Michael Moore: A Douche Story

So Michael Moore is releasing a new movie entitled "Capitalism: A Love Story". From watching the trailer, I can conclude that this is yet another poorly-substantiated work from a very disenchanted individual who should probably be living in China.

I have always chafed upon the mention of Michael Moore's name, simply because he's a douche. He's not a douche because he has an opinion; he has every right to express it. He's not a douche because he confronts political opponents; this is also the right of the citizens which they govern. He is a douche because he distorts statistics and historical facts to meet his own ends. That is the WORST kind of activist. The sad part is that millions of people actually buy into his bullshit! The first movie of his that I watched in full was "Bowling for Columbine". I watched as he portrayed guns as the ultimate evil and the killers of children. He made Charleton Heston look like the Devil, even after Heston successfully rebutted most of Moore's complaints. At no point in the movie did Moore cite any professional studies regarding the effect of gun presence on the populace. This is probably because if he showed the results of such a study, it would prove him wrong (see Florida r.t.c. laws 1987-present)

The same is illustrated in the trailer for his new movie. He walks along Wall Street, harassing corporate officials at each major building he passes...Without any substantiated fact or even an attempt at such. This man is the bane of intelligent discourse. He is an irresponsible asshole for putting out biased misinformation regarding America's issues, and I believe he does it solely for profit. If he actually gave a shit about and believed in liberalism, he would defend it with research and facts. But, he never does, so I'm inclined to believe that he is just another "celebutard".

He also just recently jumped on the bandwagon with Rep. Diane Watson saying that Cuban health care is amazing. I would LOVE to see some testimonials to that from Cubans who don't have a gun pointed to their head.

John Stossel already pummeled Moore's utopia, but I would love to see Moore debate someone like Murray Rothbard (were he still alive) or Lew Rockwell. It would be a show for the ages.

Our Economy

Getting better since 2007.

I'm glad the Fed's delusions are at least happy ones.

Race Bait

Yet another sad example of prominent black folks in our country using race as an excuse to avoid confrontation about the Democrats' failed health care proposal. Leftists are running out of any meaningful defense to intelligently-presented debate. It's depressing how stubbornly they refuse to admit that this proposal will weaken our country in every way possible.

Hallway Health Care

This is a fucking abomination. And the Obama administration wants to emulate that?

Money for Nothing

The sad part? They'll get it.

The Case for Voting

I had a debate with a friend from school the other day about the reasoning behind not voting in government elections. He claimed he's never voted in an election because he feels his vote doesn't make any difference. That argument, I felt, was silly and contradicted the basic principles of democracy. Of course everyone's vote counts! If everyone thought like that, there would be no demonstrable voice from the public, giving way to authoritarianism once again. However, there is a much more logical and thoughtfully presented argument for his side: perhaps abstaining from voting might help to fight the government's bureaucracy and expansion. My buddy-in-bloggage Stewart Browne wrote an essay about the subject on "Strike the Root" here. I did some thinking on the subject, and thought I'd offer a rebuttal to the general argument regarding the issue.

Votes are Voices. As I stated before, voting gives people a voice that could not come through other forms of government. I am and will always be a vocal opponent of government abuse and bureaucracy, but I AM a fervent supporter of democracy in it's purest form. But that's a much deeper argument for another day, hehe. (ahem) Anyway...

Where there is a lack of democracy, there is authoritarianism. This has been demonstrated innumerable times throughout human history. If we surrender our votes, we give up all right to be heard by government officials. The percentage of voting among citizens is already the lowest in America's history, and we are seeing the effects of it everyday. Because we are no longer in control, our politicians are doing whatever they please without any concern for what we, the people that elected them, think. Some might argue that anarchy/absolute independence can be achieved if we "leave" the system, but history has proved that the inactivity or discontent of a populace provides the perfect opportunity for dictatorship.

