Who is Paul Ryan?

The struggle continues.I will forever possess a commitment to human civil liberties, to religious freedom, and to equality. Now, in thinking revolutionary, a person should not be oppressors. The agenda of the oppressors focuses on following archaic economic viewpoints and adhering to the interests of the oligarchy. Sometimes, it takes monumental changes in order for human beings to bear witness to the truth. Recently, I have to be confronted with things about the truth. Now, I believe in a foreign policy that adamantly disagrees with a war on terror ethos. We live in a time where folks are trying to justify the war crimes done by NATO in Libya and the terrorists in Syria. I accept the premise that if it is wrong for violence to occur in America and it is wrong for imperialist violence to commence overseas as well. The military industrial complex activate accepts the grotesque violations of human dignity and human civil liberties via the policies of the TSA and the Department of Homeland Security. A real world of justice doesnt try to maintain the status quo under the guise of charities (although, legitimate charities done by folks ought to be commended) & United Nations visits. Justice is accomplished when there is the abolishment of the current corporate system and the institution of a better system (that rejects materialism, which rejects the glamorization of offensive language against our people, and which loves righteousness. For monopoly capitalism never was meant to eliminate poverty or end all forms of discrimination at all).See, activism is more than flipping a coin to a beggar. Its about the restructuring of the whole corrupt machine and making it beneficial towards all of the people, including the poor. One example of this activism is to call for the end the war on terror & the ending of the War on Drugs period (including for the calling of society to send massive investments to tackle poverty

comprehensively). Activism deals with speaking out, protesting, and working in a grassroots level among folks from the streets literally. We still have the battle in Arizona where the Governor is refusing to allow immigrants to receive even basic public benefits or some in Mississippi violating the human rights of young kids (by sending them into juvenile for minor offenses in the schoolyard without the police determining if probable cause has been established. This is a blatant targeting of young black kids. This stuff is happening now in 2012 not in the 1960s. The Equal Justice Initiative is doing their best day in and day out in fighting against this nefarious reality. The Mississippi Department of Justice has documented this information too). The current bipartisan domination of the American political system by two monopolistic parties is rather transparent to the eyes that see. Similar foreign policies of the previous administration exist in the current one. The drone attacks in Pakistan, the support of the imperialist Africom, the continuation of Guantanamo Bay, the support of NATOs war crimes in Libya, and the covert operations globally are acts that I personally oppose. A man like Mitt Romney says to people who cant afford to go into college to just borrow money from your parents. Its that mentality which causes me to never worship the GOP at all. One person, who is the Vice President Joe Biden, talked about chains inside of Danville, Virginia. It doesnt take a genius that some in the oligarchy want us as human beings to be held into the chains of mental slavery, corporate domination, and other forms of social oppression. In the end, we will win and forever rejects those chains. Still, there is value in love. Love can make complications to be improved upon. We do need love since as human beings there is no shame in expressing a soulful connection among the human race. There is great value in us as humans to express empathy, compassion, and strength in this special, revolving globe. Now, its time to show some other forms of realities. Its fine to talk about love, but we have to talk about reality as well. Not everything in life will be filled with rainbows or unicorns. Not everything within our longevity will be all peaches and life. That is why we have no other option but to fight for our tranquility and social stability. For example, our ancestors fought in American soil to eradicate slavery and Jim Crow oppression. Our ancestors fought to institute labor reforms and the abolishment of child labor among the workplace. Humanity now is still fighting against war, against poverty, and against discrimination. Therefore, fighting is neither a vice noran irrational proposition. Its a fact of human resistance against the varied forms of evils. Now, fighting doesnt necessarily equate into indiscriminate violence for that form of violence is morally repugnant. We should fight using peaceful means and yes self-defense during extreme circumstances. I am not a pacifist, but non-violent methods are the most peaceful means in developing a revolutionary change. I am a man. Therefore, I love debate, I love fighting for truth, and I love to present my masculinity (which means that I dont scapegoat women like some men are doing [I love the beauty and intelligence of a woman], I fight for my rights, I express legitimate aggression, and I strive to be a better human being. Robert F. Williams, Malcolm X, Fred Hampton, Lumumba, Kwame Khrumah, and others are real male role models). I am not ashamed of my masculinity period. Also, the reactionaries and the Tea Party types cry about the Tenth Amendment, but the Bill of Rights says that the freedom of speech in real. Also, the Constitution gives Congress the right to make laws that can benefit people beyond the confines of state rights. Its time to embrace something superior to just state rights, but its time for us to fully love human rights. Human rights trump state rights. Not to mention that we have to be activists. That means we should call out corrupt politicians and immoral actions done by evil corporations. We should be on the front line

and criticize any musicians that disrespect our sisters (one artist even uses leaches on our sisters literally during one occasion and then claims to have some Rastafarian religious experience. Another artist disrespects LeBron James for immature reasons and disrespects sisters. You have a politician that believes in a creed that once taught that black people werent worthy of a priesthood until 1978. Mormonism is a Masonic/Kabbalic religion. This same politician blatantly said in 2012 that he doesnt care about the interests of the poor. How much more blatant can he be? Instead of some obsessing over some swimmer trying to trademark a word with a grill on his face, we should keep on eyes on the prize of advocating real Power not celebrity foolishness). Many genres of music have members that express the denigration of our people. Not to mention that the prosperity gospel preachers are running great game on unsuspecting people. They typically promote Nicean Christianity (aka Eurocentric supremacist so-called Christianity. Lets keep it real here. This religious heresy exploits the words of Yeshua, peace be upon his name) and obsess with riches instead of spiritual enlightenment & social reformation. A preacher saying I want my stuff in promoting the prosperity gospel is nothing more than demagogic rhetoric. Instead of monopoly capitalistic propaganda, we should promote radical fights against poverty including the radical redistribution of economic plus political power. Religious expression is fine, but not a sense of fanaticism that deals with the sick union of church and state. I dont bow down to my enemy or integrate with a sick, wicked culture. Assimilation historically into a beast system wont cause cultural improvement at all. Threats against our people are diverse from the War on Drugs, gentrification, discrimination, the mainstream media promoting lies & stereotypes against folks, and the great enemy of white supremacy. I am independent. That means we should promote self-sufficiency [long term especially], strength, unique solutions, and job creation. In the final analysis, a man and a woman have a right to have an income and live a stable life.

In the final analysis, we have to know who we are without the mimicking our oppressors. We are folks that are created in the image of one God with dignity plus worth.
It is official. Mitt Romney has chosen Paul Ryan as his Vice President candidate. The announcement was inevitable to some and surprising to others. The Republican ticket is now complete. Mitt Romney made the announcement in downtown Norfolk, Virginia. I visit Downtown Norfolk plenty of times in 2012. Romney was in Nauticus, which is a famous place in Norfolk near Waterside and the MacArthur Mall. I've been to Nauticus before when I was a child years ago back in the summer of 1996. Mitt Romney is in an unique space. He trails the President by 7 points. Many want to see his tax return tax returns for multiple zero tax years. Romney had issues with his foreign policy talk when he spoke in London, Jerusalem (of lying to say that Providence allowed the Israelis to have a standard of living than the Palestinian people), and Poland. Folks want to know his business record and Bain Capital. The Republican National Convention will come into Tampa, Florida. Florida is of course a crucial battleground state. Paul Ryan is a Republican House member from Wisconsin's 1st district. Paul represents the corporate and plutocratic financial interests in America. Ryan's economic views are similar to Mitt Romney's views. Ryan represents Kenosah, Racine, Muskego, and Janesville, Wisconsin. He was born in 1970, so he is part of Generation X. He is famous for his Catholic views and upbringing. He loves to hunt in various locations. Now, he worked or the Oscar Mayer Wiener Company (Ryan advanced Oscar Mayer's meats and corporate interests). He majored in Economics and Political Science. He is part of the Delta Tau Delta Fraternity too. Now, he is famous for promoting austerity in the world. Empower America (or a Republican think tank) was in his life. He served there as a volunteer speechwriter for Congressman Jack Kemp and two former Reagan officials: UN Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick who defended the rape, torture and

