Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category




“You can’t have your privacy violated if you don’t know your privacy is violated”. Those were the words out of the mouth of Mike Rogers, the chairmen of the House Oversight Committee of the United States Intelligence agencies. This ridiculous and frightening quote was said during a hearing about concerns American University College of Law professor Stephen Vladeck had over the NSA surveillance program. Mike Rogers has made it clear on many occasions how he supports the NSA surveillance program and feels the American people are on a need to know basis.

Thanks to Edward Snowden, the former NSA contractor who leaked several top secret NSA documents to various media outlets. American citizens now know that their privacy is being violated. This has infuriated the Congressman, who has implied that Snowden may have been helped by the Russian Government. Saying “I believe there’s questions to be answered there. I don’t think it was a gee-whiz luck event that he ended up in Moscow under the handling of the FSB” when asked by David Gregory if he thought the Russians helped Edward Snowden. Rogers has done everything in his power to label Snowden as a traitor, who’s “acts of betrayal place America’s military men and women at greater risk” and will have “lethal consequences for out troops in the field”. All of this is fear mongering at it’s best, as there is no evidence, what so ever that Snowden was or has been working with Russia, and that any of out troops are at greater risk.

Mike Rogers has a way of ginning up fear so he can continue his agenda. Which makes him very dangerous to American citizens and their rights. One example of this was a short exchange I had with him on Twitter the other day:

The “changes” that Rogers is talking about in Obama’s Drone Policy was just lip service for those who are opposed to the drone program. There was no actual policy change for targeted strikes. On December 11th of 2013 a wedding party in Yemen was struck by a drone, killing 12 civilians. Yet Rep. Mike Rogers still thinks that so called “self-imposed red tape” is limiting drone strikes, and making The United States less safe. What the Congressmen doesn’t understand is that drone strikes are creating more individuals looking to attack and plot against U.S. interests. In a report by The Washington Post it shows that “U.S. drone strikes is stirring increasing sympathy for al-Qaeda-linked militants and driving tribesman to join a network linked to terrorist plots against the United States”. In the article a businessman whose two brothers were killed in a U.S. strike in March is quoted saying “These attacks are making people say, ‘We believe now that al-Qaedea is on the right side’”.

Just the other day on February 10th, two new revelations became known about the U.S. Drone policy. Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill released a report about “The NSA’s Secret Role in The U.S. Assassination Program” on their new news website The Intercept ( In the report:

“a former drone operator for the military’s Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) who also worked with the NSA, the agency often identifies targets based on controversial metadata analysis and cell-phone tracking technologies. Rather than confirming a target’s identity with operatives or informants on the ground, the CIA or the U.S. military then orders a strike based on the activity and location of the mobile phone a person is believed to be using.”

The former drone operator goes into further detail about how these strikes are conducted, using “the SIM card or handset of a suspected terrorist’s mobile phone” to “geolocate” a suspected terrorist. He makes it clear that “that the technology has been responsible for taking out terrorists and networks of people facilitating improvised explosive device attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan.”. “But he also states that innocent people have “absolutely” been killed as a result of the NSA’s increasing reliance on the surveillance tactic” Yet, Rep. Mike Rogers is furious over the fact that the American people know now what the government is doing in their name, with their tax dollars.

The other news on the U.S. Drone program that broke the other day by the Associated Press, was that the Obama Administration is weighing the decision if they should launch a drone attack on a U.S. citizen. The target is an “American citizen and suspected member of al-Qaida who is allegedly planning attacks on U.S. targets overseas” If the Obama Administration goes through with this attack, this would be the fifth U.S. Citizen killed by a drone strike under President Obama’s term. Under Obama’s new “policy”, American’s suspected of terrorism overseas can only be killed by the military and not the C.I.A.. This is the “red-tape” the Mike Rogers is referring to when he Tweeted me. The new policy isn’t about how it is legal/constitutional to kill a U.S. citizen, without trial. The new policy and “red tape” is about the method we kill a U.S. citizen.

Yet, Mike Rogers continues to spout out lies, and spin the truth. In the Academy Award nominated documentary “Dirty Wars”, Jeremy Scahill shows first hand what the effects of U.S. drone strikes have on the people of Yemen. Graphic images of women and children who have been killed by U.S drone strikes is disturbing, and eye opening. The effects it has on the villagers left in the destruction is heart breaking. One of the villagers says to Scahill “If children are terrorist we are all terrorist” while showing him photos of the aftermath of a drone strike, which killed women and children.

