The Democratic Party completely fails to address a number of very important issues facing the United States.The reason they neglect these important issues is unclear, although we may speculate that it is because of cowardice or decadence. The Democrats are easily wrapped up into a debate on ridiculous issues such as gay marriage and torture when they should be insisting on the discussion of more pressing issues.The 2008 elections are upon us, and again the democrats present a platform filled with holes.It is pleasing that the Democratic Party has addressed the important issues of Universal Health Care and the Iraq war, but why must they stop there?Those are not the only issues facing America or the only issues worthy of debate. There is no discussion of the following topics which have an enormous impact on our lives:
Education
Prison Reform
Restoration of Civil Liberties
Fiscal Decentralization,
The Military-Industrial Complex
Business-government collusion.
The Separation of Church and State
Surely these issues warrant discussion, but we endure the endless bickering on the minutia of the Universal Health Care plan which we are already in favor of either way.Ralph Nader runs for president for this reason.He does not think he will win, and he certainly does not intend to disrupt the election.Nader runs in an attempt to force the discussion of the neglected issues, which we will now examine.
Education
The Federal Government spent around 90 billion dollars on education in 2007.Funding for education is up over 100% from 2001; however the “no child left behind” policy has not produced the results expected by the GOP.The “test and punish” approach to school management has left 30% of our nation’s schools failing to meet the criteria for federal funding.There are countless reasons that the NCLB act has done nothing but harm our schools.Please review this article on the problems of NCLB from fairtest.org, the national center for fair and open testing.Clearly the current system is fatally flawed… So why has education has gone virtually unmentioned on the 2008 campaign trail?What could be more important to the future of our country?
Nonviolent Prisoners
The United States Prison System is may be even more flawed than that of its education policies.US Prisons contain 2.25 million prisoners, 60% of which will commit a crime after they are released from prison according to the US Bureau of Justice. Half of the 2.25 million prisoners in the United States are non-violent offenders, and 40% of those non-violent offenders are serving time on narcotics charges.This means that 450,000 drug users are behind bars, a population rivaling the city of Atlanta.At an estimated cost of $25,000 per inmate per year, imprisoning drug users costs the United States over 11 billion of the 60 billion dollars spent annually on “corrections.”US prisons are also disproportionately composed of African-Americans and Latinos.With the percentage of the population in prison nearing 1%, this issue cannot be ignored any longer.We must be diligent, and demand that it be discussed.
Restoration of Civil Liberties
Largely forgotten in the wake of September 11th, labor laws in the United States have not been continuously upheld by the government.The Reagan administration refused to enforce union rights beginning in 1981, when thousands of union workers were illegally fired and their constitutional rights violated.The Reagan administration’s outright refusal to enforce labor laws lead to the rapid decline in both wages and occupational safety for the workers of America.Those rights continue to go unenforced today.The table below illustrates the relative and actual decline in average weekly wages for the American worker.
The United States economy grew with record speed through the late 1980s and 1990s, but the proceeds never made it to the American worker.“It isn’t the economy, stupid.”
Civil liberties have fallen on even tougher times over the post-9/11 period.Government has effectively stripped the American population of many civil liberties we once held dear.The signing of the Patriot Act in 2001 by 99 senators served to open the door to the repeal of other civil liberties, Russ Feingold, the democratic senator from Wisconsin and the finest man in Washington, stood alone in voting against the bill.The last two presidential administrations have violated FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) and later changed the law to conform to their needs.The FISA violations are just one example of when the executive branch has broken the law, and that is a violation of our civil liberties.The Bush Administration has run amuck with its violations of civil liberties.According to Boston.com, “President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.”The American people must demand an end to these blatant violations.
Fiscal Decentralization and Poverty Reduction
The disparity between the wealthiest and the poorest Americans has grown to record levels.39% of Americans live below the poverty line, according to the US Census Bureau, and wages are well below relative historical levels.There is no excuse for poverty in the wealthiest nation in the world.Neither party seems likely to address this issue, as members have become prosperous themselves and stand to gain from current policy which favors the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the deprived.The United Nations offers a primer on Fiscal Decentralization and Poverty Reduction, perhaps the United States could use that as a starting point.
The Military-Industrial Complex.
Time after time, the United States has ignored the advice of its retiring leaders, beginning with George Washington’s condemnation of political parties.The advice given by Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address warned us of the dangers of the military-industrial complex:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
It is not the size and strength of our military that is of concern, but rather our failure to resist the temptation to use it to dominate others. We must learn to limit our military spending to what is absolutely necessary to defend ourselves, and also show the utmost restraint in the use of that power.The topic of US imperialism should also be at the forefront, as the issue may ultimately be vital to the quality of life for US citizens.
Business-Government Collusion
Collusion between business and government is a large problem in the United States.No bid contracts awarded to companies such as Halliburton, Bechtel, and others with close ties to government are not even held as secrets.There are multiple levels of corruption, from the special interest influence in Washington to politicians serving on corporate boards.Dick Cheney and Haliburton, Hillary Clinton and Wal-Mart, the list goes on and on and on and on.Corporations strategize on how to best influence and manipulate our politicians, and we must demand litigation to prevent such activity.
The Separation of Church and State
The first amendment rights of Americans are too often violated when it comes to religion.The governor of Arkansas is running for president on a campaign promising to “amend the constitution to be in ‘god’s standards.’”The word “god” should not even appear on money or in the pledge of allegiance, but some of our public schools have taught creationism.We must demand that our constitutional rights be upheld, before out national falls into Theocracy.