murder of three Catholic nuns by the government of El Salvador and Education Secretary William Bennett. Bill Bennett would be publicly defiled as a gambling addict and racial profiler when he said on his talk show that the abortion of all African-American babies would cause the crime-rate to go down. Ryan first ran for Congress in 1998. He loves Ayn Rand for years. Now, Paul Ryan renounced Ayn Rands extreme views. Rand promoted Objectivism or a selfish philosophy where an individual promotes his own interest without the consideration of other people. Ayn Rand was a notorious Christ-hater and she claimed to abhor government intervention (although, she took federal government services). That is why Ryan is part of the Atlas Society. Ryan in 1999 voted for the repeal of Glass Steagall Act (that some document as being one of the reasons why the recession occurred in the first place. Glass Steagall prevented large scale financial speculation and limited financial activities between commercial banks and security firms). He has worked on the federal government. The reactionary tax reform agenda is Paul Ryan's bread and butter. Ryan wants a top U.S. tax rate of 25%. He wants a VAT tax of 8.5 percent and a voucher system for Medicare (that would make beneficiaries to buy their own insurance from 2021 leaving them partially uninsured). He promoted a long term deficit reduction that would lower tax rates while eliminating income tax on capital gains, dividends, and interest. He wants to eliminate the corporate income tax and the estate tax. Like some Tea Party people, he wanted the privatization of Social Security and Medicare. Private corporations shouldn't control all of these programs at all.

Even Princeton economist Paul Krugman said that Ryan's proposals would cause losses of revenues while increasing the taxes on the 95 percent of the U.S. taxpayers on the bottom of the economic ladder (while reducing them for the 5 percent at the top). Romney was endorsed by the Roman Catholic Lech Walesa in Poland (this person worked openly with Opus Dei for decades). Ryan is trying to get Roman Catholics and others to vote for Mitt Romney. Ryan is a member of St. John Vianney Catholic Church, named for a person who was venerated for miracles performed in his priestly life including supernatural knowledge of the past and future and healing sick children. Paul Ryan agrees with the canard that Social Security is a ponzi scheme when Social Security had a surplus for decades. Some extremists say that Paul Ryan isn't conservative enough. Ryan voted for the Patriot Act and agrees with the warrant less wiretapping system of the TSA. He voted for the National Defense Authorization Act. This gives the President the power to arrest suspected terrorists under certain circumstances. So, Ryan is not for real civil liberty promotion. Paul Ryan promotes the following extremist views: *Paul Ryans budget plan will eliminate Pell Grants for more than 1 million students over 10 years. Pell Grants are funds that low income Americans need in order for them to go into college (especially in the non-graduate level). Ryan wants to cut the Pell Grant program by 200 billion dollars. *According to the Economic Policy Institute, Ryans budget plan will suck demand out of the economy. This can reduce employment by 1.3 million jobs in fiscal 2013 and 2.8 million jobs in fiscal 013, relative to current budget policies (as a result of massive reductions in government spending. He proposed cutting discretionary programs by $120 billion over the next two years and mandatory programs by $284

billion).

Paul Ryan loves to talk about Medicare. Medicare has been a popular, successful social program among or elderly citizens for decades. Paul Ryan made the deception that Medicare will be bankrupt in a short span of years. The trust fund that primarily supports one part of Medicare is projected to be exhausted come 2020 (This part is called the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund), according to the Congressional Budget Office. The Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees said it might not actually happen until 2029. That still doesnt mean the system will be "bankrupt," though. Medicare is divided into Part A, Part B, Part C, and Part D. Each Part deals with various parts of helping the elderly to recieve basic services. CBOs projections for Medicare didnt say that the SMI trust fund was in danger of exhaustion. In fact, in its 2010 report, the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees said that Parts B and D were "both projected to remain adequately financed into the indefinite future because current law automatically provides financing each year to meet the next years expected costs." Predictions about the

HI trust fund being exhausted since 1970, 1980, and 1994. None of these predictions came true. Paul Ryan's budget plan is easily very extreme. He wants to cut Medicare, Medicaid (which he wants to be decimated in large measure), and Security including welfare. Paul Ryan claims to want to control spending, but he wants even more defense spending. He endorses slashing taxes for the wealthiest. It will cut massively economic investments. It isn't the just the Republicans that have promoted erroneous errors. The Democratic Party in its leadership has promoted militaristic and corporate interests as well even during the era of the present President Barack Obama. For example, the current administration agrees with the National Defense Authorization Act and the White House agrees with the existence of the militarist Africom organization, he supports the Patriot Act, and the White House executes a neoconservative foreign policy. It is true that a man can't reform all of the country in 4 years (I don't blame President Barack Obama for all of our problems like some reactionaries do), but a man can eliminate unjust laws in 4 years though.

The ending of all forms of discrimination and the creation of radical economic reforms are needed in order for our standard of living to be substantially improved. The Democrats and the Republicans seem to be fighting like little children at all. Except on some issues, they are more akin in their philosophical views. Both parties have leaders that expressed war mongering, pro-austerity, antiimmigrant, and anti-civil liberty policies. George W. Bush and the President Barack Obama are one on the issues of war, empire, civil liberties & human rights (with them supporting the current prison system, drones, extrajudicial murder, the militarization of the U.S. police, police surveillance, etc.). It isnt like I am making this up. People from across the political spectrum have exposed this fundamental truth. Even Bill Clinton made a bipartisan deal with Newt Gingrich on welfare reform (which exploited poor mothers of small children in forcing them to get low wage jobs. These jobs hardly revolutionize our economic system). Our middle class is shrinking. Our poor are still struggling within demented, harsh conditions in our land. This shouldn't be our new normal at all. The status quo won't even get our unemployment rate down into 5 percent. Americans having access to decent, good paying jobs is a good prescription among all of us. One progressive economist named Robert Pollin has some interesting ideas on how to achieve this just goal. Pollin believes that full employment or near full employment is possible without harming the economy. Sweden used a macro-policy to decrease the unemployment rate in less than 4 percent and keep inflation under control (as too much inflation is bad for the economy). So, the labor unions in Sweden used labor market interventions in getting the unemployment rate down. Job training, transportation, childcare, etc. were activated in

