EL FORASTERO DE OHIO

Wisconsin + Ohio = Mierda

2011-03-13T16:13:00.000-07:00

Wisconsin + Ohio = Mierda

La Razon Por La Ecuacion

1. Republicanos [Gobernadores]

2. Democartas y Sindicatos Obligando A Los Trabajadores a Filiarse

3. El propio pueblo

4. Manifestaciones de Extremistas: En Los 1960's eran ultra hippies y ahora son ultra conservadores o liberales pensando en su culo en vez de ellos mismos.

5. OHIO HIZO UN ACTO DE REPUDIO CONTRA LE BRON JAMES FOR SU DECISION DE JUGAR CON LOS HEAT DE MIAMI.

POR ESO Y MUCHO MAS, DEDICO LA MIERDA QUE SALE DE MI CULO A ESOS ESTADOS Y A INDIANA, MICHIGAN, ILLINOIS Y OTROS ESTADOS DEL MEDIO OESTE

WISCONSIN AND OHIO SUCKS

2011-03-13T16:08:00.000-07:00

Wisconsin sucks

1. Republican Governor
2. Democrats and Labor Unions
3. Demonstrations
4. Extremists
5. The people

Ohio Sucks
1. Republican Governor
2. Democrats and Labor Unions
3. Demonstrations
4. Extremists
5. The people
OHIO ALSO REPUDIATES LEBRON JAMES WHEN HE SIGNED WITH THE MIAMI HEAT

I DEDICATE THE CRAP THAT COMES FROM MY BUT TO THESE TWO STATES.

Reflexiones Sobre El Maleconazo

2009-08-05T17:54:00.000-07:00

El 5 de agosto de 2009 Miami Florida:

El escritor de este articulo regreso del trabajo y recibió noticias de una revuelta en Cuba. Parecía inevitable la revuelta debido al periodo especial y los eventos del remolcador 13 de Marzo. Incluso un experto en la materia de revueltas hablo de la posibilidad de “fenómeno social en Cuba”.

Las noticias sobre el Malecon fue transmitido mediante las cadenas Univisión, Telemundo, y el Canal Sur. El escritor decidió que los noticieros no fueron suficientes y saco su receptor de onda corta para más información. Escucho información de la BBC, Radio Nederlands, Deutsche Welle, La Voz de Rusia, y Radio Nacional de Armenia.

El sintió la sangre hervir en las arterias pues era cubano de sangre y alma. El quedo con las emisiones de Radio Nacional de Armenia en el idioma de Cervantes. Incluso, comenzó escribir un informe de recepción a la emisora de Armenia con una plegaria para ayudar y/o mostrar solidaridad con Cuba y la Comunidad Cubana en el exterior.

Las emisiones de Radio Nacional de Armenia mostro claramente la perdida de control del Malecón por las fuerzas de castrismo aunque sea por cinco minutos. Se podía palpar a un pueblo clamándose por la libertad en medio de una indiferencia mundial. Quizás algunos estaban en los conceptos antiguos de la Guerra Fría como todo un buey de la izquierda/derecha antigua.

Cuando termino los acontecimientos, hubo un sentido de desconcierto. El escritor siguió escribiendo a Armenia.

El 27 de Agosto de 1994 Miami Florida:

El escritor envió su carta para Armenia en el buzón. Parece que se había olvidado de la situación.

El 30 de Septiembre 2009 Ereván, Armenia

Radio Nacional de Armenia respondió a la carta del humilde escritor. He aquí la respuesta:

Respetado Señor:

Contestamos su atenta carta del 27-8-1994 le aclaramos que estamos al tanto de lo que acontece en la hermosa Cuba. Aceptamos su mano de amistad y le alárganos la nuestra.

Radio Nacional de Armenia

El escritor es el autor de esta reflexión y este eternamente agradecido a la República de Armenia y Radio Nacional de Armenia por este gesto bondadoso.

ABAJO LA ONU

2009-07-19T15:36:00.000-07:00

Con que derecho tiene la ONU de lanzar acusaciones falsas contra Honduras cuando no levanto un dedo durante el genocidio en Camboya por Pol Pot [1970’s] y de Ruanda [1994]?

Abajo la ONU

¿Quién es Kim Jong Il y qué quiere? JOSE BRECHNER

2009-07-19T15:33:00.000-07:00

¿Quién es Kim Jong Il y qué quiere?

JOSE BRECHNER

Si existe un líder enigmático, ese sin duda es Kim Jong Il. El curioso autócrata, es considerado maniático por unos, nihilista por otros. Sea lo que sea, para nadie es “normal”.

Apasionado del cine, tiene la colección personal de películas más grande del mundo. Unos 20.000 títulos. Su sueño era ser director cinematográfico. Con la muerte de su padre Kim Il Sung en 1994, que gobernó Corea del Norte desde su fundación en 1948, Kim Jong Il, 67, se hizo cargo con mano dura de la dictadura comunista impuesta por su antecesor.

Amante de la buena vida, disfruta de los placeres mundanos como cualquier playboy, o mejor dicho, como cualquier socialista. Champán francés, caviar iraní, autos veloces, mujeres rubias y asiáticas le son importadas para satisfacer sus deseos, mientras su pueblo, literalmente, se muere de hambre en las calles.

Corea del Norte es la cuarta potencia militar del mundo. Posición que hace trepidar a cualquiera cuando amenaza con tirar bombas. Lo único que produce Pyongyang es armas. Todo lo demás es importado, desde comida a combustible, principalmente de China. Los norcoreanos que no entran al ejército o son empleados por el gobierno, tienen muy pocas probabilidades de sobrevivir en alguna actividad privada. Corea del Norte es un estado cien por ciento militarista.