Why are none of the preceding issues discussed heavily in the campaigns?Iraq, Immigration, and Health Care are by no means the only problems facing our country.Media reform, term limits for congress, and many other issues should also be discussed.Democracy requires eternal vigilance, so join me in demanding that these issues be addressed.Contact your representative and demand an answer now.
“Assure a man that he has a soul and then frighten him with old wives’ tales as to what is to become of him afterward, and you have hooked a fish, a mental slave.”
- Theodore Dreiser
People who have nothing to lose cannot be threatened and therefore cannot be controlled by conventional means, for that we use Religion. Aggressive religious indoctrination of a child an an early age, the kind of indoctrination found in many of our most prevalent religions, should be considered a crime against humanity; a crime as morally indefensible as to keep fellow men as slaves. How many brilliant young men and women have been taught to reject science by their parents and teachers? How many wonderful discoveries and inventions has humanity missed out on while wasting much of our collective energy worshiping imaginary personal gods? What would Thomas Aquinas or Martin Luther have done with their undoubtedly great minds had they not been poisoned by religion? How many young Galileo’s and Da Vinci’s has religion murdered and censored from history for disputing it’s claims? How can an act so malicious as to condemn an innocent child to a lifetime of ignorance and slavery be smiled upon in any culture?
“I didn’t know I was a slave until I found out I couldn’t do the things I wanted”
- Fredrick Douglass
The common theme among religions that have survived the test of time is ambition; those that best programmed loyal servants to spread the doctrine and to aggressively reject all other systems of belief, even going to far as to advocate the murder of those enslaved by a different master. An indoctrinated child who fails to overcome their beliefs later in life is forever enslaved and used by the church to promote it’s interests. The individual human being receives only empty promises in return for his service, which is the same wage that is paid to an individual living in the civil institution of slavery.
“He that cannot reason is a fool. He that will not is a bigot. He that dare not is a slave.”
- Andrew Carnegie
A religious slave pays tithes, seeks to acquire additional slaves for his master by spreading his religion, refuses to admit, even to himself, any internal doubt concerning the particular dogma he has been indoctrinated with, and views all observable events through a religious lens, thus observing negative events as divine punishment and positive events as miracles. A truly indoctrinated individual may believe a destructive earthquake caused by a deity punishing nonbelievers rather than shifting tectonic plates, or believe rain during a drought caused by divine intervention rather than an accumulation of water vapor in the atmosphere. A religious slave will not question his beliefs out of a fear of supernatural, parental and societal punishment.
“Slaves lose everything in their chains, even the desire of escaping from them.”
- Jean Jacques Rousseau
The indoctrination of children is a skill that has been perfected and passed down for hundreds of generations under the clever guise of “theology.” It seems to be the direct intention of the church to damn it’s followers to a lifetime of ignorance, for if indoctrination is completely successful they will have done exactly that. To classify religious indoctrination as “education” should be viewed by mankind as an act of barbarism, instead of embraced as it is in many cultures. What greater atrocity exists than that of an indoctrinated child who is so poisoned by his parent’s religion that he would love his imaginary god more than he loves himself and his own family?
“No religion which is narrow and which cannot satisfy the test of reason, will survive the coming reconstruction of society in which the values will have changed and character, not possession of wealth, title or birth will be the test of merit.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
The ambitious religions of the world continuously attempt to cast mankind into a dark age of unlearning. There are countless examples of religion attempting to impede human learning, even examples that suggest that religion would fondly welcome a period of ignorance, superstition, and loss of intellectual freedom. The catholic pope’s renunciation of Capitalism and Communism in Brazil is but one recent example of the churches desperate desire for mankind to regress into a dark age. Capitalism and Communism may not be perfect, however it is nearly indisputable that the development of these systems has been progressive when compared to labor and economic systems considered obsolete long ago due to their oppressive nature, such as the feudal caste system, serfdom, and slavery. The simple advocacy of hatred by many religious groups should be considered the enemy of progress, as the very racism, sexism, and religious intolerance our society has worked so hard to escape are championed by mainstream religion. The conservative christian lobby in the United States has used it’s political clout to impede the progress of mankind many times over, from the avocation of religious indoctrination in public schools to the blocking of stem cell research. The continual mistreatment of women by Islam is yet another atrocity committed by religion. How anyone can argue that the emancipation of women is not progress for mankind is beyond anything that I can bring myself to comprehend.
“No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always convinced that it says what he means”
-George Bernard Shaw
Another example of the pure arrogance of the religious is the ability to interpret scriptures any such way they see fit. Ancient scripture has been used to justify anything and everything throughout history. Murder, rape, racism, sexism, and even genocide are actually encouraged, especially in the three largest monotheistic religions of the West. Religion must be exposed for its tendency to encourage hate, but still much more so for it’s tendency to enslave the minds of mankind.
“The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it.”
- Thomas Jefferson
The most frightening aspect of religion is not it’s unprecedented spread of hatred and intolerance, but it’s ability to resist revolution by brainwashing followers before they are equipped to fight back with reason and logic. Fascism, Theocracy, and other vehicles for the spread of hatred are imposed by governmental will but do not easily penetrate the hearts and minds of the population, though they crush all opposition with destruction or the threat of destruction. Religion intends to be instilled so deeply at such a young age that a theological revolution is unthinkable, while maintaining the unprecedented power of the fear of post-mortem consequences. To fight back against a dictator is to rebel against one’s government, but to fight against the slavery of religion is to rebel against one’s own parents.
“The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppose.”