Sweden in order for that nation to improve its country. Pollin wants the taking a portion of money spent to be sent into labor, hiring people, etc. Investments in green technology and education are great as well. Our public infrastructure in America ought to be modernized as well. Unions should be strengthened and the minimum wage can be higher as a means to help people receive true economic benefits. Even the Congressional Progressive Caucus created their reasonable plan in lowering the deficits and debt better than the Paul Ryan budget plan. The Congressional Progressive Caucus plan includes many things like a public works plan, allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, having a transaction and a big bank tax on the banks, ends emergency war finding in 2014, eliminates the payroll tax cap, and other policies. This plan doesn't gut important safety net programs like food stamps or Pell Grants. It focuses on job creation and economic stimulus in the short-term. It is also important to end a militaristic foreign policy that denies justice to people overseas and deprive our country the necessary resources to achieve justice in America. A broader distribution of wealth and a national guaranteed minimum income for all Americans are superior to monopoly capitalism. At least Occupy Wall Street in my opinion wants no corporate sponsorship while the Tea Party (in some places) has been infiltrated by FOX News and other corporate sponsors. I am learning about issues in my life. Forever, I will reject imperialism and the prison industrial complex. I will oppose the corporatization of all Government services. One of the revolutionary aspects of political thinking is for us to escape the Republican and Democrat camps. The Left/Right Paradigm has been exposed for what it is (a deception) than in any other time in human history. Now, people know about the errors of the GOP and their blatant extremism. I am not a Tea Party type of guy (as numerous Tea Partiers embrace white nationalism & bigotry. I had debates with them and some of them admit that they oppose Black history month including BLACK POWER). Although, we have to deal with the Bushbots years ago. Now, we have to deal with others who worship the ground that the Democrats walk on too. Some try to justify every single policy of the current President no matter how wrong it is. These people forget that numerous progressives and independents don't follow some of the current administration's actions. Some of these supporters of the President legitimately critique the Bush/Cheney administration's neo-con agenda. Yet, they are silent when we have drone attacks in Pakistan or the allowance of Africom to organize neo-imperialist actions in the Motherland. Now, some Democrats are supporting the NATO aided terrorists causing havoc in Libya and presently in Syria. For a man (or Mr. President) to call our people mongrels and to ignore white supremacy, police brutality, and the War on Drugs; this man is truly disappointing. Barack Obama may ideologically disagree with Ronald Reagan, but he is enacting similar policies as Reagan (in support of civil liberty suppression, war & Empire, no radical solution to the housing crisis, etc.). Also, the current reality is that the black community & all communities in the nation are still suffering. Today, the supporters of the Democrats say that a vote for Romney/Ryan would be the cause of a ruination of society. I won't vote for the Romney/Ryan ticket, but the current President ought to have some accountability for his policies. When you think deeper, you will realize something. Irrespective if the Obama/Biden ticket wins or the Romney/Ryan ticket wins, we will still have the Wall Street bankers plus the military industrial surveillance Security complex controlling society. When the President calls for long term cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and other social programs (via his sponsorship of the Bipartisan Economic Commission), he further inspires Paul Ryan to propose an even more radical austerity agenda. It is unjust for a man to say that an extrajudicial assassination against an American citizen [without due process] is great, it is unjust for an administration to glamorize nuclear power, and it is unjust to ignore the discrimination of Africans in Israel (with some refusing to speak on it because of obvious reasons).

We know that many Republicans act like the wolves, but some Democrats are like the foxes (in that they may smile in your face, but they can be as devious and harmful as reactionaries are). Although, I am smart here. It's bigger than President Barack Obama. For example, we have a corporate media the permits the limitation of political choices for us to vote for on the national level. You have the 1 percent dominating our economic, social, and religious infrastructures in the globe. See, life isn't about the philosophy of "get rich or die trying." It's about being real and never stop trying. We should never go into the route of blaming the President for every ill in the world. In the final analysis, we have a responsibility too not just the White House. Our responsibility is to help our families, help our neighbors, help our people, and help our communities via all legitimate means possible. We can offer legitimate criticism to the current administration, while at the same time offering respect for the President (and his family). We should always offer correction to the brother President Obama excluding fear mongering and hatred. That is why I am independent politically.

In a way, Paul Ryan is the fruit of the current political system (and of the establishment Democrats). Today, Paul Ryan is the brain of the GOP's economic agenda. He claims to abhor the stimulus as a philosophical concept, but he supported the Bush stimulus package back in 2002. Ryan of course proposes a national budget that cuts at many social programs like Medicare. Republicans for decades have wanted to create the environment where they could offer massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Years ago, when the Republicans promoted this sick agenda, they risked political suicide. Now, it's a different time with the advent of the Tea Party. The Republican Eisenhower and Nixon Presidencies had economic policies similar to the modern Democratic Party today. Now, the Republicans have been so extreme (with one of them apologizing for their wrong views on rape) that they make Eisenhower seem like a centrist. Eisenhower taxed the wealthy at 90 percent and Nixon at over 70 percent. Back in the day, people didn't talk much about cutting Social Security or Medicare in public. Bush Jr. tried to privatize part of Social Security, but massive opposition prevented him from achieving his goal. The current administration has talked about some long term cuts to Social Security and Medicare (via his budget proposal). The President's budget wants to cut 3 trillion dollars from the national budget in 10 years. The New York Times says the following information about it: "....The proposal also includes $580 billion in adjustments [cuts] to health and entitlement programs, including $248 billion to Medicare and $72 billion to Medicaid." This leaves $260 billion in cuts to other yet to be named social programs. In secret, the President made a bargain with the Republicans that aimed at making cuts to Social Security and Medicare. An interesting article in the Washington Post explains: "...the major elements of a [Grand] bargain seemed to be falling into place: $1.2 trillion in [national programs] agency cuts, smaller cost-of-living increases for Social Security recipients [cuts by dollar inflation], nearly $250 billion in Medicare savings [cuts] achieved in part by raising the eligibility age. And $800 billion in new taxes." This plan failed, so there was the bipartisan Partisan deficit reduction committee. It was created to cut much of the social safety net under the guise of a balanced budget. Many blue dog Democrats supported this plan. They wanted the cuts to take place after November 2012 (after the election assuming no new budget deal goes into effect). The

cuts will destroy at least 50 billion dollars a year in non-military spending programs until 2021. These goals inspired Paul Ryan to propose even more radical austerity plans than what the current President is adhering to. Paul Ryan is attacked by the Democratic parties and its allies. Yet, the corporate elite funds both sides. Regardless who is the lesser of 2 evils, it's time to build up independent solutions beyond the Left/ Right Paradigm. The President wants to tax the rich to fund his deficit reduction plan, but he extended the Bush tax cuts. Also, his deficit reduction plan will cut massive social programs. If Obama actually fought to remove the Bush tax cuts, the richest 1% would see their income taxes raised 3 percentage points, to 38 percent. It is right that there should be some increased taxes on the wealthy and the corporations. Labor and community groups can independently demand taxes on the rich and the corporations to prevent all cuts to social programs. It is right for us to fight against income inequalities. That is why independent groups are uniting in fighting for no cuts to social programs. Some folks want people like me to unite with the Tea Party people. That isn't going to happen, because some of them used bigoted signs and criticize the President and the First Lady in the most offensive terms (beyond legitimate dissent). Paul Ryan has a hardcore foreign policy perspective as well. We have the Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act harming our civil liberties. Even Secretary of Education Arnie Duncan used privatization in Chicago Public schools and he blamed teachers and unions for the problems in public schools (when it is more complicated than that). Privatizing school districts and the firing of even qualified teachers don't equate into real educational reform.The truth is that the current foreign policies of the West promote genocide (including a subjugation of the Third World via wars, torture, imperialism, terror, and human rights violations) not humanitarianism or freedom.The current form of crony capitalism have used nefarious tactics in exploiting resources and labor throughout the Earth (especially in the Third World). One example is how the West committed the abomination of kidnapping Africans and exterminating the vast majority of Native peoples (in the Americas) in order to seize land plus the resources of human beings. The Eurocentric capitalist system utilized ruthlessness, materialism, exploitation, and yes genocide for centuries. The elites use loopholes in causing pollution (as found in industrial waste, GMOs, etc. not just air pollution) as well. You reap what you sow. Now, the same internationalists are harming their own people via GATT, NAFTA, and EU tactics. The deceivers can defend their lies to Calvary, but the truth is with the Lord's power.
Voter ID laws are in violation of human rights. Some people want to subvert the American democratic process by promoting evil photo ID legislation. Some Republicans have admitted that such laws aren't really meant to decrease fraud, but to decrease certain political demographics in order for them to increase their political power. The action of reactionaries to decrease the number of legally registered Americans that will be able to vote in the 2012 election is apparent. The reality is that modern voter fraud is very small and to decrease even the amount of time people can register to vote is blatantly immoral. Decreasing the time on voter access will definitely restrict basic human rights freedoms. Now, these laws want people to submit to government issued photo ID in order for citizens to vote. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, More than 5 million Americans could be affected by the new rules already put in place this year a number larger than the margin of victory in two of the last three presidential elections. Voter fraud is wrong. Legally registered voters have a right to be heard. The problem with the voting ID laws is that this voter fraud is almost nonexistent. According to Mother Jones, The analysis of 2,068 reported fraud cases by News21, a Carnegie-Knight investigative reporting project, found 10 cases of alleged in-person voter impersonation since 2000. With 146 million registered voters in the United States, those represent about one for every 15 million prospective voters In Pennsylvania, the latest state to approve ID laws, the state attorneys signed a stipulation agreement acknowledging that there

have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states. Another problem with such laws is that these law will prevent many seniors, people of color, the poor, those with disabilities, and students the right to vote. As many as 11 percent of voting age Americans citizens don't have a current and valid government issued photo Id. The percentage is higher is you include the low income, older citizens, and other according to Citizens without Proof. Many restrictive voting rights laws lower the time of early voting periods in Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee, and West Virginia. Most of these states have Republican controlled legislatures or with Republican governors. Most Republicans advance such voter ID policies. Ironically, the same obscene restrictions as found in many of these Voting ID laws were antithetical to the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which was formulated to protect the rights of minorities including all Americans. Also, the Electoral College ultimately decides the election irrespective of the popular vote. Both the Republicans and the Democrats have promoted nefarious aims then and now.