Recientemente, el misterioso y pequeño tirano que a diferencia de su imponente padre que medía 1,93 metros, tiene 30 cm menos que él --disgusto que disimula montado sobre elevadas plataformas-- decidió mostrar los colmillos a sus enemigos de siempre: Corea del Sur, Japón y Estados Unidos.

Los norteamericanos no saben cómo lidiar con este personaje a quien consideran loco, pero según los que lo conocen de loco no tiene nada. Con el cociente intelectual de un genio, es audaz y decidido. También es despiadado. Es un hábil estratega que gusta de shockear a su pueblo y al mundo. Kim Jong Il es un típico dictador narcisista.

En Barack Obama encontró el incauto perfecto para hacer gala de su armamento. George Bush previno con su maniquea y simplista forma de describir las cosas, que el “Eje del Mal” estaba formado por Irak, Irán y Corea del Norte. ¿Dónde empezaron los problemas este año…? No obstante, los demócratas siguen pensando que porque ellos entraron a la Casa Blanca, el mundo dejó de ser lo que es.

Están abandonando Irak prematuramente, les tiene sin cuidado que Irán siga desarrollando tecnología nuclear, y Corea del Norte ni debe figurar en el mapamundi de la Oficina Oval.

Kim es despótico y sombrío, pero sabe perfectamente lo que hace. De lo contrario no estaría en el poder por tantos años, con un país arruinado económicamente, y sin ser el héroe nacional que fue su padre, al que su pueblo veneraba. Los norcoreanos nunca conocieron una sociedad libre y él sabe manejar esa obediencia colectiva.

Kim es incomprensible para los occidentales, porque les resulta exótico. Pero no tiene diferencia con cualquier Stalin o Hitler. Es muy peligroso porque tiene poderío nuclear. Viviendo aislado del mundo, su mejor carta de supervivencia es “la bomba”. Sus enemigos saben que si intentan agredirlo puede arrasar con millones de ellos. Por su parte, Kim sabe que si ataca, sus contrarios lo destruirán.

Consecuentemente, se mantiene el balance de fuerzas.

Kim es el perro que ladra a sus vecinos para que se percaten de que domina su territorio. No es un zángano con ilusiones imperialistas como Hugo Chávez. Es de cuidado porque les vende armas a los Chávez, los musulmanes radicales, y cualquiera que le ponga dinero sobre la mesa. Por lo demás, se asemeja más a un niño rico y egoísta, que no tiene amigos, y compra costosos juguetes para disfrutarlos solo.

Con su salud en veloz deterioro -- le dan un año de vida-- su última exhibición de fuegos artificiales fue la manera de decirle al mundo que nada cambiará cuando él no esté, y que su hijo más joven, Kim Jong Un, de 25, a quien nombró su sucesor el mes pasado, continuará la temible saga de la familia.

Kim Jong Un, hizo la secundaria en Suiza. Tiene los gustos y el carácter del padre --a diferencia de su hermano mayor, Kim Jong Chul, 28, quien según su progenitor tiene “el cálido corazón de una muchacha”-- y está mejor dotado para dirigir el país.

www.josebrechner.com

Costa Rica Vence A Guadalupe en la Copa Oro CONCACAF 2009

2009-07-19T15:25:00.000-07:00

Desde el Estadio de los Vaqueros de Dallas en esa bella ciudad en el estado de la estrella solitaria, Costa Rica enfrento a la isla francesa ubicada en el Caribe cuyo nombre es Guadalupe.

El propósito del enfrentamiento era los cuartos finales de la Copa Oro 2009 de la CONCACAF.

Primer Tiempo

Costa Rica comenzó con un dominio del juego debido a su poderío del juego, disciplina, consistencia, y deseo de superar en la tarea. Borges sorprendió a la multitud en el estadio y el arquero guadalupano con un gol mediante una patada con el pie derecho y la espalda en frente a los tres minutos.

A pesar de los intentos de Guadalupe en retomar el dominio, cometieron errores que facilito la tarea de la nación centroamericana. Incluso, los ticos anotaron otro gol cuando Saborío dio un cabezazo directo a hacia la parte izquierda del arco y por encima del pobre arquero del contrincante.

El Primer Tiempo siguió con el dominio tico y el apoyo de los hinchas de su equipo con el equipo guadalupano en un estado de depresión. Costa Rica termino con una aventaja de dos puntos comparado con ninguno de la isla francesa en el Caribe.

Segundo Tiempo

Costa Rica es una nación creyente en los versos de la canción “Hay Que Trabajar” interpretado por Oscar D’Leon y Tito Puente que decía: “Mira Pa’lante No Para Atrás... Camina”. Los ticos hicieron lo mismo cuando Andy Heron anoto un tercer gol.

Guadalupe rehusó darse por vencido y anoto un gol con la patada de Alphonse dentro del arco de los ticos a los 64 minutos. Costa Rica respondió con un gol del Maestro Saborío a los 71 minutos mediante una patada hacia la esquina del arco a los 71 minutos.

Costa Rica termino con una bandeja dorada y un tiro de gracia con el último gol del juego de Herrera. Después del gol, se acabo lo que se daba con los ticos avanzando hacia los finales.

Jugador Valioso del Juego: Saborío

Guadalupe 1-5 Costa Rica

Evento: CONCACAF Copa de Oro 2009

Fecha: 2009-07-19

Lugar: Estadio Vaqueros de Dallas en Dallas Texas

Canada 0-1 Honduras en la CONCACAF Copa Oro 2009

2009-07-19T10:00:00.000-07:00

Honduras enfrento a un rival poderoso en la Copa Oro CONCACAF 2009. El juego de la nación centroamericana contra Canadá surgió dentro de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica un 18 de Julio 2009.

