Warning: Adult Language

The video runs a little long but this is quite an excellent rant.
(Via United Liberty)

Here we go. Maybe the calendar should be set back to 1984.

From Global Research:

In the wake of Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and Susan Collins' (R-ME) alarmist report, "Violent Islamist Extremism, the Internet, and the Homegrown Terrorism Threat," the Senate may be moving towards passage of the Orwellian "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" (S. 1959).

A companion piece of legislative flotsam to the House bill, "The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" (H.R. 1955), the Democrat-controlled Congress seems ready to jettison Constitutional guarantees of free speech and assembly. The bill passed the House by a 404-6 vote in October. Twenty-three congress members abstained, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers.

More here.

When will politicians, and the people who vote for them, learn that the more you regulate something the harder you make it for honest, law abiding citizens to function as honest, law abiding citizens? Just look at gun control or the licensing requirements in some states for cosmetologists. I'm just saying.

Now is it just me or is this a really BAD IDEA! I mean come on, Mayor Bloomberg (a RINO if I ever saw one) is really going to force the men and women of the tri-state area, who work hard to earn a living in NYC, pay a fee for going to work in their own cars just because they happen to be traveling during "Peak Hours"?
This is just another ploy by statist politicians to take away more choices from individuals.
And I call bullshit!
Remember folks; Politicians can never be trusted to do what's right for the individual, all they really want is power.

From the NY Post:

Mayor Bloomberg's congestion-pricing scheme has cleared its first major hurdle, the City Council, and is now headed to Albany - where it faces an infinitely more formidable roadblock: Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.

The council passed the legally required home-rule message by a 30-20 vote (by Council standards, an unusually slim margin). Now the Legislature must give its final approval by next Monday - the deadline for $350 million in federal transit funds needed to offset the program's startup costs.

But Silver is in no rush to get anything done - even though the Senate's GOP majority is ready to take up the issue right away.

In fact, the speaker says he won't even begin considering the matter until both houses have passed the state budget - which likely will take until Friday.

This means that congestion pricing would come before the Legislature as a stand-alone item, rather than as part of the budget process - making it much more difficult to pass.

In voting to endorse congestion pricing, the City Council recognized the plan for what it is: the biggest boost for New York mass transit in decades.

The Legislature must show the same wisdom. Albany lawmakers - notably Speaker Sheldon Silver and Assembly Democrats - should approve pouring the billions of dollars that would flow from congestion pricing into transportation improvements.

The Council stepped up big-time. Led by Speaker Christine Quinn, members voted, 30 to 20, to require drivers to pay $8 (minus tolls) to enter Manhattan below 60th St. on weekdays.

That means tolling the four East River bridges, a step long viewed as akin to touching a political third rail. What made it smart and do-able was the commitment to dedicate revenue for transit improvements that would benefit the majority of New Yorkers.

Amazingly, two-thirds of Council members who voted yes represented the outer boroughs. Some of their constituents would be hit with the charge, but commuting would get easier for many more.

You might recall that last month an American businesswoman in the great, freedom-loving nation of Saudi Arabia was arrested, strip-searched, finger-printed, and detained for having the audacity of hanging out in a Starbucks with a man who wasn't a relative.

Spurred in part by the infamy of this incident, a brave female journalist with Arab News is now posing some tough questions for the famously brutal Saudi religious police (Known as the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice).

Among the questions she's seeking answers for: "Why is having coffee in a public place with an unrelated man considered 'illegal seclusion'?"; "Is a strip search really necessary for women arrested for khulwa (illegal seclusion)?"; and finally, "Is brutally beating a suspect to death a form of promoting virtue or preventing vice?"

We here at the Professor Politico Show commend this woman for her courage in trying to put a cruel and corrupt system on trial.

I have been teaching economics at the university level for twenty-five years. Easily the most often-asked questions relate to monopolies. The questions are often put in the following form: "In an economy free of governmental regulation, wouldn't a firm or group of firms obtain a monopoly over some vital resource or product? And won't the monopoly then exercise its power by raising prices?"

The issues most often revolve around the oil industry and the famous Standard Oil Company antitrust case. The history of Standard Oil, students frequently tell me, proves that monopolies exist in free markets — and that they do raise prices arbitrarily — and that this is precisely why we need antitrust laws.