Mike Rogers is the Chairman of the committee that is suppose to over see all the U.S. intelligence committees, and says the U.S Drone Policy has too much “red tape”. Since becoming Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee in 2011, Mike Rogers has received over $162,000 in campaign contributions from drone manufacturers ( Any reasonable person would consider this a conflict of interest, but not in U.S. politics. Mike Rogers has a history of defending policies in the sake of campaign contributions. Back in March of 2013 Rogers was the biggest supporter of CISPA, a bill that would make American’s personal data accessible to the U.S. Government by setting up a knowledge-sharing agreement with private companies. Rogers tweeted, and then deleted a link to a story about how CISPA supporters, had received 15 times more cash from pro-CISPA groups compared to the opposition had received from anti-CISPA groups.

Mike Rogers’ wife Kristi Clemens Rogers, who is a former CEO of Aegis LLC, a security defense contractor company. Aegis would of benefited from CISPA, but it was voted down in the Senate, and threaten to be vetoed by President Obama. As CEO of Aegis, Mrs. Rogers was “focused on business development and new-market-entry relationship building for Aegis LLC and the worldwide Aegis Group, drawing on her established global network of relationships with key stakeholders in U.S. federal civilian, defense and intelligence agencies, foreign governments and leading private sector companies to pursue and secure new business opportunities in Latin and South America, the Caribbean, the Middle East and Africa, and to land U.S. defense and intelligence contracts.” Mrs. Rogers now works for Manatt, a lobbying firm were she is focused on “executive-level problem solving in the defense and homeland security sectors”. So you can safely say, Mr and Mrs. Rogers have a lot of stock invested in defense contractors success. Once again, any reasonable person would consider this a conflict of interest for Mike Rogers.

On February 4th, Mike Rogers finally went off the deep end, by accusing Glenn Greenwald of “selling his access to information” and calling him a “thief” and an “accomplice” to Snowden. Glenn Greenwald is the journalist who broke the story on the NSA snooping program based on the documents leaked by the whistle blower Edward Snowden. Mike Rogers is once again trying to protect his cronies in the defense and intelligence community, by threatening to imprison a journalist who has exposed them. Rogers is also sending a message to other journalist that he will not let The Constitution get in his way. Greenwald has not broken any laws by reporting on the NSA’s unconstitutional program, but he has angered those who benefit from it.

Mike Rogers is a very dangerous man, and his actions put American’s safety and liberties at risk. By calling for more Drone Strikes, which create blow back and new enemies toward the U.S.. Saying “red tape” let’s individuals who want to harm U.S. interest remain free, when the drone program is already responsible for countless civilian deaths. He does not argue the fact that we are killing our own citizens, he is arguing the fact that there is too much “red tape” preventing us killing our own citizens. He wants to keep American’s in the dark about their privacy being violated, labels journalist as criminals, who should be prosecuted. His campaign contributions mold his policies and his voting record. Mike Rogers puts his personal gain over the well being of the American people by supporting programs which are unpopular and dangerous to our country. Mike Rogers is the man who is in charge of overseeing the Intelligence Committees, when he should be the one being overseen. Mike Rogers is a man who gets angry at the fact that there is “red-tape” preventing the United States from killing one of it’s own citizens, without trial, whenever it feels someone is guilty. That kind of mindset, and ideology is what makes Mike Rogers The Most Dangerous Man in Congress.


Back in March when National Intelligence Director James Clapper appeared before the Senate, he was asked directly, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly.” We now know that he was lying under oath to congress and the American people. What actions will you take against James Clapper for committing a serious felony of perjury? Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI3) has already gone on record saying: “It now appears clear that the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, lied under oath to Congress and the American people. Members of Congress can’t make informed decisions on intelligence issues when the head of the intelligence community willfully makes false statements. Perjury is a serious crime. Mr. Clapper should resign immediately.”