Canadá gozaba de las ventajas de su victoria contra Jamaica 1-0, El Salvador 1-0, y un empate con Costa Rica. Honduras gozaba del apoyo de su pueblo en el estadio a pesar de una derrota frente a los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica y una victoria frente a Granada.

El Primer Tiempo comenzó con ambos equipos echando todo a la suerte. Honduras jugo con alegría y fortaleza bajo los gritos y la música de fondo de los hinchas. Los intentos del equipo de Honduras para pasarse las pelotas fueron interrumpidos de manera brusca por Canadá.

Walter Martínez de Honduras intento varios goles sin éxito y la respuesta no tardaba en esperar. Los espectadores de Honduras comenzaron el abucheo y los actos de repudio. Canadá aprovecho de la situación para que sus integrantes Jankovic y Stalteri pasaran la pelota entre ellos mismos.

Cuando todo parece que Honduras perdió el deseo de continuar con las tarjetas amarilla y otros desmanes, Saltera pego a Walter Martínez y recibió una tarjeta amarilla. Honduras tuvo la oportunidad para anotar un gol a base de la penalidad.
Walter Martínez anoto un gol mediante una patada directa a la cancha y el portero de Canadá. Honduras quedo con el dominio del primer tiempo y lo continuo durante el segundo tiempo y hasta el final.

Honduras 1-0 Canadá

CONCACAF Copa Oro 2009

RECETA PARA DEBBIE ROWE

2009-07-19T09:56:00.000-07:00

Tenemos una receta para la ex esposa de Michael Jackson. Estamos hablando de la puta gringa llamada Debbie Rowe.

Receta Para Debbie Rowe
1. Un Batido de Mango
2. Un Batido de Papaya [Fruta Bomba/Lechosa]
3. Un Jugo de Ciruela
4. Ensalada de Aguacate
5. Una Botella de Colon [o Colom] Cleanser
6. Una Pinga
para la liberacion interna de una puta gringa.

Poesia Para La OEA Y Los Politicos

2009-07-19T09:52:00.001-07:00

Imagínate Insulza Con Su Pinga
Penetrando el Bollo de Pelosi La Gringa.

Imagínate la Coca de Morales
Dentro de la Boca de Chávez.

Imagínate Washington tirando un Peo
Y Zelaya oliendo algo Feo y alabarlo.

Imagínate Castro sin Huevo
Con Correa adquiriéndolo de Nuevo.

Imagínate Cristina Fernández en la Cabroneria
Con Néstor Kirchner en la Mariconeria.

Estamos en mundo podrido y jodido porque queremos.

¿Michael Jackson era negro, loco, enfermo, pervertido? JOSE BRECHNER

2009-07-12T08:42:00.000-07:00

¿Michael Jackson era negro, loco, enfermo, pervertido?

JOSE BRECHNER

La comunidad negra norteamericana se desmidió en elogios hacia Michael Jackson reclamando su progenitura. ¡Era uno de los nuestros! gritaron pastores, actores y músicos. ¿Era Jacko alguien que se identificaba con sus hermanos negros? Por los experimentos que hizo con su piel y las cirugías en su rostro, da para dudar.

Cuando los papeles firmados por sus dermatólogos y médicos, no tengan validez, o cuando ya no les preocupe las consecuencias de sus revelaciones y saquen los trapos al sol, se sabrá la verdad sobre el cambio de color del controvertido Rey del Pop.
Michael Jackson era excéntrico, no quiso ser negro, y según las versiones de especialistas, se sometió a un proceso de emblanquecimiento haciéndose inyectar vitíligo, que lo transformó no en Peter Pan, el niño que nunca creció, como él pretendía, sino en Blanca Nieves.

No sólo él quería ser blanco, sino que alquiló el vientre de una rubia para que albergase los espermatozoides, supuestamente de su dermatólogo Arnold Klein, para que sus hijos sean también del mismo tinte. No obstante, Jacko juró públicamente que las células conservadas in vitro que reprodujeron a sus hijos, eran suyas. Hecho desmentido por los exámenes de ADN.

Los óvulos tampoco fueron de la que dice ser la madre biológica, Debbie Rowe, que ahora reclama la tenencia de los niños porque cree que encontró un próspero negocio post mortem del ex marido. La paridora dejó a los bebés en manos de Michael, tal como acordaron, y no los volvió a ver. El frágil y delicado Jackson decía que amaba a la corpulenta y tosca inglesa.

Para Afroamérica, Michael Jackson era negro porque fue exitoso. Si hubiese sido mediocre lo hubiesen tildado de “blanquito”. A los blancos nunca les importó su color. Simplemente aplaudieron su originalidad.

Los tres vástagos, Prince Michael Joseph de 12, Paris Michael de 11, y Prince Michael II de 7, apodado “Blanquet” (manta), nunca mostraron su rostro al público, porque su estrafalario papá les obligó a cubrírselos con máscaras o velos. Nunca fueron a la escuela, jamás conocieron a un niño del vecindario ni tuvieron amigos, duermen los tres en el mismo cuarto, y los únicos extraños con los que tuvieron contacto, aparte de los que circundaban en Neverland, fueron animadores contratados para entretenerlos.

Allende sus complejos cromáticos y faciales, hay otros asuntos más sustanciales. Michael Jackson fue un farsante que no se bajó del tablado en ningún momento de su vida. En las entrevistas televisadas a lo largo de su existencia, resalta su fingimiento. Jackson era la mentira andante. Su susurrante hablar, su barbijo, su guante, su banda hitleriana en el brazo, su entorno, todo era parte del show cotidiano. Nadie conoció un Michael Jackson real.