- Fredrick Douglass
For civilization to break free from the bondage of religion, we all must do our part by refusing to pass dogmatic beliefs on to future generations. We must value intellectual honesty above spirituality, and we must realize that a child indoctrinated with religion is a child living in intellectual oppression. A child shackled in such bonds is burdened to shackle his own child, lest he be the one fortunate enough to free his mind and to break the endless cycle. If in your greatest fantasy, your dreams, your imagination you feel the presence of god… consider for once leaving him there.
Hillary Clinton just can’t stop embarrassing herself lately. Maybe 3.8 million dollars a month doesn’t buy the kind of political strategy that it used to, because her outrageously duplicitous behavior and chronic, pathetic attempts to drag Obama into the mud will do nothing but repel voters. Take a look at this RantingRaver.com video montage featuring Hillary’s rampant hypocrisy:
CNN has been accused of manipulating the public perception of last night’s debate. A CNN producer allegedly prompted the standing ovation at the end of the debate by encouraging the audience to rise when Mrs. Clinton finished her final statement. My personal feeling is that the the standing ovation occurred because it was the end of a good, largely respectable, debate… however CNN would spin the story as if Hillary Clinton was receiving the standing ovation for her masterful commentary. Would CNN do such a thing? This is not the first time that they have been accused of manipulating political discourse, there are many recent examples of possible corruption at CNN.
CNN was clearly trying to spin the debate into a Clinton victory by their completely pro-Clinton analysis of the debates, including insinuating that the standing ovation was directed at Clinton and not both candidates for a civil debate. A review of CNN’s political blog illustrates the way in Obama’s successes in the debate were downplayed. There was also no mention of the booing heard in the background when Hillary made her unpopular “Xerox” comment (as if she writes her own speeches) on the CNN blog.
CNN has also come under scrutiny for the abrupt firing of a producer who happened to be writing for a liberal blog. Chaz Pazienza (the producer who was fired) has come forward with the information that CNN fired him not just for “his name being attached to opinionated blog posts,” but because of his political views. The CNN HR department informed Chaz, regarding his firing: “It’s also, you know, the nature of what you’ve been writing.”
The mainstream media cannot be trusted as long as these shady dealings continue to occur. When applying critical thought to the topic, it would seem to me that CNN favors Hillary for obvious reasons. If you were a large corporation, who would you want to be President, the candidate who owes you something in return for your large campaign contributions or the candidate who refused such bribes donations? Human nature would indicate the former.
The Clinton family, an American political dynasty, is fighting desperately to hold on to political power. Their desperation is evidenced by the recent and entirely absurd claims of plagiarism against Barak Obama. They are really grasping at straws here, as the recent attempts to smear Obama as a plagiarist is ludicrous and completely unfounded. The first I heard of this ridiculous tactic was last weekend, when the story was reported to have come from some of Hillary’s people. I assumed that, due to the preposterous nature of the accusations, they would not go much further.
Hillary surprised me when she tried to use the plagiarism claims to smear Obama in a debate, a setting in which he could defend himself. Barack did a very good job of letting the audience know that whether or not speech writers collaborate is not a real issue without getting drawn into the topic, and deflected the conversation back to REAL issues facing the nation. The audience put Hillary in her place when they booed her Xerox comment, which was made as if Hillary writes her own speeches personally.
It would appear that the Clinton Dynasty is using Karl Rove style political tactics against Obama, which I find to be quite hypocritical… Not to mention the fact that she’s accused Obama of “not having substance” while she employs underhanded political tactics. Does inaccurately calling your opponent a plagiarist constitute “substance” to you, Hillary? I also find it hypocritical that Hillary talks a big game about uniting the country behind the democratic agenda while she attempts to smear a fellow democratic Senator using “silly” political games. She talks about how her campaign is about the people, even though she proved it wasn’t by skipping the FISA vote and taking money from special interest groups. Hillary’s hypocrisy doesn’t end there. It also must be difficult to back up the “about the people” claim when your campaign is financed by special interest groups while your opponent is financed by a grass roots movement of individual supporters.
Hillary Clinton’s recent behavior has done a fine job of demonstrating what type of a president she’ll be. She said it herself last night when she said “actions speak louder than words.” Hillary’s actions should speak volumes to the American public. Her blatant slander of Obama (the plagiarism thing), her absence at the FISA vote, her pathetic political tactics, and her willingness to accept special interest contributions (bribes) tells us all we need to know.
John McCain is a terrible liar. It’s quite impressive that he has been able to achieve such success as a politician, considering his obvious liar’s tells. The most obvious of McCain’s tells is the impressive rate at which the man blinks when speaking. Look at this WikiHow article on spotting a liar and see how many other tells you can match up to McCain. Anyone who plays poker will clearly detect McCain’s obvious deception, and immediately see past his “straight shooter” facade.
Is John McCain really as big of a hypocrite as he seems, or is he just lying about his views to pander to the GOP electorate? McCain claims to support torture, however he is an ex-POW who knows that if Americans torture prisoners then American prisoners will be tortured. McCain also voted to impeach Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, but is now caught once again committing similar actions to the ones he condemned. McCain has also been critical of the president in the past, and then later claimed that criticism of the president is “unpatriotic.” It would seem that McCain’s past values have changed to take on a more GOP-friendly perspective. Nobody likes a hypocrite or a liar, Mr. McCain… and certainly not both.
The only time in recent memory that I believed a word John McCain uttered, is when he said this:
“We’re all tainted. We’re all under suspicion as long as Washington is awash in special interest money.”
Seems like John McCain forgot about Barrack Obama when he made that statement. Obama isn’t perfect, but he’s doing his best to keep his campaign clean and special-interest free. Such a campaign is refreshing and is exactly what the United States needs to begin the reformation of our corrupt political system.
