The Problem with Twitter

This is a rant, a long, annoying rant about an inherent issue with Twitter. 

My account was recently permanently banned for violating Twitter's hateful conduct terms. Now these terms, on their surface, make perfect sense. They allow Twitter to suspend or ban people who use their platform to attack people based on their gender, sexual orientation, creed, ethnicity, job, or other protected status. 

The problem is Twitter's censors don't seem to grasp nuanced language, so something as simple as calling Tomi Lahren a "Blond Bimbo" is perceived as violating these standards. Even though bimbo simply references a contemptible person, someone who is childish, or crass. It is gender neutral, it doesn't attack a person based on any of the listed protected status. 

The worst part of this whole ordeal, isn't the loss of my account, or my followers, or twitter connections; no the worst part is that I'm suspended for calling Tomi Lahren a contemptible person, but this arrogant, ignorant, self-absorbed, racist, bigoted, right-wing mouthpiece is still allowed to post on Twitter. 

The problem here is Twitter gives unfair and undue deference to celebrities and public figures like Tomi over the general user. So while they can post vile and vitriolic bullshit, attacking immigrants and asylum seekers, women's rights activists, Black Lives Matter activists, the LGBTQ, etc. Those of us who aren't in the public eye are scrutinized with a much sharper sword. Even when we say something that isn't a violation of their terms of service, we can be suspended and banned without any recourse.

Despite repeated attempts at appeals to this decision, even starting a Change.org petition found here, a complaint to the FCC, and even emails to the CEO Jack Dorsey (jack@twitter.com), and VP of User Services Donald Hicks (dhicks@twitter.com) my account still remains shuttered.

So, please sign my petition, and email Jack Dorsey and Donald Hicks if you find this lopsided treatment to be unfair.

KJ Martin

Age of Digital Dissonance

The Misinformed Voter

By Kristoffer J Martin

The 2016 US elections proved divisive, both in the practical issues common to both presidential and congressional elections. The methods through which the populace learned of the candidates played a huge role in their understanding of current political. In part, these methods relied on digital media. Many factors go into the political process, and the impacts of digital technologies on politics is relatively unexplored. Several issues concerning voting rights, policies, and misinformation were just as influential on US politics as digital media.

There are three categories of digital medium that directly concern politics and elections; 1) social media, such as; Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, etc. 2) News media, including both valid and fake news sources. Lastly, 3) Alt-news sources, such as; Wikileaks, AnonNews, Factcheck.org, Poltifact.com, etc. All three types of media were used in addressing audience in the 2016 election. This shift to digital media proved more valuable in swaying the voter than formal sources of news and propaganda. Social media played a major role in the efforts of all political parties, and ostensibly relied upon confirmation bias, along with limited media scope, in creating narrow perception of individual candidates and social issues.

In their study The Spreading of Misinformation Online Michela Del Vicarioa, and Alessandro Bessib, (et al)¹ discussed the impact of misinformation and fake news sources in social media. In their foreword of their study they state “The wide availability of user-provided content in online social media facilitates the aggregation of people around common interests, worldviews, and narratives. However, the World Wide Web (WWW) also allows for the rapid dissemination of unsubstantiated rumors and conspiracy theories that often elicit rapid, large, but naive social responses...” User provided content is a key aspect to social media, conflating opinion with fact and ultimately obfuscating the truth.

Obfuscation of facts with opinion is only a small part of the puzzle revolving around digital media. In the case of Facebook, tailored news sources designed to target a user based on their digital footprint is often the cause for gaps in factual information. Facebook was the number one source for election news in 2016, especially among millennials. Tailored news and advertising sources targeted at specific demographics laid the path for misinformation and the dissemination of false news sites. Click-bait news sources used vague or false news headlines to spur a specific political agenda, especially regarding Hillary Clinton with her leaked email scandal, or against President Obama extending specific racist talking points, all the while gaining profits through ad-revenue. It is no wonder the authors of The Spreading of Misinformation Online concluded; “Digital misinformation has become so pervasive in online social media that it has been listed by the [World Economic Forum] as one of the main threats to human society. Whether a news item, either substantiated or not, is accepted as true by a user may be strongly affected by social norms or by how much it coheres with the user’s system of beliefs...” However, social media, such as Twitter, often worked in opposition to the spread of misinformation. By and large, Twitter, being a spur of the moment form of interaction, allowed for immediate refutation of false claims by politicians. This is especially true of the President-Elect Donald Trump’s tweets. On numerous occasions Trump tweeted false claims, often to be met with rebuke. Twitter also served as a highlight reel for some of Trump’s more outlandish statements and exposed his lack of knowledge and political experience.

Beyond the scope of social media, other digital sources played a major role in this election cycle. Classic media sources (commonly called Mainstream Media), such as CNN, MSNBC, top network news channels, Fox News, and newspapers also reported on scandal rather than present facts. The spin of the mainstream media is just as suspect as fake-news sources found throughout social media. This is in part due to their need to reach an audience that’s moved away from formerly reliable sources, such as; cable and network television, printed news and their respected web presence. The very nature of SEO targeting and ad population as a revenue source drove the propagation of false, misleading, or vague news reports. The ability for mainstream media to deliver content works on the same principles as fake-news found throughout social media. Classic news sources, to compete with online news media, are forced to rely on sensationalized reporting. In many ways, this reflects the advent of click-bait news sources.

Bearing this in mind, alt-news sources can potentially fill in the reality-check for both mainstream media and fake-news sources shared via social media. Unfortunately, alt-news sources are plagued with the same issue the previous two media types contended with during this election cycle, leaving the audience to discern what is real and what was fake. “Many mechanisms cause false information to gain acceptance, which in turn generate false beliefs that, once adopted by an individual, are highly resistant to correction... findings show that users mostly tend to select and share content related to a specific narrative and to ignore the rest... Most of the times the information is taken by a friend having the same profile (polarization)––i.e., belonging to the same echo chamber.”(Del Vicarioa, et al). Despite there being news sources which, in the case of Politifact and Factcheck.org, which act to fact check and correct false information, these sources still rely upon the audience to utilize them. If a person on social media retain their confirmation bias , and to an extent rely upon false consensus bias, and the news they’re reading affirms their beliefs, they tend not to seek out fact checking sources. When presented with such sources debunking the media that affirm their beliefs, they are quick to attack the fact checking source.

In his 2010 article How Facts Backfire² Joe Keohane discussed the political research done by University of Michigan political scientist Brendan Nyhan. From 2005-’06, Nyhan conducted a study where participants with partisan political views were given fact corrected news stories. The study found, despite being corrected, the news articles rarely ever changed the participant’s mind. “In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an under-powered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger”(Keohane). Nyhan suggested it is threatening to admit you’re wrong. When facts contradict strongly held beliefs, the presented facts tend to backfire as a natural defense against cognitive dissonance (Nyhan). The nature of confirmation bias is a tool politicians have used throughout history. It is why propaganda and political attack ads work. Regardless of the means through which the misinformation is presented, be it social media like Facebook, or through mainstream media, misinformation will sway the unassuming or already partisan voter.

The 2016 election cycle did open the door to a different type of digital tool, digital espionage. Alt-news sources, such as; Wikileaks and Anonews, propagated leaked and hacked information from unverified sources. Hillary Clinton’s leaked emails played a huge role in the disillusionment of liberal leaning voters, the results of which were some of the lowest voter turn out in US history. If any technological advancement is a real threat to the election process, it would be digital espionage.

Hillary’s email leak actually represent two sides of the same coin when it comes to digital espionage. There is a surprising positive result stemming from her emails being leaked, that is the revelation of the Democratic National Committee’s collusion with Hillary’s political camp to undermine Bernie Sanders. It illuminated underhanded tactics systemic of the DNC. In doing so, the leaks will prosper greater scrutiny over election processes in both the DNC and GOP. However, the negative side-effect of such leaks drove a dissent among voters, many of whom felt betrayed by a system in which they put their faith. Nonetheless hacking and leaking of information is just another tool in politics and it is nothing new. There are plenty of historical examples of leaked information curving the popular opinion of politicians. Some examples include; the Pentagon Papers (1971), Watergate (1972), the Iran-Contra Affair (1986), the Valarie Plame Affair (2003), Abu Ghraib (2004), Warrantless Wiretaps (2005), and the Afghanistan War Diaries (2010). Digital espionage may prove to be both an invaluable source in exposing the wrong doings committed by our government, and a detrimental force in our politics. This is especially true as more and more technology becomes involved in our politics. But for now, the impact of digital espionage and the digitalscape on the most recent election cycle is questionable at best.

In examining the digitalscape and its potential impacts on our election process and politics, it seems clear the effects of digital media and resources are not the bane of politics. They are, like other resources, a tool which can be manipulated to take advantage of an audience, just as other media sources, historically, were manipulated to the same effect. If digital media, social media, and digital espionage aren’t the express cause behind our election failings and political strife, that begs the question of what is to be blamed?

