Wash your mouth out with SOPA.

I'm sure almost everyone knows what's going on with SOPA. If not, please give THIS a read...

In short, if this passes I could be censored and shut down simply for posting that link. (yeah right, like reddit cares?)

This stinks of government musings from back in 2009. Remember my post? No? Right here...

I'll never beg someone to call their congressman - but if you're reading this, it will affect you. If we do nothing, we deserve what we get.

Adam Carolla is in my head...

...at least he's in my head if I were very vulgar, or after a night of a drinking.

WARNING: foul language.

Where there's smoke...

...there's a Cain Train on fire, and there is enough flame to go around.

So Herman Cain has been leading the polls for the GOP primary for a couple weeks now. That was far too long before SOMETHING happened. A few anonymous sources say he did naughty things. How much truth behind this? Only the accuser, Cain, and God really know... Then a woman came out and said he not only sexually harassed her, but actually assaulted her.

Some of my observations...

The anonymous women:

• Why was there no legal action? Why now? [smoke]
• One of the women identified filed complaints demanding cash at her next job... pattern? [smoke]

Sharon Bialek:

• A celebrity lawyer that's been politically involved in the past, really? [smoke]
• 14 Years later? Your accusations aren't just a personal issue, it's sexual assault. If what you say is true, he should be arrested and thrown away. Why wait? [SMOKE!]
• She is a republican - which is part of my point in my next section....

Media:

• Covering this more in the first week than all the Obama issues his whole campaign? Shame. [FIRE!]
• Suggesting this is orchestrated by the left? Doubtful. They would have saved this for after the primary. You think they want to go against Romney? No way. [smoke]

Cain:

• First of all, you gave concessions for your 999 plan. Big mistake. [not related, but it's my blog]
• You handled your press conference almost perfectly. With a few exceptions.
• Blaming the democrats for this. What-The-Frack? I can't believe those words came out of your mouth unless you have proof. You can't blindly suggest that unless you specifically state it is just a gut feeling. While there may be a difference in severity, how is that much different in principle than what you say these women are doing to you? [FIRE! FIRE! FIRE!]
• Offering to take a lie detector test. Good idea.
• Offering to take a lie detector test, then qualifying it. Bad idea. [smoke]
• Saying you had never met Mrs.Bialek, when there was a fairly detailed account of a meeting you had with her at a Tea Party event a month or so ago on a popular conservative radio talk show hours before your press conference? Either you're not telling the truth about that, or your memory sucks. Either way... [FIRE!]
• Suggesting that there may be more women coming forward? Dumb move dude. [smoke]

When it comes down to it, you believe these women, or him.

If you believe the women, there are a lot of things that don't make sense or seem a bit shady. If what they say is true, he should be investigated (I'm unsure the statute of limitations on that sort of assault) and punished. He should not be given one more second of coverage as a candidate.

If you believe him, there are a lot of things that don't make sense or seem a bit shady. If what he says is true, the women should be investigated for libel and/or slander and punished. The women should no longer be covered by the media and he should continue on campaigning.

I believe there is some truth in stereotypes and rumor. Not always THE truth, but some. Realistically, there's far too much smoke surrounding him to have my vote. Unless the air gets cleared really quickly, I think he'll lose many more.

Show me your friends...

Show me your friends, and I'll show you your future... Looking back at my life, this seems to have been true. It's not because of the friends, but by my own decisions that attracted the kinds of people I was hanging around with. Luckily I found this to be true when I was young enough to change my future. It's the same concept of "birds of a feather flock together"... So I feel if you really want to see the moral sense of someone, looking at who they associate with is very important.

PJMedia did a great job at looking at the supporters of occupy wall street so far. (List will be updated regularly)

