.

But their traditional attire has now come in for criticism from equality experts who claim it could send a negative message to toddlers in nursery and lead to racism.

Instead, teachers should censor the toy box and replace the pointy black hat with a pink one, while dressing fairies, generally resplendent in pale pastels, in darker shades.

Another staple of the classroom - white paper - has also been questioned by Anne O’Connor, an early years consultant who advises local authorities on equality and diversity.

Children should be provided with paper other than white to drawn on and paints and crayons should come in “the full range of flesh tones”, reflecting the diversity of the human race, according to the former teacher.

Finally, staff should be prepared to be economical with the truth when asked by pupils what their favourite colour is and, in the interests of good race relations, answer “black” or “brown”. 

Read more at:

Barking Moonbat Early Warning System

The Clansmen Would Be Proud: Herman Cain Jumps Ahead in the GOP Pack and Deems Black People “Brainwashed”

Same ol', same ol'.
Black people are not allowed to think differently than Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton. If they do they are simply "low hanging rotten fruit that comprise the black face of the Tea Party GOP."

Whites are able to have differing opinions, think Rick Perry and Michael Moore. But blacks are not allowed that privilege. They must all think alike, follow their "leaders" (are these leaders elected or self-appointed?).

Also, what does race have to do with it anyway? Cain is black; so what? What does it matter? It seems it only matters to other blacks who see one running away.

-Honkies for Herman

See article at: http://goo.gl/QfKoU

AZ School Chief Compares Studies to Hitler Jugend

Not endorsing or condemning this guy (I've never heard of him), why is that no one is allowed to compare anything to Hitler without being branded a Nazi or racist?

Hitler was one of the most evil people to ever lived, but you have to admit he wasn't stupid. Making sure all guns were confiscated before he started his witch hunt, enabled him to capture and kill millions.

Another smart idea was the creation of the Jugend, to indoctrinate children and teenagers in the Nazi way of life, to believe they the Aryan was superior.

Our government schools sometime do the same, there were many videos of school kids singing the praises of Obama. Here's one: http://goo.gl/Czi0b

A government indoctrinating children to support one Presidential candidate over another. Just like the Jugend.

Read the article at:

AZ School Chief Compares Mexican American Studies to Hitler Jugend (As He Endorses White Supremacist-Backed Candidate) « SpeakEasy

The death penalty must go!

When the state of Georgia finally executed Troy Davis the other day, not far from where I live, it reminded me of my belief that the death penalty has outlived it's usefulness. Davis was sentenced in 1991 for the brutal murder of an off duty Savannah police officer who was attempting to help a man being assaulted in a parking lot.


That was twenty years ago. It cost $3 to $5 million dollars to execute a prisoner, while it costs less than $1 million to house him for the rest of his life. This is money the states simply do not have. 


States waste millions of dollars each year housing prisoners on death row when they could have simply locked them up for life. The result will be the same, as I don't believe the death penalty is a deterrent to anyone but the person executed. A convicted murderer in prison is removed from society just as much as one who has been executed, at a much lower cost. In reality, the prisoner-for-life is probably suffering much more than the dead one.


It's time we push our states to eliminate this wasteful death penalty and replace it with a "life without parole" option. The taxpayers deserve it.  

One morning in the Oval office

Why are we allies with these people? Saudi woman killed for chatting on Facebook

From The Telegraph


Saudi woman killed for chatting on Facebook
By Damien McElroy Foreign Affairs Correspondent
12:01AM BST 31 Mar 2008

A young Saudi Arabian woman was murdered by her father for chatting on the social network site Facebook, it has emerged.

The unnamed woman from Riyadh was beaten and shot after she was discovered in the middle of an online conversation with a man, the al-Arabiya website reported.

The case was reported on a Saudi Arabian news site as an example of the "strife" the social networking site is causing in the Islamic nation.

Saudi preacher Ali al-Maliki has emerged as the leading critic of Facebook, claiming the network is corrupting the youth of the nation.