Since now we know he has lied, he has come out and apologized saying “Thus my response was clearly erroneous — for which I apologize.” Is that acceptable for committing perjury and lying under oath. If it is acceptable for the National Intelligence Director to lie under oath and just apologize, what kind of precedent are you setting by not taking legal action towards him? Will it be acceptable for future heads of government agencies to lie to Members of Congress and the American people? Will there be an investigation of James Clapper? I hope to hear back from you soon.

Dear journalists, reporters and media outlets,

I am writing you this letter as concerned American citizen. The election is less than 40 days away, and once again Americans are going to “choose” who will be the President. I have been watching all the coverage of this election on CNN, FOX, ABC, CBS, MSNBC etc. I have been deeply concerned about many thing that are being ignored by a majority of our news outlets. The economy is in the dumps and everyone knows it; there is no way of hiding it. This seems to be the main issue in the election, and for good reason. We are $16 trillion in debt and counting, unemployment has been at 8% plus for months, and the cost of living continues to rise. Yet the one thing everyone keeps ignoring is that under the cover of the horrible economy, Americans have been losing freedoms. When George W. Bush was President it was on the news every day and night: The Patriot Act, the wars in the Middle East, and the fact that the US openly used torture against its detainees. Ever since Barack Obama has become President, however, it seems that everyone has just ignored the fact that our civil liberties are being attacked daily. It seems just because we have a Democratic President, the media chooses to ignore these issues.

On December 31, 2011, under the fanfare of the New Year, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012. It is basically a bill that funds our military and all of our overseas adventures. There is a new NDAA each year, but this most recent one contains some sketchy provisions, hidden in sections 1021 and 1022 of the document. These two sections give the president the right to detain anyone he feels is a terrorist, or is associated with terrorist. It also state that he can detain them indefinitely without trial. Originally President Obama said he would veto it, but that never happened. He also “promised” he would never use it to detain American citizens, How is that Guantanamo Bay promise going? When it was first signed it got some media attention for about a week, and then you all got bored with it. US District Court Judge Katherine Forrest made a permanent injunction that bans indefinite military detention of Americans without charge. Well, less than 24 hours later the Obama administration issued an appeal to fight to keep that power. This fight is going on right now in the courts, while you, the media, focus on fluff issues to fill up your time slots.

So our Democratic, Nobel Peace Prize-winning President now has the power to (1) spy on US citizens without warrants (Patriot Act), (2) kill American citizens without due process (Anwar al-Aulaqi & “Kill List”), and (3) detain anyone suspected of being a terrorist or supporting terrorist indefinitely and without due process (NDAA). Yet you, the media, have dropped the ball on this, or just have chosen to ignore it. You have FOX News focusing on Obama being a raging liberal; you have MSNBC focusing on Romney being Thurston Howell, III; you have ABC and CBS just ignoring these abuses of power. The American people rely on the mainsteam media to make informed decision when it comes to electing Presidents. But now we are forced to rely on Twitter, YouTube, WikiLeaks, and bloggers to find out the truth. You prop Barack Obama up as some kind of uniter of the people. Tell that to the people of Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, and Afghanistan, who are bombed by predator drones. Their families torn apart by bombs being dropped on their villages by our President. Barack Obama launches a campaign that states “If You See Something, Say Something , yet he has held Bradley Manning, and American soldier, for over 800 days without trial, in harsh conditions, because he said something when he saw our military killing innocent civilians, and journalist. I guess the “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign doesn’t pertain to our government. Our government has deemed the founder of WikiLeaks Julian Assange and WikiLeaks an “Enemy of the State”. These are people who are doing the job you be doing, and now they are considered similar threats to Al-Qaeda. Julian Assange has been seeking refuge in an Ecuadorian Embassy in fear of what the US government will do to him for informing the American people about the truth.

You, the media-from ABC News all the way down to my local newspaper-have let us down. You stay on the script that is given to you, and you fear asking the real questions. There are a few true journalist still out there: Ben Swann, Amber Lyon, Glenn Greenwald, David Seaman, and several U-Steam and YouTube reporters. These men and women are doing your job, for little to no money, with little exposure, and lot of pressure on them from our government. Yet, you sit in your comfy chair, with you nice wardrobe and ramble on bullshit about what is going on in the world. Why is the truth so scary for you to report? Do you think you know what’s best for the American people? Do we not deserve to hear about the war crimes of our President, and the innocent civilians being killed in the Middle East, about how we are constantly under surveillance? What about the human rights crimes being committed in Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc? These governments were propped up by US foreign aid and weapons sales, and now people are being slaughtered in the streets. It is a disgrace that you have given this President a free pass, and it is unfair to the American people and to the world. Every single Senator, Representative, and President (and candidate) should be grilled on why they think the President should have the power to detain US citizens without due process. Why is it OK for the President to have a secret “Kill List” that has Americans on it? Why is it OK to keep the American public under constant surveillance, and forced to go through TSA check points? Why are these questions and more not being asked to those in power?