Chen Guangcheng wants Apple to stop its support of China's evil one child policy. He wants Apple to use its influence to make China stop its human rights abuses. Apple has a large manufacturing stake in employing thousands of Chinese workers to assemble Apple products. Chen Guangcheng is very well known for exposing the forced abortions and sterilizations that existed from China's one child policy. This policy is enforced by state family planning officials. The one child policy is immoral and wrong of course. Apple in China should take a very active role, Chen said. Theres a huge social responsibility for these international corporations like Apple. Chen is now in America. He is speaking out against China's forced abortion policy. He was once arrested and jailed in China. Chen now received a fellowship to study at New York University after seeking help at the U.S. embassy in Beijing just as high level talks between the 2 countries got under way in April. Chen and other China human rights advocates are seeking a meeting with Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook to talk about their concerns. They sent a letter to Cook. They did it last week in order to ask Apple to get measures to end the forced family planning practices in its factories. The human rights activists want to promote the prohibition of access to factories for government family-planning officials and refusing to report women who are pregnant without birth permits. The group also wants other companies, including Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO), to urge the Chinese government to drop its policy. The global elite also promotes population control in a radical fashion. Last month, eugenicists, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva proposed after-birth abortion for infants up to age 2 as they are a threat to their parents and society because of the drain on resources, time and energy expended to care for them. Giubilini and Minerva continued on to say that merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life. This refutes the argument that no one is pro-abortion.

Bob Woodward promotes austerity blatantly. At first, I didn't want to believe it, but it does. He obsesses with the national debt like a Tea Party representative. The truth is that we can build the economy up first and handle the debt situation long term as Paul Krugman states so often. His new book promoting this archaic philosophy is entitled, "The Price of Politics." He assumes that the President must compromise with the Republicans even at the expense of the massive cutting our social safety net (which are not entitlements as Woodward slanders, but are programs people earned via their sweat, blood, and tears) is reasonable. The Republicans exploited the national debt crisis as a means to promote draconian cuts to society. Woodward doesn't mention a thing about poverty and our civil liberties, but only about debt (when we had high debt for eons in American history. Our debt can't be massively decreased anything soon, but gradually over time). Bob Woodward is acting like a Republican here. The reality is that the Tea Party Congress forced John Boehner to take the extreme position that raising any taxes is equivalent to extremism. The President compromised more so than the Tea Party has throughout the term of the current President. This is why Woodward is gaining support among the radical reactionary Sean Hannity

on FOX News. When Woodward was on FOX News (with Herman Cain and Michelle Malkin), Woodward blamed the current President completely for the failure of Congressional negotiations. The reality is that the Republicans would never entertain raising taxes or spending money. He makes the claim that the President didn't lead on the debt crisis, but both parties made errors. Also, a temporary rising of a debt crisis is better than an economic disaster. The reality is that the President was willing to make substantial spending cuts and cuts to social programs. John Boehner could not get his caucus to agree with a dime in tax increases. Joe Boehner said that the President tried to make a last minute deal of a forcing the Republicans to accede to billions of dollars in additional tax revenues. The White House said that they settle on a rough framework for deal, but it was part of a fluid negotiation. They believe that the additional revenue was one option on the table not a last minute demand. You can decide for yourself who is correct or not. There is no evidence that this brick wall was going to be destroyed (when Mitch McConnell said that I want Obama to be a one term President. The GOP wants the compromise to be agree with them 100 percent or there is no compromise) and I don't agree with the President on every issue. Also, the GOP still stands for Empire, reactionary deception, and economic barbaric policies. The big picture is that the corporate establishment is influencing both parties in trying to cut Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare as a means to promote anarcho-capitalism. Both of the major candidates are speaking very similar words as Wall Street executives. Even in the 1980's, Speaker of the House Tip O'Neil worked with Ronald Reagan to raise taxes on the poor and middle class via their "grand bargain" about Social Security. Even Bill Clinton took money from the Social Security trust fund to fund the stock market. Both candidates now want to cut the social safety net during 2013 and beyond. So, the GOP isn't just responsible for this extremist agenda. Some Democrats want the Simpson-Bowles plan like Dick Durbin and Steny Hoyer. Although, Mitt Romney is wrong to assume to cut college federal aid and to advise people to just borrow money from parents in causing people to pay for record college tuition. That's silliness.

Lessons from Iceland

Iceland has shown the world on how to handle economic depression. The Nobel prize winning economist Joe Stgilitz said that Iceland did the right thing. You can't let the creditors of private go wild and do what they want to do. Krugman explained how Iceland escaped economic Armageddon. Instead of allowing permanent bailouts of private banks, Iceland did something unique. Iceland let the banks to go bust and expanded the social safety net. Iceland didn't try to compromise or placate investors, but Iceland created temporary controls on the movement of capital to give itself room to maneuver. That is why some want the banks to go bust. When Iceland told the banks to go bust, Iceland's economy developed better than all the other countries to let the banks to push them around. Iceland allowed the losses by the bankers to be sent into the hands of the bondholders instead of the taxpayers. Iceland safeguarded the welfare system, which shielded the unemployed from penury helped to propel the nation from collapse. Iceland has a recovery (by refusing to protect creditors in its banks. They failed in 2008 after their debts bloated to 10 times the size of the economy). Iceland didn't make the taxpayers liable for the bank losses (but only the industry's creditors). Iceland did the right thing creditors, not the taxpayers, shouldered the losses of banks, says Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, an economics professor at Columbia University in New York. Irelands done all the wrong things, on the other hand. Thats probably the worst model." Ireland guaranteed all the liabilities of its banks when they ran into trouble and has been injecting capital 46 billion euros ($64 billion) so far to prop them up. That brought the country to the brink of ruin, forcing it to accept a rescue package from the European Union in December. Countries with larger banking systems can follow Icelands example, says Adriaan van der Knaap, a managing director at UBS AG. It wouldnt upset the financial system, says Van der Knaap, who has advised Icelands bank resolution committees. Arni Pall Arnason, 44, Icelands minister of economic affairs, says the decision to make debt holders share the pain saved the countrys future. If wed guaranteed all the banks liabilities, wed be in the same situation as Ireland, says Arnason, whose Social Democratic Alliance was a junior coalition partner in the Haarde government. In the beginning, banks and other financial institutions in Europe were telling us, Never again will we lend to you, Einarsdottir says. Then it was 10 years, then 5. Now they say they might soon be ready to lend again. Iceland even prosecuted white collar fraud. When a nation prosecutes banker fraud in a vibrant fashion, then the economy can be restored. Iceland is a real example that unique strategies in order for us to see economic renewal.