Si bien Jacko fue un genio musical que tuvo una infancia sufrida con un padre despótico que lo puso a trabajar desde los tres años, también fue premiado por sus logros. Gastó más de 500 millones de dólares en extravagantes caprichos y encima dejó una deuda de más de 400 millones.

Jacko derramó incógnitas muy oscuras acerca de su sexualidad. Un hombre que podía tener a cualquier mujer, o por último a cualquier hombre, buscaba niños, algunos cancerosos, con quienes acostarse.

Nunca se demostró su culpabilidad en el juicio que le inició en 1993 uno de los chicos invitados a su casa a pasar la noche, porque el proceso se detuvo con 20 millones que fueron pagados por Jackson a la supuesta víctima sexual para acabar con el escándalo. Pero ¿cuántos adultos se acuestan con niños y quedan libres? Por otra parte, ¿qué clase de padres permiten que su hijo de 13 años pase la noche en la cama con un individuo de 34 que usa maquillaje, lápiz labial, delineador de cejas y rimmel?

En los siguientes meses habrá escándalos sobre derechos de paternidad, maternidad, herencias. Juicios a médicos que recetaron drogas ilegales o restringidas. Acusaciones de homicidio. Infidencias que contarán sus mucamas, choferes, guardaespaldas, o personas más allegadas. Muchos secretos se conocerán en el próximo capítulo.

¿Por qué Michael Jackson nos debe importar? Porque los ídolos del Pop y el Rock son muy influyentes en el comportamiento de los adolescentes, que usualmente los imitan copiando lo peor de ellos.

La polvareda que deja Michael Jackson es densa. Honrarlo por su extraordinaria creatividad artística es apropiado. Por lo demás no se merece nada. ¿Es correcto juzgar a las celebridades por su comportamiento fuera del escenario? Es por lo que deberían ser juzgados, porque es lo único auténtico. Lo demás es teatro.

www.josebrechner.com

ARRIBA HONDURAS ABAJO CASTRO, CHAVEZ, Y YANQUIS

2009-06-29T09:01:00.000-07:00

VIVA LA REVOLCUION CONTRA LA DERECHA Y IZQUIERDA DE HONDURAS
ABAJO LOS MARICONES QUE SON EL GOBIERNO DE CUBA, VENEZUELA, LOS EEUU, LA ONU, LA OEA Y OTROS ORGANISMOS QUWE MERECE UN ACTO DE REPUDIO CON LA MIERDA DEL MUNDO

EEUU 2-3 Brasil Copa Confederacion 2009

2009-06-28T14:08:00.000-07:00

EEUU 2-3 Brasil en la Copa Confederación 2009

En el juego de los campeonatos, EEUU enfrento a Brasil en Johannesburgo Sudáfrica. Ambos equipos listos para la batalla histórica después de la batalla entre España y Sudáfrica por el tercer lugar.

El primer tiempo pertenecía a los EEUU con un gol de Dempsey y otro de Donovan en los primeros treinta minutos. A pesar de los esfuerzos de ambos, comenzó la caída de la defensa estadounidense.

No obstante, los EEUU logro mantenerse con la ventaja de 2-0.
Cambiaron las cosas en el segundo tiempo con los dos goles de Luis Fabiano y otro de Lucio. A pesar de que Brasil gano el campeonato por tres puntos, Brasil en realidad gano con cuatro puntos pues hubo un gol que no fue contado por el árbitro.

No obstante, los EEUU salieron bien con una medalla de plata en la Copa Confederación 2009 y con el futbol estadounidense con la frente en alta. El futbol estadounidense llego para quedarse después de cumplir sus quinces en Sudáfrica.

EEUU 2-3 Brasil

Torneo: Copa Confederación 2009

Lugar: Johannesburgo Sudáfrica

Jugador Más Valioso: Lucio

En otros eventos en la Superliga, Chivas USA y San Luis empataron 1-1.

Iran Si Washington No

2009-06-21T08:54:00.000-07:00

Las últimas semanas hemos sido testigo a las elecciones en Irán y los intentos de los delincuentes títeres de los Republicanos y Demócratas para sabotaje el proceso de la Revolución Islámica de 1979.

Los Republicanos y Demócratas cuyo medio siglo de mal gobierno en EEUU es conocido quiere dictar los derechos humanos y la libertad a un pueblo que ha tenido tres décadas de libertad, paraíso, dignidad, y democracia.

Cuando hay una elección donde el candidato obtiene más de 60% del voto y su rival 40%, no se puede hablar de fraude. Hubo elecciones limpias y organizadas comparadas con el relajo de 2000, 2004, y 2008 existente en los EEUU.

Los Republicanos y Demócratas no pueden hablar de los derechos humanos cuando son expertos en buscar pleitos en el mundo y dentro del imperio estadounidense contra las minorías.

Los Republicanos y Demócratas robaran territorio de México, del pueblo indígena, participaron en la destrucción de países y sociedades en la búsqueda de mano de obra barata para reemplazar a los esclavos afro-americanos.

No podemos olvidar de cómo los Demócratas y Republicanos provocaron a Japón para declarar la Guerra durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial y colocaron japoneses americanos [incluyendo nacidos en EEUU] en campos de concentración casi similar a los que tenia Hitler en Alemania y Stalin en Rusia. La única diferencia es que no hubo documentación de muertos.

Incluso, los Republicanos y Demócratas no pueden aceptar un afro-americano ni otra minoría en cargos de alta magnitud. La maldad se extiende hacia las elecciones donde existe Libertarios, Verdes, y otros partidos.

En el 2004: el Secretario de Estado de Ohio nulifico 57,000 firmas del Partido Libertario cuando querían incluir a su candidato para Presidente Michael Badnarik en el boleto de ese estado famoso por sus violaciones de los derechos humanos.