“Captured combatants and civilians who find themselves under the authority of the adverse party are entitled to respect for their lives, their dignity, their personal rights and their political, religious and other convictions. They must be protected against all acts of violence or reprisal. They are entitled to exchange news with their families and receive aid. They must enjoy basic judicial guarantees.”
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
There should be no further mention of torture in United States politics. The fact that it is even being debated is completely ludicrous. By no means may the United States violate international human rights laws on behalf of it’s citizens. Any elected official who knowingly authorized water boarding or any other form of torture must immediately be brought to justice. Those who willfully committed “grave breaches” should immediately stand trial as prescribed by the Geneva Conventions.
By violating the Geneva Conventions, the United States is endangering the human rights of its own citizens and troops. Universally accepted humanitarian laws as laid out by the UN will not be respected in regards to US soldiers and civilians by our enemies if we do not also abide by said laws, not to mention the Geneva Conventions’ protection of prisoners of war. These fundamental human rights laws must be protected at all costs. Committing war crimes against others will only lead to war crimes being committed against the US, and nothing more.
Any information obtained from an enemy through torture cannot be treated as reliable. A tortured individual will say whatever he or she believes the war criminal wants to hear in order to stop the torture, regardless of truth. Have we not learned this from the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem Witch Trials?
Why is political discourse focused on torture if it is not even an issue? Perhaps it is to distract the population from the REAL issues in America, as happened last election with the “debate” over whether or not to discriminate against homosexuals. The issue of torture is perhaps even more outrageous than the suggestion that discrimination against anyone should be legal, and is doing a fine job of dominating the attention of the mainstream media. Americans must become vigilant, and demand coverage of the real issues like the widening gap between the rich and poor, education, media reform, health care, and corporate/government collusion.
Americans must also be vigilant in demanding that the war criminals be brought to justice. We must insist that there be an immediate investigation into torture and the authorization of said torture as a gesture to the global community. Such a gesture would signal that the United States wishes to remain a member of the UN and participate in the treaties of the Geneva Conventions, despite the criminal actions of corrupt individuals in power. We cannot afford to set a precedent for the degradation of the basic human rights our ancestors fought and died to provide for us.
“We learn from history that we learn nothing from history.” — George Bernard Shaw
We are living in world of great irony. The United States is engaged in terrorist actions across the globe while fighting a war against terrorism. How soon we have forgotten our founding fathers, forgotten that the reason we idolize them is for their acts of “terrorism” against the British Empire? We must remember that the definition of terrorism is in the eye of the beholder. Unfortunately, we have become unable to see things from any other point of view but our own. We have become so greedy that we allow over 24,000 people a day worldwide to starve to death while we use our vast resources to ensure our continued access to global oil reserves. What would the world think of us if we used our resources to fight worldwide poverty and hunger as opposed to furthering our vast wealth? Perhaps combating poverty does not make an economic chart show growth the way the way bombing a country and then letting Halliburton and Bechtel make fortunes rebuilding it with no-bid contracts does. When our corporations use underhanded methods to abuse foreign land, foreigners will view it in the same way Americans view September 11th. If the illegal invasion of Iraq is not enough, the following atrocities have also been committed in our name:
- Coca Cola spreads terror around the world using paramilitary forces to assassinate union leaders and remove political threats. Check out this quote from a 2004 fact-finding delegation sent to Columbia in 2004:
“Most troubling to the delegation were the persistent allegations that paramilitary violence against workers was done with the knowledge of and likely under the direction of company managers. The physical access that paramilitaries have had to Coca Cola bottling plants is impossible without company knowledge and/or tacit approval. Shockingly, company officials admitted to the delegation that they had never investigated the ties between plant managers and paramilitaries. The company’s inaction and its ongoing refusal to take any responsibility for the human rights crisis faced by its workforce in Colombia demonstrates — at best — disregard for the lives of its workers.”
2004 was not the beginning of Coca-Cola’s criminal rampage. A more comprehensive article on Coca-Cola and other terrorism in Columbia can be found here.
- Unilever Corporation allegedly illegally dumped 300mt of Mercury outside one of its plants in India. Coca-Cola and Pepsi are also active in the destruction of India’s environment, and have been banned from several Indian states. The Indian states allege that the Coca-Cola sold in India contains high levels of pesticides. Coca-Cola was asked to leave India in 1977; 40 years later they are still damaging the reputation of the United States.
- Exxon Mobile is accused of illegally bribing foreign government officials, paying them billions of dollars for the rights to their countries oil reserves. The people of these countries, such as Equatorial Guinea, are robbed of the resources that rightfully belong to the entire country by the reigning despot. Exxon Mobile supports tyrannical autocratic regimes in order to rape foreign lands in the name of the United States.
It is not only corporations, but our government as well. Consider the following examples:
- The 1998 destruction of a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan by 16 US cruise missiles. The pharmaceutical plant was responsible for a large percentage of medicine in the region, subjecting many to unnecessarily untreated illness.
- The 1997 bombings of Cuban hotels and nightclubs in an effort to destroy the Cuban tourism industry. Cuba accuses the United States of having links to several other attacks over the past few decades, and violating international terrorism treaties.
- The US has sponsored acts of terror in Panama and Venezuela, hiring Luis Posada Carriles to commit the acts. Carriles also admits to the 1997 Cuban tourist bombings mentioned above, and enjoys political amnesty at his home in Miama, FL. The national security archive holds the declassified records, which can be viewed here.