Are monopolies truly an inherent problem in a free market? And do we need antitrust laws to combat them?

The clearest definition of monopoly is one seller, with the law prohibiting competitors from entering the market. Local telephone and cable-television companies are examples — they are usually provided a monopoly by their local governmental officials — that is, they are made the only provider of the service in a certain locale — and competition is prohibited by the local governing body. Obviously, this is not a monopoly arising in a free market since it is the government not the market that is dictating the number of suppliers. The best way to get competition in these types of activities is to remove the legal restrictions on market entry — which, by the way, is happening in some cable-television markets, which has resulted in a decrease in prices.

We have a new weekly segment here @ the Professor Politico Show which will focus on one subject each episode.

And here's our first subject:

Global Warming/Climate Change

From Cosmic Variance:

The widely accepted Global Warming Theory, is a pseudo science and must be abandoned. Here I explain what it is and why it is totally wrong.

The Global Warming Theory (GWT) believes that human activity considerably increased the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. As a result it leads to considerable warming up of the arth's surface. As a consequence it could leads to the melting of polar ice and cause raising sea level, and other catastrophies that would eventually render the planet earth un-inhabitable to human. Some GWT doomers even believe that we have passed a point of no return. i.e., the global warming cause by human is already so high it releases the methane gas frozen in the polar ice, and methane, being a more effective green house gas, causes more global warming, and it leads to to more green house gas being release and so it leads to run off global warming that destroys all life on earth.

Global Warming is not pseudoscience because it has always occurred cyclically in nature since the Earth was formed. However, the idea of an anthropogenic global warming is a pseudoscience. There is not convincing scientific support that human discharge of CO2, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the projected future, cause disastrous warming of the Earth's atmosphere and disturbance or change of the Earth's climate. There is considerable evidence that the current warming is entirely natural and obeys the periodical changes in the planetary system. The attribution of global warming to the CO2 generated from human activity is a fallacy.

From theSeminal.com:

Montanans have themselves a fine Governor.

The Department of Homeland Security is trying to force states to issues "Real ID-compliant" drivers licenses. The Real ID Act of 2005 requires licenses to hold electronically encoded information, along with more complicated background checks for license applicants.

The mystics finally show their true colors.

Reason and logic are the only things that provide humanity with it's means of survival.

Because without reason or logic we are nothing more than primitive animals living only for the moment.







P.S. What side do you think I'm on, hmmmm?

From United Press International:

In America we like our juries dumb and predictable. God forbid they should know anything about the case they're judging, much less the law they're judging it by. We need to protect them from all sorts of things that could infect their brains with information.

If we didn't do that, it would be like trusting 12 guys off the street to dispense justice. What a quaint idea. And, obviously, a dangerous one.

The idea of a jury is at least 3,000 years old -- the Greeks thought 12 was the perfect number of panelists -- but our version of it is much younger. We're coming up on the 800th anniversary of the year when King John was told, essentially, stop forcing your laws down our throats or we're going to burn down your castle.

Voila! The modern jury system was born. The king could decree all the laws he wanted to decree, but from then on it would be 12 guys from the neighborhood who decided whether they would actually be used against anybody.

From HowStuffWorks.com:

Most people know what communism is at its most basic level. Simply put, communism is the idea that everyone in a given society receives equal shares of the benefits derived from labor. Communism is designed to allow the poor to rise up and attain financial and social status equal to that of the middle-class landowners. In order for everyone to achieve equality, wealth is redistributed so that the members of the upper class are brought down to the same financial and social level as the middle class. Communism also requires that all means of production be controlled by the state. In other words, no one can own his or her own business or produce his or her own goods because the state owns everything.

From AOL News:

A California court ruling that challenges parents' legal right to teach their children at home is angering home schoolers, who hope the state's Supreme Court will overturn the decision. Otherwise, advocates say, thousands of families may be forced to abandon home schooling.

From wired.com's how-to wiki:

You might as well check your dignity curbside. Soon you'll be shoeless and flustered, spilling comics across the floor as you dig your MacBook from the depths of your duffel. But take a deep breath, frequent fliers: It is possible to pass security with your ego intact. Here's how.

Having sex can cause pregnancy. This one seems too obvious to mention, but judging from the number of "oh, shit, I'm pregnant" pregnancies in the world, I thought it bore repeating. Nothing is 100% effective against pregnancy except abstinence, or the removal of your ovaries or testicles.