En el mismo ano, candidatos para los puestos políticos en Illinois y Wisconsin [del partido de la dictadura Republicana/Demócrata] enfrentaron una manifestación de Libertarios, Verdes, y otros partidos. Amenazaron con arrestarlos por iniciar una revuelta cuando la manifestación era pacifica.

Cuando Michael Badnarik quería participar en los debates para Presidente en aquellos comicios en Miami Florida, la policía lo arresto por conducta anti social. Esta es el país que hace alarde de los derechos humanos pero no lo practica.

Incluso los Republicanos y Demócratas junto con los Chavistas de Venezuela compraron maquinas de votación para sus elecciones. Sabemos los resultados y su fraude masivo.

En el 2006, el Gobernador de Illinois un tal Rod Blagojevich y de Ohio un tal Strickland prohibieron la participación de los Verdes y Libertarios en los debates gubernamentales durante los comicios de esa posición en los dos estados.

Un aviso para los Republicanos/Demócratas, deja de meter sus narices en los asuntos internos de otros países como Irán. Ustedes no tienen la moral de hablar de derechos humanos. Incluso, deben renunciar y dar luz hacia un gobierno multiétnico multirracial del Partido Libertario.

Monarquia Si Republica No

2009-06-09T04:53:00.000-07:00

Soy un latino nacido en la llamada Republica Americana y considero que los dos siglos de Republica en EEUU fueron un desastre.

Hubo guerras, busca pleitos, esclavitud, discriminacion, marginacion por un grupo llamado Republicanos y Democratas. Elegimos Presidentes pero son de los dos partidos Republicanos y Democratas que son lo miamo.

La Republica Americana traiciono a Cuba, mataron latinos y robaron la mitad de Mexico. Ellos despues tienen el descaro de dictar los derechos humanos hacia el mundo. Aunque nacido en EEUU soy latino, cubano, espa~nol por la sangre y con el orgullo pues aunque ofrecio un lugar para el nacimiento, sigue siendo un Imperio vestido de Republica y un pais inseguro de si mismo.

La Republica Americana durante las elecciones es sitio de insultos entre los Republicanos y Democratas. La unica unidad es cuando los Republicanos y Democratas quieren reprimir a los otros partidos como Libetarios, Verdes, y Monarquicos con sus leyes electorales injustas y la mordaza.

Si los EEUU tuviese un voto de verdad donde se escoge entre una Republica o Monarquia, votaria por una monarquia pues prefiero un rey neutral a un presidente de doble cara. Incluso, los EEUU no levanta NI UN dedo para sus ciudadanos cuando hay problemas. Me despido con lo siguiente: Que Viva Espa~na y los pueblos latinos dentro de America y que se acaba la Republica Americana

Piratas en EEUU

2009-04-13T14:48:00.000-07:00

El Mundo fue testigo del rescate de un capitán de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica entre las costas de Somalia y Kenia. El capitán del buque y los tripulantes era rehén de los piratas somalí. Me alegro que el capitán fuera rescatado y que todo saliera bien.

El único desacuerdo fue cuando los Republicanos y Demócratas que violan los derechos humanos dentro de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica hablan de una guerra contra la piratería. Los Republicanos/Demócratas son creadores de las guerras como la Guerra Contra El Terrorismo, la Guerra Contra Las Drogas, y otras guerras tontas.

Con que derecho tiene los Republicanos y Demócratas en hablar acerca de una guerra contra la piratería cuando ellos son piratas. Los Republicanos y Demócratas lograron secuestrar a la Constitución de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica con sus Leyes “Patrióticas” y su Departamento de Seguridad Interna.

La Oligarquía de Los Republicanos y Demócratas como buen pirata están arrestando a los Independientes, Libertarios, y otros partidos en el Estado de Missouri. Los cargos son piratería y terrorismo cuando los crímenes de verdad es mostrar el verdadero rostro de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Parece que los Republicanos y Demócratas temen la verdad y no quieren un pueblo informado.

Que se espera de una oligarquía que habla tanto de derechos humanos pero nulificaron las peticiones de otros partidos, cancelaron su derecho en participar en debates, y hasta amenazaron con arrestos y cárcel a los que no están de acuerdo con su régimen.

Los distintos pueblos de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica puede ser dueño de su propio destino. Su tarea consiste en informarse acerca de la verdad de los piratas que gobiernan a los EEUU. Hay que quitar a los Piratas denominados

Republicanos/Demócratas que saquean al país con su intervención en exceso en los asuntos internos de la ciudadanía.

Hay que acabar con los Piratas Republicanos/Demócratas que crearon odios y divisiones para avanzar su política de mantenerse en el poder. Hay que acabar con los Piratas Republicanos/Demócratas que hablan de libertad, fraternidad, y la verdad pero no lo quieren practicar.

Hay que acabar con los Piratas Republicanos/Demócratas y su abuso de la palabra y el concepto “Patriotismo” para políticas baratas y demagógicas.

La solución Anti Pirata es el Partido Libertario para los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. El Partido Libertario es un partido que favorece la economía del mercado, la no intervención del estado en los asuntos personales, el respeto, la dignidad, y el deseo de superarse sin miedo. Veremos que sucede en el presente y el futuro.

http://forasteroohioohiostranger.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/los-piratas-de-los-estados-unidos-de-norteamerica/

http://partidolibertario.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/los-piratas-de-los-eeuu/

http://partidolibertarioespana.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/piratas-en-los-eeuu/

State Constitutions and God

2009-04-11T12:26:00.000-07:00

Do you know the Preamble for your state?
I found this very interesting.
Do you know the Preamble for your state? . . ..

Be sure to read the message in red at the bottom!
Alabama 1901, Preamble We the people of the State of Alabama , invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution..