So my simple request for you journalist, reporters, and media outlets: Start doing you job!


Troy Frederick Jurimas

Written by Troy Frederick Jurimas & Edited by Michael Roy Fisher

Bradley Manning is a 24 year old U.S. Army solider from Oklahoma, who is facing life in prison because he spoke out against what he believed to be wrong. An openly gay solider who had access to classified networks for long periods of time. He believed that files and videos that he had access to deserved to be in the public domain. He said he hoped the material would lead to “worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms”. Manning leaked this information to Wiki Leaks so the public could really know what was actually going on in these wars that cost millions of deaths, and billions of dollars.

Manning was arrested on May 29, 2010, on July 29, 2010 Manning was moved from Kuwait to the Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. He was held for 9 months as a “maximum custody detainee”. During those 9 months he stayed in a 6x12ft cell, with no windows for 23 Hrs a day. He was denied sleep between the hours of 5am and 8pm, no sheets for his bed, no pillow, and forced to sleep in his boxers, which resulted in server chaffing of the skin. Frustrated with his treatment Manning made a sarcastic comment to one of the guards saying if he wanted to hurt himself, he could do so “with the elastic waistband of his boxers or his flip flops”. After that comment Manning was forced to sleep naked, and stand in front of his cell naked every morning.

Manning’s treatment was brought to the public’s attention and there was immediate outrage. In March of 2011 State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley speaking to a small audience called Manning’s treatment “ridiculous, and counterproductive, and stupid”. This caught headlines, and at a Press Conference a few days later, Jake Tapper from ABC News asked President Obama if he agreed with P.J Crowley’s statement. Obama responded by saying “I asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures that have been taken in terms of his confinement are appropriate and are meeting our basic standards.” “They (the pentagon) assure me that they are. I can’t go into details about some of their concerns, but some of this has to do with Private Manning’s safety as well.” A few days after that press conference P.J Crowley resigned as State Department spokesman.

In April of 2011 during a fundraiser Obama was asked again about Manning’s treatment, he responded by saying: “I can’t conduct diplomacy on an open source,” Obama told an unidentified questioner. “That’s not how … the world works. If I was to release stuff, information that I’m not authorized to release, I’m breaking the law … We’re a nation of laws. We don’t individually make our own decisions about how the laws operate … He broke the law.” Mind you this statement was made a year before the Manning trial would actually begin. So now according to Obama the Commander-in-Chief, Manning broke the law and he is guilty before he even stands trial before the military courts.

It is an outrage that a President like Obama who ran on a platform of ending torture, and transparency would allow this to happen. And, when confronted about what was going on he would just respond with “He broke the Law” and “his confinement are appropriate and are meeting our basic standards.”. Glad to see “Our” basic standards are what Obama considered torture when he was running for President in 2008, and  in which he bashed former President Bush of doing to alleged foreign terrorist. Now “Our basic standards” are allowing torture of an American Citizen, who didn’t even stand trial. If this would of happened today, under the NDAA 2012 (which Obama signed into law 1/1/12) Bradley Manning or anyone who speaks out against war crimes, or wrong doing by their government would be arrested and detained indefinitely with no right to a trial. You would just disappear and your voice would be silenced.