	Communist Party USA Sources:Communist Party USA, OWS speech, The Daily Caller
	American Nazi Party Sources: Media Matters, American Nazi Party, White Honor, Sunshine State News
	Ayatollah Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran Sources: The Guardian, Tehran Times, CBS News
	Barack Obama Sources: ABC News, CBS News, ForexTV, NBC New York
	The government of North Korea Sources: Korean Central News Agency (North Korean state-controlled news outlet), The Marxist-Leninist, Wall Street Journal, Times of India
	Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam Sources: video statement (starting at 8:28), Black in America, Weasel Zippers, Philadelphia Weekly
	Revolutionary Communist Party Sources: Revolutionary Communist Party, Revolution newspaper, in-person appearance
	David Duke Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, davidduke.com
	Joe Biden Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, Mother Jones
	Hugo Chavez Sources: Mother Jones, Reuters, Examiner.com
	Revolutionary Guards of Iran Sources: Associated Press, FARS News Agency, UPI
	Black Panthers (original) Sources: in-person appearance, Occupy Oakland, Oakland Tribune
	Socialist Party USA Sources: Socialist Party USA, IndyMedia, The Daily Caller
	US Border Guard Sources: White Reference, www.usborderguard.com, Gateway Pundit, Just Another Day blog
	Industrial Workers of the World Sources: IWW web site, iww.org, in-person appearances
	CAIR Sources: in-person appearance, Washington Post, CAIR, CAIR New York
	Nancy Pelosi Sources: Talking Points Memo, video statement, ABC News, The Weekly Standard
	Communist Party of China Sources: People’s Daily (Communist Party organ), Reuters, chinataiwan.org, The Telegraph
	Hezbollah Sources: almoqawama.org, almoqawama.org (2), almoqawama.org (3), wikipedia
	9/11Truth.org Sources: 911truth.org (1), 911truth.org (2), 911truth.org (3)
	International Bolshevik Tendency Sources: bolshevik.org, Wire Magazine
	Anonymous Sources: Adbusters, The Guardian, video statement
	White Revolution Source: whiterevolution.com
	International Socialist Organization Sources: Socialist Worker, socialistworker.org, in-person appearance
	PressTV (Iranian government outlet) Sources: PressTV, wikipedia
	Marxist Student Union Sources: Marxist Student Union, Big Government, marxiststudentunion.blogspot.com
	Freedom Road Socialist Organization Sources: FightBack News, fightbacknews.org
	ANSWER Sources: ANSWER press release, ANSWER web site, Xinhua
	Party for Socialism and Liberation Sources: Liberation News (1), pslweb.org, The Daily Free Press, Liberation News (2)

Please comment and let me know what your feelings are, and if you would still like to support a movement supported by groups like this...

Great sh!t, Schiff. (Updated with pt.2&3)

http://mrctv.org/videos/peter-schiff-takes-99

http://mrctv.org/blog/peter-schiff-takes-99-part-2



http://www.mrctv.org/videos/peter-schiff-takes-99-part-3

Put your money where your whining crying mouth is...

The Hacking group Anonymous has prepared something I totally support based around the Occupy [Your Space Here] movement... A boycott. God Bless! Anonymous is using capitalist means to dictate the market - just the way it should be.

I actually hope some of these wall-streeters take part - not because I personally want any particular bank or person to fail, but because it will actually accomplish something they have been crying about for weeks.
I have money in a couple banks - one I've been very happy with and one I'm not so happy with and plan to consolidate as soon as I can. Good on these folks for following suit.

Blast from the past...

While going through some of my old posts I wanted to see how far off I was then to where we are now. Then while doing my normal rounds of reading, I found an article on Business Insider called "Here's the Chart That Will Get Obama Fired" and it sure looks like I expected it would have back in 2009.

At the time of my "There are three kinds of lies..." post, we were at the high of just over 10% - and the only excuse anyone could provide was that it was worse than their predictions had shown them. Meanwhile conservatives who told the left this would happen were what? Insane psychics?!

If I fail to understand a problem at work, and then promise that my plan is the right one to fix the issue and it gets worse, I'm fired. Hey BigO (and company), you're all about "fairness" right?

Retaining the new and in with the old... Or something...?

About a year ago I changed servers for this blog. It looks far less cool than what it use to look like, and I had really calmed down with the political posts... With that said, I had always wanted to recover many of my old thoughts and transfer them to here - which I did today.

When I originally started LLHost years ago it was about my journey through pilot training for my private pilots licence. It then became a journal for my experience with joining the Air Force. I have kept most of the posts on these items off of this new version, as I feel they are both somewhat pointless now, and those topics would be better suited for future discussions.

So some of my favorites from years past...

• *Let's Say... - Trying to ponder analogies to political policies.
• How much does a promise cost? - When our deficit topped $1T
• A Tragedy... - Me, a politician? Here's why not.
• There are three kinds of lies... -Stimulus? Inflation? Bueller?
• Three out of Five citizens agree, the healthcare bill sucks! - Fairly descriptive title
• Talkin' 'bout my generation... - Musings on generational politics
• Stan wojenny w Polsce - A Christmas history lesson

Because I had to transfer these from the old database manually, the dates are only accurate to the month and year - not the day or time. Also, many of the links in the stories will not work, but I expect to fix those over time.

Can't Afford to Care...