I firmly believe that most people call themselves Democrats or Republicans because they were brought up that way and simply buy into ideologies without reading into them. I was raised by both a staunch conservative and an old-school liberal hippie. I didn't really buy into either of their philosophies, but I did agree with fiscal conservatism and strong social freedoms. So I did a little research, and discovered libertarianism. How many people do you think actually look into the philosophies they claim to agree with? Sadly, not many. Discourse with Democrats and Republicans is completely stale, because most of them simply regurgitate what the mainstream media feeds them. Their parties' respective reigns have ended.

My point is: libertarians now have the fiercest momentum this country has seen since probably the American Revolution. Ron Paul's campaign was the match that lit the fuse: he brought a light upon us that was unprecedented. So you see, the trick is not to abstain from voting, but to continue the push into Washington's bloodstream. It's already begun...More and more people are beginning to recognize our philosophy for what it is: a step towards TRUE "power to the people".

The more people that know about us, the stronger our movement will get.

The stronger our movement gets, the more libertarians will be elected.

The more libertarians that are elected, the closer we get to personal freedom.

But this can only be done if we truly believe in democratic process, which means voting. Let's start at the base, and work our way up. Even if it takes 100 years...If it spells the end of government expansion, it'll be worth it. We'll take some heavy losses, granted, but no victory comes without defeats.

A Radical Change in Position

Well, this is new. Only a month ago, the President himself said that the goal of the proposed health care reform is to get everyone covered.

I Got Your Probe Right Here.

What balls they have.

How 'bout a probe on congressional spending?

Incalculable Suffering

Nature listens to the UN, you know.

It's so funny when they try to look useful.

Saskatoon Scramble

Another example of just how "healthy" and "optimal" socialized health care is.

We've had a good step forward in the health care debate...They're thinking about removing the "public option" language. Granted, this will piss off just about every Democrat in the country, but at least we won't be forced to pay for others' privileges. Even if they kept the public option but included a private one, that would be an improvement.

English Dystopia

Oh noes! It seems the UK conservatives' Utopian image of health care is coming apart at the seams.

Here is another aggregator with information on how awful British health care is. Whenever someone tries to tell you that socialized health care is the best in the world, let them take a look.

Voices Devalued

It's sad...In many articles I read about the Obama administration's response to criticism and protest over the health care plan, they accuse corporate insurance rivals of "sending" people to protest at conferences and town meetings. Similarly, they accuse protestors of merely attempting to incite riots instead of making intelligent discourse. And the worst part is that the media caters to this line of thought. Naturally, 85% of media corporations are liberal-leaning, but I don't believe that liberalism is synonymous with dishonesty. And the same applies to conservatism.

So why is the media allowing this bullshit? Why are they focusing on the few protests where people have begun screaming and pushing, when the vast majority of protestors are calmly and collectively stepping forward to voice their concerns? Like I said before, considering the media's leftist slant, I can understand why they're trying to push favor towards Obama, but there's a line. This is blatant disrespect of journalistic integrity.

Bottom line...Protesting has all but lost it's reverence and value. This nationwide debate has ruined the image of people banding together to voice what they believe to be right. Now they're treated like hired thugs.

Hypocrisy of the Year

Fast forward to 2:07.

This is the same woman that's been calling protestors "un-American" this month.

Some Simple Numbers

Number of cancer patients, either current or recovering, in US - about 12 million.

Aggregate cost of cancer treatment/aftermath in 2008 - $228.1 billion.

Projected cancer patients in 2020 - 18.2 million.

You do the math. And this is just cancer; I didn't even account for the other major diseases.

National debt as of today - $11.7 trillion.

Cost of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars - $897.2 trillion.

I wonder if Obama and Geithner have even seen these numbers. Or even care.

Sources:
1) http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-03-13-cancer-boom_N.htm
2) http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
3) http://www.cancer.org/docroot/MIT/content/MIT_3_2X_Costs_of_Cancer.asp
4) http://www.nationalpriorities.org/

4 Months to Save the Planet

Yeah. And the world will end in 2012.

White Lies

You WISH that AARP had your back.

You WISH that seniors would just lay down and accept this bill that blatantly discriminates against older patients.

You WISH that all of us were sheep and weren't protesting night and day to stop a bill that will condemn cancer/long-term disease patients to death.

Well...guess what.

Lost Cause?