On October 21, 2011 Obama makes a big announcement: “After taking office, I announced a new strategy that would end our combat mission in Iraq and remove all of our troops by the end of 2011. As Commander-in-Chief, ensuring the success of this strategy has been one of my highest national security priorities.” also stating by the end of the year all troops will be withdrawn from combat in Iraq. Woo, everyone praise Obama, Hooray!!! He fulfilled another promise….Wait not so fast. Obama and Leon Panneta both said that they intended on keeping up to 20,000 combat troops in Iraq past the 12/31/11 deadline. They didn’t want to end the war, they were forced out by the Iraqi Government. Why were they forced out you ask? Well in a cable released by Wiki Leaks, in which they received from Bradley Manning, it shows that US forces were responsible for at least 10 Iraqi civilians (LINK) which included a 70 year old grandmother, and 5 month old infant. The US government covered this up by bombing the house in which the crime was committed, but before they could , the people of the village captured photos, and reported eye witnesses account to back up the cable provided by Bradley Manning. Which stated that an autoposy performed on the victims showed that they were handcuffed and shot in the head. The Iraqi government was furious about this and refuse to accept Obama’s plea to keep 20,000 combat troops in Iraq for the years to come. Now, Obama uses this as a big campaign message, that he fulfilled his promise to the end the War in Iraq, yet when the real hero is Bradley Manning.

So now Bradley Manning, a brave solider who has been tortured for 9 months, charged with “aiding the enemy”, and now faces life in prison, for what? Speaking out about something he thought was ethically and morally wrong. Something he felt that the American people deserved to know what was going on in the Middle East. Tortured by the administration of a President who claims to care about humans rights, and transparency. Who says that  “I was clear throughout this campaign and was clear throughout this transition that under my administration the United States does not torture,”
“We will abide by the Geneva Conventions. We will uphold our highest ideals.”. What a crock of shit. And people wonder why I dislike Obama so much, they say “Oh, it’s just one person who broke the law” When did speaking out against murder, rape, violence, and depravity become breaking the law. Bradley Manning did what was right and now faces life in prison. Make your voice be heard and speak out!!!

“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.” -Thomas Jefferson

When reading the headline of this article I feel that people’s first thought would be that I am crazy. How could Ron Paul win the GOP nomination and if so, how could he beat Obama. Well it is pretty simple in my honest opinion. First, I will tell you how Ron Paul is the only one who can beat Obama and how he his the only person running in both parties who is not corrupt or bought off by banks and big business.

List of top Donors for GOP Presidential candidates:

Mitt Romney

  1. Goldman Sachs- $367,200
  2. Credit Suissie Group- $203,750
  3. Morgan Stanley- $199,800
Super Pac: Restore our Future 
John Paulson donated $1 million to Restore our Future SuperPac which is a pro Romney Super Pac. John Paulson is a hedge fund manager, and became a billionaire by short-selling sub prime mortgages in 2007. His net worth is $15.5 Billion according to Forbes magazine. In 2011 he made bad trades with Bank of America, Citi-Group, and Sino-Forest Corp.
Newt Gingrich
  1. Rock-Tenn Co- $27,500
  2. Poet LLC- $20,000
  3. First Fiscal Fund- $15,000
Super Pac: Winning our Future
Sheldon Adelson has donated $10 million to the pro Gingrich Super Pac so far, and has said he will donate millions more. His net worth is $21.5 billion, according Forbes he is 8th wealthiest man in America and 16th wealthiest man in the world.
Ron Paul
  1. U.S. Army- $24,503
  2. U.S. Air Force- $23,335
  3. U.S. Navy- $17,432
Super Pac: Endorse Liberty
The pro Ron Paul Super Pac is funded by many individual contributions. A majority of the donations are small, but by many individuals.
                       By showing who donates to each candidate says a lot about each candidate. Mitt Romney is obviously backed by banks, Wall St., and the wealthy. These are same people who funded Obama in 08′ and are still funding him again in 2012, but not as much as Mitt Romney. It is very frightening to see someone who could possibly be our next President be bought by the same people who got us into the mess we are in today. You can say the same thing about Newt Gingrich, his top donors are not that shocking, but his Super Pac is frightening as well. Sheldon Adelson is one of the richest men in the world, and he is one of the main reasons Newt won the South Carolina Primary. Being so indebted to one industry or person is very dangerous when you could possibly be the next President. The majority of Ron Paul’s donations come from the military and individual citizens giving small donations. This shows the Ron Paul will not owe anyone anything except the citizens of the United States, and not banks, lawyers, Wall St. or the wealthy.
How Newt Gingrich, Barack Obama, and Mitt Romney are no different.
                      You may think that Romney and Gingrich differ from Obama by all the rhetoric that they spew, but they are really no different. They all agree on The Patriot Act and spying on US Citizens in the name of safety, they all agree on keeping Gitmo Open, they all agree on The NDAA (which gives the President power to imprison US citizens indefinitely without trial), they all oppose gay marriage, they all want to bomb Iran, and they are all bought off by Wall St. and the wealthiest people in the world.
                     They claim to all have different views on foreign policy, yet they are the same. The only thing they disagree on is the way each persons foreign policy is implicated. Obama wants to sanction the economy of Iran and cripple the Iranian people, Newt and Mitt want to bomb Iran and cripple the Iranian people. Obama feels that we should police the world, and nation build in foreign countries, as do Mitt and Newt. They all agree we should have went into Libya, but Mitt and Newt think we should have done it sooner. All three are warmongers and want to profit off our military.
                     They all believe on spending like there is no tomorrow. They all agree on the Bush/Obama bailouts, and do not believe in true capitalism. They believe in the concept of “too big to fail”, while giving the tax payers money to Wall St. and the big businesses that causes the financial crisis.
                      They all believe in torture and that Bradley Manning is a terrorist. Everyone cheers Obama for the end of the Iraq War, yet if it was not for Bradley Manning we would still be in Iraq today. So what does Manning get for calling out the lies of our Government? He gets tortured and held without a trial for months by the Obama Administration. If Newt, Mitt, or Obama win in 2012 whistle blowers and people speaking out against the wrongs of their government will have to live in fear of being arrested.
How Ron Paul can beat Obama?
                       If Ron Paul wins the nomination for President of the United States the citizens of this country will have a real choice for the first time in my lifetime. They will have a choice between two different candidates, with two different views of the direction of this country. If Newt or Mitt win, there is no real option. Ron Paul believes in civil liberties for all citizens, it does not matter if you are black, white, rich, poor, gay or straight.
“You have to remember, rights don’t come in groups we shouldn’t have ‘gay rights’; rights come as individuals, and we wouldn’t have this major debate going on. It would be behavior that would count, not what person belongs to what group.” – Ron Paul
                       Ron Paul believes in the rights of everyone to marry who they want, and that the government should not get involved. As long as others don’t push their views on anyone else.
“If two parties with two sets of bad ideas cooperate, the result is not good policy, but policy that is extremely bad. What we really need are correct economic and politcal ideas, regardless of the party that pushes them.” -Ron Paul
                         Another major reason Obama won in 08 was because he had the youth vote, a vote that now Ron Paul is in control of. Youth support for Ron Paul has been exploding and it shows in the first the contest for the nomination. I Iowa Paul carried the youth vote 48% for Paul next was Rick Santorum with 23%. In New Hampshire Ron Paul had 47% of the youth vote, Mitt Romney had 26%. In South Carolina Ron Paul had 31% of the youth vote, Newt Gingrich had 28%. Besides just having the youth on his side, Ron Paul has independents. In a CBS poll conducted on 1/9/12 if Ron Paul vs Obama happened today 47% of Independents would vote for Paul and only 40% for Obama. Paul is the only candidate who beats Obama when it comes to independents. The youth and independent vote is vital for anyone to win the general election and Ron Paul has both.
                          So, if it does come down to Obama Vs Ron Paul in November the American people will have a real choice between: A man bought by the banks and Wall St. or a man bought by the American people, a man who has destroyed our civil liberties or a man who will protect our civil liberties, a warmonger or a peace keeper, a man who believes in rights for certain groups or a man who believes in rights for all, a man who is pro-torture or a man who is against torturing another human being. If Romney or Newt win the nomination, it will be sad day for this country.

I consider myself Republican, but I have a few Democratic views. One of the things that I have noticed is that it seems many Democrats have abandoned the few views that I agree with them on. Why is it that the Democrats have gone into hiding when it comes to these views they used to believe in?? Anti-War, Anti-Torture, Anti-Patriot Act, and Anti-Gitmo. Now these are 4 things that I agree with, and when Bush was President, along with many other things I disagreed with his views on these issues. He was all about war, torture, the Patriot Act and Gitmo. I was happy to see Americans speak out for what they believe in, Democrats and Republicans alike. Now for some reason many people have gone into hiding or just have changed their views because we have a different President. Did they do this because it was cool and popular to disagree with Bush and now that Obama is President their views have changed?? I am just very curious to this change.