"Facebook is a door to lust and young women and men are spending more on their mobile phones and the Internet than they are spending on food," he said.

The woman was murdered in August but her death was highlighted following Maliki's comments.

Social customs and religious rules oblige women in Saudi Arabia to cover their head and figure with a veil so that men are not distracted by the female form.

Critics also allege that Facebook is an avenue for the promotion of homosexual relations in Saudi Arabia. More than 6,500 people have signed the online petition in a bid to stop the conservative Muslim kingdom following Syria in banning access to the network from local internet servers.

There are estimated to be more than 30,000 Facebook users in the oil-rich kingdom. Many Saudi women use nicknames and post comic images or drawings on their pages instead of photographs. Some Saudi bloggers have dubbed the network "Faceless".

Women users' contact details and email addresses are often pseudonymous. The popularity of sites for singles has broken taboos on people making contact outside family and class connections.

One of the most popular Facebook groups among Saudi Arabian youth is Single and Looking in Saudi Arabia, which has 1,823 members and hosts many sexually explicit images.




Saudi woman killed for chatting on Facebook - Telegraph

The Mark of Zero

From theo Spark

MkOfZero3WebCR-9_13_11.jpg (409×576)

Cartooning vs. Technology: How Steve Jobs Ruined Comics

Cartooning vs. Technology: How Steve Jobs Ruined Comics
http://goo.gl/7dbRY

Honkies For Herman 2012

Honkies For Herman 2012

Rick Perry a radical libertarian?

I usually don't get involved in the primaries, as the republicans for the most part haven't come up with anyone who I would want as President. But since Obama is a threat to this country, I am paying more and more attention.

Perry is looking better to me that the rest, his one big failing is the fear that he might attempt to impose his religious beliefs of us.

Libertarian Republican: WaPo Columnist: Rick Perry a radical libertarian

Johnny Cashless sings "Obama's Prison Blues"

From Maggies Farm

If the government won't pay for it, that doesn't mean they're against it.

This article from AlterNet focuses on the anti-abortion tactics of Prez hopeful Rick Perry. I don't worry too much about that, because I don't believe the Supreme Court will ever overturn Roe v. Wade.

The part of this article that disturbs me is the comment that Perry has a "hostility to contraception and sex education" . This is backed up by the fact that Perry's administration has cut funding for family planning. This doesn't mean that Perry is against contraception or sex education, he is against taking money from taxpayers to pay for it.

The article continues: "These cuts had no relationship to abortion, but are simply cuts in basic reproductive healthcare services and, of course, contraception. The Austin Chronicle estimates that hundreds of thousands of women will be cut off from subsidised contraception. Since these women already struggle to afford basic healthcare, many won't be able to get contraception elsewhere, and will get pregnant. Since it's even harder to afford a baby than a pack of pills, we can expect many of these women to get abortions, even if they have to borrow money or pawn belongings to afford it."

They will borrow money for an abortion, but not for contraception. That doesn't sound like they have a grasp on what "family planning" means.

Read the full article at:
Pushback on Draconian Rick: Stay Out of Women's Sex Lives | | AlterNet

Speechless

Speechless | Flushed Up

Does the Tea Party Really Want to Lynch Black Folks? AlterNet makes up "statistics"

This article quoted a "recent public opinion research" and linked to another article about the research, but no links to the research. This "recent" poll was April 2010; here is the link: http://goo.gl/x8fCc

Nowhere in that poll is anything about "Tea Party members are more likely to believe that blacks are not hard working, are lazy". This appears to be made up.

This article makes statements about TEA party members being “oppressed” and that they "believe that they are victims of prejudice" without backing it up. That means those statements are also probably made up.

The article then goes on to describe the horrors of lynchings with no backup or reference to the TEA party. The attempt in logic goes like this:

TEA party members are white.
Blacks were lynched by whites
Therefore TEA party members lynched blacks.