The 2012 Republican National Convention

Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey gave his speech in 2012 Republican National Convention. He spoke bluntly about issues and presented his regular rhetoric in falsely classifying Social Security and other programs as "entitlements." The transparent fact is that people worked and earned the benefits that are found in Social Security and Medicare. He is known to berate public servants. His policies have harmed the state of New Jersey. New Jersey is ranked the 47th in the nation in GDP growth in 2011. New Jersey's state unemployment rate is 9.8 percent, which is the fourth highest in the nation (which only trails Nevada, California, and Rhode Island). New Jersey is ranked 44th in personal income growth in 2011. The state lost 12,000 jobs last month, which is the most in the country. Christie is so brazen in his extreme policies that he wants tax cuts for millionaires while blocking millionaire surtax. He slashed social spending and opposed plans to help New Jersey's workers. He cheered the firing of public sector workers. Public sector workers have built this nation for centuries and for him to cheer their firings is perverted to say the least. He eliminated important infrastructure projects on false pretenses. Job growth has been stagnant when he handed out a number of corporate handouts. So, just because Governor Christie claims that his Republican economic policies are a success in New Jersey doesn't make it so. You can't demonize the people and give economic giveaways to the rich then claim to be some economic guru. It doesn't work like that. Christie talks about debt, but Romney's tax plan (which includes 10.7 trillion dollars in tax cuts) would make the debt significantly worse. The big drivers of the debt were a product of Bush era policies. Even a recent poll said that 53 percent of Americans would raise taxes now rather than cut Social Security benefits for future generations. CNN is confirming that a Republican attendee was removed after throwing nuts at black CNN camerawoman. The delegate reportedly said, this is how we feed animals. This is how many in the GOP feel about my black people. A bunch liars & bigots are represented among many (not all) GOP folks. They don't hide in their hoods anymore. Thank the Good Lord that I am not in the GOP at all. A significant number of Republicans believe in the racist assumption that most black people are Democrats because they want government handouts. So, the camerawoman sister should receive our sympathies. If someone would try that in front of my face, well, you know the rest. Mike Huckabee and Condoleezza Rice gave their speeches. Huckabee described mostly about domestic issues, while Condoleezza Rice pronounced words mostly about foreign policy. On

domestic policies, Condoleezza Rice's words made some believe that she might run for Governor in California. The Sister Condoleezza Rice was right to describe the value of immigrants inside of America. The mosaic of American culture is heavily impacted & enriched by the importance of immigrants. Paul Ryan spoke at the Convention too. Condoleezza Rice, Huckabee, and Ryan expressed eloquent words, but the catch is that some of their policies don't work. A foreign policy that ignores the terrorists among the Syrian opposition groups is something to know about. To claim that you want the Arab Spring or other movements to liberate fellow human beings, while support Gulf States which promote some of the most barbaric, sexist, and anti-civil liberty policies in the world isn't representative of ideological consistency. Claiming to strengthen the social safety net, but you want to radically cut that social safety net (without a cent of increased taxation on the super-rich) is baffling. To say that you want to have Medicare to exist as voucher system for people in my generation, while cutting it in a slick fashion in the near future equates into a hypocritical position. Eloquence in speech doesn't always equate into accuracy. I respect any human beings' right to speak of their views in public, but I have a right to dissent peacefully as well.

Many protesters are in Tampa to protest the RNC. The police state apparatus have guarded the RNC. Thousands of Tampa police, state police, and federal police guard the area. There are almost 100 high resolution surveillance cameras in the vicinity. Miles of fencing and concrete barriers exist in concentric rings around the site of the convention in the last couple of weeks. Helicopters are around buzzing away. Some report depict unmanned flying drones patrolling the skies over Tampa, which is a first for a political convention in the United States. The Department of Homeland Security and the national security state want similar acts to be done in the Democrat convention in Charlotte, North Carolina. We should rightfully oppose this sophisticated global war on terror, and the high tech surveillance police state, which historically harmful legitimate protest. Millions of our taxpayer dollars have even funded Homeland Security to work with law enforcement closely in order for them to crack down much of the Occupy Wall Street Movement (starting in late 2011).

The Republican National Convention ended with controversial words from "Dirty Harry" and the speech made by former Governor Mitt Romney's words. Mitt Romney described his Mormon upbringing and the love between his parents as a motivating factor in his life's achievements. The love of parents is a great thing and he is correct to love his parents. He opposed the hope and change message from President Barack Obama. His speech outlines war mongering rhetoric toward Russia and Iran. Frankly, the Cold War is over, because Russia now isn't like the Soviet Union of old. He talked about private enterprise and various companies in the world. He omits that government created jobs for thousands of years. Public jobs have as much value in the world as private jobs. Mitt Romney focused on the point that Americans now aren't better off than they were four years ago. Mitt Romney promised voters that he would cut deficits (in $500 billion per year from the federal budget by 2016) and cause a balanced budget to come about. The issue is that Romney didn't present a detailed process in how he would execute these policies (except his proposal to cut foreign aid, Amtrak subsidies, etc.). It's strange for him to want to increase military spending and then he said that he opposes massive government spending to create jobs. Military spending is still government spending. He desires more tax cuts when the current President cut taxes all of the time. I don't agree with the current President on all issues, but austerity can never worked to solve our financial issues. If you want jobs and more jobs, you have to spend money. We tried Romney's vision before. It doesn't work at all. Also, not all regulations are evil and Wall Street hoarded trillions of dollars, which prevented much needed economic growth. The government is made by the people and some of the government is controlled by oligarchs not the people presently. It's as simple as that. Mitt Romney refused to talk about Social Security, welfare, Medicaid, the war with Afghanistan, and real issues. Romney wanted radical deregulation in the world. Mitt Romney before has been on record saying that he is not concerned about poor people. So, you know where stands on issues. The Romney agenda is about the privatization of public education, a massive program of austerity, and the reduction of taxes on the super wealthy. Mitt Romney was upstaged in controversy by the words from Clint Eastwood. Clint Eastwood's words were controversial. Clint Eastwood tried to talk with an empty chair and attempted to communicate with that chair as it was President Barack Obama. It was disrespectful and crass. The President isn't some chair. He's a human being, he's our brother, he's a family man, and he deserves dignity plus respect (even if we have some policy disagreements with him). Clint Eastwood hypocritically talks about the President supporting the war in Afghanistan, but Mitt Romney wants possibly a war with Iran. Also, the current administration on some levels have out militarize the

Republicans by the White House have used counterrorism and flexing military muscle. I dont agree with the foreign policy of the White House or Mitt Romney obviously. Eastwood for years have supported Republican causes. Clint Eastwood lost his credibility when he supports a man that agrees with war mongering and an domestic policy that can harm our society. Clint Eastwood is a libertarian Republican just like Condolezza Rice, but I have more respect for Rice. Still, the current President should be made accountable for his own actions and policies. No man is an idol or a god. Even though President Barack Obama supports some policies that are related to the interests of the Wall Street oligarchs, the Republicans aren't any better. The Republicans on economic issues sometimes are even worse than the President. The Republicans like the Democrats are in league with the radical Lukidniks & special interests. The Republicans gave us the Patriot Act, the 3 trillion dollar war against Iraq, and other violations to our constitutional liberties (making the executive's power more absolute over the citizenry). Chanting USA! USA! Will never help USA. America

needs to be born again and repent to Almighty God for its sins. Thats how USA will truly wake up. A nation that spends trillions of dollars on war and doesnt do a radical solution to solve poverty is a total disgrace on the part of that nation. There is nothing wrong with love. Yet, love without justice and sentimental and anemic as Dr. Martin Luther King said. So, we need love, Power, and Justice now without hamstringing equivocation.