US politics is plagued by a dichotomy setup between progressive and regressive ideology. It is important to recognize this dichotomy when examining the social motivations of political parties that inhabit either ideology. Vague as this notion may seem, it derives from two very different political demographics that exist in the US population. If the demographics are examined as to who voted for which party, Democratic vs Republican, there is a disparity between the majority of voters who vote for liberal political platforms and voters who vote for conservative political platforms. Minority groups, such as; women, the LGBTQ, African-Americans, Latinos, and non-Christians tend to vote for liberal platforms and therein progressive politicians, while men, and especially Caucasian men, tend to vote conservative. This dichotomy drives policy changes which directly impact who can vote and when. Leading up to the 2016 election-cycle many regressive laws were passed with the specific purpose of curtailing minority voters. Voter ID laws, restrictions on early voting, reduction in poll locations, restrictions in polling times, unlawful purging of voting rolls; all of these efforts were instituted by conservative run state governments with the express intent in reducing voter turnout.

The state of Wisconsin (author note: my home state) instituted some of the strictest Voter ID-laws. In the past, student IDs issued by the University of Wisconsin were acceptable IDs for voting. It so happens one of the largest liberal voting demographics in Wisconsin are university students. In an effort to curtail their voter turnout, the conservative majority in the state assembly, at the direction of Gov. Scott Walker, changed the ID requirements and changed the process in obtaining state issued IDs that met those requirements. While the ID law was challenged in court, ultimately it remained instituted. The University of Wisconsin reacted by changing their IDs to meet the standards, and in reaction, the governor's office issued a new edict with further restrictions. The new process of obtaining a state ID, which made it so all state IDs have to be processed in one location and mailed out with a turn around time of up to one month, meant many people seeking a state ID for the sole purpose of voting could not obtain the necessary IDs in time to vote. Furthermore, the necessary identification papers were changed for obtaining a state ID, such that many people were deterred from voting because they no longer had the necessary paperwork to obtain the required ID.
The case of Christine Krucki, a lifelong voter, went viral this year (2016). Born in 1925, she’s voted in nearly every election since she was first able to in 1948. At 90 years old she moved to Wisconsin with no functional IDs. She’d let her Illinois driver’s license expire, as she didn’t drive anymore. Despite having the expired license, a bank statement, and insurance statement proving her identity and residency, the Wisconsin DMV would not issue her an ID. This happened in 2013 after the first new ID laws went into affect. Despite an ACLU backed lawsuit, retrieval of her birth certificate, marriage license, and attempts to amend documents to reflect marital name changes, the Wisconsin DMV still refused to issue her an ID. 2016 was the first election in her lifetime where she didn’t vote.³

Krucki isn’t an anomaly either, The Nation published an article in September of this year (2016) titled Wisconsin Is Systematically Failing to Provide the Photo IDs Required to Vote in November detailing the illegal refusal by the Wisconsin DMV to provide IDs to two African-American voters, Zack Moore and Claudell Boyd.⁴ Patrick Marley, a journalist at the Milwaukee Sentinel, reported in his October 3^rd article DMV workers at 7 more stations give wrong voter ID info⁵, that several DMV employees deliberately mislead and misinformed voters seeking an ID as to how and what was needed to obtain state IDs. It should come as no surprise that “Democrats on the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules proposed holding an emergency legislative session to eliminate the voter-ID law before the election, but Republicans blocked it on a party-line vote” (Berman, footnote 3). Obstruction by regressive politicians with the aim of retaining their political power played a major role in the 2016 election-cycle outcome.

If it appears voting is being made impossible, to understand why, requires a close examination of causal forces behind why people don’t vote. In some cases it is simply they can’t, because of laws and policies preventing them from voting. In other cases it’s because of misinformation, or a sense of being disenfranchised by politicians with a specific agenda; all of which deter voters from participating. The digitalscape, through which many people obtain information, only serves as another media tool. Like all media outlets there are limitations, benefits, and hindrances that come with digital media sources. In this respect, digital media is not to blame for the issues surrounding elections. It is not making voting impossible. What is making voting harder, and what is making politics harder, are the direct efforts by politicians to hinder voters and directly effect voter turnout through oppressive regulations.

In spite of the malign fake-news and click-bait stories designed to garner attention and ad-revenue, many sources remained faithful to the facts. It is through the continued reliance on existing political ploys, designed to take advantage of preconceived notions and confirmation bias held by the voting populace, that influenced voter mentality. The unwillingness to fact-check and substantiate claims remains the same, despite the readily available sources that fact-check politicians and news. In effect, it is not the plethora of news sources available on the internet inflating dishonest news stories that is the problem. Rather it is the long standing attitude of voters to side with politicians who affirm their preconceived beliefs that enabled voter suppression seen during this the 2016 election process.

It is true this year saw the advent of digital espionage, which continues to be an outlier in the digitalscape, in both its scope and ability to affect elections. The potential danger of digital espionage remains to be realized as it has only served as a backdrop to existing historical precedence in regards to leaked material. Even so, the impact of the leaked material seems minimal in comparison to gerrymandering and rigging of elections through new policies and laws designed with the express purpose of deterring minority groups from participating in politics. The arguments that Russia influenced the election, aiding Donald Trump to a win, is a palpable option for voters who are unwilling to blame themselves for the Democrat’s loss. Yet, this narrative is not without some merit, and is hardly solely the result of digital media propagated through social outlets like Facebook and Twitter.

In part, a solution to the current difficulties centered on our election processes, both at the state level and Federal, and in both Congressional elections and Presidential elections, involve the enabling of voting for all eligible voters. Solutions need to be reflected in laws and policies that directly affect voter access to polls. The removal or reformation of ID laws, changing the electoral college to reflect population density rather than state size, increased poll locations, longer early voting periods, and better voting registration, are all needed changes that would guarantee fair representation.

The biggest hurdle in our election process is the participation of well informed voters, who are capable of making the crucial decisions regarding our governance and leadership. Fake news and social media may cloud the pool of information, but it is a benign water-strider floating on the surface of already poisoned murky waters comprised of political propaganda. When our laws are not based on facts, but preconceived notions, emotional responses, and the political agenda of a given party, they cease to serve the people. When people vote for politicians who support unconstitutional laws, that is what makes politics impossible.

[Meta-text: I decided to focus on the US election in response to the prompt because it embodies the nature of digital technologies and how we interact today. It exemplifies the nature of the issue questioned, even if the subject is narrow. The same forces that drive backlash and confirmation bias in other areas of governance drove the divide in the 2016 US elections. Furthermore, the general issues I discussed are transcendental when it comes to politics, regardless of the country or tier of government. What we learned from the US elections is any person or party with an agenda can use media to obscure the truth and twist facts, and they can do so with ever increasing certainty their message will be heard when they use the internet. Yet, when it comes to governance and politics, it isn’t disinformation at fault for the difficulties faced, but rather issues revolving around how people learn, understand, and accept given beliefs. If the populace were to simply ask questions and maintain skepticism of the claims made by politicians, misinformation (however reported or disseminated) would lose the power to sway people.]

1 http://www.pnas.org/content/113/3/554.full.pdf The spreading of misinformation online

Michela Del Vicarioa, Alessandro Bessib, Fabiana Zolloa, Fabio Petronic, Antonio Scalaa,d, Guido Caldarellia,d,

H. Eugene Stanleye, and Walter Quattrociocchia,

2 Keohane, Joe How Facts Backfire 2010 Boston Globe http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/

3 Berman, Ari A 90-Year-Old Woman Who’s Voted Since 1948 Was Disenfranchised by Wisconsin’s Voter-ID Law October 5, 2016 The Nation https://www.thenation.com/article/a-90-year-old-woman-whos-voted-since-1948-was-disenfranchised-by-wisconsins-voter-id-law/

4 Berman, Ari Wisconsin Is Systematically Failing to Provide the Photo IDs Required to Vote in November September 29, 2016 The Nation https://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsin-is-systematically-failing-to-provide-the-photo-ids-required-to-vote-in-november/

5 Marley, Patrick DMV workers at 7 more stations give wrong voter ID info October 3, 2016, Milwaukee Sentinel

Pulse Nightclub Massacre

Recognizing the ingrained hate of the queer community, many more stand in solidarity with the victims from today's events. Thousands have turned up to donate blood in order to save the survivors of this fatal attack. The President of the United States, Barack Obama, ordered the flag be flown at half staff in all the US and it's territories, and a solemn timber of grief and awe is the prevailing tone in the media for now. Unlike the UpStairs Lounge Arson, the media and government recognized the significance of the attacker and the victims. The LGBTQ community was not marginalized, they will not be laughed at, as they were in the past. But, as with any event like this, the shock will wear off, we will move on as a nation. The mourners will be forgotten, the dead a cliff note in some column, a bulletin across the bottom of our screens. Questions will be raised never to be answered, and the only way we as a society will remain captivated by the eruption of hate that happened today, this byproduct of dangerous religious and social dilapidation, will be with a new tragedy that carries on where this one will be left off.