Does the Tea Party Really Want to Lynch Black Folks? Why Andre Carton was Wrong, But Not for the Reasons You May Think
Posted by Chauncey DeVega at 2:51 pm

August 31, 2011

In a talk about the economy earlier this week, Representative Andre Carton (a member of the Congressional Black Caucus) suggested that the Tea Party are the same people who in another time would have loved to see black people “hanging on a tree.”

Such language is by its very nature controversial. It is also overwrought because an allusion to lynching and the “strange fruit” of this country’s recent memory conceals more than it reveals. In much the same way that black conservatives and their white handlers deploy the horrid language of “the plantation” and “run away slaves” to describe African Americans who make a choice to support the Democratic Party, an appeal to lynching as a means to describe the motives of one’s political foes has to be handled with great care and precision.

For those reasons, Carton’s suggestion was problematic. But perhaps not in the ways that many would assume.

Let’s begin with a simple question. What do we know about the Tea Party? Who are its members? What do Tea Party members believe? What is their rhetoric? What are their dreams and goals for the country?

From recent public opinion research, we know that the Tea Party’s membership is made up of older, almost exclusively white folks, and that they want to “return” the country to “Christian values” and “the Constitution.” We also know that their animus and upset did not take full form until the election of Barack Obama, America’s first Black President. Moreover, public opinion data has revealed that Tea Party members are more likely to believe that blacks are not hard working, are lazy, and complain too much about racism. Tea Party members, as a function of their Conservative political orientation, are awash in racially resentful attitudes. The Tea Party uses the language of secession and the neo-Confederacy. They also advocate violent solutions to removing an “illegitimate” and “Socialist” President: these are the Tea Party’s dreams of civic virtue and justice.

More at:

Does the Tea Party Really Want to Lynch Black Folks? Why Andre Carton was Wrong, But Not for the Reasons You May Think « SpeakEasy

West Considering Leaving Black Caucus Over Attacks on Tea Party

Earlier this month, California Rep. Maxine Waters said the Tea Party "can go straight to hell." The next day, Rep. Andre Carson of Indiana, speaking at a convention in South Florida, told attendees that some Tea Party-supported Republicans in Congress want to see blacks "hanging on a tree."

The video of Carson's comment is now circulating the Internet, drawing a response from Rep. Allen West of Florida. The only Republican member of the Congressional Black Caucus, West has written a letter to CBC chairman Emanuel Cleaver asking the Missouri Democrat to condemn these statements from caucus members Waters and Carson.

West, who reiterated on Fox News this morning that he is considering leaving the CBC, writes in his letter that it appears to him the CBC's strategy is to "demonize the Tea Party." He continues:

More at:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/west-considering-leaving-black-caucus-over-attacks-tea-party_592049.html

Wal-Martians: The Song - YouTube

Physic Wal-Martians Space Cowboys Shopping - Song - YouTube

Leo Spark: The US Budget in "real" dollars

Theo Spark:
H/T Filippo: H/T Filippo

Obama is a Bad President - Townhall.com

John Ransom
Obama is a Bad President: An Answer to Jonathan Alter

Email John Ransom | Columnist's Archive

Progressive Jonathan Alter is outraged that everyone is ready to “fire” Obama.

“I want to know,” wrote a snippy Alter on Bloomberg.com, “on a substantive basis, why you think he deserves to be in a dead heat with Mitt Romney and Rick Perry and only a few points ahead of Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann in a new Gallup Poll. Is it just that any president -- regardless of circumstances and party -- who presides over 9 percent unemployment deserves to lose?”

I was tempted to treat Alter with the “What? You got to be kidding,” routine. Any Republican should be way ahead of the president. But Alter seems to be one of the few still genuinely shocked that Obama has lost support from all segments of the American public who consider hugging the president to be inappropriate.

So, since Alter asked sincerely, I will answer with five reasons based on substance, although I could probably come up with twenty reasons easily.

