http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061119/ap_on_go_co/military_draft

You have to be kidding me!

What the hell? Since when did economists, especially 650, even think about this?

I have become disgusted. The public school I go to puts books in its english cirriculum that are blatantly anti-American. That's fine that people hate America. But those who have a rather positive view of America deserve to say their point of view too. Right now, kids are barraged with stories of how much America fucks the poor, uses racism and prejudice to make people worse off, and how Americans' greed corrupts them.

I think kids at my school should hear the other point of view. The one that says that America has done a lot for a lot of people, especially immigrants (a common theme in the books, though EVERY SINGLE ONE of them shows immigrants worse off when they come to America). As a result, I am writing a letter to my school board asking for a more diverse set of books for the cirriculum. Excuse me if this information has been vague so far, I am going to point out every single thing I am talking about in my letter.

However, I also want to include a reccomended set of books that I might encourage to be included as a solution. Any ideas? The theme for my year is American history, so keep that in mind. Also, they ahve to be semi-classical works of literature. Larry Elder's Ten Things You Can't Say in America might be good, but it doesn't really fit what they are looking for. I haven't thought about it much, but so far all I have come up with is an Ayn Rand book, because she loved America and especially capitalism...Any ideas?

So I was in an argument today. About abortion. First of all, I don't want to hear anyone's stnace on abortion. No one's. I don't care who you think you are. I think one thing we can all agree on here is that the government should absolutely not pay for it. People who hold the opinion that it is murder should not have to waste their tax dollars for it. Then my argumentee brought up that people who are against the War in Iraq have to pay for that. I do see it as a rather similar situation, yet at the same time, it isn't. Isn't national security much different than something like abortion. To those who are pro-life, abortion is the result of irreposibility, sex out of marriage, and above all, murder. I know a lot of people violently opposed to Iraq, but do the arguments really stand up as equal?

No matter what your stance on abortion or Iraq, doesn't it make more sense that the government has a right for Iraq because it is for national security? Yes, it is pre-emptive, and not necessarily national defense, but does this mean that the government cannot tax for any sort of military action? Someone will always be opposed to military action no matter what.

Now, I'm sure some of you are so anarcho-capitalist that you think the military shouldn't even be paid for by the state/ However, I'd like to ask youg uys your opinion on this, and what you would have said to this person. For me, it seems much more reasonable for taxpayers to pay for the military than for something that really is a convenience.

After all, if someone was opposed to the court system or the cotton uniforms police wear, don't they still have to pay for it? I believe in some sort of social contract, unlike complete anarchists. However, I draw the line at the government enforcing property, protecting life, and protecting from fraud (securing free markets, etc.). Give me your retort... 

When communists march, people usually object but don't necessarily see them as evil. My school, for instance, has a communist club. No objection. Freedom of speech, blah blah blah. They have a right to be a club. they do. But what if the Hitler Appreciation League wanted to start a club? I can't imagine what people would think. Now, let us all agree that Facism and Communism are equally, just, well, awful. Communism even killed more, but that could be because it was just more successful in terms of spreading to other countries. Yet, how come people, especially in the media, see facism as evil, but not communism? Is it some sort of post-Cold War reaction? Do people not realize how evil communism is? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to support Facism, but com ooooooonnnnnn!

So tickets for this concert I wanted to go to went on sale at 10:00. I clicked to get two right away. Ticketmaster froze while I was putting in my info. The government needs to make laws against this. Regulate dammit! Since I am one person who was unhappy with this process, the government must legislate to make me happy at the expense of others!

By the way, anyone got two tickets they want to sell me for June 8th in Toronto to the greatest Statist band of all time: Radiohead?

Q: Why do bureaucrats spend so much on public education? 

A: Because if the electorate was educated they wouldn't get elected.

Pop Quiz: Working tirelessly and giving the fruits of your labor to someone other than yourself or your family (voluntarily) is known as:

a. Slavery

b. Communism

c. A Bureaucracy

d. The whole world in about fifty years, give or take.

e. All of the Above

All government regulations are sooooo necessary...

Sfgate.com reports the following quote from Sen. Clinton:

Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you

and continues:

We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.

If social security is so good, why can't we opt out of it? Didn't FDR say he wanted it privatized by the 50's? Why should we pay fucking 12.5% of our income to the largest, yes, the largest, government-run program in the world, if it's supposed to yield the same amount? Everyone says it's someone else's problem, but we need to stop it now. It is crap. I was reading the wikipedia entry for it and I noticed it's just stupid. Some U.N. charter claimed that people had the "right" to social security. Bullshit. I hate socialism. sorry, I'm just angry.