This in mind I wager my life, as many others do, with the expectations of normalcy and the fear of attack as I plan to go to Gay Pride in the Twin Cities. I ask will this happen, should I be prepared? The question is a lie, one cannot ever be prepared for a gunman amidst a crowd of festival goers, no one expects an attack as they dance drunkenly to loud music, or watch a Drag show. But gay pride isn't just about naked boys grinding on a float, it isn't really about that at all. It is about acceptance. It is about pride for being different, for being unique, pride in knowing that just because you're gay, or lesbian, or bisexual, transgender, or gender-queer, that you are still a person. You are not a pervert, or a degenerate, or diseased (...even if you're an STI filled ho…) just because you don't fit into the gender binary of male and female, or like the same sex.

What make's Gay Pride a core of our humanity is also the driving force of hate behind the attacks like these. Little has changed in the forty years since the 1973 arson attack and the attacks today. The same hate and fear fills the radicals, the extremists, the religiously devout. Our pride in our difference drives the hate in those who do not understand and do not want to understand. As the calls for prayers for the dead and injured echo, I can only feel a sense of irony, dark onerous irony, that by some virtue our prayers for their safety will somehow outweigh the prayers for their deaths in some cosmic struggle with a god that doesn't exist.

Presidential Race for 2016: Post 1; The GOP Failed and DNC Debate 3

I'm writing this as I await the third Democratic Presidential Debate. There is a huge faux pas that happened recently with Sanders Campaign and the DNC, which I think many people didn't expect. It has thrown a light on the internal struggle of the very narrow Democratic Candidate Field. Please bear in mind this is more of a stream of consciousness post and will be covering the debate as it happens. I apologize in advanced for any grammar errors or disjointedness.

In comparison to the GOP field, which is still vast and most of the candidates are just not viable. The list includes:
Jeb Bush
Dr. Ben Carson
Gov. Chris Christie
Sen. Ted Cruz
Carly Firorina
Sen. Lindsey Graham
Mike Huckabee,
Gov. John Kasich
Sen. Rand Paul
Sen. Marco Rubio
Rick Santorum
Donald Trump.

Current polls suggest that Ted Cruz and Donald Trump are the front runners, leaving few percentage points for the rest of the candidates. But looking at the field virtually every single one of these people have said moronic statements that should simply disqualify them from being President.

Politifact.com showed that Donald Trump tells the truth only 7% of the time. While Ted Cruz is less than 4%.
Ben Carson has proven he shouldn't be a surgeon let alone president, and generally speaking most of the people in the list are just stupid.

Ted Cruz actually said "Some call me an extremist because I stand for things. It's not that I'm overly patriotic or anything. I just do what God tells me to do. He speaks to me, literally, in my head."

That is a sign of schizophrenia.

Several candidates have signed on to support a so called "First Amendment Protection Act" which would make it constitutional to discriminate against the LGBTQ community, make Federally recognized marriages "one man and one woman" once again, and make homosexual sex acts illegal. All of which were aspects of past laws shot down as unconstitutional. Do these candidates even grasp the idea of protecting the constitution?


So why is it that so many people are supporting the candidates that are simply and without any other way of saying it, dumb? Is it the bravado, the forced coverage by major media outlets?

I think the answer is simple actually, these people reflect the mentality of those who support them. There is a sharp divide between the supporters who want Bernie Sanders to win, who want Clinton to win, and those who support the likes of Trump.

As the dozen or so petitions that exist that supported Sanders post DNC debacle, it is likely that a very large portion of our population supports Sanders over the other candidates. But because other candidates are kept in the mainstream, their presence seems greater, and there in too their support.

While I wait for the debate, still an hour on, I want to point out that of all of the Republican candidates, the little supported Gov. John Kasich is the only candidate on the GOP field to have a truthful rating above 25% according to Politifact.com...seriously why isn't this guy being supported by the GOP base? It's sad that a guy that can actually be truthful is shunned by the Republican voters.

Comparing candidates; Politifact shows that Bernie Sanders doesn't have any Pants on Fire lies, Hillary has one, Donald Trump has 16 ( a whooping 21% of all of his statements, it is noteworthy that 30 more of his statements have been rated as false at 39% of his statements, which means 60% of everything he's said is flat out wrong), Marco Rubio has two pants on fire tying with Jeb Bush.

Tell me, why are so many people attacking the one guy who has never flat out lied to the public?

I want a candidate that is being truthful with his constituents and has a stable solid record.

***

T-minus seven minutes...and I'm arguing with people over how much Trump sounds like Hitler....FFS.

7:06 Still waiting for this to start.

7:17: For Fuck Sake, could they get this debate going already? It was supposed to start at 7, they've spent 17 minutes letting commentators jab at the candidates. Gah!

So apparently it's been pushed off to 7:30....Full coverage is right, it's so full that there hasn't been any debate yet.

7:26 Did they really need to be supported by Blackberry? Maybe, had they used Skype instead, we wouldn't be having the terrible lag with the live stream.

7:31 Introductions, finally...of course they introduce Clinton first, but that is to be expected...seems to be Alphabetical.

7:35 Clinton's opening statement is plebian. O'Malley's poignant and reminiscent of Trumen. Sanders is blunt as usual.

7:38 DNC controversy: Sanders gave a direct reaction to the DNC server breach. He's pointed out that the issue didn't get resolved in a better way. His apology was direct more to the supporters.At least Clinton seems sincere, not entirely sure.

7:43 San Bernadino; I wonder if the Candidates will address the fact that Eyewitnesses didn't see the suspects being claimed by the media? Clinton certainly isn't. Shes framed the terrorist attack as the basis for anti-Islam military action. Typical.

O'Malley at least is acknowledging the failures for first responders and on intelligence sharing. But so far neither have addressed the issues First Responders face, or the veterans who are homeless...ISIS isn't a big issue, and I hope Sanders at least points to this issue.

7:50 Coalition at home; Gun control; at least Clinton has stated a fair argument about gun control. But she isn't addressing the fact that most gun violence in the US isn't caused by Islamic people, but white men. Like the shooting in Madison that happened a few hours ago (12/19/2015). Finally Sanders gets into it. A consensus on sensible gun safety regulation.

I'm glad that O'Malley is showing some balls now.

7:54 Americans already own 7-10 million assault rifles; FFS. Would you confiscate already owned assault rifles? No, really? Almost all guns used in shootings are stolen.

7:58 Clinton is pandering...at least she's pointing out GOP willful ignorance on gun violence issues.

On Donald Trump's suggestion of banning Muslims from immigrating to the US.

Clinton: United on the home front. Report suspicious things...protecting the state and country. Seems very 1984 to me.

8:01 Is profiling every allowable? Sanders "If you see something suspicious then report it". On Donald Trump; we shouldn't scapegoat

8:04 Clinton "Manhattan project to provide law enforcement to access encrypted tech and find a balance of privacy". Proof she doesn't understand why this doesn't work. O'Malley at least seems to get it. Supporting freedom of the First Amendment in face of security issues is a bold stance these days.

8:07 Clinton: we need to have increased vetting and screening process up to 24 months...Not a nation of fear but a nation of resolve....I don't think this plan would work but it's a good sentiment.

O'Malley "We need to act like the great country we are."

8:12 Why did Sanders support Anti-Al Qaeda troops but not for Anti-ISIS...Sander's answer is interesting. I think he could have answered this more simply; we started the Iraq war, we created Al Qaeda, so it was our fault and responsibility to handle them. ISIS isn't our responsibility and we shouldn't be expected to be the police of the US.

The Raw Naked Truth about Christians

The Raw Naked Truth about Christians
(A Response to The Raw Naked Truth About Homosexuality By Bert M. Farias)
By Lord Kristoffer Jay Martin

This is a response to the article The Raw Naked Truth about Homosexuality by Bert M Farias. (http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/the-flaming-herald/44730-the-raw-naked-truth-about-homosexuality)

The truth is that Christianity is a destructive religion, with many people who claim to be Preachers, such as Bert Farias, who take the bible out of context and attempt to apply it to the here and now. They speak of “godly Christians” who “die a thousand deaths” when it comes to realizing a family member is gay, be it a son, daughter, sister, brother, etc. The fact is that homosexuality is an innate sexual orientation. It isn't a lifestyle.

These same preachers would have you believe that god, if there is such a being, hates gays. They assert absurdities that go against fundamental functions of our country's supreme law, assert things that are inherently not true, and otherwise use demonstrably archaic and fallacious arguments to attack homosexuals.

In the case of Bert, here, he asserts that because Denmark has passed a law saying religious institutions cannot discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation and must administer gay marriages (which isn't entirely true) that the US may follow in their footsteps. However this ignores two facts; one) in Denmark the vast majority of people licensed to officiate a marriage are the clergy of churches (of which there are several religions all of which are under the same requirements under the law) and there are few secular officials capable of marrying people. And two) the US has a First Amendment, that we are free to choose which religion we follow, including none at all. No religious person can be legally forced to do something that goes against their moral judgment. This is because under this same first amendment it states “No law may be made in respect of a religion”.