If you cover your body with piercings and/or tattoos, you may not be able to find a job. This also goes for doing weird things to your hair. And please don't give me any bullshit about "freedom of expression". You go right ahead and express yourself all you want, but don't expect businesses to be under some kind of obligation to hire you. They can't not hire you for being a Jew, but they certainly can not hire you for looking like a fucking freak. (caveat: I have tattoos … And I have nothing against tattoos, piercings or fucking freaks. Just don't whine about it when you're treated like one.)

Marijuana is not a "gateway drug". OK, maybe 99% of "hard" drug users also smoke pot. And maybe a lot of them smoked pot before they got into whatever hard drug it is that they're using. But that's not because the pot made them do it, it's because damn near everyone has smoked pot at some point in their lives.

You have no right to be proud, unless you did it yourself. That goes for anything from racial pride to gender pride to national pride. Your race, gender and nationality are accidents of birth. Being proud of something you got stuck with when momma squeezed you out is assinine. You have a right to be proud of your own personal accomplishments, and perhaps those of your children (if you were actually a decent parent, and your kids didn't succeed by sheer force of will alone). That's it. Your parents had sex, Mom got knocked up, and nine months later, there you were. Race, gender and nationality handed to you out of the accident of your birth. Fuck your white pride, your black pride, your national pride, and all the other bullshit that goes along with it.

“We’re tired of the way the media portrays us as either abusive, career-driven, slovenly, or one of the myriad of other male stereotypes,” one married man complains to Dr. Helen Smith. She sympathizes.

First let me apologize for the lack of posts the last few days. It's been a little hectic here at the show. I'd also like to thank all of my friends for their support during this family crisis. To you all, I love you.

Now on to the topic at hand.

Can some one please tell me why congress is involved with the steroid "scandal" in Baseball and the "Spygate" scandal in Football? Doesn't congress have anything better to do besides spend our tax dollars on inane crap like this?

Maybe it's just me, but I think congress should concentrate on actually doing its job. They should worry about the war in Iraq, earmarks and pork, and actually protecting individual rights.

But, then again, I may be wrong.

Until next time.

Hold on there Scroogler.......... I'm not talking about Google. I'm talkin' politics!

"What does 'Do No Evil' mean?", you ask. Well, politically speaking, I'm talking about the Constitution and our government's general disregard for it.

Now I'm not just talking about the current administration, mind you. I'm talking about since the founding of our Nation.

It all started when George Washington with the urging of Alex Hamilton decided to implement the same kind of draconian excise taxes that they had fought so hard against for so long. Hence the "Whiskey Rebellion" of 1794.

Woodrow Wilson continued this tradition when he created the Federal Reserve, slowly stripping our currency of any real value.

And finally we have George W. Bush. What can I say that hasn't already been said. The Patriot Act, the suspension of Habeas Corpus, the list goes on.

I must say I find it quite amusing when people are surprised that Dubya does what he does when most if not all of our elected officials throughout the history of this nation have done the same thing.
He's only following precedent.

Now, should he follow precedent? I don't think so. The Constitution is a pretty damn good document when it comes to laying out what the federal government can and cannot do. But what do I know, I'm just some plebe.

So....... What does "Do No Evil" mean? It means people, especially politicians, should mind their own damn business and let others live their lives as they see fit, as long as they don't intrude upon the freedoms and liberty of others. And I think that's all any of us really want; To live our lives to the best of our abilities and in peace.

What's it say in the Declaration of Independence? Oh yeah, that we all have the rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. So go out and exercise your rights people.

Peace.




P.S. Go Ron Paul!!!!!

Why is it when you have a political or religious debate with someone you're demonized for disagreeing with some one else's point of view? Am I really an evil bastard for believing the voracity of the Theory of Evolution or for the Political belief that government should stick to Police, Courts and the Military? Penn Says I'm not and I don't think I am either but we could both be wrong.

Can't sleep. And my dog keeps licking the soles of my feet.

Would it be wrong to "accidentally" throw my dog out the window?

Don't worry the question was rhetorical. Time to go back to bed and try to get some sleep.



Update: Threw the dog out the window. Gonna be really awkward explaining to the neighbors why there's dog bits all over their lawn.