Alaska 1956, Preamble We, the people of Alaska , grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land.

Arizona 1911, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arizona , grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...

Arkansas 1874, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arkansas , grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government...

California 1879, Preamble We, the People of the State of California , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom....

Colorado 1876, Preamble We, the people of Colorado , with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe...

Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy.

Delaware 1897, Preamble Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshiping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences.

Florida 1885, Preamble We, the people of the State of Florida , grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution...

Georgia 1777, Preamble We, the people of Georgia , relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution...

Hawaii 1959, Preamble We , the people of Hawaii , Grateful for Divine Guidance ... Establish this Constitution.

Idaho 1889, Preamble We, the people of the State of Idaho , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings.

Illinois 1870, Preamble We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil , political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.

Indiana 1851, Preamble We, the People of the State of Indiana , grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government.

Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the St ate of Iowa , grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings, establish this Constitution.

Kansas 1859, Preamble We, the people of Kansas , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution.

Kentucky 1891, Preamble. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties..

Louisiana 1921, Preamble We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.

Maine 1820, Preamble We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity .. And imploring His aid and direction.

Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...

Massachusetts 1780, Preamble We...the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction .

Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, establish this Constitution.

Minnesota, 1857, Preamble We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings:

Mississippi 1890, Preamble We, the people of Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.

Missouri 1845, Preamble We, the people of Missouri, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness . Establish this Constitution....

Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution ..

Nebraska 1875, Preamble We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom . Establish this Constitution.

Nevada 1864, Preamble We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, establish this Constitution...

New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.

New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.

New Mexico 1911, Preamble We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty..

New York 1846, Preamble We, the people of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.

North Carolina 1868, Preamble We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those...

North Dakota 1889, Preamble We , the people of North Dakota , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain...

Ohio 1852, Preamble We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common.

Oklahoma 1907, Preamble Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty, establish this

Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences

Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance....

Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing...

South Carolina, 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carolina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.

South Dakota 1889, Preamble We, the people of South Dakota, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties .

Tennessee 1796, Art. XI.III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience...

Texas 1845, Preamble We the People of the Republic of Texas , acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.

Utah 1896, Preamble Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution.

Vermont 1777, Preamble Whereas all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man .

Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other

Washington 1889, Preamble We the People of the State of Washington , grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution

West Virginia 1872, Preamble Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God ...

Wisconsin 1848, Preamble We, the people of Wisconsin , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility...

Wyoming 1890, Preamble We, the people of the State of Wyoming , grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties, establish this Constitution...

After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state constitutions, one is faced with the prospect that maybe, the ACLU and the out-of-control federal courts are wrong! If you found this to be 'Food for thought' send to as many as you think will be enlightened as I hope you were.

(Please note that at no time is anyone told that they MUST worship God.)

'Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.' - William Penn

BLESSED IS THE NATION WHOSE GOD IS THE LORD ... PSALM 33:12

El Peo de Maradona

2009-04-03T18:06:00.000-07:00

No podemos negar el lugar de Diego Armando Maradona en la historia del futbol en lo bueno, lo malo, y lo bochornoso. Tampoco se puede negar los propósitos de Maradona terminan en un peo.

En uno de los juegos vitales para la clasificación para la Copa Mundial 2010, Argentina sufrió una derrota de alta magnitud frente a Bolivia. La perdida fue el peo enorme que tiro Maradona en su tres décadas de tirarse un peo durante su jugada. Imagínate si Maradona tendrá que pagar el impuesto de los verdes debido a los peos.

Cuando Maradona comenzó como técnico del equipo nacional de la República Argentina, el mundo incluyendo Argentina pensó que habrá progreso para el equipo. No podemos negar quizás el progreso en cuanto a la publicidad por cada payasearía de un adicto a las drogas siendo técnico de un equipo con el prestigio de la República Argentina.

Argentina no tenia la capacidad, tenacidad, disciplina del equipo boliviano que dominaba el juego desde un principio. Parece que Argentina vivía de las glorias pasadas de su jefe Maradona. Con el idilio romántico del pasado, no tenían la fuerza de los bolivianos.

Que triste pues Argentina y Brasil eran los equipos de las grandes ligas en el futbol del Continente Americano. En realidad, una de mis preferencias es Brasil desde la época del astro Pele.

Maradona parece haber estado en su estado de las drogas con su método de ser técnico. Quizás Maradona estaba adicto a sus peos y no quería molestarse con el equipo argentino. No obstante, Argentina salió perdiendo como una emperatriz en cuero.

El equipo de futbol de Bolivia mostro que existe lo incierto en los deportes. Bolivia con su tenacidad, disciplina, capacidad, y organización mostro ser un equipo proactivo. Bolivia no tenia estado de agotamiento comparado con el equipo argentino.

Bolivia mostro que existe otros equipos en América Latina que merecen el respeto y atención de las Ligas Internacionales.

Mis felicidades a los hermanos bolivianos por su victoria aplastante en el juego contra Argentina.

Argentina debe pensar en su futuro en la Copa Mundial 2010. Lo mejor que puede hacer es reemplazar a Maradona con otro técnico quizás Riquelme y/u otro que conoce el significado del orgullo nacional del futbol.

Si el equipo nacional de la República Argentina sigue con Maradona, habrá peos y mierda en el camino. Argentina no merece el castigo de un drogadicto como técnico de su equipo nacional.

Respuesta a "Obama y la Conspiración Totalitaria"

2009-04-03T17:35:00.000-07:00

Respuesta a "Obama y la Conspiración Totalitaria"

He tenido el honor y placer de publicar el artículo de “Obama y La Conspiración Totalitaria” escrito por José Brechner. En su artículo, el Sr. Brechner hablo de la imposición de un régimen caudillista, socialista, e islámica por Obama en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica.