Unfortunately, the examples mentioned above do not scrape the surface of the problem of US-tolerated terrorism. Corporations and state-sponsored entities are committing tyrannical acts abroad in the name of the American citizen’s greed. The people of the United States have convinced ourselves that we gladly help foreign nations, when in reality we are only manipulating them to serve our own interests. We have developed a tunnel vision which tragically prevents us from seeing the consequences of our collective consumption. This tunnel vision has resulted in our willingness to murder innocent people living in less fortunate nations, provided the justification is Americans’ safety or financial interest. This will not stop until the American educate themselves. We cannot turn to mainstream media, for they are under the control of the ruling corporatocracy. The American people will have to rise up and force our government to listen. We must demand not to be party to these crimes, or be burdened with the conscious of a citizen of the empire.
The FISA Bill, which would provide immunity to the telecommunications companies who violated the law in assisting Bush spy on innocent Americans, was voted on yesterday by the United States Senate.Barrack Obama attended, casting his vote in favor of the American people and against granting amnesty to the corporate criminals.Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, never bothered to show up for this very important vote.Evidently campaigning is much more important to Mrs. Clinton than representing her constituents is.By her actions, Clinton is quite clearly telling the American public that her personal campaign for the presidency outweighs any responsibility she has to her constituents in New York.Will she represent America any differently if she is elected president?
“A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy” - Benjamin Disraeli
With the allegations of election rigging in the 2004 elections, shouldn’t the integrity of the coming election be of great concern?How can Americans be certain that their votes will be counted fairly? The power faction in the United States has not recently been challenged by a legitimate, electable candidate promising to “clean up Washington” while refusing to be corrupted by the special interest.The current establishment would like nothing more than to see this candidate defeated, so that they may continue their oppression.
The fact that election-rigging allegations have not yet been picked up and milked for every dollar by the mainstream media, who jumps on any popular story and reports it until it is beaten into the ground, may provide evidence of a conspiracy.Why not jump on election-rigging?What could be a more important function of the media than informing the public that they may have been deceived?Even after 2 election workers were sentenced to 18 months in jail (yep, just a slap on the wrist) for vote fraud, the mainstream media is still not interested in the story.
Why wouldn’t the media pick this story up? It’s surely very popular as it made front-page news on Digg.com, a site devoted to democratizing media in which users vote on which stories interest them.We can only speculate that the large corporations who own the vast majority of our media outlets have stifled the story to further their interests.These companies are interested in their own, more subtle form of election sabotage.Ask yourself this: If the AP has the influence to rig the election (via selective and biased reporting) along with the incentive to do so, what is to stop them?What does human nature suggest they would do? It might not even be the fault of corporations, but more so our laws and policies. It’s the law that corporations have to do what’s best for their shareholders (ie: make the most money possible), and that fiercely conflicts with public interest in some cases, especially this one. Clearly the corporations have already proven their greedy self-interest, in fact it’s required of them…so why do we trust them?
George Orwell’s 1984 is upon us. The FISA bill aims to grant amnesty to those elected officials who broke the law to spy on innocent Americans. Telecomm coroporations who refused to uphold the law, and thus granted the Bush administration access to your private conversations, will also be granted amnesty. What is to stop the Corpratocracy from spying on us for any reason they see fit now? Where will the line be drawn? The government, and telecomms, will legally be able to spy on you when today’s bill passes. The message we are sending is this: “If you have enough money, influence and power, then you are above the law.”
Did you know that the key lobbyists for Verizon and AT&T include a former Democratic Assistant Secretary of State and a former White House Assistant Counsel under Bush? There exists a massive conflict of interest here, but there also exists a wonderful example of the problems we face today in America. Both the Republican and the Democratic party need to be shown that they exist to serve us, the American public. Both parties have forgotten their duties, and have long taken their power for granted, leaving the American citizen to suffer. Both parties have become too close to corporations and the special interest. We can change this, and we must do so before the Corpratocracy has finished rigging the system to ensure continuous political domination. We must act now, because we will not recognize our last chance until it has passed.
Are some of us really so gullible that we truly believe that one of the major political parties hates our troops? Are those of us this gullible also so stupid as to agree that the party responsible for the deaths of our soldiers is the same party who truly loves them and looks out for their interests? If one of our political parties hates the troops, which is entirely absurd, one would have to consider the following:
Democrats want to bring the troops home to their families, where they will be safe from the dangers of the Iraq war zone. Republicans want to leave our troops in Iraq for 100 years of death and destruction so long as that is what they deem necessary to secure the interests of our wealthiest corporations. Who hates the troops, the party who wants to bring them home or the party who would condemn them to war for the next 100 years?
Perhaps the most depressing thing about this whole ordeal is that the GOP has managed to convince a seemingly significant percentage of the population that the Democratic Party and other liberal factions in the United States actually do hate the troops. With the GOP propaganda machine gearing up for the 2008 elections, many “troop-hating” allegations and other fabrications of the truth have been forecasted. If Obama wins the Democratic nomination, we can prepare for constant media bombardment laden with the most absurd accusations. Why do we happily tolerate blatant lies and propaganda? How evident is the lack of critical thinking in the US considering the voting record of the American public?
The bottom line is that the Republican Party maliciously took our soldiers away from their families and placed them directly in harm’s path – not to defend our country but to further the global empire. Both the troops and the American public were blatantly lied to in order to justify this act, which is yet another illegal invasion by the United States. By tolerating these atrocities committed against ourselves and our fellow world citizens by our leaders, we are merely inviting the continuation and perpetuation of current policy. We must speak up while we still have the chance, or else risk that we may never be heard again.