His secondary argument is a scare tactic that holds no merit. Might I also remind him that the bible does state “As it is written on Earth so to will it be written in Heaven” (Matthew 18:18). The law of the land is the law of heaven, the laws of man are the laws of heaven.

Gay rights and gay marriage are human rights and human marriage. As much as you dislike reality, the US constitution protects all people equally and by your own bible, the law of the land, our Constitution, is the law of heaven. If you are a Christian it is time to realize that there are those who would preach to you to condemn others in the name of god, and Christ, and there are those will tell you to love thy neighbor.

There are those who will tell you “The Bible says that homosexuality is unnatural. Men in gay relationships have given up the natural use of the woman and women the natural use of the man.” Ignoring the myriad of other biblical laws that they choose to ignore. The bible tells us we can't eat shell fish, or wear mixed fiber clothing, it tells us that divorce is wrong or that raped women should marry their rapists. It tells us slavery is not only okay but just and right and the slaves should obey their masters. There are four quotes that are arguably about homosexuality in the bible, just four, but dozens on divorce. Yet these so called preachers harp on and on about homosexuality.

Bert here says “Homosexuality is not ordained by God, nor is it even biologically right or natural. People are gay because they choose to be--not because they can't help it.” But this flies in the face of science. We know that homosexuality is not only innate, but we've even pinpointed the genes and traits that lead to homosexuality. Homosexuality is no more a choice than what color hair you're born with or what color your eyes will be. This is not about political correctness, this is about evolving how we think and how we approach reality.

Christianity is outmoded, outdated, and frankly, a harm to society. As is the case for most religions today. Most religions preach concepts that are thousands of years old that have no true relevancy today.
There isn't a single quote of scripture that exists in the bible that is truly relevant today. Not one, all of them that are applied to the world today by these preachers like Bert are taken out of context. Their meanings are muddied by the bigoted interpretation by these so called “loving” people who are just trying to do “god's work”.

The truth, people, is that homosexuality is here to stay, a part of our society. There will never be an end to it. It has been imbedded in humanity for all of history. It is a naturally occurring thing that exists in hundreds of species. Human Rights will never cease to exist either, the natural innate right to exist, to free will, to knowledge and growth and subsistence and life shall not be lost do to the actions of even the millions of Christians who harbour hate where they claim love lies. Why, because no matter how hard you try humans will always be human. There will always be gays born to christian and non-christian parents. They will grow up, they will live a human life and exist to experience and love and care for others. Some may fall victim to the vitriol and angst that comes from the christian world view about homosexuality, but most will escape and go on to lead loving long lives. Without the shackles of religion, without the shackles of Christianity, without the stupidity with which these arrogant peons who have no real care for anyone that doesn't agree with their world view, lorded over them from some high assumed moral pedestal. And when the day is done, when their lives come to a close, they will know that they loved someone who loved them back, without condition, without some religious ideology telling them to love them.

You, Bert, can take your god, your religion, and disappear into the annals of time. Take your living myth and leave the rest of us alone. Because eventually, inevitably, the christian god will be added to the ranks of the hundreds of other gods now dismissed as being nothing more than myth and legend. These last ditch efforts to criticize and attack with serpentine tongue are the anger filled howls of a dying beast we call religion.

Lord Kristoffer Jay Martin, B.A., M.A.

Doom Gloom and Girl Scout Cookies

Dear Readers


Ugh...ugh ugh ugh...that is the only sound I can make as of late with all the awkward, annoying, and disturbing news I've had the unfortunate opportunity to read. Unfortunate, not because I could read about it, but because of what the news contained.

The first news report comes from Rachel Maddow's Facebook who relayed this news article;  (http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/meet-mccrorys-top-environmental-official)

"World Net Daily occasionally influences politicians like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), but in general, most sensible folks have some rudimentary understanding of where oil comes from. Weird extremists have a very limited ability to influence public policy.

But consider this recent exchange between WRAL’s Laura Leslie in North Carolina and John Skvarla:
LESLIE: I’m thinking about what you’re saying about natural gas and that’s true. You know, obviously, it’s very cheap right now. You know, on the flip side, it’s a finite resource and fossil resource. I mean, is there –

SKVARLA: There are some people who disagree with you. The Russians, for instance, have always drilled oil as if it’s a renewable resource. So far, they haven’t been proven wrong. There’s a lot of different scientific opinion on that."

Yep you read that right, Skvarla, one of the top North Carolina Environmental Specialists believes that natural gas and oil are infinite renewable resources.

Okay, there is some truth to this ideology, but the time frame is all wrong. Skvarla, along with most of World Net Daily's readership believe in a young Earth, ie, Creationism. This is their attempt to reconcile science with their delusion of reality. What's worse is that the creationist Christian movement is a derisive ideology that is harming humanity and our future.

Yes, if given another several million years, possibly even a few hundred million years the oil reserves we used would be replenished. The concept of Abiogenic Oil is false and has no basis in reality.

The next thing in my lovely list of anguish this morning was a video that I think needs to be disseminated.

Upworthy recently posted an article on the anti-gay violence occurring in Russia and it's definitely worth a watch. (http://www.upworthy.com/here-is-the-shocking-footage-of-gay-men-being-beaten-on-camera-in-russia)

The violence in Russia against gays has only escalated since the installation of their new anti-gay laws. Anti-gay laws that are scary in similarity to the laws now trying to be passed in the US. Arizona recently passed a resolution to allow for religious discrimination against gays. Similar laws have been put forward by state houses all over the US. Many being defeated by their respective senates. Both Kansas and Maine and Utah have all had anti-gay discrimination laws put forward by religious groups, passed by the house, and defeated by their Senates. Ohio seems to be next in line.

These "Religious Freedom Laws" vary in writing and form, but all essentially do the same thing, they give license to those of a specific religious class (Christianity) to hold prejudice and discriminate against gays and gay couples based on their religious beliefs. Every "christian" person who opposes homosexuality, be it the local baker, photographer, or business owner, to public servants such as; the police, firefighters, doctors, paramedics, etc, can refuse to help or provide services to a person if they're gay or perceived to be gay.

These laws are so wide and sweeping that they give a good deal of license to discriminate for one specific group of people against another. Any law of this nature that does pass their respective state congresses would be a violation of the constitution and would be one more law that gays and human rights activists will have to stand up to and defeat in court.

**

The deep and intrinsic connection between religious ideology and socio-cultural disdain for gays is overwhelming. Because of overzealous people lording their religion over their respective societies is the very reason why we must move away from Christianity and all religions. Christianity is the bane of our existence. For everything that it does that is "good" it does a dozen things that are bad.

However, it's not all doom and gloom.

In San Francisco a Girl Scout sold 117 boxes in front of a cannabis shop, she's been invited back. Read the entire article here: "http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/Girl-Scout-Does-Brisk-Business-Selling-Cookies-Outside-San-Francisco-Pot-Club-246452511.html" 

The Other Anti-Gay Country Not in the News; Nigeria

Dear Readers

While I stew over Russia's anti-gay hyper-religious laws, one country's radicalism has escaped my postings.
One of the reasons why I rag on Russia is because Russia is supposed to be civilized, a developed nation. Not Third World or even Second World (yes that is a term). It is supposed to be the Eastern equivalent to the US. In many ways it is, and in many oh so many ways it's not. So oppressive laws, overt in their language, coming out of Russia and the violence spurred there against the LGBT community is appalling and worth fighting against on both principle and as a fact that Russia, as a major world power, is meant to be setting a standard of sorts for human rights and progressiveness.

However, Nigeria has passed laws that go far beyond the disgusting oppressive (regressive) laws of Russia. Where Russia has acted to ban free speech on the matter of homosexuality, Nigeria has moved to make it out right illegal. Punishable by death. Many Nigerians that are of the LGBT community are afraid to leave their homes, to speak out against the law (especially because the laws against homosexuality also make it illegal to support homosexuality in any way).

From "http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/13/nigeria-gay-marriage-_n_4590799.html"
"Nigeria's president has signed a law banning same-sex marriage as well as homosexual associations, societies and meetings, with penalties of up to 14 years in jail.

The Associated Press obtained a copy of the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act on Monday signed by President Goodluck Jonathan and dated Jan. 7.

Any public show of love by people of the same sex is a new crime punishable by up to 10 years in jail. It is already a crime to have homosexual sex in the West African nation.

Operating or even going to a gay club, society or organization also becomes a crime.

Secretary of State John Kerry said the United States was "deeply concerned" by a law that "dangerously restricts freedom of assembly, association, and expression for all Nigerians."


"BAUCHI, Nigeria (AP) — Thousands of protesters massed outside the Shariah court in Nigeria's northern city of Bauchi, throwing stones into the building to demand the speedy convictions of seven men arrested for belonging to gay organizations.