No podemos negar que estamos presenciando un cambio revolucionario en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Hablare a base de experiencia siendo un latino nacido en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Basta para decir que el proceso hacia un régimen totalitario empezaba con los Republicanos y Demócratas antes de la llegada de Obama.

Desde el 11 de Septiembre 2001, hemos visto la creación de una sociedad dividida, la gente teniendo que hacer sacrificios, y la creación de un Departamento de la Patria.

El propósito es sembrar división entre familia, amistades, y dentro de la oposición libertaria e independiente con la meta siendo la creación de un estado totalitario. El proceso ha sido refinado por Obama y compañía.

Además de un dirigente popular [Bush nunca fue popular], fue necesario buscar chivos expiatorios. En la Primera Guerra Mundial eran los alemanes. En la Segunda Guerra Mundial eran los japoneses. En el mundo de hoy, eran los islámicos y “no americanos” bajo Bush y la economía del mercado bajo Obama.

Aquí, existe en la palestra de la discusión estadounidense las palabras como guerra y ley marcial desde el 11 de Septiembre mezclado con nacionalización y lucha de clase desde los comicios de 2008. Veo una mezcla del Socialismo del Siglo XXI [Los de América Latina eran títeres de Washington] con el Nazismo.

Muchos han preguntado porque el pueblo americano no se dan cuenta de lo que sucede. He escuchado comentarios de que los americanos se darán cuenta cuando pierden la patria. He aquí la diferencia.

Desde el 2001, aparece otra palabra utilizada por primera vez desde los 1860’s. La palabra es separatismo. Hay veces que estoy convencido que un intento de implementar un régimen totalitario conducirá hacia la disolución de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica en distintas repúblicas según las etnias y los estados.

Existen movimientos para la independencia de Texas, Ohio, Michigan, Vermont, Nuevo Hampshire, Alaska, y Hawái. Hay grupos étnicos como los pueblos indígenas de la Dakota que declararon su independencia.

La fuerza de los separatistas es de tal magnitud que 20% del Estado de Vermont quiere la independencia y son de tendencia izquierdista. La mitad del pueblo estadounidense apoya la medida del separatismo para no tener que bregar con los distintos grupos dentro de su país.

Para aquellos con motivo para celebrar la muerte de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica, el país de ficción puede ser mas peligroso como una nación dividida pues los Anglo-Americanos o Gringos odian a los Latinos, Afro-Americanos, Asiáticos, y La Nación Indígena.

Cada grupo tienen armas o la materia para fabricar armas. También no querrán más inmigrantes en su lugar. Para aquellos que creen en los Demócratas y los Republicanos, los EEUU no permitirá ni un inmigrante mas si un día sobrevive lo de Obama. Este país no quiere nadie que no son afro-americano ni Anglo-Sajones Americanos.

El latino incluyendo los nacido en EEUU o que han vivido la mayoría de su tiempo en el país de las maravillas deben pensar en América Latina como los Judíos piensan en Israel o buscar la manera de sobrevivir sin pensar en aquel vecino decrepito del norte. La razón es obvia que son el odio racial y étnico creado por los mismos Republicanos y Demócratas.

Ojala si Dios podía escuchar mi plegaria y colocar en el Continente Americano un gobierno libertario donde la responsabilidad va mano a mano con la libertad. En eso estamos en veremos.

http://forasteroohioohiostranger.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/respuesta-a-%e2%80%9cobama-y-la-conspiracion-totalitaria%e2%80%9d/

http://alvarezgalloso.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/respuesta-a-obama-y-la-conspiracion-totalitaria/

Carta Abierta Para Radio Praga acerca de los Derechos Humanos en EEUU

2009-03-26T15:46:00.000-07:00

Quiero felicitar a Radio Praga por ser la voz de la verdad y libertad en un mundo que no reconoce ni uno ni el otro.

Es importante que Radio Praga se mantenga en el aire mediante la onda corta y el ordenador para mantenerse como una llama de la libertad.
Estoy de acuerdo con las declaraciones del Primer Ministro renunciante acerca de los EEUU en el camino hacia el infierno.

Nuestro continente americano especialmente Cuba, Venezuela, y los EEUU esta en el camino o esta en el infierno. Ojala si Cuba y Venezuela podían buscar el camino hacia la libertad.

En el caso de los EEUU, el país es una creación artificial de distintos estados y grupos étnicos. Los EEUU han estado en el comino hacia el infierno desde que los Republicanos y Demócratas salieron con la suya en acabar con las libertades, la Constitución de 1787, y la creación de un aparato represivo en nombre de defender a la patria.

El Gobernador de Missouri, un demócrata cuyo apellido es Nixon declaro a los Independientes como "Enemigo de Estado" y Terrorista". Incluso, el Gobernador de Missouri ordeno a la policía estatal en parar a los carros con consignas políticas de los Partidos Libertarios, Independientes, Verdes, y de la Constitución.
Toda es infamia en un lugar que alarde de ser cuna de los derechos humanos peor lo reprime en la casa.

Sindicatos Estadounidenses = Parasitos

2009-03-22T07:51:00.000-07:00

PARASITOS DE LA SOCIEDAD: LOS SINDICATOS ESTADOUNIDENSES

Los sindicatos de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica merecen los títulos de parásitos e hipócritas de la sociedad estadounidense y el mundo.

Ellos quieren dictar las prácticas laborales en el mundo exigiendo elecciones mediante el voto secreto en los sindicatos negando el derecho del voto secreto a los obreros de los Estados Unidos.