Anti-Patriot act: I disagree with it and feel it is an invasion on American Citizens and it has been proven to be such that. Many people wanted to have Bush impeached because of the Patriot Act calling it unconstitutional. Obama during his Senate campaigned promised to repeal the Patriot Act . He was against roving wiretaps, but as President he has signed 2 extension to the Patriot Act. Where are all the Democrats at, all the people who wanted Bush’s head on a platter because of the Patriot Act. They are all pretty much silent now. I disagreed with it when Bush was President, but now when I complain about it now it’s just because I hate Obama

Anti-Torture: Bush was called every name under the sun for having people tortured, and rightfully so. I think if you torture someone sooner or later they are just going to tell you what you want to hear. Many people felt the same way while Bush was President. Now, it seems they are singing a different tune. Obama ran a hard campaign against torture and said he would not run the White House like the Bush Administration did when it comes to torture. Also when asked in 2007 “Does the constitution permit a president to detain US citizens without charges as unlawful combatants?” President Obama answered “No. I reject the Bush Administration’s claim that the President has plenary authority under the Constitution to detain US without charges as unlawful combatants.” Interesting, how about you tell Bradley Manning that. He has been detained for over a year now, he has been subjected to what Obama and many people consider torture and harsh living conditions, and he has yet to be convicted of anything. When asked about the treatment and detainment of Bradley Manning Obama replied “He broke the law”. Where are those Democrats who believe in Human Rights? Imagine if something like this happened just a few years ago when Bush was President? Those Democrats would be out in droves, yet today they just ignore it and their beliefs.

Anti-War: Let’s make this simple. The Iraq War is bull shit, we all agree. Huge waste of money and lives. Osama is dead, glad Obama got him. I feel it is time to bring many troops home for Afghanistan, and Iraq. It is time for us to stop policing the world, yet Obama decided that it is up to him to start a new war  in Libya. No congressional approval what so ever. His excuse is actually laughable, he say we are not involved in hostilities. Ok, bombing the shit out of a country’s air defense is not involved in hostilities. I do give some people credit for standing up to Obama on this issue, but still there are many Democrats who sound like Bush era Republicans on this issue. People are dying, money is being spent, bombs are being dropped, sounds like a war to me. So according to Obama and his spineless Democrats we can just bomb any country we want as long as there are no boots on the ground, and we label it “Humanitarian Aid”. Look out Syria.

Anti-Gitmo: Obama ran hard campaign to have Gitmo closed down. He tried, it was too difficult and he  just gave up. Now all these Anti-Gitmo Democrats have shut up and just say he had too much Republican pressure. What? Of course he did, Republicans hate him they are going to put tons of pressure on him for every choice he makes. If you actually thought he was going to close Gitmo you must have really bought into that Hope and Change bull shit. So now Obama is President I guess Gitmo is not that bad.

The whole point of this is, that it just pisses me off how people’s views change as the President changes. If  people still have these views they have been silent, and not as outspoken as they would be if Bush was still President. I don’t claim to be something I am not. My grammar sucks, I am not well spoken, and I am not college educated. But one thing I can say is, that I have strong views on these issues and many more I haven’t listed, and I am not going to let that change just because we have a different President.


The Obama double standard.

Posted: May 27, 2011 in Politics

Many people get on my case for criticizing Barack Obama as much as I do. I have been called numerous names, a racist, a Republican idiot etc. Yes I describe myself as a Republican, but I am not loyal to one party. If Republicans do something I disagree with I say it, and same goes for Democrats. It is amazing how many people tune you out because they disagree with what you say, or just flat out refuse to believe you.  Considering what the other side has to say does not exist anymore, it is a war of “Well (insert party here) did this and that is way worse than (insert party here)!