The 2012 Democratic National Convention

What do I think of the Democratic National Convention so far? I believe that there is more energy present in the DNC than at the RNC. More people are speaking out for their interests. I will say that on economic issues, the Democrats are more correct than the Republicans are. The Democrats make more sense. Economic fairness is a great way in trying to grow the economy. On foreign policy matters, both parties are nearly identical. They want to see who the bigger cheerleader is for the American Empire. On social issues, the Republicans and the Democrats disagree the most upon those topics. There were many eloquent speeches shown by the Democrats. All of them expressed

emotion, urgency, and words on the families of America. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick spoke about the economy, health care, love, and many issues that appeal to the concerns of the Democratic National Convention. San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro described his disagreements with the agenda of Mitt Romney. He defended the policies of President Barack Obama and he viewed him as the necessary leader to carry America forward during these times of history. He enters the spotlight with his speech. Some believe that he will be the first Hispanic American President of the United States of America. Many people defended the Affordable Care Act. The public is split on whether they support it or not. I recently did receive a rebate check from my insurance company (as a result of ACA) as Alex Wagner talked about. My views are known about the healthcare law. I support many parts of it. It isn't perfect, but it's a first step toward our real goal, which is the universal health care for every American in this country. I believe that there should be revisions to the law without a total repeal of the entire law. All of the law won't exist until 2014 since the law has a long process in order for it to be implemented completely. Now, the Republicans don't have a serious health care alternative, except to have a totally privatized health care system (and a voucher Medicare system. It's more of the same). In order to have universal health care, you have to allow the government to execute public interventions. First Lady Michelle Obama gave a personalized, emotional speech about the United States. She looked very radiant with her dress. She spoke of her life and her early relationship between her and the President. She described the love she has for her husband despite the huge debt that they had to pay. She outlined her life from humble beginnings in the South Side of Chicago. Michelle Obama didn't overtly criticize Mitt Romney, but she utilized inferences that outlined disagreements with some of the political positions of the Republican candidate. Michelle Obama made a great speech in describing her vision for America. The issue usually in both of these conventions is what they don't say. The DNC is correct to promote investments in our land, but they ignore how the Democrats are promoting imperialism in many nations overseas. The Democrats aren't truly anti-war and their convention proves it. They are right that we should have health care, but our liberties ought to be preserved. Our liberties are still under threat when a President refuses to rescind the Patriot Act or when he agrees with NATO supporting rebels lynching black men, women, and children in Libya (to be fair, these brutes murdered black people before Obama was President). The victims of drone attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan will not have a voice in the DNC. These victims suffer at the hands of a hypocritical 2 party system. It's easy to criticize a Mormon extremist, but will they call for the end of the war on terror in general? It's fine to want investments in education and our infrastructure, but we need a higher minimum wage too. They are right to advocate no further tax cuts for the wealthy, but it is just as evil as to endorse closet austerity in a long term fashion (Republicans want overt austerity ASAP in a wicked fashion). Some Republicans are rather overt in their hatred of people that look like me. For example, Republicans disrespected an African American camerawoman for just doing her job at the RNC convention. CNN was one of the few mainstream media folks that reported on this story. See, the truth is both parties have to be held into account for what they say and what they don't say during their conventions. The Democrats promoted the Won't Back Down film, so the Democrats aren't the progressive messiahs. Many people are intimidated in following the two party system. Grown men and grown women know full well that this system advocates war mongering, civil liberty violations, and union busting, but they love the system so much. The good news is that real protesters disagree with oppression. The DNC says that no man is perfect. That is true. No man is perfect, but a man can go out and publicly condemn the war on terror and advocate a radical

redistribution of economic & political power though. A man can publicly condemn white supremacy in public too. Some Democrats say the other lie that we didn't criticize Bush when he was in office. The truth is that I criticized Bush on his war mongering policies tons of time in public, in the Net, and in other places (for over 10 years). Some protesters have done civil disobedience. It's doesn't matter how much people whine, the White House is wrong to support the TSA's perverted molestation of human beings, and to continue the existence of Guantanamo Bay. The White House is wrong to promote an assassination of an American citizen without due process of law, to allow the FBI plus other intelligence groups to suppress peaceful protesters, and to promote laws that can cause indefinite detention of people. He can call himself not the President of Black people, but he's a black man that overtly promoted the interests of other ethnic groups & other backgrounds of people too (and he said their names). Ex-President Bill Clinton created an inspiring and eloquent speech. He made legitimate distinctions among the policies of the Democrats and the Republicans. He tried to defend the record of President Barack Obama, because he conceives that it will take longer than four years to end the economic disaster that transpired as a product of the Bush administrations policies. He spoke of arithmetic of how Democrats created more jobs than the Republicans did from 1961 to the present. Bill Clinton spoke as a teacher in trying to educate folks on the weaknesses of trickled down economics. Everyone knows that doubling down on trickled down never will develop true economic growth, especially for poor human beings. It isnt a secret that the Republicans believe in harsh economic proposals. So, it wasnt unusual for Bill Clinton to expose the Republicans apparent political weaknesses. Its apparent that too many Republicans harbor a sick, apprehension toward the poor and people of color via their policies including their actions. That is why it isnt surprising to witness a small percentage of minorities joining the GOP ranks. His speech inspired the crowd, but real people know about Clintons history & legacy. The economy was certainly growing under Bill Clinton, but he was the corporate Democrat. He wasnt perfect and he advanced NAFTA, the War on Drugs, and other acts. Bank deregulation (Democratic agents try to let people sleep on the fact that ex-President William Jefferson Clinton repealed the Glas-Steagall, which according to some scholars contributed to our current economic recession. Wall Street banks engaged in more ponzi schemes after the laws repeal), welfare reform, and an execution of NATO war crimes in Southeastern Europe are pristine legacies of William Jefferson Clinton. Its not popular to outline this information within the timespan of a convention, but nevertheless, its the truth. Now, Clinton is correct to express the fact that the middle class ought to be respected and earn just opportunities. Although, the poor should have as much consideration for being included in a cooperating society as the middle class. In other words, radical programs are needed in order for us to assist poor Americans not just the middle class. The current President isnt responsible for all of our complications though and that is true. *The Democratic platform on two issues represents a huge capitulation to AIPAC and political correctness. In our day, even in our modern age, the suffering of the Palestinians is minimized by the Democratic establishment. It is reasonably fair to condemn the violence against innocent Israelis. This is true. The peace movement is prominently active in Israel. Yet, it is unconsciously inappropriate for us to ignore the suffering of the Palestinian people from Gaza to Jerusalem. Numerous Palestinians live in squatter, they suffer extreme poverty, and they endure obscene discrimination inside of the Middle East. All people are created equal; therefore a two state solution is superior to nationalistic fervor and religious extremism. The question of Jerusalem ought to be

solved by both the Israelis and the Palestinians. A resolution to the Middle East crisis is the acknowledgment of individuals of goodwill among all sides without the omission of the sufferings of the Palestinians or black Africans that reside in Israel. It is taboo to promote a two state solution, but real action is incredibly necessary in order for us to reject folly. It is never anti-Semitic to advocate real peace for the Palestinians and Israelis in the Middle East. Now, the concept of God. I have no massive trepidation of the mention of God in the platform. Yet, we live in a multifaceted, multicultural society. The platform should mention God in the context of a nation where believers and non-believers live in it. Therefore, the platform should respect peoples belief in God while realizing that not all people worship God or ally with mainstream religion. I will always love God, but I will not utilize the concept of God as an excuse for me to advance totalitarianism or theocratic extremism. The radical, evil war mongering agitation against Iran (which is found in the DNCs platform) is truly demagogic rhetoric. Iran is no direct threat to American soil and Iran has no nuclear weapons. Sanctions regularly kill innocent men, women, and children. That is why the Non Alignment Movement is promoting real cooperation among nation-states including Iran excluding the bloodlust of war. Peace on Earth is an incredibly revolutionary teaching that we must follow irrespective of our paralyzing imperfections. We are called to speak for the weak and the voiceless, therefore war is obsolete. I have come into that conclusion after studying human history. Now, the Republicans are wrong as well. Mitt Romney is a blatant extremist (and his economic policies threaten the social safety net. Will I vote Romney? You know the answer to that question. No. I don't believe in cutting voting hours either since folks can't lose the sacred right to vote in America), but no man is beyond critique. I am not going to shine some shoes for the Republicans and I will bootlick or half step to the Democrats. I am an Independent brother. In some of my disagreements with the White House, I don't hate the White House. As many great leaders have said, we should treat all humans the same. I believe that we should love the President as a brother and his family as our family. I do believe that Michelle Obama's speech set the emotional tone of the convention. Michelle Obama made a great speech, which you can make a case that her speech was oratorically better than every person in the RNC's speeches. Michelle Obama made an excellent speech whether you agree with her or not.