Security officials shot into the air to halt the protest and the judge quickly halted the trial. He ordered the seven be returned to the safety of the prison.

The same court last week convicted a young man of sodomy and had him publicly whipped with 20 lashes. Though he was tried under Islamic law, his was the first conviction of a gay man in Nigeria since the president signed a bill that further criminalizes homosexuality under the penal code.

Bauchi state has both the Western-style penal code and Shariah, under which sodomy carries the death sentence."
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/22/nigeria-gay-trial-protest_n_4645942.html"

Not only is homosexuality now barred by two separate legal systems, but one of the punishments is death.
This is a human rights travesty. Nigeria's President has institutionalized radical religious ideology mirroring the actions of one of humanities' greatest (yet evil) leaders of all time, Hitler.

It may seem cliche to compare a leader of a little known or country with little power taking radical actions to Hitler, but the comparison is valid. Hitler used radical religious rhetoric and laws to first ban Jews from working in Germany and Nazi controlled territory, then made them wear marks to identify them as Jews, regardless of if they were Jewish or Not. He held hearings to determine if people were Jewish or not. Sentenced many to imprisonment in internment camps, and then proceeded with genocide and the absolute persecution of those he found unworthy.

Nigeria is heading down a dark road we have already experienced and the US and the UN needs to act to squelch this discrimination before it balloons into a much bigger threat.

Sochi Olympics a World Stage: Why Russia's Hosting of the Olympics is an Stab in the Gut to Free Countries

Dear Readers

Oh the Olympics are under way an as we sit here cheering for Team USA or which every country you might be cheering on, I want you to consider just what having the Olympics in Russia represents.

Russia's draconian laws that ban free speech in regards to homosexuality, it's extreme anti-gay laws which come with anywhere between 15 days to decades long prison sentence only represents the surface of Russia's anti-freedom regime.

The list of Russian laws that allow very loose vague interpretations is long and branching. However, the current laws that go after the LGBTQ community are directly in violation of Russia's Constitution (The Constitution of the Russian Federation) which is closely tied to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

"Between 2006 and 2013, ten regions enacted a ban on "propaganda of homosexualism" among minors. The laws of nine of them prescribe punishments of administrative sanctions and/or fines. The laws in some of the regions also forbid so-called "propaganda of bisexualism and transgenderism" to minors. As of May 2013 the regions that had enacted these various laws, and the years in which they had passed the laws, included: Ryazan Oblast (2006), Arkhangelsk Oblast (2011), Saint Petersburg (2012), Kostroma Oblast (2012), Magadan Oblast (2012), Novosibirsk Oblast (2012), Krasnodar Krai (2012), Samara Oblast (2012), Bashkortostan (2012),[note 3] and Kaliningrad Oblast (February 2013).[38]
In June 2012, the Moscow City Court upheld a new law banning gay pride parades in the city for the next hundred years.[39][40]" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Russia)

"In June 2013 the national parliament (the State Duma) unanimously adopted, and President Vladimir Putin signed,[41] a nationwide law banning distribution of "propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations" among minors.[33][4][42][43][44] The law does not explicitly mention the word "homosexuality", but instead uses the euphemism "non-traditional sexual relations".[4][45] Under the statute it is effectively illegal to hold any gay pride events, speak in defense of gay rights, or say that gay relationships are equal to heterosexual relationships.[37][4][42][43][44]
The law subjects Russian citizens found guilty to fines of up to 5,000 rubles and public officials to fines of up to 50,000 rubles.[46] Organizations or businesses will be fined up to 1 million rubles and be forced to cease operations for up to 90 days. Foreigners may be arrested and detained for up to 15 days then deported, as well as fined up to 100,000 rubles. Russian citizens who have used the Internet or media to promote "non-traditional relations" will be fined up to 100,000 rubles.[4]
The statute amended a law that is said to protect children from pornography and other "harmful information".[41] One of the authors of the statute, Yelena Mizulina, who is the chair of the Duma's Committee on Family, Women, and Children and who has been described by some as a moral crusader,[47][48][49] told lawmakers as the bill was being considered, "Traditional sexual relations are relations between a man and a woman.... These relations need special protection".[37] Mizulina argued that a recent poll had shown 88% of the public were in support of the bill.[50]
Commenting on the bill prior to its passage, President Putin said, during a visit to Amsterdam in April 2013, "I want everyone to understand that in Russia there are no infringements on sexual minorities' rights. They're people, just like everyone else, and they enjoy full rights and freedoms".[45] He went on to say that he fully intended to sign the bill because the Russian people demanded it.[37] As he put it, "Can you imagine an organization promoting pedophilia in Russia? I think people in many Russian regions would have started to take up arms.... The same is true for sexual minorities: I can hardly imagine same-sex marriages being allowed in Chechnya. Can you imagine it? It would have resulted in human casualties."[37] Putin also mentioned that he was concerned about Russia's low birth-rate and that same-sex relationships do not produce children.[41]
Critics say that the statute is written so broadly that it is in effect a complete ban on the gay rights movement and any public expression of homosexuality.[21][37][45]
On 21 July 2013, four Dutch tourists were arrested for allegedly discussing gay rights with Russian youths. The four were arrested for allegedly spreading "propaganda of nontraditional relationships among the under-aged" after talking to teens at a camp in the northern city of Murmansk.[51]"

Not only do these laws violate the freedom of religion clause of the Russian Constitution, but it also violates the freedom of speech guaranteed under the Russian Constitution. And because the law make's illegal to even raise a voice against the law, no one has attempted to successfully sue the Russian government over it's violations with these laws.

So what does this have to do with the Olympics?
The Olympics stand for unity of the world. Where everyone joins together to celebrate physical and mental achievement of our top athletes. It has served to represent a world community. However, with the Olympics in Russia with the current laws in place, it is serving to high light Russia's anti-gay laws and to exemplify Russia.

While it's true that the Olympics are bring a light to the lawlessness of Putin and his government, the truth is that the Olympics is also supporting the country by bringing business and people from all around the world to Russia. It's also putting many people at risk, regardless of the guarantees made by Putin and his government.

It's clear that Putin has any intention of reversing these laws or countering the hate speech and hate acts being carried out against gays while the Olympics take the spotlight. As we focus on the events, in the background the LGBTQ community is being beaten, hunted down, shunted, shuttered, and oppressed.

And because the Olympics bylaws prevent the Olympiads from using the Olympics as a political stage, we'll hear little to nothing about the problems during the Olympics. It is the perfect cover to keep Russia's human rights violations out of the international eye for awhile.

State of the Union Review

Dear Readers

It's been awhile, I've been on hiatus trying to get things in order. The good news is that I might be moving to South Korea to teach English in the near future. I also just got another job so I might just be able to pay for food and rent. Ha!

On the State of the Union;

Oh what a development this is, don't you think? Not the State of the Union itself, Obama's speech reached many people and touched on many points in an otherwise vague way. No, I mean the response from the religious right.

The funniest so far is from Alex Castellanos who said on CNN “I think I’ve said before that I think a speech by Barack Obama is a lot like sex. The worst there ever was is still excellent, and I thought he gave a very competent performance tonight.”

But some of the more ludicrous ones came right from the post speech response.

The GOP's response was the worst droning dribble I've heard in a good long time. The woman there is Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and she delivered the post SotU address response by the GOP.

(Full transcript here http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/us/politics/text-of-the-gop-response-to-obamas-speech.html?_r=0)

The first thing to note is that it was tapped before the State of the Union Address aired and is based on a transcript of Obama's speech rather than the actual speech itself. This means that it has nothing whatsoever on how the audience reacted to the speech.

The first problem I have with the response is how it addresses the US. "Tonight we honor America, a nation that has witnessed the greatest rise of freedom and opportunity our world has ever seen, a nation where we are not defined by our limits but by our potential, and a nation where a girl who worked at the McDonald’s drive-through to help pay for college can be with you from the United States Capitol."

Rep. Rodgers asserts a massive contradiction here, we as a nation have limits, those limits are defined and thus they define us as a country. Our potential, being an unknown thing, is undefined, and the logical fallacy asserts that we are defined by the undefinable. More importantly, we have the potential to be great or to fall flat on our faces. The next big issue is that Rep. Rodgers makes the speech about her and not the people or the SotU speech. She makes another fallacious argument that, because she worked at McDonalds while in college and now is an Elected Representative that everyone who works at McDonalds must be in college and can make the same move as she does. Of course this doesn't come across in the written form, but that is the air with which she speaks if you listen.

The next paragraph again doesn't address the speech, but rather sets up an Ad Hominem argument that is appealing to the personal events of the viewers rather than taking on any specific part of the speech.

"But the most important moments right now aren’t happening here. They’re not in the Oval Office or in the House Chamber. They’re in your homes, kissing your kids good night, figuring out how to pay the bills, getting ready for tomorrow’s doctor’s visit, waiting to hear from those you love serving in Afghanistan or searching for that big job interview. After all, we the people have been the foundation of America since her earliest days, people from all walks of life and from all corners of the world, people who come to America because here no challenge is too great and no dream too big. That’s the genius of America."