It is amazing to me how criticism of The President has changed from one President to another. In President George W. Bush’s second term in seemed that it was patriotic to criticize and disagree with him. It was cool to wish death on Bush, call him Hitler, a racist, say he planned 9/11 and so on and so on. Everyone banned together in a mutual hate for our President. The 24 hour news cycle would bash Bush left and right, Hollywood would, people on Facebook and Myspace. Yes Bush did a lot that I personally disagree with: The Patirot Act, The Iraq War, torture, and spending like a drunk sailor. Many democratic groups, Senators, and media personalities rallied to have Bush impeached for: Misleading congress and the American people about Iraq, Condoning the torture of prisoners, and authorization of illegal electronic surveillance. Funny how peoples opinion has changed. Now if you dare criticize Barack Obama you are deemed unpatriotic, and a racist. If you disagree with him people get so angry, like you are personally attacking them. The media puts Obama on a pedestal as a man who can do no wrong. People say “How dare you disrespect the office of  The President of the United States!!!” Really??? Man Times are changing. Imagine if you called Obama Hitler or said that you wish death on Obama. Droves of people would be at your house in five seconds screaming for your head. Yet when you said the same things about Bush people would be applauding you as a patriot.

The double standard that Barack Obama has is so disgusting. Let’s look at a few examples, People wanted to impeach Bush over The Patriot Act. They said he had no right to spy on American people without a warrant. Funny enough just today an extension for The Patriot Act for another 4 years was signed by President Obama. The media says that Obama is a patriot and he is protecting our nation, and that Obama is doing the right thing extending The Patriot Act. Wait one man agrees with The Patriot Act and they want to impeach him, and another man agrees with The Patriot Act and they cheer him??? Another example is Guantanamo Bay, Obama ran a hard campaign against Gitmo saying that he would shut it down as if first act as President. Well he began too and then just went with status quo and kept it open. The media had little coverage about disagreeing with Obama. Shocker! Another attempt to impeach Bush was about condoning the torture of prisoners. People had rallies about this during the Bush administration. Where are all those protesters now? Under the Obama administration prisoners continue to be tortured, including an American solider who has not even been convicted of one crime in over a year. Yet, Bradley Manning has been tortured and forced to endure horrible conditions under the Obama administration. If that happen under Bush’s watch what do you think the reaction would have been? What about Bush illegal war in Iraq? He had horrible Intel and no he is not the brightest star in the sky, but at least he got congressional approval. Obama has been in Libya for over 60 days now without congressional approval and yet no one says anything. What about when everyone screamed murder when Bush went into Iraq? Many innocent people were killed yes women and children included. Well how about this little stat: Since Obama has been President he has authorized Over 200 Drone strikes over 1450 people have been killed. Some have been enemies, but many have been innocent civilians, Some attending funerals, some just sitting in school, and some just sitting in their homes. No one has screamed murder about this, the only people who have spoken out are the people who live in the areas being bombed. Who cares what they have to say anyway, they are all the way in another country. Funny how peoples tone changes, same policies, same horrible acts just a different man pushing the button.

What Obama ran against:

“I reject the Bush Administration’s claim that the President has plenary authority under the Constitution to detain U.S. citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants.” (Tell that to Bradley Manning)

“I was clear throughout this campaign and was clear throughout this transition that under my administration the United States does not torture,”  (Look into Bradley Manning, and many detainees at Gitmo.)

“I will not raise taxes on citizens making less than $250,000 a year” (Look at the “Affordable Care Act”)

“I “will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” (Never happened)

“I’m going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We’ll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies — they’ll get a seat at the table, they just won’t be able to buy every chair. But what we will do is, we’ll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies. And so, that approach, I think is what is going to allow people to stay involved in this process.” (Never happened)

“I will repeal the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000” (Backed down to pressure and extended the Bush Tax cuts for the rich)

Now you may think I am nitpicking quotes and playing Gotcha! Well that is not what I am going for. These are the main things that Obama ran on to get elected President. Many people voted for Obama because they thought he was going to End the wars, End the torture, repeal Bush policies, have a more transparent government. Non of this stuff has happened, he has kept many Bush policies that people wanted to Impeach Bush over and fueled hate towards Bush. People voted for him because they thought he was going to bring “Change” a different kind of President, an outsider. Someone who can relate to the people. Well buyer beware, what you have got here is just another Washington Politician, Keeping many of the same staff members from The Clinton and Bush administrations. Business as usual with same old, same old. What I hope for is for people to become more critical of this President like they were with Bush, ask the tough questions and stop giving him a free pass. Yea I get it you are the first black president, which I think is awesome no sarcasm. Now it’s time to stop fawning over him and start holding him accountable and stop giving away free passes from the media and the people.