Washington DC - "You know, I was on my way to a strip...uhh...to church yesterday, when I realized that people could turn right legally when it was a red light. This made traffic speed up for everybody involved." Bill Frist (R-TN) observed to the media last Thursday. Senator Frist, among the hundreds of millions of Americans known as "motorists," recognized that right turners speed up their lane by decreasing the number of drivers who need to go straight or left, thus decreasing the people who need to wait for a green light to go.

As a result, the Republican Party, reaching a bipartisan deal with Democrats, meaning that everyone agrees since everyone is one or the other, persuaded the President to add tax incentives for drivers who turn right. This incentive, to be included in the 2007 budget, aims to speed up traffic significantly. "We look to encourage people to turn right instead of going their usual convenient way of turning left or going straight. I don't know why we haven't thought of this before!" Sen. Rockefeller (D-W. Va) said.

Traffic experts disagree on the actual result of the incentives. Jack Abramoff, with no relation to Washington lobbyists, who claims loosely to be an expert on the case, stated that "This will increase traffic flow, thus decreasing fuel consumption, which means less dependency on OPEC and foreign oil. If you don't sponsor this, you like terrorists. Do you like terrorists?"

Jerome Poop, professor at Harvard with a doctorate in intersection engineering, dissagreed. "This will just make people take three right turns when they could have just turned left. Either that will happen, or people will freeload of this sytem and make a living off of turning right."

Congress diagrees. In fact, they were so excited to reccomend this to the President that they missed one, well, mino detail. How they're going to keep track of it. John Kerry (D-MA) supports the idea that people have security cameras installed in their car by law to record every time they turn right. Sen. Frist (R-TN) diagrees. He believes people should just record it themselves and put it on their income tax return. "I trust the people to tell the truth. I trust them so much, I take about half of their paycheck and put it towards broken down programs. I trust them so much, I don't even let them decide what to do with their bodies or trust them with what language to use. I am the American congressman."

Washington, D.C.-Responding to lobyist group SPOA (Southpaws of America), congress passed a resolution adding left handedness to the status of "minority" in affirmative action programs. The government hopes this willend the centuries old discrimination against people who primarily use their left hand. "It is about time the government did something about discrimination in the workplace against left handed workers. People like Tim Smith, who works at this paper store down the street from my office will now have jobs because of things like this."-Sen. Kennedy (D-MA).

Tim Smith, the man Senatr Kennedy was speaking of, had this to say: "Huh? I dn't get it. Is this a joke? How would this help me get a job? I already have a job. I don't think my boss even knows I'm left handed."

Sen. Will Compernolle (L-IL) was the lone dissenting vote in the senate. He reasoned that "Left handedness isn't a disability, a race, an ethnicity, or anythnig that has ever been discriminated against or probably will ever be."

Barbara Boxer (D-CA) thought otherwise. "I remember when I was a kid, I knew this other kid. His name was John...er...Jim...no! It was James. He was going out for the baseball team and was a left handed pitcher. He didn't make the team. Now, we all know he didn't make it because of his minority status. But, you wanna know the reason the coach gave him?! He said that they didn't need anymore left handed pitchers on his team! As if there was a difference between a left handed and right handed pitcher! Pish posh! Thanks to this bill, things like that won't happen."

Randy Johnson, local weird looking guy and Cy Young award winning pitcher, was the only person who testified in front of congress against the bill. "I am a left handed pitcher. I think this is funny. What Senator Boxer and other dumbasses who agree with her don't realize, is that there is a fundamental difference between a left handed pitcher and a right handed one. Anyone who has watched a baseball game knows this."

Many in congress were sent thank you cards from lefties around the globe. Things such as left handed guitars, left handed can openers, and other things found at Ned Flanders' Leftorium were included in the gifts.

Barack Obama (D-IL) loved the bill so much, he decided to sponsor it. "I like this bill!" the senator exclaimed.

The bill, among other things, includes a $500 fine for all employers who give a job to a right handed applicant when a left handed applicant is ready available and applying. As for those who are ambidexterous, they can reap the benefits of both sides.

He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.

Thomas Paine

Amen. 

Did she say these things because the Libertarian Party was fairly underdeveloped at the time or what? I also heard she voted for FDR at one point. FDR!!!!

Ok. So everyone here can agree that FDR was the best president next to Johnson.

I got into a discussion with someone who said Eleanor Roosevelt was their hero. I tried telling them that she was rather sympathetic to Stalin and some of his practices, seeing as she and FDR completely ignored people telling them that Uncle Joe oppressed religious freedom (the concentration camps werent known at the time).

Anyone have any evidence showing that Eleanor or FDR was sympathetic to Stalin, I know I read it somewhere, I just don't know where.

So I've got a political myspace blog. My liberal friends hate it. I haven't really posted in it lately.

http://www.myspace.com/federalistpapers

Anyways, just look through them if you want and back me up, showing m dumbass friends that the government isn't that cool after all.