But for now, five will do.

Each reason will come in two parts. The first part will be substantive arguments as to why Obama is a bad president because of a failed or flawed policy. The second part will put that argument into context with a campaign promise.

More at:

Obama is a Bad President: An Answer to Jonathan Alter - John Ransom - Townhall Finance

Oh Great, here's another country we need to impose on for the next 50 years.

Michael Reagan

United States Must Lead in Libya

8/25/2011 | Email Michael Reagan | Columnist's Archive

With approximately 135 different tribes within its borders, the hard lifting in Libya now begins. It is incumbent upon the United States to take a lead role in this vital area. No more of the Obama policy of leading from the rear -- the U.S. must lead, and must lead from the front.

The Libyan people have not breathed freedom since the tyrant Gadhafi took control of their government way back in 1969. It may not be easy for Libyans to learn how to be free after all that time, but we can and must help them.

There are factions in Libya that support terrorism, and we cannot allow them to gain control of a nation with $85 million a day coming from oil sales and with upwards of $150 billion in assets now frozen by international action. We also cannot allow known weapons supplies and raw nuclear material to get into the hands of the enemies of freedom now vying for power.

That lead role will be critical. With Gadhafi's 42-year-long dictatorship all but over, Libya's new leaders face what Peter Apps of Reuters called "the daunting task of restoring order, beginning reconstruction and avoiding collapse into conflict and chaos."

More at:

United States Must Lead in Libya - Page 1 - Michael Reagan - Townhall Conservative

Truth-O-Meter: Has class sizes under Rick Perry grown massively?

The Truth-O-Meter Says:

Says Texas schools have had "massive increases" in class sizes with Rick Perry as governor.

Arne Duncan on Thursday, August 18th, 2011 in an interview.

The nation’s education secretary says Texas students have struggled on Gov. Rick Perry's watch.

In an interview with Bloomberg TV’s Al Hunt touching on the new Republican presidential candidate, Arne Duncan said: "Far too few of their high school graduates are actually prepared to go on to college. I feel very, very badly for the children there."

Duncan, the former chief executive officer of the Chicago public schools, continued: "You have seen massive increases in class size. You’ve seen cutbacks in funding. It doesn’t serve the children well. It doesn’t serve the state well. It doesn’t serve the state’s economy well. And ultimately it hurts the country."

The college-readiness of Texas high school graduates is a rich topic. For instance, The Dallas Morning News, citing a report, noted Aug.ust 17, 2011, that a majority of Texas high school graduates who took the ACT college-entrance exam this year lacked the skills to pass introductory college courses in math, reading and science.

Too, the revenue-strapped 2011 Legislature did not provide billions of dollars in state aid to school districts that the schools would have fielded for enrollment growth under existing funding formulas.

We wondered if Duncan was accurate about Texas seeing massive increases in class size.

Read the truth at: PolitiFact Texas | Arne Duncan says class sizes in Texas have grown massively

Texts From Last Night

He set an alarm on my phone to an infant screaming and puking to make sure i take my pill. its working.

Texts From Last Night

You can photograph my daughter spread eagle, but...

"You see, judge; when the photographer paid my 15-year-old daughter to pose in hot pants on a motorcycle with her legs spread wide open, I didn't realize he was actually going to use the picture."


15-Year-Old's Parents Suing Urban Outfitters For $28 Million Over "Spread Eagle" T-Shirt

15 years old is too young to drive a motorcycle.

It is also too young to be straddling a motorcycle in a sexually suggestive pose on a t-shirt.

The parents of teen fashion model Hailey Clauson are suing Urban Outfitters, as well as photographer Jason Lee Parry, over a "blatantly salacious" t-shirt that features their daughter.

For $28 million.

According to the New York Post:

"The Manhattan federal court filing accuses photographer Jason Lee Parry of making "her crotch area the focal point of the image," adding that he also styled it to show "what some observers believe to be pubic hair."

Classy.

