Third Party & Independents

Congratulations, America: You're officially unncessary

The nation's biggest political-action committees have raised $66 million so far this year -- all of it for Republican presidential candidates. That's roughly nine-and-a-half times more than any one of those candidates has raised in public campaign financing.

The people behind Super PACs know how to influence elections (or "buy politicians" as it's more accurately known), and how to legally avoid scrutiny.

At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, James Madison said, "The people are the fountain of all power." Hop in the DeLorean and time-jump to today, and the power of the people has been utterly perverted. The job of supposedly leaders is to produce what the money-ballers and power-brokers who bought their office want. And we have the ludicrous "Citizens United" Supreme Court decision - wherein it was ruled that corporations have the exact same rights as individual U.S. citizens and cannot be limited on how much money they can give to a political candidate, *AND* they don't have to disclose having done so.

A whopping $66 million was raised in the first half of this year by independent groups known as "super-PACs" (political-action committees), according to Federal Elections Commission filings. The justification for these money-funneling organizations is that PACs weren't effective enough in buying politicians and super-versions of them were necessary. It's the same exact mentality that decided that Congress wasn't effective enough to pass laws, so we needed the "Super-Congress" to get things done. And we've all how non-partisan, streamlined and effective that's been.

Santorum: No woman can ever have an abortion ... except my wife

Rick Santorum is one dangerously denial-ridden hypocrite. He's best known for his inability to associate his professed compassion for life at the level of the zygote, with the physical realities of human sexuality. He said same-sex relationships lead *DIRECTLY* to bestiality. He said that abortion should be outlawed, INCLUDING when the pregnancy is the result of rape and/or incest. He is opposed to abortion under absolutely any circumstance. Well ... almost.

In October, 1996, Rick Santorum's wife Karen had a second-trimester abortion. But the Santorums don't like to describe it that way. Instead, they call it "a necessary interruptive surgical procedure to save the mother's life that resulted in the death of the fetus." How that is anything other than the literal clinical definition of "abortion" is something that can only be found in the dementia of faux-Christian hypocrisy.

Newsflash: Calling it anything other than the word "abortion" doesn't change the fact that it was, in fact, an abortion.

Gingrich: The man who won't be President

Newt Gingrich has a lot going for him in his quest for the presidency -- a famous name, plenty of inside-Washington friends, lobbyists and allies giving him untold millions in now-unlimited-by-Citizens-United money, nearly four decades of being a Washington D.C. politician for which he claims makes him and "outsider," a lifelong history of adultery, deceit, financial opportunism, criminal convictions, ethics violations and unmitigated hypocrisy, and just the right amount of sub-dermal racism that appeals to his party's longing-for-the-days-of-Dixie, all-white-all-the-time, faux-evangelical base.

It's almost enough to make you forget his central handicap; the fact that he is Newt Gingrich.

While you were asleep...

We might as well face it guys we are no longer the United States of America. The land of the free. We brought it upon ourselves, worked hard to make it the law and work hard to bring authoritarian rule on ourselves. So I suggest we call it what it is, "The Authoritarian States of America", has a nice ring to it right?

Congress wants to decide what YOU can do and see on the Internet

Protect the Internet: Help stop Internet censorship legislation!

Join the virtual strike to protest two proposed laws in the United States, called SOPA and the PROTECT IP Act. On January 24th, the U.S. Senate will vote on the PROTECT IP Act to censor the Internet, despite opposition from the *VAST MAJORITY* of Americans who have made their disapproval crystal clear.

The Internet blacklist legislation--known as PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House--invites Internet security risks, threatens online speech, and hampers innovation on the Web. Urge your members of Congress to reject this Internet blacklist campaign in both its forms!

Here is the complete text of the SOPA proposal, and here is the complete text of the PIPA proposal.

Congress wants to give corporations unlimited free speech rights and for you to have NONE!