Of course this section ignores many problems and challenges that people are facing today; hunger, homelessness, the fact that the GOP is pushing to kick out even more foreign persons and immigrants, but it is also a misnomer, the argument doesn't follow the SotU or any of it's major points. It really doesn't have a place in the response. Sadly it becomes the basis of the rest of the speech.

"Tonight the president made more promises that sound good but won’t actually solve the problems facing Americans. We want you to have a better life. The president wants that too. But we part ways when it comes to how to make that happen."

This section made me laugh, the President's points were solid and if it were true that the GOP wanted us to have a better life they wouldn't stand in the way of legislation that would force regulations on businesses who are taking advantage of the American workers. If it were true, the GOP wouldn't be pushing to give big businesses more tax breaks while forcing higher taxes on the poor and middle class, or making claims like "The poor should pay more taxes because they can pay with welfare" (Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert (R) has proposed raising taxes on the poorest Americans even if the only money they have to pay is money that they get from government programs like welfare.~http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2014/01/david-edwards-louie-gohmert-raise-taxes.html).

"So tonight I’d like to share a more hopeful Republican vision, one that empowers you, not the government. It’s one that champions free markets and trusts people to make their own decisions, not a government that decides for you. It helps working families rise above the limits of poverty and protects our most vulnerable, and it’s one where Washington plays by the same rule that you do. It’s a vision that is fair and offers the promise of a better future for every American." 

This is the last pertinent piece of the speech for several minutes as she drones on about her life growing up and having to work hard. A anecdote that has little to do with the issues at hand and seems to present the idea, as most GOP speakers do, that if people were to just work hard they'll get ahead. Sadly this isn't the case in the US. She talks about her son after she was elected who has down syndrome and stated "But when we looked at our son, we saw only possibilities. We saw a gift from God. And today we see a 6-year-old boy who dances to Bruce Springsteen; who reads above grade level; and who is the best big brother in the world."

This is her first reference to 'god' in her speech and it won't be the last. It's clear that her religious views are more and more a factor in her speech and how she, and the GOP, perceive how the US works.

She again illustrates her lacking understanding of logical contradiction as she states; "...whether we’re born with an extra 21st chromosome or without a dollar to our name, we are not defined by our limits, but by our potential, because our mission, not only as Republicans, but as Americans, is to once again to ensure that we are not bound by where we come from, but empowered by what we can become. That is the gap Republicans are working to close. It’s the gap we all face: between where you are and where you want to be."

Besides the obvious grammar errors, this is a crucial insight as to what the Republicans would like us to do, that is, to forget what they've done in the past so as to empower them to continue doing what they're doing now. Let's get rid of the extra verbiage shall we? Paraphrased "Our mission as Republicans is to once again ensure that we are not bound by where we come from, but [are] empowered by what we can become..."

Restated: Our missions as Republicans is to not be held accountable for our past mistakes so we can remain empowered to do what we want in the future. The "gap" is the closing of the control of the Democrats seats and government at large. This reminds me of the subversive speech Umbridge spoke at Hogwarts...Rodgers Umbridge...maybe there's a connection there.

"The President talks a lot about income inequality, but the real gap we face today is one of opportunity inequality. And with this Administration’s policies, that gap has become far too wide. We see this gap growing every single day. We see it in our neighbors who are struggling to find jobs, a husband who’s now working just part-time, a child who drops out of college because she can’t afford tuition, or parents who are outliving their life’s savings."

It's funny, actually, the GOP doesn't seem to grasp that "Opportunity" is tied to "Income". If you want to fix the opportunity gap you have to fix the income inequality gap. Whatmore, Rep. Rodgers wants to blame Obama's policies for the gap becoming "far too wide", but doesn't seem to grasp or doesn't want the audience to grasp that it is GOP obstructionism that blocked policies that would have lessened that gap. A similar sentiment was expressed by Michelle Bachmann when she went up against Bernie Sanders in a  debate.

Michelle completely fails to acknowledge that it is GOP partisanship and obstructionism. She says "We've had five years of Obama's Policies and the Economy is in the tank." Ignoring that fact that we've had five years of Obama trying to get policy into place and five years of the GOP standing in the way at every turn preventing 39 of 41 asked for policy changes last year and 90% of all policies in his first term.

How about that hypothetical college student? Yeah, the one who can't pay tuition? Well for a start tuition costs have increased dramatically, because of many different factors including decreases in available FAFSA funds. So students have to take out more loans and go further into debt to go to college. So what is the GOP plan for education? Not one damned thing, nothing. Nor do they make any such plan clear in their speech they just jump to another area, the job market. 

Can we fix the tuition in the US? Hell yes we can. (http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/03/how-washington-could-make-college-tuition-free-without-spending-a-penny-more-on-education/273801/)

The Atlantic reported that higher education institutions (aka colleges and universities) earned about $60 billion dollars in tuition while the US Federal Aid Program (FAFSA) spent some $77 billion dollars on that tuition (via grants and tax breaks) and covering interest and other costs. Rather than making students take out loans and go into debt the US could pay for the cost of higher education for free for all students giving all students and people applying to school a step up which would drive the economy and bring money into the economy rather than taking it out as more and more students' debt skyrocket.

"Last month, more Americans stopped looking for a job than found one. Too many people are falling further and further behind, because right now, the President’s policies are making people’s lives harder. Republicans have plans to close the gap, plans that focus on jobs first without more spending, government bailouts, and red tape. Every day, we’re working to expand our economy, one manufacturing job, nursing degree and small business at a time."

This was already fact checked by Politifact and Factcheck.org. This statement ignores that many people who left the workforce are retirees, and again Rep. Rodgers asserts a fallacy that it is the President's policies that are making people's lives harder, it is the GOP's policy of obstructionism that has prevented policies that have affected and made people's lives harder.

If it is true they have a plan to help create jobs without extra spending, bailouts, or red tape, working to expand the economy, etc, they've not shown it. Every policy that would have made getting a job easier, that would have helped people, was blocked by the GOP. How exactly are they going to expand the economy? They don't bother to say in this speech. However, if it follows past trends, it will rely on the debunked trickle down economics model and will only put the economy in the tank all the more.

It should also come as no surprise that GOP wants to take away welfare support from the people who need it the most. " Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) floated the idea of capping government benefits for women who have children out of wedlock...."(http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/01/29/3220881/rand-paul-welfare-cap-children/)

Or that the GOP has little to no respect for our President. One even walked out on his SotU (http://www.examiner.com/article/republican-congressman-walks-out-during-obama-s-state-of-the-union-address) Rep. Steve Stockman walked out halfway through the President's speech. Stating as an explanation "Tonight I left early after hearing how the President is further abusing his Constitutional powers. I could not bear to watch as he continued to cross the clearly-defined boundaries of the Constitutional separation of powers...Needless to say, I am deeply disappointed in the tone and content of tonight’s address." "After five years in office Obama refuses to admit his policies have failed...He instead demands we double down on the bitter class warfare that has left Americans jobless and hopeless. Obama’s plan for higher taxes and more spending is a blueprint for perpetual poverty. The last thing America needs is more of the Democrats’ class warfare that has left our economy a barren landscape."

If you're thinking that this sounds familiar, you'd be spot on the nose. The GOP wants to make the President's policies look as though they've failed, all the while ignoring their hand in making them fail.

This section of the SotU response made me laugh "And with too many Americans living paycheck to paycheck, we have solutions to help you take home more of your pay, through lower taxes, cheaper energy costs and affordable health care."

The GOP has blocked all policies that have been attempted to push better clean energy solutions in the US like wind turbines, solar, etc. They've pushed for further fracking, coal mining, and oil production including a massive oil pipeline that would go right through the central plains crossing three of our major aquifers. I've already shown that several GOP members want to raise taxes on the poor and middle class while reducing taxes on the rich. They've spent an estimated $50 million dollars to repeal Obamacare which was originally a GOP program, and they've made wild claims about Obamacare's effectiveness when people they hired and their own sponsored site was designed to create denial of service attacks on the website.  Cheaper energy costs...more like damaged environment and more sick people from more human caused environmental disasters.

The funniest part of the speech is this statement "The president said many things tonight. But now I ask him to listen to you, for the true state of the union lies in your heart and in your home."

I think that it is the GOP who needs to listen to the people, as the President already has and he's doing his best to do what the people have asked of him.

The last part of the GOP response is the most disturbing and clearly shows a religious bias. "So tonight I simply offer a prayer, a prayer for Sergeant Hess’s family, your family and for our larger American family, that with the guidance of God, we may prove -- proves ourselves worthy of His blessings of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. For when we embrace these gifts, we are each doing our part to form a more perfect union.

May God guide you and our president, and may God continue to bless the United States of America."