Read more:

15-Year-Old's Parents Suing Urban Outfitters For $28 Million Over "Spread Eagle" T-Shirt

Obama: Out of Touch on the Economy

Personal note: As a young voter at the time, I voted for Jimmy Carter over Ford because I was pissed at Ford for pardoning Nixon. Later, as I matured (politically), I realize that Ford made the right decision to help get us out of that depression.

From Townhall.com:

A Tip O’Neill quote is inscribed on Jerry Ford’s monument in the U.S. Capitol’s Statuary Hall:

"God has been good to America, especially during difficult times. At the time of the Civil War, He gave us Abraham Lincoln. And at the time of Watergate, He gave us Gerald Ford – the right man at the right time who was able to put our nation back together again."

Ford knew the right thing to do for the country, and he did it knowing it could cost him an election: He pardoned Richard Nixon.

Experience, humility and an understanding of the greater good are required to make such decisions.

Barack Obama has faced bad economic circumstances from the moment he walked into the Oval Office. A generous press and electorate – remember, not just Democrats supported him; he had independents and Republicans, too – gave him broad sway to implement policies to spur growth.

Unfortunately, he didn’t have the experience, humility or understanding of the greater good to make the critical decisions.

More at:

Out of Touch on Economy - Salena Zito - Townhall Conservative

Accidental Flash on Jumbotron at Braves game

Accidental Flash on Jumbotron - YouTube

Drug Testing for Welfare? - A Libertarian Stance.

On July 1st, 2011, A new law took effect in Florida that required welfare recipients to submit to a drug test to be able to receive money. Kentucky and Arizona have already done this, and Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama and other states are considering it. Many on the left have called it unconstitutional, referring to the 14th amendment concerning equal protection. I feel that a lawsuit will soon be forthcoming. Leftists will target the state they feel is most vulnerable.

Here is a Liberal, Conservative and Nose Pin Zone (Libertarian) view:

Liberal: Why test just welfare recipients, why not test all who receive government assistance (farmers, pell and other grant recipients, etc.)?

Conservative: Those others are helping the economy grow, the welfare recipients are just leeches.

The Nose Pin Zone: Why is the government in the business of giving farmers assistance and granting money to students and others? Is this a proper function of government? All redistribution of money from one person to another should be eliminated.   

L: What about "Corporate Welfare" (Tax breaks for big businesses, Oil company subsidies, etc.)?

C: Corporations are creating jobs, and the oil companies are helping us to wean ourselves from the dependence of foreign oil.

NPZ: Tax breaks for businesses should be eliminated, as a matter of fact, business taxes should be eliminated. Businesses do not pay taxes, they only collect money from their investors and customers and turn it over to the government. All wealth is in the hands of the individual. Instead implement the Fair Tax to replace the income tax.

L: The 14th amendment protects us from "Unreasonable searches"

C: It's not unreasonable to require welfare recipients to prove they're not on drugs.

NPZ: It doesn't matter, if they're on drugs or not, the governments should not be in the forced charity business. People should be free to choose where their money goes.

In the end, as long as we have this country ruled by Democrats and Republicans (at least the "old school" ones) we will never truly be economically free. The TEA Party is a promising movement, but it's getting more and more co-opted by the mainstream Republicans.

 

The politician's Prayer

From RightWingNews.com

politiciansprayer.jpg (450×476)

100 years of an AAA rating

100years1.jpg (650×841)

Why I (might) care about Republicans

This election season, for the first time in many years, I am starting to pay attention to the Republican candidates. Usually I don't care who their nominee is, as I mostly vote Libertarian. I don't vote Libertarian because they are a Libertarian, but they usually espouse my political philosophy better than the Republican or Democrats.

Now, I'm not going to get into a comparison of Libertarians vs. everybody else (at least not right now), but I know the reality of the situation. Next November, the race will be between a Democrat and a Republican, the Libertarian won't be in the fight. We know the Democrat will be Barak Obama (he might get a primary challenger from the left, but he will be the nominee). I also know that my state (Georgia) is a "Red" state, and it's electors will go to the Republican.