The speech made by President Barack Obama ended the DNC Convention. His family walked up unto the Charlotte, North Carolina to congratulate the President. He displayed an articulate representation of his political positions. He made the point that the country still has a long way to

go in order for economic growth to boon in a realistic fashion. The President said that he is the President beyond simply a candidate. The President felt that he represents a forward thinking philosophy, while Mitt Romney's agenda of deregulation plus more tax cuts for the super wealthy outline backward ideologies. The crowd adored him and cheered when spoke his words. He wanted to rally the public to accept his goals. The President discussed about the deficit, energy, health care, and a litany of other subjects. President Barack Obama spoke about national security. One thing about the Democrats is that they are philosophically identical with the Republicans on national security issues. On foreign issues, both parties are very much reactionary and militaristic. In other words, the Democratic establishment isn't made up of doves mostly and even liberals like it like that. I oppose unjust militarism completely. That's just me. The President contrasted his agenda and the Republican agenda (as in his mind trying to roll back some regulations, have more expensive tax cuts, and they refuse to outline a plan to improve the conditions of the USA. Mitt Romney is wrong to assume the slur that Russia is some great threat to American security). He made a religious reference by his following quotation: "I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go. This reference obvious related to President Abraham Lincoln seeking religious guidance during the hugely bloody Civil War. What do I think of his speech? I think his speech was eloquent and precisely outlined his personal convictions. I still don't agree with him on some issues, but I respect the President as a strong black man. Likewise, he seems to not talk about issues pertaining to human civil liberties, police brutality, and other issues plaguing the American landscape. His words were very powerful including the words from Joe Biden and others. I think that President Barack Obama is the best orator of the 21st century as a President. Yet, one weakness of him is that he refuses to accept some radicalism. It was radicalism that made successful movements and revolutions possible. For example, he would gain a huge amount of support if he advocated an end to drone attacks on sovereign nations (like Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, and other lands), and an end to the Patriot Act. If he said that his goal of world peace was a paramount position, then he would gain huge votes. He would gain extra support if he publicly calls for the labeling of GMO foods. Also, courage is about of condemning the imperialist aims inside of Africa, to completely expose the reckless cartel-capitalist system and to promote Africa for the Africans alone. Africom should stay out of African soil. That's courage and a true magnificent moment of solidarity. More people would vote for him in droves if he called for a Medicare for all health care plan. Even a massive WPA like program can put millions of human beings to work as well. For the record, there is nothing completely safe about nuclear power plants being in the mostly black and poor communities of Georgia and South Carolina (which caused cancer in those areas because of the leaks from those plants). Also, a real man or a real woman must be consistently and strongly opposed to the War on Drugs where millions of people have been imprisoned in the prison industrial complex. Time after time again, innocent men and innocent women find themselves unjustly imprisoned in prisons worldwide. Their plight ought not to be omitted in our souls. Michelle Alexander has written on this issue extensively. She exposed this wicked war on Drugs as like a new Jim Crow ethos. Now, much of President Barack Obama's speech included legitimate aims and it has accurate information. Yet, as one saying goes, it's not what they say; it's what they don't say. The brutal bombs killing human beings overseas distract from battling poverty in America. So, the President was confident and strong in his speech. I do admire the things that he got correct (like the President signing the Fair Pay Act for women, government compensation and grants sent to black & other minority farmers, giving students grants, and other specific policies). I disagree with the things that he got incorrect.

Who will I vote for on November 4, 2012? Thats a great question. I will tell you afterwards, but I am leaning to many people. One thing is certain. I wont vote for Mitt Romney, because this man is radically anti-poor. One thing is certain regardless of where you stand politically. VOTE AND DEFEND THE RIGHT TO VOTE. WORDS ON THE LEFT GATEKEEPERS
We know that the reactionaries and the GOP establishment is heavily made of intolerant, extremist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, and deceived human beings. There are also the left gatekeepers that promote deception as well. As many have said before, the power structure uses the liberal establishment (not real progressives) as a means to promote the corporatist imperialism and domination of the world's resources under the guise of "humanitarianism" or "democracy." The technocracy exploits liberalism and conservatism as a mean for the establishment to dominate our public political discourse. This is why we have little major political choices to voice for every 4 years. Some folks use liberalism as a cover for them to promote aggressive Anglo-American militarism. This militarism causes the expansion of the police state, and the select interests of transnational corporations. Back in the 1800's, liberalism was used as a means to justify radical free trade and extremist diplomacy against the public. The establishment liberal presently expresses interests on important issues like students' rights, public health, environmental degradation, and forms of other policy matters. Yet, increasingly, some liberals want more military interventions as a solution to the complex nature of foreign policy complications. Franklin Roosevelt's legitimate efforts prevented the country from having a real revolution when the poverty rate increased to over 20 percent. Even though Keynesianism isn't perfect, it does have some legitimate components to it like spending some money in order for the growth of the economy to be transparent. Likewise with Lyndon Baines Johnson, he passed many great, legitimate progressive legislation that assisted minorities, immigrants, the elderly, the poor, and other human beings. Yet, he consistently follow the immoral, unjust war of Vietnam when a negotiated settlement early on would be a better solution to experience. The Vietnam War was blatantly militaristic. The war related to a coalition among industry plus military power in order for this nefarious union to advance the exploitation of the world's resources according to SDS President Carl Olesgby. Members of the liberal establishment agreed with and supported the Vietnam War. We know their names of the following human beings: National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Ambassador to South Vietnam Henry Cabot Lodge, Ambassador to the United Nations Arthur Goldberg, and the President in that time LBJ. The Vietnam War distracted from the crucial need to seriously complete the agenda of the Great Society. Today, reactionary foreign policy is supported by President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, Susan Rice, Samantha Rice, and John Brennan. All of these human beings use the same justifications that some promoted Vietnam in their war on terror situation. They use the mantra of humanitarian assistance as a means for them to execute not only drone attacks, but to support of the terrorist group MEK in Iran. All of these actions definitely revolve around the advancement of neo-colonialism (with the organization of Africom spreading its military might all over the Motherland of Africa). The US/NATO war machine is still strong. This machine supports and fights Al-Qaeda mercenaries at the same time. War debt is monetized in our nation while the poor suffer. Not a single Wall Street criminal has been prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law. Even Cass Sunstein (or the Information Czar) had some academic writings. In those writings, he admitted blatantly that he hates information that is related to conspiracy information. He advocates a COINTELPRO-style cognitive infiltration of groups discussing and circulating such ideas. Sunsteins liberal credentials are indisputable. It is true that the people of the Middle East should be liberated from oppression. On the other hand, it is hypocritical for some to support Libya to be bombed, but these individuals support Saudi oppression against its own people. Much of the mainstream media ignores the atrocities in Libya, the atrocities in the Gulf States, and the IMF & World Bank recolonization of much of the Third World. While our infrastructure is being harmed in the USA, imperial war persists. Ideological conformity to corrupt banks, pharmaceutical evils, and the military industrial surveillance complex is a vice. We must renew our mind and not follow the ways of the world. Regardless of what anyone says, there is absolute truth. There is good and evil, right and wrong. Over the years, some in the New York Times back then slandered Malcolm X after he died since they falsely

accused him of fanaticism or hate. After JFK was assassinated, people like Chomsky falsely called him a war monger on the scale of the neo-cons. The truth is that JFK supported the hero