First of all, I've had Breaking Benjamin's "Lights Out" stuck in my head: hence the title. Great song.

Welcome to political post #1. I'll keep it light, and mostly informative...

The White House administration insists they're championing for tax cuts and real financial reform. Yet our debt continues to increase. The most recent $3.7 Trillion budget will supposedly reduce the deficit by $1.1 Trillion over ten years... Ten years, yea right. This from the same people who though paying everyone healthcare for six years and paying for it over ten was a good idea.

So we know they never hit their goals for deficit reduction - and never even come close to cutting sufficient spending - but at least we can believe them when they say they're cutting taxes....right?

"The White House is billing its $3.7 trillion budget as a package of cuts that will reduce the deficit by $1.1 trillion over ten years.

But at closer inspection this budget is as much about tax hikes as cuts.

In fact, the budget contains as much as $1.5 trillion in hikes over ten years, according to the Americans For Tax Reform."

Business Insider 

"President Obama released his budget this morning. Rather than focusing on Washington’s over-spending problem, the budget calls for higher taxes on families and small businesses to pay for even more government spending. Under the Obama budget, tax revenues will grow from 14.4% of GDP in 2011 to 20% of GDP in 2021. By comparison, the historical average is only 18% of GDP.

Add it all together, and this budget is a ten-year, $1.5 trillion tax hike over present law. That’s $1.5 trillion taken out of the economy and spent on government instead of being used to create jobs.

The “tax relief” in the budget is mostly just an extension of present law, and also some refundable credit outlay spending in the tax code. There is virtually no new tax relief relative to present law in the President’s budget."

Americans for Tax Reform

...DOH!

Here are some examples:

• Raising the top marginal income tax rate (at which a majority of small business profits face taxation) from 35% to 39.6%. This is a $709 billion/10 year tax hike
• Raising the capital gains and dividends rate from 15% to 20%
• Raising the death tax rate from 35% to 45% and lowering the death tax exemption amount from $5 million ($10 million for couples) to $3.5 million. This is a $98 billion/ten year tax hike
• Capping the value of itemized deductions at the 28% bracket rate. This will effectively cut tax deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions, property taxes, state and local income or sales taxes, out-of-pocket medical expenses, and unreimbursed employee business expenses. A new means-tested phaseout of itemized deductions limits them even more. This is a $321 billion/ten year tax hike
• New bank taxes totaling $33 billion over ten years
• New international corporate tax hikes totaling $129 billion over ten years
• New life insurance company taxes totaling $14 billion over ten years
• Massive new taxes on energy, including LIFO repeal, Superfund, domestic energy manufacturing, and many others totaling $120 billion over ten years
• Increasing unemployment payroll taxes by $15 billion over ten years
• Taxing management capital gains in an investment partnership (“carried interest”) as ordinary income. This is a tax hike of $15 billion over ten years
• A giveaway to the trial lawyers—not letting companies deduct the cost of punitive damages from a lawsuit settlement. This is a tax hike of $300 million over ten years
• Increasing tax penalties, information reporting, and IRS information sharing. This is a ten-year tax hike of $20 billion.

It reminds me of the concept of large numbers, and how humans don't really have a good perspective to understand what a trillion is. Those who do have perspective, realize how screwed we really are. In the SOTU address the big O bragged about how he would find $100 Million to cut out of a $3.5 Trillion budget. People went OOO and AHHH. I cursed and did a /facepalm. Sort of like this guy did:




Another video of that user also reminded me of another swindle by this administration. Back in November of 2009 I made a post about the bull the BigO was spewing about unemployment and the need for the stimulus package. I included this image:




Here is a good visual interpretation of this using pennies again, to help illustrate scale.



The best judge of future performance is past experience. How's that change working for most of you?

More Debt...*facepalm*

"The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it's headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO's deficit estimates.

That figure would equal 90 percent of the estimated gross domestic product in 2020, up from 40 percent at the end of fiscal 2008. By comparison, America's debt-to-GDP ratio peaked at 109 percent at the end of World War II, while the ratio for economically troubled Greece hit 115 percent last year."
CBO report: Debt will rise to 90% of GDP

So real life example... Say you and your spouse make a combined amount of $100,000 a year. First of all, your in pretty good shape income-wise compared to many. Can you imagine supporting your home while you give $90,000 of that to credit cards and paying bills with $10,000 a year? What advice would you give if you were a financial advisor to this home? Perhaps "stop buying things on credit and spending what you don't have!" Would you explain the concepts of interest and inflation? The country is in the same state as this home, but the morons in congress and our Presidents (yes, that's plural) keep saying "eh, we'll get more credit - we're good for it!" Unfortunately, our "banks", primarily China and Japan, are catching on.