Lunchpails and Republicans

Their thinking for themselves. I know it is hard to believe but in Indiana republicans are thinking for themselves. Well at least some of them. It seems the 2010 elections served a purpose after all, showing the excesses of conservative control of government for what it is. And it seems the corporatist/fascist/uber conservatives should start to worry. Good I say it is long overdue.

The numbers don't lie, Ms. Bachmann

Michele Bachmann missed 2,375 (53.02%) of 4,479 Congressio­nal roll call votes since Jan 4, 2007. She missed 58.7% of votes in Q3 2011 (145 out of 247) and missed NINETY ONE POINT THREE PERCENT of votes in Q4-2011 (190 out of 208). And yet, somehow, she still draws every penny of Congressio­nal salary and perks, plus the profits from her book signing tour (which just *happens* to coincide with her presidenti­al campaign).

Ron Paul, thank you for your service.

Would you consider a spelling error is responsible for the battle between the church and the state?

In god we trust should be; in gold we trust, yes? Don't you agree, Ron Paul?

The State Department's Private Army: High-dollar, low expectations

How do you justify paying a contractor SIX TIMES what you pay a Soldier, Marine, Airman or Seaman? Funny how nobody in Washington today - Republican or Democrat - seems to accept the Rumsfeldian "You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want" mentality that we were shoved into Iraq with in the first place.

And exactly how many more decades will the "Iraqi security forces" need to "train and prepare to provide their own security?" They've been "making progress" since 2003 and STILL can't field so much as a standard battalion of capable soldiers. Does the Iraqi equivalent of the Pentagon have a "retards and incompetents only" policy in its recruiting stations? Or do they save that distinction for the diplomats?

The state department­'s new "private army" DOES NOT DESERVE ONE DIME MORE IN PAY OR BENEFITS THAN THEY'RE ACTIVE DUTY, RESERVE AND/OR NATIONAL GUARD MILITARY COUNTERPAR­TS GET.

There's really nothing else that needs to be said about it.

https://garystlawrence.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/the-state-departments-private-army-high-dollar-low-expectations/

I want to make you happy!

I want to make you lie.

Keeping Church and State separate

I do agree that we as a country have went to far in the wall of separation, Kevin but that is a discussion for another time. Actually Kevin let me rephrase that. I do agree that we as a Country have went beyond the intentions of the founding fathers in building the wall of separation between church and state .

Possible Liberty Comeback

It's been decades since some good news from the Supreme Court concerning individual liberty has come our way, up to and including the despicable Kelo v. New London decision in 2005. But since them, as if to say they were sorry, this court has actually been looking out for us more and more. Between DC v. Heller and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, two huge landmark cases that reaffirmed individual rights to the 1st and 2nd amendments, many liberty minded people were cautiously optimistic since they were limited to two specific amendments and both were 5-4 decisions. But now a unanimous decision in a small strange case, Bond v. United States, opens up a whole new world to the individual citizens of the United States, one that had been wrongly closed to us.

Missing the Point

Over a month ago groups of people got together to protest Wall Street. The OWS protestors understand that something is wrong. Unfortunately, in their anger they took their message to the wrong people. And as the government started cracking down on their protests, they still seemed to miss the point of where their grievances should be directed, still looking to the very people who were using force against them to solve the problems that they created. But even worse, the protesters fail to comprehend that they are no different than the people they are angry at.

Hey, Occupy Wall Street - - Over Here - - - - Over Hear!

The Occupy Wall Street movement has been impressive in numbers if short on focus. Generally, sharp focus on one or two issues is thought to encourage supporters and get them to turn out in large numbers. How this group was able to have such a good showing with such divergent viewpoints on as many divergent issues is astonishing.

On The Hunt For Jobs

Seems everyone is putting jobs on the front burner these days. A little strange that people should be that concerned at this point in time. I think most of us are of age to recall Perot's campaign mantra; 'the sucking sound of jobs going overseas'. Only a few, 19% seemed concerned back then.