All of that we know, what we don't know is who that Republican will be.

Normally I don't care who the nominees for the D & R parties are, sometimes I will get behind a candidate such as Regan, or vote against a candidate such as Ford. (OK, I'll admit it, I voted for Carter in '76. I did it because Ford pardoned Nixon. I later realized that Ford did the right thing for this country to get that scandal behind us.), but for the most part, I don't care which candidate from the major parties won. Democrats and Republicans are equally evil and terrible for this country.

This time it's different. Obama is not just terrible for the country, he is dangerous. For the first time, we have a President who I believe is trying to purposefully destroy our economic system so he can implement a new one, one that is more Socialist than what we have now.

Thus, I feel that it is important to help pick the Republican nominee; one that I may or may not vote for in the general election. I do not have anybody in mind yet, I need to both hear their positions and assess their "elect-ability", because it doesn't matter what their position is if they have no chance against Obama (Palin, Paul, etc.). I hope to still hold to my principals and try not to vote for someone who may be on the right fiscally, but on the left socially.

Now that Perry is in the race, and Pawlenty is out, things are starting to get interesting. I hope to create a list of likes and dislikes and post them here in the near future.

When government gets too big

Today, BART, the San Francisco transit service shut down communications to stop a planned protest: http://goo.gl/6PeLD.




BART officials said the disruption in public service was "in the interest of public safety".




How far can this go? What's next, when the GOP or TEA Party holds a demonstration outside an Obama event, will the feds cut their communications "In the interest of public safety"? This is the latest example of letting the camel's nose in the tent.




Some on the left and right will praise the government for taking stern action against a protest until they take action against THEIR protest. I'm not one of these who holler "there ought to be a law", but...maybe it should be illegal for a government to force a communications carrier to cut communications for any reason.

Welcome to the Department of Innovation

What a great logo for a government department. Three interlocking gears that cannot possibly turn...

July 26, 2011

Welcome to the Department of Innovation

Welcome to the Department of Innovation | Department of Innovation

Real highway signs

Stolen from Theo Spark

PDA+6+%282%29.jpg (700×543)

Dumb tweet

Daddy, can I have an increase in my allowance?

Us parents who have had teenagers all too well know that sound. The kid want's more money, but most often they don't want to do anything extra for it. And on the occasion that we do increase the allowance, do you think the kid puts part of it away? No, they will spend it.

Cue the folks in congress: The latest proposal is to raise the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion dollars over two years. Is that just in case of an emergency like a credit card that we keep for just that purpose? No, they plan on spending the whole damn thing! Our federal deficit is expected to hit $1.5 trillion this year. Out total debt is over $14 trillion. This will amount to a 17% increase!

After that, will we try to lower the deficit? No, the debt ceiling has been raised 74 times since 1962, and each time the debt ceiling has been hit. As long as we keep increasing it, the debt will get higher. It's time to cut up the credit card. the only way to force congress to stop spending increases is to hold firm on the debt ceiling.

According to a NPR article, New York Professor James Ramsey is quoted as saying: "[As Samuel] Johnson said about hanging, it concentrates the mind wonderfully," Ramsey says. "I would say if we were in a position of not being able to pay our debts in the short term, it would concentrate the politicians' minds dramatically."

In February 2010, Rep Cantor (R-VA) said this about efforts to raise the debt to $14 trillion: “It is a travesty,” said Cantor. “The writing is on the wall. Congress needs to wake up and realize that the future of American prosperity is in dire straits, mortal danger..."

Would it be the right thing to do right now? My thoughts are that not raising it would cause the economy to slow down, so we should raise it by maybe only by 2-3%, but federal spending (in 2012, not ten years down the road) should be cut more than the increase (let's start with 10%). Start cutting spending now so we don't have to raise it again.