Most people can barely live with the income they keep after the current taxes. I can't imagine living on %10 of my income, so why is it ok for our governmnet to?

These are our leaders... *facepalm*

There are a bunch of stories I haven't brought here yet - but this one makes me *facepalm* yet again.

This story is one I've been expecting to see for a while. Virginia is getting in on it too.

51, 60...What's the difference!

Lots of numbers on LLH this week... more to come in the next few days too.

With all this talk about reconciliation I figure I would go straight to the man in charge to see what his feelings about it are. Luckily, someone already did it for me.




WHEW! Glad there are no special rules, exceptinos, illegal alterations of code, or unethical practices being used on this healthcare issue.

Yeah, we really dodged a bullet here...
/sarcasm

I'm proven wrong... YEA!

I've mentioned in the past my feeling towards my generation and their general lack of political awareness. (or at least common sense) It seems I may have jumped the gun on that notion though.

CNN reports that at least %60, and possibly up to %80 of attendees of CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) were expected to be under 30. As for actual numbers, I've seens stats say between %48 and %54 of attendees were between 18 and 25. That surprises me. I would have been expecting numbers in the teens, or lower.

How many accidents have YOU had this year?

Vice President Biden's motorcade has been in three accidents in the last three months - one resulting in a death.

When mentioning this to my wife she had the most logical reply...
"Damn, our insurance would drop us like a bad habbit"

yup.

Another amusing justification...

Yet again, I see some of the things I write about or reference in other, more reputable, articles...

That particular article is about the economical lies the Big O has spewed, and offers a simple solution to INSTANTLY CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF!


On another note: I was in the ER yesterday for a bad reaction to some medication. My health insurance seems to be working just fine.

Baaaaa!

It seems like most of the political things I'm annoyed with and write about are the same things that others write about. (1|2) My quick posts are just less refined so take less time, hence why it's usually here before on the news or official opinion places.

If I made my writings and opinions based on other people opinions I would feel pretty much like a sheep. With that said, Mr.Gibby (Robert Gibbs, that is) is speaking so time to pay attention for myself!

Well the next big deal is going to be the cockiness of this A-hole. Don't misunderstand me... if he was providing true change and bringing together the country and congress I feel he would be justified in making an off-the-cuff comment like he did. But what collaboration has he shown? What issues has he helped mend between liberals and conservatives? in Gibby's breifing today he even discussed how divided the country is despite the president vowing to fix that.

*ring*ring*
Hello? Leg store? yes, I need something for the Big O to stand on...

Vgh...

In an interview to ABCs George Stephanpoulos the big O had one specific thing to say about the Scott Brown win that irked me...

"Here's my assessment of not just the vote in Massachusetts, but the mood around the country: the same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office [...] People are angry and they are frustrated. Not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years."
-President Obama Says Voter Anger, Frustration Key to Republican Victory in Massachusetts Senate

Huh? So let me get this straight. People are so pissed at the Bush administration that they voted in a republican who is against most of the big O's beliefs? How delusional is that? THIS IS OUR PRESIDENT? I bet if Coakley was elected he would have said the same exact words. Reread them replacing Browns name with Coakley and see how they can be interchanged. It happens all the time.

My next big gripe with this is that in at least two of his speeches I've specifically heard him say something along the lines of "We need to stop blaming other people for our problems and take responsibility". Yet I've lost count of how many times he has blamed the Bush administration for his bad decisions. Yes, you inherited a crappy economy, but guess what: YOURE BAD DECISIONS ARE MAKING IT WORSE, NOT BETTER!

To quote a great man... "Oh you are nuts. N-V-T-S - nuts!"

Proof of lies...

The heritage foundation has a pretty good article on many of the Big O's promises versus reality. The topics include the individual mandate, not losing your doctor, lower healthcare premiums, a reduced deficit, and tax payer funded abortions. The one that makes me most upset (if I HAD to choose one) would be the lie stating no family making less than $250,000 would see a dime in tax increases. Primarily because it was a huge promise, affects everyone poor or middleclass, and also essentially means he was going to reduce spending. They get around this wording by taxing employers and thinking it won't trickle down to individuals.

