If you read my Why I cannot support the US Government post, you probably noticed that I have stopped supporting Obama. I used to support Obama because I believed he might actually cause some change in the government. However, over the last several weeks I have realized that under Obama nothing will change.

I supported Obama when I did not know much about him. I just knew every other option at the time would not cause change.

I have learned a lot about Obama since the general election started. For example he supported the FISA bill, he talks about voting for the lesser of two evils, and has started reforming his policy to less of a change stance to more of a “Continue the Course”. Because of this I can no longer support Obama, and since I have yet to see a candidate who is not the “Lesser of two Evils” I will not vote for a President unless a GOOD candidate miraculously appears. I will not support someone I can only support 20% who is the lesser of the bad.

Outside of the $10b cost per month of the Iraq war, I really don’t care about it. I know it is going on, I know soldiers are dying, but other than that I really don’t care.

I don’t care because No Ears Bush doesn’t listen to anybody about how the American public disagrees with the war. He continues the “Continue the Course” mantra as if no one has ever said anything disagreeable to the war. So if my yelling and screaming against the war isn’t going to do any good, I am going to ignore it.

The only thing we can do is not volunteer for the army. If there are not enough members of the armed forces that will force the president to request a draft. Requesting a draft for the Iraq war will be political suicide and the country would riot. So if we can’t raise an army the government will be forced to start pulling out of the policeman roll and then maybe we will actually be able to start paying off our debt.

So my political protest of the war is don’t join the army, don’t care that soldiers are dying, and in general ignore every aspect of the war except the $10b a month price tag. Because if our soldiers did not support the war, they would not join the army.

When I look at the political priorities Americans hold I see two distinct sets. You have the internet savvy young generation priorities and then you have everyone else. In my view here are the sets of priorities for each group:

Net Savvy

1. Privacy
2. National Debt
3. Bush’s War Crimes

Everyone Else

1. Economy
2. Gas Prices
3. Iraq

Interestingly you will even see some people list the “Net Savvy” priorities when they are chatting online, but if you talk to them in person they will list the “Everyone Else” priorities. Why is there this difference in priorities and why do people say different things depending on their surroundings?

Part of the reason people use 2 faces when talking about priorities is peer pressure. But I think another part of it is that in an indirect way all of the “Net Savvy” priorities support the “Everyone Else” priorities.

Decreasing the National Debt should increase the value of the dollar which should also improve the economy. Bush’s war crimes and the Iraq war is partially being blamed for high gas prices. Is this the true reason? Not entirely, but the National Debt and the Iraq war have certainly contributed. The privacy priority pertains to Iraq/Terrorism where the government is trying to strip all of our privacy under the name of terrorism. I believe the younger generation has seen through this facade and realized that reducing all risk of a terrorist attack is not worth giving up our privacy.

This is causing an interesting challenge for the presidential candidates having to try to appeal to both sides of the argument. However, in doing this they will eventually end up alienating one group of voters. As much as I wish differently, I believe that one group will be the “net savvy” block of Americans.

The US Government is supposed to be a government of the people for the people. This means it is supposed to represent the will of the people. The Constitution was written with this intention; however, the government is no longer doing its duty.

The US Government has become the government of the tyrant for the tyrant. One example of this is the FISA bill which in more legal terms says that if George Bush told you that warrantless wiretapping was legal and you allowed the government to execute warrantless wire taps then the warrantless wiretapping was legal and you cannot sue. Another example is the Iraq war, where a majority of Americans and even the Iraqis want a timetable for the US involvement to end. Yet the tyrant is again ignoring the will of the people and insisting that no timetable exist.

Those are just two examples of the government for the tyrant; however, a simple look at approval ratings in the 20% range for both Congress and the president show that the government is no longer a government that represents the will of the people.

But George Bush is leaving office in 6 months and you can elect a new president that is not a tyrant. Right?

Wrong! Both candidates have propagated the US Tyranist Government. McCain who before his presidential run followed the Republican line has voted for many of the things George Bush did that the US People did not want. Obama is supporting taking away one of the last ways the people have to fight the government. In voting for the FISA bill Obama has supported removing the ability to sue because George Bush said it was legal. Whatever happened to judicial oversight to prevent a tyrany?