This section only proves, again, the GOP is very christian and holds no respect for people who aren't christian. It's insulting for them to address the US this way, they represent dozens of people and yet they make some pretty big assumptions. I'm annoyed at best with this final statement. The whole of the response was vague, offered no concrete expectations or realistic plans. It didn't describe anything beyond the same old rhetoric.

That's it for this post. I'm still working on my debunk of the anti-gay site....look forward to the next post soon.

Krist

2013 In Review; New Years Post

Dear Readers

It's that time of year again, when we don our pointy paper hats, drink champagne and count down for an otherwise every day shift of time. Yep it's New Years.

2013 has been both an enlightening and devastating year. We've seen many ups and downs, amazing highs, and absurdly low lows. This is my 2013 year in review.

Here is how it works, I pair good and bad events together, a sort of pros and cons list and at the end I determine if this year was more or less positive or more or less negative. Here goes.

LGBTQ wins and losses

1 +/a)Gay Rights; yep 2013 has had a great up surge in rights wins across the United States. The Defense of Marriage Act was shot down, several more states, including the conservative state of Minnesota  pass marriage equality and many more are slated to pass this equal protection as more and more state supreme courts are shooting down unconstitutional laws that discriminate against gays.

These states include: (by Court Decision) California (June 28, 2013), Connecticut (Nov. 12, 2008), Iowa (Apr. 24, 2009), Massachusetts (May 17, 2004), New Jersey (Oct. 21, 2013), New Mexico (Dec. 19, 2013), Utah (Dec. 20, 2013).

(By State Legislature) Delaware (July 1, 2013), Hawaii (Dec. 2, 2013), Illinois (law will take effect June 1, 2014), Minnesota (Aug. 1, 2013), New Hampshire (Jan. 1, 2010), New York (July 24, 2011), Rhode Island (Aug. 1, 2013), Vermont (Sep. 1, 2009). &

(By Popular Vote) Maine (Dec. 29, 2012), Maryland (Jan. 1, 2013), Washington (Dec. 9, 2012).

Washington, DC legalized same-sex marriage on Mar. 3, 2010.
1+/b) The California supreme court determined that Proposition 8, the right wing conservative and religious movement to ban gay rights and marriage equality, was unconstitutional. This decision cemented California's marriage equality and created a lasting legal precedent for other states to follow as they push for equality.

1+/c) The United Kingdom passed marriage equality this year.

1+/d) Many states are outlawing gay conversion therapy. From total outlawing of the practice to barring the practice for minors who are often pushed into this sort of therapy against their wills. California's ban on gay conversion therapy was upheld in court this year after challenges of religious freedom violations. Again California has set a standard and precedent that other states are following. Conservative Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey is slated to sign a bill to ban gay conversion therapy and Ohio is also slated to ban conversion therapy, possibly as early as spring next year.

1+/e) Bonus: John Paulk, the former anti-gay leader and head of the now defunct Exodus International apologized for his push against gays in an interview. He's since shut down Exodus and is a voice against gay conversion therapy.

1-/a) Unfortunately there are still several states that are maintaining unconstitutional laws that discriminate against equal protection under the law for the LGBTQ community. One of which is my home state of Wisconsin.
They include: (by Constitutional Amendment and State Law)
Alabama (2006, 1998), Alaska (1998, 1996), Arizona (2008, 1996), Arkansas (2004, 1997), Colorado (2006, 2000), Florida (2008, 1997), Georgia (2004, 1996), Idaho (2006, 1996), Kansas (2005, 1996), Kentucky (2004, 1998), Louisiana (2004, 1999), Michigan (2004, 1996), Mississippi (2004, 1997), Missouri (2004, 1996), Montana (2004, 1997), North Carolina (2012, 1995), North Dakota (2004, 1997), Ohio (2004, 2004), Oklahoma (2004, 1996), South Carolina (2006, 1996), South Dakota (2006, 1996), Tennessee (2006, 1996), Texas (2005, 1997), Virginia (2006, 1997), Wisconsin (2006, 1979)
(by Constitutional Amendment only)
Nebraska (2000), Nevada (2002), Oregon (2004)
(by State Law only)
Indiana (1997), Pennsylvania (1996), West Virginia (2000), Wyoming (2003)

1-/b)In some states, police are using these laws to do "gay stings" arresting people for soliciting gay consensual sex. In some cases it's in states where debunked anti-gay laws are still on the books even though they're not legal and have been overturned by courts.

"On Saturday the Advocate, an LGBT magazine, uncovered a sting operation run by the sheriff of East Baton Rouge targeting gay men in Louisiana. Under the sheriff's orders, police officers would meet gay men in public parks and bring them back to their apartments, where they would proceed to arrest the victim on the grounds of Louisiana's anti-sodomy laws." (http://www.policymic.com/articles/57039/being-gay-is-still-illegal-in-this-louisiana-sheriff-s-town)

1-/c)Anti-gay rights advocates, while losing ground in the US, have pushed for and gained ground in other countries with less strict laws on religious intervention on governance. These include; Russia, Sudan, South Africa, and sadly India. The leaders of NOM (National Organization for Marriage) along with conservative politicians have traveled abroad to voice their anti-gay beliefs.

1-/d) Russia is probably the biggest anti-gay news source this year. With the Sochi Olympics right around the corner, their anti-gay propaganda laws, which severely cripple any discussion about homosexuality in the country, has lead to many concerns. With arrests being made for wearing rainbow shirts or ribbons, for voicing opinions against the law, and jail sentences for foreigners as well as residents, Russia has gone back to a dark age for gay rights.

1-/e) Gay bashing, literally; both in the US and in Russia and world wide for that matter, violence against gays is on the rise. Many reports of teens in Russia being lured into traps, being kidnapped, then beaten and tortured on video, have become all too common. Uganda passed a law making being gay not only illegal, but punishable by the death penalty. It also legalized and institutionalized "rape" as a therapy to turn lesbians straight.

Women's Rights

2+/a) We've seen a surge of women's rights advocates arise in the US. Including Wendy Davis (D-Texas) who filibusters for over 11 hours a bill that sadly was passed in a special referendum. The bill killed dozens of abortion clinics by forcing unnecessary medical standards that the clinics have to meet to be open. This law dropped the total number of abortion clinics available in the state to just four.

2-/a) The closing of abortion clinics and the Texas war on women, and the greater US war on women by women. Many conservative women have taken on the mantle of calling their fellow women the whores of the US. Why, because they don't agree with abortion and with contraception. This has played a major part in another area the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act aka Obamacare aka Romney Care, see later section.

2+/b) Equal pay is closer than ever before. As many states push for minimum wage increases, some with extensive increases, woman are getting closer to equal pay in the work force.

2-/b) Unfortunately equal pay also means a drop in pay for everyone as rich corporations push to lower over all costs and maximize productivity while paying less to all employees. The creation of minimum wage jobs is the equalizer in this equation.

Governance

3+&-/a) The initiation of the insurance market in October came with bad and good news. While many states didn't expand medicare and medicaid and open their own exchanges (mostly conservative run states) many states did, bringing health insurance to millions of uninsured people and lowering the total cost for health care and health insurance for millions more now able to search for and apply for insurance through the exchange. Unfortunately, because of the number of states that didn't expand or opt into the ACA, the federal run website was overwhelmed with traffic making it difficult if not impossible for some to sign up for health insurance. The site wasn't designed for the amount of traffic. But what was worse is the fact that GOP leaks exposed a Denial of Service attack on the site created by and perpetrated by anti-Obamacare proponents. It was estimated that over 4 million of the hits on the site in the first week were caused by DoS attacks.

3-/b) The Government Shutdown and other GOP obstructionism, including Austerity cuts. The GOP has shown time and again this year that it doesn't care about serving the greater good of the people, but instead was only concerned with political warfare. Every move they made for the majority of the year, including the government shut down, was their attempt to discredit and cause harm to President Obama. Despite their hopes to get him impeached or to force the hands of the Democrats, they've only proven their stupidity and uncaring nature. Not to mention their totally non-fiscally conscious attempts to repeal the ACA. With 47 attempts costing the US taxpayer nearly 70 million dollars, the GOP attempts to repeal the ACA is the biggest expenditure in US history to repeal one law.

3+/b) Despite the obstructionism caused by the GOP many good bills have gone through, and the Dems have changed the rules on filibustering, at least on presidential appointments, filling many open spots with liberal politicians, lawyers, experts, and judges. 

3+/c) The big one in this list I think is that the ACA is working, much to the chagrin of the GOP. Not only has it lowered over all healthcare cost increases, but has a projected affect on over all cost of health care going down. Further, because of the ACA, several states are working on or already have passed universal health care for all residents. Some slated already to be in affect as early as 2017. Millions of Americans who weren't able to get health insurance will now be able to with lower out of pocket costs.