In this report, which is supposed to be done by a nonpartisan proganization trying to make sure the media is fair, there is a ton of ripping on Stossel. No one seems to support him. His book is incredible. What makes me trust him more than these people? He has very little reason to lie and deceive people. I think he is a genuinely nice person. Also, he started off as a toe tag liberal and became a libertarian. He wouldn't discredit liberal ideas that he himself had unless the liberal ideas he used to have were false. Something obviously changed his mind to make him a libertarian. He wouldn't just "decide" to change and then "mold the facts" like some of these people claim.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&media_outlet_id=19

I go to a great school. Very rich in terms of students and money. John Stossel, Ann Margaret, Donald Rumsfeld, and Charleton Heston are alumni. They did something that really pissed me off.

Apparently, teachers were going around myspaces and finding pictures that kids posted of them with beer or pot and suspended them. first of all, none of their business. Second of all, where does the school's involvement occur?

Something I am against but can see the school's place in it is another thing. Since for Facebook kids have to submit their school email addresses, the school does have a place in getting them in trouble, or at least the right. So some kids made a facebook named "I hate [someone at our school]." these kids were suspended and were threatened with expulsion. Sure, the school can techincally do this because the kisd were using the school email addresses, but let's be reasonable, the school really just wanted to police people whenever they could within their jurisdiction. In the words of John Stossel, Give me a break.

My mom thinks I hate the poor and don't want to to help them and just care about myself because I am against minimum wage. Any ideas? Rember, the whole, "government doesn't ahve the right to do this" won't be a very convincing argument. I've already told her about the near unanimous economic support and the whole wage competition, but she won't budge? Ideas?

Seeing as we, Progressives Against Progress, are against the development of anything that does not promote the equality of mankind, we support legislation to significantly decrease funding towards education, and, in addition, regulate the amount of money families can spend on private or public education. It is obvious that we as humans are closest to each other in terms of intelligence at the earliest of ages. It is also well known, after thousands upon thousands of years, that education merely promotes those smarter than others to a higher class and leaves the dumb behind. We must learn from history, as education has merely gotten humanity farther away from our true natural state of being at birth: uneducated. Somewhere in the Declaration of Independence, there says something about equality. We as PAP love that document as much as we love the constitution. We follow it to the letter. For example, did you know that you're allowed to kill someone in the court of law within 24 hours under something called habeas CORPus? Well, anyways, to be truly equal, we must not learn anything. Our eventual goal is the complete aoblishment of education altogether as well as any sort of learning or self-improvement involved with life. We hope to at some point reach the point where we will all be equal in terms of intelligence, and we feel that the only way to reach this goal is to abolish all forms of learning altogether. History has taught us one thing: education is just the rich monopolizing society to seperate classes even more. From what I've read on the Communist Party USA's website, that's all that's come out of it. Legislation is needed now so that working families don't have to decide between a Mercedes an a BMW. Education must stop now. The goal of equality is within our grasp. Eventually, everyone will be equally dumb, and no one will be able to communicate with each other. Furthermore, we support legislation that will put cameras into homes of everybody in the world to make sure that people don't learn on their own or teach their children secretly, much like those antagonists did in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. If there's anything that can be learned from that book, it's that we should burn more books and get rid of everything related to curiousity and knowledge.

Maryland Forces Wal-Mart yo Spend More on Health

I just don't get it. Regulating cable. I don't get it. When you buy cable, you are voluntarily funding something, a product you went out of your way to purchase. When the government censors cable, they are deciding something that they have no grounds over whatsoever. whatsoever. When you buy MTV, you're buying that. You WANT to see all that crap or whatever.

I just think the world is coming to an end very soon.

WASHINGTON, DC - With a 8-1 vote, a Supreme Court ruling today set an extremely strict precedent on the way parents can raise their children. Seeing as how the judicial branch is meant to make laws, the court set forth new guidelines on how much television children can watch, as well as certain eating habits. The first part, pertaining to television, received very little objection. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who kinda almost sorta tends to be a liberal judge, said that, "Parents just can't be trusted today. I voted yes on this ruling because parents who let their kids watch television instead of making them do homework are a menace to society. Because I think this, I have the power to change the whole country."  read more »

WASHINGTON, DC - Congress overwhelmingly passed a $28.6 billion initiative "making sure that the market is equal at all levels," paving the way for government subsidies for lemonade stands. "Some street corners are just busier than others and to make sure that every kid goes to bed with an ample supply of baseball cards, we need to make sure there is a level playing field," said Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA). "Kids should not have to decide between their lunch money and comic books. The economic injustice must be stopped," the senator continued.  read more »