No Tax Hikes for People Making Less than $250,000: On February 24, 2009, President Barack Obama promised the American people: “if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” Speaker Pelosi believes the Senate bill’s excise tax on insurance plans breaks this promise, and she is right. But it is not the only way that Obamacare shatters the President’s no-middle-class-tax-hike pledge. There are a slew of new taxes in the Senate bill, many of which will hit the middle class, including taxes on medical devices, tanning beds, insurance user fees, and brand name drugs (not to mention the individual mandate which is enforced by a tax or the employer mandate which kills jobs and punishes the poor).
-Obama’s Other Broken Health Care Promises

As I hope you know, currently democrats from both the House and Senate are deliberating and trying to create a bill that THEY can all agree on to send to the Big O. Oh yeah, and they're hiding while doing it.



Remember all that? Even Pelosi did.



Of course in nearly the same breath as saying that, she says "There has never been a more open process".

How can you deal with people who refuse to answer questions and live in reality? It reminds me of a T-Shirt slogan I've seen sported by Mythbuster Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own!"

Kick these people out of office: all of them. *facepalm*

A comment on my comment.

In my last post, I made a quick update in the comments when I looked something up for a friend...

I just looked up the tax a buddy will have to pay because he chooses to not have medical insurance. It's in Title 5, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart A, SEC 501, Part VIII, Subpart A, SEC59B. wow.
The answer is 2.5% of income, BTW. That's right, you will now be required by law to buy a product or face a punishment. This is the first time this has ever happened in America. *facepalm*

...and today there is a story about how some organizations and lawmakers will be challenging this concept as unconstitutional.

On the first issue, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., on Tuesday renewed the call to examine the constitutionality of whether the federal government can require Americans to purchase a product. "I don't believe Congress has the legal or moral authority to force this mandate on its citizens," Ensign said in a statement, raising what's known as a "constitutional point of order." Such procedural challenges are rare and typically lead to a vote. The non-profit Fund for Personal Liberty, as well as a Virginia-based group called the 10th Amendment Foundation, already have threatened to file suit in federal court over this issue if the health care bill passes.

The Constitution allows Congress to tax, borrow, spend, declare war, raise an army and regulate commerce, among other things. Proponents of the insurance mandate point to the Commerce Clause in arguing that Congress is within its rights to require health insurance and dismiss such potential legal challenges. But foes say the across-the-board requirement is too broad.
"I personally do not believe the Congress has the authority to enact an individual mandate requiring a person to purchase a product from a private seller," said Kent Masterson Brown, lead counsel with The Fund for Personal Liberty. "I don't think the power is there. This is not regulating anything." He said his group would be joined by the Washington Legal Foundation in filing suit against the health care bill.
Even though Obama argues that the mandate is similar to laws requiring drivers to obtain auto insurance, opponents cite several key differences. First, the auto insurance mandate is avoidable, since anyone who doesn't want to pay doesn't have to drive. Second, auto insurance is mandated in large part so that drivers carry liability insurance to cover damages to other people and cars -- not themselves. Third, auto insurance regulation occurs at the state level.
-Health Care Bill Could Face String of Legal Challenges

Three out of Five citizens agree, the health care bill sucks!

60-40. That ratio represents two things. First, it is the ratio of votes that helped move the new healthcare plan through the senate. Second, it is the approximate ratio of people who oppose the bill to those who support.

Here's some stats from Rusmussen to back that up... (Week of Dec19th)
-55% opposed, 41% favor (Just 19% Strongly Favor the plan while 45% are Strongly Opposed)
-Senior citizens: 60% opposed, 33% favor
-32% of dems, 80% of rep, and 64% not affiliated with any party oppose the health care plan
-57% say passing nothing would be better than passing this, with 54% saying they will be worse off if it passes.
-53% say it will most likely lead to lower quality of care
-58% say it will drive the cost of care up
-66% say free market principals would reduce healthcare costs more than government
-Most adults under 30 approve of this plan, while a majority of every other age group oppose

Representatives have accepted what essentially equates to bribes in order to pass this. The public does not want this by a wide margin. It is unconstitutional to require someone to buy something just for living. These representatives purposely hide the bill, spend less time discussing it than most other bills, and fail to even read and understand everything that is in it. The goals outlined are either not met with this new legislation, or can be achieved with far less cost in the free-market system. This does not address tort reform, inter-state sales of insurance products, or massive fraud and financial shortfalls in the current government run medical systems. We are going to start paying immediately for this, but won't see results for 4 years. Ten years of payment will support six years of this healthcare. The majority of healthcare professionals fear this reform. Lawyers love this reform.
So, assuming representatives truly represent the American people, why and how did this pass?