3+&-/d) Economic recovery has been slow for the vast majority of the populace. While we've seen a rebound in jobs, over 70% have been in part time positions. Especially in heavily hit cities. Detroit is one of the biggest hit cities from the economic depression of the 2000s. This year it declared bankruptcy, a first for any major city in US history. Detroit lost over 80% of it's major industry over the last two decades. Car companies shifted jobs overseas derailing Detroit Steel, and labor unions. Detroit, under emergency austerity measures being dictated by an emergency economic manager, has since taken away thousands of people's paid for pensions, insurance, and has even tried to auction off Detroit's museums to get money back for the city. Implementing quick fixes to cover over a long lasting problem. Detroit is a city without industry to keep it going. On the flip side, new non-profit organizations are taking a foothold in the city. Some of which are providing free housing to writers and artists if they would be willing to move to Detroit.

Weather and Environment

4+ & -) Global warming/climate change researchers got a boost this year with more data and their weather predictions coming true. Unfortunately this boost in recognition came with many opponents from conservative sources dishing out misinformation.

None the less the weather machine churned out many massive storms this year. Check out Huff Posts' list here.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/26/most-extreme-weather-2013_n_3654414.html

5-) Monsanto wins big, people lost big. Monsanto won several court cases against them this year cementing their place in our food production and our use of their pesticides. Including several that are killing bees.

5+) This year a Malaysian company built an urban vertical farm slated to feed millions of people.

6+) Green energy hit parity, matching and then beating energy production costs of fossil fuels and dirty energy sources. With new innovations hitting new highs in efficiency (30% energy conversion) for solar panels, we'll soon see more and more solar panels and local energy production. Germany reached 400 megawatts of power per 1 million people. That's 32234.28 TW of potential power annually. If the US were to reach this same potential green energy production density, each year we'd produce 124800 TW of power, or four times the total power consumption in the US (including fossil fuels for heating). That'd be from solar power alone, let alone the additions of other power sources. Such as; wind turbines, geothermal, nuclear fusion, and hydroelectric sources (both dams and tidal). Now, only if we could do that in the US.

7) The number of environmental and weather wins and losses is massive, too massive for my list.

Social and Tech:

8+&-)The PS4, Wii U, and Xbox 1 all came out this year. All promised many things, much of which gamers didn't like and they had to change. The new generation of game consoles are more like computers than their predecessors with a first of shared tech between the two major players, the PS4 and Xbox One. This means more cross platform games but it also means an end to an era of gaming. The comparisons of performance are so minute in difference that the two consoles are almost indifferent.

9) Apple loses ground on competitors and makes the OS free, while it's competitors ever increase in numbers, with Chrome OS netbooks and tablets abound. Windows 8 replaces windows 7 and updates to 8.1.

10) Justin Bieber retires at a ripe old age of 19.

11+) Al Jazeera America started this year bringing back old fashioned reporting of the facts without spin.

11-) Fox News is still on air and has a mass of spin off news sources spreading misinformation. 

For more tech advances check out http://www.technologyreview.com/lists/breakthrough-technologies/2013/
For more tech failures check out http://readwrite.com/2013/12/20/top-10-tech-failures-of-2013#awesm=~orxIu0vbr0Ig9Y


2013 Conclusion:

2013 has been a dynamic year, filled with both personal triumphs for some, and devastating failures for both individuals and the country at large.

However, one event sums up the whole of this year and the message that we as a country have sent and it is one of positiveness. Of triumph over evil and the tyranny of certain few. That is, of course, BatKid.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/15/batkid-san-francisco_n_4283772.html

What was intended to be a little known special event to celebrate 5 year old Miles Scott's recovery from cancer, turned into a nationwide event. Millions of people participated in one way or another to help Batkid take down the Joker, the Riddler, and save a damsel in distress. Elevating, at least for a small time, this little boy to superhero status. This celebration of his fight against his cancer and being able to play Batman represents the greater view that people want fairness and the righteous to win out. While we might have an issue with what is and isn't right, ultimately people at large will vote for and strive for what is right.

PS: Yes I left out things in this list. Please don't judge. I can't cover everything.

Faux Fags and Gay Sex

Honesty Blog 1

Gay sex...yep, gay sex that is what this post is about. Let's talk about gay sex.

So two gays walk into a bar...no no, not that no...

I had this interesting conversation with a friend of mine, a gay friend, he said "I so miss being with
a real homosexual"
I asked, "Oh, you found a fake homo, an Artificial homo? Is there like a market for those like an
 artificial xmas tree?"It's a Faux Fag""

Here's the thing, gay is gay, there is no such thing as the Faux Fag...though I suppose people said the
same thing about fake news...oh right Faux News...

A person can be gay and act in any number of ways. The stereotypes that exist about how gays act, stemming
from the shows like Will and Grace or Rupaul's Drag Race. These stereotypes don't reflect the fact that
homosexuality exists in every culture. There is no stereotypical dyke, no expected flamo glitter boy.

So the man stick's his cock in...no no not that...

Mental floss check, gays make up 16% of the US population, or nearly 35 million people. Of that about 1.2 million
are out of the closet and openly gay.

So funny story, the first time I gave head the guy's dick was basically a soft fleshy gummy worm.

"What do you mean it looks nice, it's not hard yet"
"I was just being polite".

No, okay so gay sex...not much different than heterosex. You know straight guys like sticking it up the pooper
too.

Some gays will act "straight" others super-gay. Some straights act "gay" when they're not. We shouldn't judge
people based on how they act, because you don't know who that person is. You don't know if they were raped at
age four by their step dad who was a murderous douche bag. You don't know if that person grew up with a single
mom, or no parents at all. You don't know if they love Chaucer or Power Rangers or Anime or Star Trek.

Pinning a stereotype on a person is glossing over who that person is. Just like there is huge range of how
straight people act, so is the case with gays.

We have our embarrassing moments, those moments when we're discovering who we are, what we like, who we like.
We grapple with our first kiss, our first wank, you know when you realize that your dick feels AWESOME when
rub it just in the right way. It feels even more awesome when it gets hard and you look at porn, that sensual
sexual carnal humping. When any nudity, this natural state, makes you so hard that your cock presses against
your jeans so badly it hurts and you can't help but to adjust yourself. Even if it's in the middle of the mall
and you're hard because you saw a mannequin that was sort of hot.

We all grapple with these moments. Like the first time you're used by someone to get off and then left high
and dry by the douche. Or the first time you penetrate someone and it feels so weird, nothing like your hand.
And you try and you try, humping slow,  humping fast, humping with a weird rhythm. Your partner moans, pretending
for a moment it feels good, maybe it does, maybe they're just being nice and you keep going while the alcohol
is making you feel tired and exhausted and farty, and you're hoping you won't fart. You clench your own ass,
feeling the gas build up and you hear your partner moan again, and you moan, not because you're about to cum
but because your ass hurts from the pressure. Yeah we all struggle with that.

We struggle with the first time putting a condom on, getting the damned thing out of the packaging which for some
reason doesn't have a perforated edge that's obvious to a drunk guy. No of course not. We have to deal with nudie
pinups in the men's bathroom that no one really want's to see unless they are drunk in some dive bar. We've
all experienced the inexperienced kisser, the slobber gobber, too much spit in the saliva exchange.

We're all nervous about the first time, and brag about it when it didn't really happen. We've all had to hide
our boners in class, wanting a wank in the back of the library, or in the bathroom stall. And  when we see our
crush we get embarrassed and blush. Being gay isn't different than being straight, no biblical statement exists
that can exterminate our humanity.

We want to walk hand in hand, to dance at our proms, we want to live without fear, without needing to scan each
corner we turn, peak around each every door, to have happiness and live life assured. Why should we be treated
any different than the straight boys and straight girls? Why should we be society's toys, unfurled by stupidity
that's so fluidly washing over political practices and religious factlessness? What's the PC thing to say
to the discriminators and haters and masturbators that love the blood and violence that comes with being decloseted?

So gay sex...gay sex, yep gay fucking sex, fucking fuckers fucking the fuckers. No more dirty than the straight sex
we use everywhere, titties on a big screen. 'Merica says we love the boobs, we have to have them for everything, in
magazines, on the tv, behind the football players, and in the movies. Shssh no one needs to know you're'all sort of gay.
Who wants to see a little needle dick penetrate a girl's pussy anyway? Maybe that's why Catholic priests go after little boys,
their mouths are like pussies, yeah.

No fucking way, no, what, no.


***

I tell you my head hurts anymore. Stupid people are everywhere. Every day I feel my IQ points slipping away. I read stupid posts,
hear stupid statements from supposedly respectable professionals. I feel my IQ points slip away, and I wonder how the fuck I don't
have the job I need. How do these losers who have no sense, no logic, pandering to their bosses, unwilling to speak the truth
without spinning it for some audience, have a fucking job? I have to wonder how our politicians have reached the station that they're
at now. How did they get elected when they do nothing. How can we change the stupidity with which our country is run, our society is rung
our culture is run, if no one can seem to recognize the stupidity therein.

Jokes aside, real stories aside, I can't handle the stupid anymore. I can't.