I'm not sure what our gov't is hoping to achieve through talks with North Korea. So far, they have demonstrated a complete unwillingness to work with other nations and to listen to any incentives offered by the UN to dismantle their nukes. So why are we bothering?

Here's the thing about North Korea. The people there have no voice. Their only real face-to-the-world is Kim Jong-Il, who is a 100% grade-A nutcase. The concerns of his citizens don't matter to him. All that matters is that North Korea looks tough to everyone else. We'll never reason with them, because the only voice we hear is that of fanatical jerkoffs who like to brag about their inflatable 10-inch dicks. I've said this many times: they won't use their nukes, because half the world would come crashing down on them if they tried.

So let's focus on our own shit and leave them to their devices. I'm sure Ms. Clinton has better things to do.

I Am An American

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/08/unamerican-attacks-cant-derail-health-care-debate-.html

Protesting is "un-American"? Really? Well, I'll be damned. Because I'm pretty sure protesting is how our country was founded.

It's funny how the media only shows the noisy, obnoxious town meetings and ignores the other 98% of the country's political forums. The county freeholders and local city meetings by me in Jersey aren't loud and violent. And I'm sure they're not in 98% of the rest of the country. But you'll never hear that in the (liberal) news.

This lady is really delusional. She actually believes that this health care bill will have every American citizen covered and secure. Whether it does or doesn't (it won't, because the Fed can't afford it...unless they raise taxes, of course ;) ), they could drum up so much more support by simply removing the language in the bill that strips private insurance options from employers after the bill takes effect. Outlawing our right to choose between private and public insurance is outright authoritarian.

Ms. Botox, YOU are the un-American one here.

Epiphany

Check out the National Priorities Project link on my sidebar. It's really amazing/scary.

I just discovered that as the amount of money we've spent on these two ridiculous wars since 2001, we could have given every American citizen $3,000.

How's that for a stimulus?

Whores.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/07/31/us/politics/0731-sotomayor-vote.html?em

I'm not a Republican, but given the comments and votes of the other 31 Senators...Why do I get the feeling that the 9 voting "yes" only did so because they want to get re-elected?

Quite a hooker behavior if ever I saw one. Especially in light of approving an active bigot (Ricci v. DeStefano) and anti-free-marketer (Granholm v. Heald) to the Supreme Court.

Health Care Reasonings

To nationalize or not to nationalize...

Health care certainly needs reform, that's for sure. The way it stands, people wait on line for hours, insurance often won't fully cover life-saving treatments, and many people can't afford insurance at all. I have a number of friends who's insurance companies essentially dropped them when they needed serious treatments because they were too expensive.

However, I'm not sure nationalizing health care would make any difference. In fact, it will likely make matters worse. I read countless stories of the horrors of socialized health care from Canadians and Europeans alike. Waiting for endless hours to see a doctor, only being allowed to see certain physicians who might not necessarily be the best, and being led along by gov't bureaucrats who don't know jack-shit about medicine. I sympathize with people who can't afford insurance, but we have to remember...Health care is a privilege, not a right. The same way that Social Security money is a privilege earned through years of work. In an ideal capitalist society, we have to work for what we have. Nothing is handed out. Unfortunately, we live in a partially socialist society where redistribution of wealth takes the form of welfare and unemployment (necessary evils, but evils nonetheless).

Another problem with this bill is the destruction of competition. One of the most important aspects of our economy, the one which keeps it alive and fighting in an unstable global market, is competition. The consumer has choices; there is no legal monopolies. However, if this bill were to be passed, it would destroy any incentive companies had to stay with a private plan. Most employers would drop the private plans in a heartbeat for the gov't plan. So, what happens to the private insurance industry? Stocks will plummet, their revenues will dry up, and they'll have to fold.

So much for creating jobs.

Welcome!

Hey there, everyone! This is my new blog, spawned from the demise of "Stay Out Of My Wallet!". I'll be dishing out liberty in mass quantities from a Jersey boy's perspective. And I'll throw some other good stuff in there, too.

I love to hear from people. Let me know if there's anything I can do to improve the site.

I hope you enjoy your visit. Come back soon!