Lumumba and he wanted to visit and supported the nationalists in Indonesia during the Spring of 1964. When Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called out Johnson for his hypocrisy via
his "Beyond Vietnam" address at Riverside Church, LBJ fumed at MLK with disgusting language. So, just because a person may call himself a liberal, doesn't mean that he's a savior. Even the Southern Poverty Law Center called the activist group called War are Change a hate group, which is hilarious. We are Change just oppose the official story of 9/11 and they never advocated hatred of human beings. The lesson is for us to be Independents ideologically as the late Malcolm X said. Both parties have utilized unconstitutional wars on phony grounds, promoted the NDAA, promoted extrajudicial assassinations, murderous sanctions in foreign lands, and other evils. We don't need the Koch brothers or left gatekeepers either. When I write about the liberal establishment, I don't mean to

encompass all progressives or all sincere liberals. When I expose the neoconservatives, I realize that numerous sincere conservative want the best for society in general as well. So, I want to make that perfectly clear. We can have creativity and strength without political deception.
The 47 Percent Comment
Mitt Romney is completely wrong in his 47 percent comments. Mitt Romney said that 47 percent of American portrays themselves as victims, government dependents, and they will never vote for him anyway. He is wrong, because many of that percentage don't view themselves as victims and even some in the 47 percent include some of his constituency. Just because some individuals don't pay income taxes, doesn't mean that poorer Americans don't pay taxes at all. Some of them pay payroll taxes. He disparages 47 percent of Americans (who are made up of the elderly, the mostly poor human beings, students, etc.) as basically leaches. Romney plays on the old lying stereotype that if you're not super rich, then you must be lazy, weak, or inferior. He also made the remark that if were a Mexican, he would have a better chance of becoming President of the United States. This is the same man that made the racist remark that the Palestinians suffer a lower GDP than the Israelis, because God favored the Israelis (or that the Palestinians have cultural inferiority not because of oppression, barriers to outside trade, or discrimination). Saeb Erekat, a top aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, told The Associated Press that Romneys comment was a racist statement and ignorant of the facts. This man doesnt realize that the Palestinian economy cannot reach its potential because there is an Israeli occupation, Erekat said. It seems to me this man lacks information, knowledge, vision and understanding of this region and its people. Now, Romney's view that 47 percent of Americans view themselves as victims and refuse to learn personal responsibility is not only offensive, but ignorant. The reason is that as President, you supposed to appeal to as many people as possible beyond a certain percentage. His speech talked about some of his own voters, so Mitt Romney is blatantly anti-poor. He even said that he is not that concerned about poor people. So, what more proof can you see that this man isn't up for the job? Mitt Romney must understand that you have to work for everybody if you want to become President. Romney does believe in redistribution from the poor/middle class to the rich. The Romney/Ryan plan will increase taxes on the poor and middle, while giving more tax breaks to the super rich. Ryan's economic plan will cause the largest redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich in modern American history (according to economic experts). Ryan's economic plan will cuts needed programs that can help the poor Americans.

ON DEBTS AND THE FEDERAL DEFICIT

Now, people have been talking about deficits and debt. We should talk about these important subjects, because they affect us directly and indirectly. I dont believe in the extremists though. We can solve our debt and deficit issues without taxing the middle class into oblivion and without cutting every social program down as well. There are alternative solutions to these issues as advocated by Ralph Nader, Webster Tarpley, and other human beings. We can first end corporate welfare and end corporate tax loopholes as a first step in helping lower the federal deficit and the debt. Getting rid of corporate welfare will save billions of dollars a year. The major expenditure is from the military industrial complex not

domestic activities. Also, you can tax corporations, especially corporations that dont pay any form of taxation. There are 12 major corporations (like Honeywell, Verizon, General Electric, etc.) in 3 years that made $167 billion in profit, paid zero tax, and got $2.5 billion back from the Treasury. The economy is a dynamic and complex situation. You can return the tax rates and effective tax payments back to the 1960s level and billions of dollars can be received. We should end the evil war on terror (that involves covert oppressions in Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.) to save $150 billion. You can cut waste in the military industrial complex. These funds can cause a creation of a national public works program to rebuild our ailing infrastructure in the USA. As the economy grows as Paul Krugman says, then you can handle the debt more thoroughly. The deficit hawks are still making their comeback. They believe in the fantasy of the solidity and fixity of the gold standard. The deficit hawk/Tea Party types are hypocrites since they criticize the federal government for spending money. They hate government spending which can help the poor and the elderly. Yet, they live in places that receive farm subsidies, federal water works, and federal funds for the military that promote their current economic well-being. Some of them rely on Medicare when Medicare is a government program. Public intervention was necessary to fight against discrimination and to promote progressive efforts in order to benefit the American people. In order to solve poverty, you have to change the economy not scapegoat the poor. A policy of the government being committed to full employment is an excellent plan (like a major jobs program. The scholar Minsky is right on that point of advocating making job creation the central theme of decreasing unemployment. So, you need a comprehensive jobs program. Social programs can be maintained in order for those programs to help the aged, the infirm, the elderly, the extremely poor, etc. Our minimum wage must up too in order to see a solution). There should be other universal programs can help fight back against poverty. A national employment plan is what the late Dr. Martin Luther King wanted before he was assassinated. It is a historical fact that faster growth of worker productivity doesnt mean you can reduce poverty, but sometimes a more active government can increase market derived income and total income (which is a good thing). I disagree with Minsky that poverty is largely an employment problem. Poverty is caused by income inequality, discrimination, and by oppression by the corporate elite (not just by unemployment alone). Education and training are always necessary to fight poverty, but you need a jobs program also. As Hyman P. Minsky said brilliantly, if you have private investment strategies alone, it will not be comprehensive enough to end income inequality since it will not directly affect low income workers. You need also public sector spending. So, you need full time and full year jobs in reducing poverty rates.

Final Thoughts

Ryan is a man who believes in the old thinking that almost nothing that the federal government can do can help society fundamentally. They are clear in their hatred of New Deal reforms (of believing in the deception that eliminating regulations on corporations and maintaining tax breaks for the super wealthy can result in massive economic growth among the poor and middle class). Its easy to see that the Paul Ryans Path to Prosperity plan will lead people to the poorhouse. Anybody born after 1956 will suffer the end of the current Medicare program as we know it. It will replace Medicare with a system where beneficiaries would get a set amount of money from the government each year. This money is used to buy coverage from private insurers, but the catch is that the money goes into insurance companies bank accounts. The result of this plan will make the insurance companies richer and have more control of our health care system. I am clear about my dissent with Ryan's viewpoints. Another issue is that our premiums have been rising (so the people will have to use more money out of the pockets to cover the premiums that private insurers would charge people). We live in a time that 46.1 percent of Americans are now dying with less than $10,000 (with 19 percent dying with no financial assets at all). These statistics are found by the recent study by the economics professors at Harvard, MIT, and Dartmouth. Some have to rely on Social Security benefits for support, which refutes the old reactionary lie that Social Security is some ponzi scheme. Now, isnt the time for a privatized Medicare proposal that Ryan is adhering to. History has shown us that private insurers will profit by selectively enrolling the healthy and sunning the sick (as proven in the New England Journal of Medicine article entitled, The healthy go in and the sick go out). Such premium support programs can increase costs as shown by the Congressional Budget Office estimates (the CBO said that the Ryan proposal will more than double out of pocket costs for the typical 65 year old Medicare beneficiary in 2022 from $5,630 to $12,500). Private insurers competing on prices for those under 65 have existed in the market for decades (costs and premiums have increased even as benefits and choices have been reduced).

Many scholars and researchers have proposed a single payer system as a means to make the Medicare system better.

As for voting, people have the right to vote. I voted before, and I will continue to vote in the future. I cant tell you who to vote for since you are a free thinking human being. Although, people died for that right and the right to vote should never be taken for granted.

I refuse to be the new man, but I will be just a man. I have great hope for the future. I always did.
By Timothy