It is not an ethnic group, it is not a sexual group, it is not a gender, it is not a social class, and it is not a traditional religious group. Atheists are the most discriminated against group in America according to several studies including the now famous study done at the University of Minnesota.
Please review these key questions and associated answer distribution from The University of Minnesota’s study on discrimination: This group does not at all agree with my vision of American society…
Atheist: 39.6%
Muslims: 26.3%
Homosexuals: 22.6%
Hispanics: 20%
Conservative Christians: 13.5%
Recent Immigrants: 12.5%
Jews: 7.6%
I would disapprove if my child wanted to marry a member of this group….
Atheist: 47.6%
Muslim: 33.5%
African-American 27.2%
Asian-Americans: 18.5%
Hispanics: 18.5%
Jews: 11.8%
Conservative Christians: 6.9%
Whites: 2.3%
*It’s important to note that the study wasn’t looking for atheist discrimination. The research team actually assumed that people would be more likely to target Muslims and were blindsided by the rampant hatred of atheism.
Why are atheists discriminated against more than other groups? The reasons are uncertain. Many believe that the source of atheist distrust stems from evolutionary processes still affecting humans.
Societies and social structures have evolved much faster than our genes have, so we continue to suffer cognitive biases leftover from our days on the African savanna. During human evolution group ties were very important to survival, as our descendants formed “in-groups” because they relied heavily on each other’s cooperation. An individual’s “in-group,” may conflict with other groups but may form alliances that create a more inclusive “in-group” if faced with an “out-group” of larger scope. Jews, Christians and Muslims belonging to the larger “Theist in-group,” will agree on their views of Atheism. The evolutionary predisposition to discriminate against the “out-group” will come to the forefront, and Jews, Christians and Muslims may share in their contempt… that is, only until the scope is slightly decreased and they become three distinct “in-groups.”
“In-group” vs. “Out-group” is nothing new. We see it in our world every day. Yankee fans vs. Red Sox fans, Conservative vs. Liberal, Ohio State vs. Michigan. “Us and Them” has always been human mentality, perhaps before we were even regarded as human. Consider your high school sports teams. When playing a nearby rival school, there is a strong desire to take one side or the other, preferably your own home team. Later, when your state college plays the neighboring state’s college, the two high schools set aside their differences to join against the larger “out-group.” The more we understand these evolutionary tendencies, the better we can become at overcoming them. Nobody should be discriminated against for their religious beliefs, especially if they don’t have any!
Hilary Clinton is a populist by definition — she changes her opinion along with what is popular in the eyes of the public.She admitted this to all of us when she “found her voice” last month – after 30 years in politics mind you.Since we live in a democratic society, most could argue that this is a noble stance to take, however…We need a president who does his or her own thinking.In this age of information, popular public opinion will reflect that of the media, which is largely owned by a few giant corporations.All you have to do to find out what the masses are thinking about is watch mainstream news (Britney Spears… Heath Ledger… blah blah blah). Human nature and recent history suggest that said giant corporations will attempt to bend political discourse to suit their interests. If we aren’t careful, the media will attempt to convince us that Alaska is harboring terrorists in it’s nature reserves, but really our corporations just want access to the oil. Remember when they convinced us that Al Queda has ties to Iraq or that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction? We’ve already seen what happens when a blind follower (George W. Bush) will do in the oval office, so lets elect a free thinker.
Education in our country has regressed to the point in which people no longer seem to think for themselves.Perhaps the expediency bias is affecting us all.We assume because we live in such an age, that we need not put forth any effort to become educated.Perhaps we simply have become too lazy for thought? After all, there are plenty of pundits on TV willing to do our thinking for us if we will not do it ourselves. Perhaps the government has deprived our educational system of funding, and shackled it with policies like no child left behind for so long that we are no longer willing to do our own thinking? Whatever the reason for our collective unwillingness to think, we must be willing to overcome it. To do this, we will need a leader that we can look up to, one who owns his or her own thoughts and is not afraid to voice them.
We must elect a president who is able to think critically and prepared to do so.The president elect must be willing to question everything and to stand up to corporations and international banks.Hillary “Wal-Mart” Clinton is a member of a political dynasty with strong ties to such entities… The candidacy of Hilary also most definitely does NOT represent change. How would electing a person who has already spent 8 years living in the White House constitute change?
If you think that I’m crazy for suggesting that everyone scrambles to bend at the whim of the media, just look at how the term “change” was sensationalized and applied to this election. Even the republican candidates said “change” every 5 seconds in their debates! It really is sad how political strategy has become more a game of wordplay, and less of a serious discussion of who the best leader will be. I guess that’s what happens when you let the PR industry handle something that is supposed to be informative.
Who should you vote for? I’m voting for Obama, but you should THINK FOR YOURSELF!
According to the Washington Post, international terrorist cells may be using video games such as World of Warcraft to communicate.This seems to be a very clever way to organize attacks, and should be pursued by US intelligence.It definitely appears more likely that terrorists separated by great distances would use MMORPGs (massively multi-player online role-playing games) to communicate in the safety of their own homes, rather than congregate in the ultra-dangerous Iraq or Afghanistan where they are being hunted and little infrastructure remains.A clever terrorist organization could even use first-person shooter style MMORPGs to train in a virtual environment and develop teamwork.The US military has sponsored such a game… Wouldn’t that be the epitome of irony — terrorists using US assets to train for attacks on the US? We already know they are resourceful and like to use our own strengths and freedoms against us, so I wouldn’t call it far-fetched. The CIA has even created “virtual islands” in which to train agents for spying in online worlds. I can see it now — The CIA Guild vs. the Al Queda guild in a winner take all World Of Warcraft battle royale. On a more serious note, virtual war cannot be far off. How long before the controls of our aircraft exactly resemble video games? How long before all military equipment is operated with an Xbox controller? They’ve been training us, and we don’t even know it.