The second amendment to the constitution, the right to bear arms, was created to provide the people with a last recourse against the government becoming too powerful. Is now the time to take up arms against the government? No. But now is the time to boycott this upcoming presidential election. Sorry, but none of the independent candidates are much better than McCain or Obama.

So this year for president I am voting for everyone!

The New Yorker has a very good article titled The News Business: Out of Print.

This article has some very interesting, but not new, observations about the death of the newspaper. An interesting statistic is that only 18% of individuals 18-34 claim to look at a newspaper on a daily basis. If the young are not reading the newspaper, it is only a matter of time before they cannot afford to continue publishing.

I think it is obvious that newspapers are being replaced by the internet. However, with the wealth of information on the internet, who filters this data for us? Continue reading →

The Huffington Post recently had a great article, The Democratization of the Music Industry, that I think warrants coverage.

In summary, the article states that the evolution of the internet has reduced the need of record labels. Record labels have 2 functions access and distribution, with the internet distribution is no longer an issue, an access is slowly becoming easier too. But not only do the record labels provide the access and the distribution they also act as a filter. Only certain artists and certain songs are signed and granted the access.

I specifically want to cover this filtering. Continue reading →

I actually like Barack Obama, but only because he is something new. Unlike the other candidates he does not seem to be indoctrinated in the Washington kiss my ass and I will kiss yours system.

Yes, Barack does not have much experience, which is the entire reason I like him. That and he is an excellent orator. In my opinion, the only quality needed in a president is that they are good orators. I could care less what their policies are, a president’s job is to unite the nation. That is definitely something we need now, as the current screw up most definitely does not have that skill.

Barack seems like a well educated person who has the ability to unite. That is all I want in a president.

Forget all of her claims that she is being treated poorly by the press, forget here economic plan, and think about the underlying person.

A whore, without any “true” experience, that at least 10 years ago did not have the resolve to see anything through. Let me explain:

Whore: She is from Arkansas, yet while she was still living in the White House she bought a place in New York solely so she could establish residency and be Senator of New York. Apparently, Senator of Arkansas was not good enough for her.  

(Hillary is not originally from Arkansas.  She moved there when she married Bill; however, I still think she has spent a large portion of her life in Arkansas which to me means she is from Arkansas.)

No “True” Experience: It seems like every speech she gives she emphasizes 35 years of experience. Experience doing what? Before Bill, you never heard of Hillary. Yes, she was the First Lady for 8 years but during that time, she did not get anything done. She failed to pass all of her initiatives.

No Resolve: Speaking of failed initiatives, I think we all realize how often health care is being brought up in this election. What no one seems to be mentioning is her healthcare plan, is the same healthcare plan she tried to push through Congress while she was First Lady. In her 8 years in the White House, after failing to pass the plan through Congress in the first 2 years, she quit and did nothing about it for the next 14 years.

(I was wrong. The health care plans are radically different. However, after failing to push her healthcare plan through Congress she did not bring it up again. She quit.)

(Thanks to Robin for the corrections.

Have you ever noticed how a lot of the people using handicap people are significantly overweight?

Almost every time I see someone parking in a handicap spot, the only reason I can determine that they might be eligible for a handicap sticker is they are overweight.  But it seems to me that if you are overweight, it means you need more exercise.  So why would the government give them a handicap spot?  Because they can’t walk very well because they way too much?

Well, I have a better option.  When you get your license if you are 30 or more pounds overweight you should get a sticker on your license plate for overweight parking.  Then in parking lots, have the half of the parking lot furthest away from the store designated as obese parking.  Force them to get at least a tiny bit of extra exercise a day and maybe even embarrass them and convince overweight people to change their lifestyle and lose the weight.

Yes, there are some technical issues that would need worked out such as how to determine if someone is overweight or just very muscular, but its a thought.

Disclaimer:  I would probably be affected by this rule.