Fox News and the US government have joined forces to create a new international televised news network, codenamed “FPN.”The powerful media network has reportedly developed a confidential technology capable of broadcasting messages directly into the brain, drawing the interest of the United States Military.The Catholic Church may also be involved, providing Fox with millennium old brainwashing methods.The recently exposed technology has reportedly been in existence since 2000; however its effectiveness has been limited to chimpanzees and other lower forms of intelligence.Not only will the FPN directly broadcast into inferior minds around the globe, but it will provide 24/7 indoctrination via high-definition television and radio airwaves fronted by the “ultra-liberal” Bill O’Reilly.When asked about the launch of the network, a source within the FPN exclaimed “we’re talking about the consentual raping of nations here, what could possibly be better!”
The reasons may be different than you might think. Despite your family physician’s best intentions, there may be other factors at play. Medical doctors practicing in the United States struggle with a number of professional dilemmas that can affect the care they administer to their patients. All patients should be aware of these potential pitfalls, and the reasons they exist. All voters should be aware of these problems so that we may free our doctors from a system that benefits only large corporations.
Unnecessary Treatments
Perhaps the most problematic issue is over-treatment. Doctors are often forced to treat patients against their own intuitive judgments and recommendations in an effort to prevent future lawsuits. Any doctor will argue that excessive testing/treatment is not often better for the patient’s overall health, but the United States legal system seems to disagree. This has created an atmosphere in which Doctors must provide treatment to a patient that they may even disagree with, in order to protect themselves from litigation.
Consider the following: Little Johnny’s mother brings him to the doctor’s office, complaining that Johnny has been vomiting and has a headache. Doctor Bill isn’t sure whether or not to give little Johnny a spinal tap to test for Meningitis, as the disease is very rare and a spinal tap could cause severe side effects. Doctor Bill explains the pros and cons of the spinal tap testing to Johnny’s mother, who weighs the possible outcomes and determines that the cons outweigh the pros and she will elect not to submit Johnny to the spinal tape. Doctor Bill agrees, and he trusts his medical intuition as he is seldom wrong, but knows that no doctor can be perfect. Five weeks later, Johnny is diagnosed with Meningitis. Johnny’s mother immediately questions why the doctor did not insist on the spinal tap testing and immediately sues Doctor Bill for malpractice; this is her son we’re dealing with, after all. Doctor Bill is forced to settle the lawsuit at great cost to his personal finances. If he is found liable in a malpractice suit, his practice will no longer be able to afford the cost of his skyrocketing malpractice insurance and he will no longer be able to continue practicing medicine, if he manages to keep his physician’s license. From this point forward Doctor Bill is aware that he must protect himself and his family by providing sometimes excessive care to many patients. He can no longer afford to risk giving them the option to elect out of certain tests, even if said test is not scientifically certified or even recommended by an independent study.
While your doctor may have your best interest in his or her heart, you must assume that they are taking every step possible to insulate themselves and their families from frivolous lawsuits. Your doctor more than likely trusts his medical intuition, and he should since medicine is based on trial-and-error and empirical data. Despite this, he may feel compelled to follow legal advice rather than his medical expertise, since following the legal advice is the only sure way to protect his personal assets. We can’t blame doctors for doing this; if they did not protect themselves they would be doing themselves and their families a disservice. Physicians are involved in business, and it is important to remember that businesses must follow legal advice as it is in their best interest. It’s quite obvious that the United States healthcare system (if you can call it a “system”) creates a conflict of interest between doctor and patient, but many seem to be in denial. To a doctor protecting his own family against financial ruin, every patient is a potential lawsuit, including you and your family. Logic tells us that this is neither an effective nor moral method of distributing health care.
The Special (conflict of) Interest
Ask yourself this question: Do special interest groups have more or less power in Washington than they did 50 years ago? 30 years ago? I’m guessing you chose “more” as the answer to both questions. Now think about how easily cigarette companies have been able completely defy the best interests of the people simply by placing lobbyists in Washington. The health care industry has escalated lobbying expenditures so much that it now ranks first among the top industries for lobbying, edging out Communications (controlled monopolies) and the finance industry (international banks).
The US health care system is clearly broken, so why do we keep hearing from public officials and presidential candidates that our healthcare is better than it’s ever been? Mixed messages seem to be coming from everywhere. I find myself mystified as to how the current generation will be the first to have a lower life expectancy than that of the previous generation amidst the rapid developments in medical technology and exponential increases in the cost of healthcare.
Doctors are very busy and have little time for the continuing education necessary to keep up with the rapidly advancing world of medical technology. As a result, most doctors end up being “educated” by large pharmaceutical corporations. The “education” provided by these corporations is likely to be biased, as said corporations stand to gain large sums of money by “educating” these doctors to be their new sales force. As a result, physicians may not be properly informed of potential harm caused by the drugs. This sponsored training makes it easy to emphasize the benefits and devalue the dangers when they fund and control the training.
Are you or your children on a drug that could potentially cause much more harm than good? The answer is usually “you’ll have to wait and see.” Recall the Vioxx scandal of 2004, which was said to have caused upwards of 140,000 cases of heart disease. The drug received FDA approval in 1999 and wasn’t fully exposed until several years later. Has the special interest reserved a spot deep in the pockets of the FDA? I know I don’t want to bet my life on it.
The Data Mining Bias
Have you ever heard such ridiculous claims as “studies show that cigarette smoking decreases your chances of bladder cancer” or something nearly as preposterous? Do you wonder how this is possible? I am not saying that a study could not show that, I am merely questioning the validity of such a study. How do we explain such studies? One answer is randomness and the data mining bias.
The “data mining bias” is a cognitive bias that occurs in researchers when large sets of data are “mined” for information. In the example above, for instance, the researcher would take a sample number of smoking patients and obtain all health information available for those patients. The researcher would then back-test the data to find common threads that display statistical significance in said data. In the example, the researcher finds that the patients in his sample have a lower instance of bladder cancer than the general population and draws the hasty conclusion that cigarette smoking decreases the odds of bladder cancer. One problem is that the researcher has absolutely no proof that the decrease in bladder cancer among his sample is caused by cigarette smoking at all. The larger problem here is that the researcher in question didn’t know exactly what he was looking for when the data is mined, thus failed to realize that it is actually very likely that he will find some correlation that happened just by chance. Given enough diseases or conditions to test for, there will always be some condition that has a significant correlation based on randomness alone. Think about this when you see a study making questionable claims.
Doctors and patients alike would benefit greatly from a new healthcare system that could be free of the problems listed above. Corporations have no business imposing their will on our doctors, nor do they have any right to harm the public out of pure greed. Please remember to do your own research, because you cannot trust the current system. Vote for change.
The National Media is interested in one thing and one thing alone, making money. It doesn’t matter to corporate management if the information they pass on to you is informative, relevant, or even true so long as there’s a source to cite. Editors and journalists are faced with a choice between acquiring the values of corporate leadership and committing virtual career suicide. The newspaper that you read or television network that you watch care little about what you know or want to know, for their only concern is to entertain you briefly while they extract your advertising dollar. The average individual journalist most likely detests this fact, but nonetheless must do what is expected or face the consequences handed down by a faceless and unforgiving corporate entity. Important information is completely extraneous to this flawed system, and therein lies but one of the many problems.
A democratic society is dependent on a free press of diverse voices, without which there can be no discretion between actual news and mere propaganda. A truly “free and diverse” press is not largely owned by 5 entities, as we see in the United States. The fact that giant corporations own all of the major media outlets, and thus a place in our society’s collective brain, has created many conflicts of interest that we must be wary of.
Conflict of Interest #1: Media consolidation should be considered a very important and newsworthy issue as it affects all Americans, not to mention the rest of the World citizens. Despite the significance, the major media outlets refuse to cover said consolidation because that would be in direct conflict with their interests.
Conflict of Interest #2: Large corporate media networks may have a drastic effect on the political dialogue of the nation. Since large corporations have many interests affected by politics, they may be motivated to manipulate political discourse in such a way that favors them. Since corporations are legally bound to act in the best interest of their shareholders, it could actually be considered illegal for them to NOT attempt to manipulate politics in such a way. If nothing else, “shareholder wellbeing” provides for a convenient shield for corporate management to hide behind when unethical acts are perpetrated against the public. Mainstream media has absolute power to influence national opinion, the motive to do so, and nothing to stand in their way.
Conflict of Interest #3: The FCC is composed of politicians who are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. This could create a feedback loop in which a large media corporation uses its influence over political discourse to manipulate a presidential or congressional election as vaguely described above. The president elect may appoint corporate-friendly FCC members in return for some assistance from the corporation’s media outlets during the election. The president will certainly have received large campaign contributions from all these entities, as major corporations hedge their bets by giving large sums of money to all candidates who have greater than a remote chance of winning. The scope of this article does not permit deeper evaluation, but the potential conflicts of interest concerning the FCC members will be discussed in future posts.
The Expediency Bias: Like most of us, journalists are prone to the same cognitive biases that affect all humans. We are all biased to some degree towards what is easy and fast, meaning that journalists will likely be biased towards the information that appears readily available. This leads to the tendency for a disproportionate number of journalists to report stories that stem directly from the AP backbone, also known as “bandwagon jumping.” Since major news outlets are making drastic budget cuts in an effort to compete with other forms of media, this bias will only increase in relevance as more and more media outlets write articles based on the citations of other articles without their own due diligence. The public does not need 10,000 different narratives of the same event, what we need to be informed and educated.
All of Earth’s residents should be aware of these threats to the freedom of our information networks, for they have a far and reaching affect. The above post barely scrapes the surface of the problems we face, as subsequent posts will attempt to make light of other problems such as the bias towards sensationalism. It is unlikely that you will see any similar article published in any major publication or aired on television for reasons described above. Remember that individual journalists are not to blame, but rather the system itself. Remember that today’s news media exists not to inform, but to provide commentary or even to think for you if you choose to let them. If you are one who cares about unbiased and relevant information, be advised to look outside of conglomerated media, for they can’t be trusted any further than you can throw a Wal-Mart store.
The media thinks for us.Our religions manipulate us.The “democratically elected” government has become a political dynasty which no longer listens to us.The education system is falling apart.The poor are getting poorer.Health care costs skyrocket while quality decreases.Despite rapid developments in interactive, educational technology, television has increased its capacity for passive entertainment and now may directly cause ignorance.
The smell of peaceful change is in the air.A revolution of mass media is on the horizon.The masses are no longer solely dependant on large corporations for their news, thanks to the emergence of blogs and independent news media. Major conglomerated media makes chronic budget cuts and will fight to keep its stranglehold on public opinion. Don’t let them fool you, think free.