Ellos quieren proponer que las elecciones sean publica en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica con la intención de amenazar con violencia y/o tortura sicológica a los que no quieren ser miembro de un sindicato.

El Presidente de los Teamsters James Hoffa hijo del estafador del siglo Jimmy Hoffa burlaba del concepto de unas elecciones mediante el voto secreto con la declaración de que el “Obrero Estadounidense no sabe ni leer ni escribir.

La razón por querer un voto en público es que quieren que todos los obreros y profesionales sean miembros de los sindicatos sin importar la decisión de ellos. Considero que la membrecía en un sindicato debe ser mediante una decisión individual tomada en un ambiente tranquilo en vez de agitado.

Los sindicatos de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica quieren el dinero de los obreros para que el liderazgo [bajo la tutela de obreros vivos] pueda vivir una vida de reyes y emperadores en los mejores hoteles y lugares turísticos mientras el obrero no vivo sufre con vivir de lo poco que recibe de su salario.

La palabra para ese comportamiento puede ser varias como botella y parasito. Otro ejemplo del parasitismo de los sindicatos de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica es obligar a la gente a las compras de productos fabricados en Estados Unidos de Norteamérica.

La teoría según los parásitos denominado sindicatos es que comprar productos estadounidenses ayudaría la economía local. En realidad, el dinero para los productos fabricados por obra de mano de los sindicatos termina en los bolsillos de la nomenclatura de los parásitos.

Un individuo puede comprar productos hechos en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica utilizando su tarjeta de crédito y un ordenador. Hay páginas cibernéticas como el Partido Libertario, Radio Free Texas, los distintos estados de la unión estadounidense como Ohio e Iowa que venden productos estadounidenses sin tener que buscar mano de obra barata de los sindicatos.

Ojala si los distintos pueblos de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica pueden utilizar su cerebro para derogar la propuesta de los sindicatos para dominar todos los aspectos de la vida y economía del país. Ojala si un día, los distintos pueblos de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica podían votar Libertario.

Si los sindicatos logran su dominio de la vida estadounidense, todos perderían. Incluso, habrá personas que haría su negocio fuera de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica como sucedió en la época de Bush. La decisión final seria con los distintos pueblos dentro de ese país artificial si pertenece a un sindicato por su voluntad o a la fuerza.

http://forasteroohioohiostranger.wordpress.com/2009/03/22/parasitos-de-la-sociedad-los-sindicatos-estadounidenses/

http://partidolibertario.wordpress.com/2009/03/22/parasitos-de-los-eeuu-los-sindicatos/

LA PUTA PELOSI

2009-03-08T18:21:00.000-07:00

PARA VENEZUELA, CUBA, Y LA COMUNIDAD LATINA DENTRO DE LOS ESTAMOS JODIDOS DE NORTEAMERICA

2009-02-16T14:08:00.000-08:00

PARA LOS QUE VOTARON "SI" Y LOS QUE ABSTUVIERON EN VENEZUELA

Para aquellos que votaron por el "Si" o no tenian los cojones para votar, ustedes mataron un pais lindo. Incluso, Venezuela [a pesar de sus problemas] era un paraiso sin complejos raciales y etnicos como en el pais de mierda por excelencia los Estados Unidos de Norteamerica.

Para aquellos que votaron por el "Si" o no tenian los cojones para votar, sus hijos, nietos, y bisnietos bajaran su culo para cagar en su tumba por la mierda que lograste hacer.

Para aquellos que votaron por el "Si" o no tenian los cojones para votar. si te sales mal con Chavez, espero que tienes los cojones para luchar para recuperar su patria pues nosotros en los EEUU no te queremos. Los EEUU tiene problemas economicas y algunos estados y grupos etnicos buscando la independencua de ese gigante.

Incluso, ustedes son titeres de los Republicanos, Democratas, y Comunistas Europeos.

Incluso, si nosotros vemos los que votaron por el "Si" y/no tenian los cojones para votar en nuestro suelo estadounidense o su sucesor [pues creo que dentro de poco no habra EEUU]. Pues seran recibido con una patada en el culo.

Para los que votaron por el "Si" y los que no tenian los cojones para votar, mete tu cabeza dentro de tu culo para saborear la mierda.

PARA LOS CUBANOS DENTRO DE CUBA, FUERA DE CUBA Y LOS CUBANOS NACIDOS EN EEUU

Ustedes hablan mierda de una Cuba Libre pero no quiere levantar un dedo porque segun ustedes, los gringos no nos dejan. Hay que cagar a los gringos, los vestigios de la Guerra Fria, y los demas con su negativismo.

Hay que hacer como los afro-americanos que desafiaron a los gringos para buscar sus derechos. Para aquellos que dicen que los gringos dio los derechos a los afro-americanos y que no se puede aplicar a la situacion cubana, los afro-americanos tomaron las riendas de su nacion y mandaron a los gringos p'al carajo.

Existe elementos dentro de nosotros que son brutos, metiches, apaticos, y todos los negativos. Esos elementos son los besa culos en nuestra comunidad y deben ser sometidos a proceso quirurgico colocando su cara dentro de su culo

AVISO PARA LOS LATINOS

Busca la manera de recuperar a America Latina. Si crees que por nacer en EEUU tendras proteccion, lo siento. EEUU tendra una una guerra civil entre los Afro-Americanos y Gringos terminando en su disolucion en mil republicas. Si quieres defender su "Sue~no Americano", debes defenderte con lo que es posible. Si quieres seguir comiendo mierda con su "Sue~no Americano" sin defenderte, preparate para los campos de concentracion de los gringos y otros grupos dentro de los Estamos Jodidos de Norteamerica.

Arresto de Un Gobernador/Arrest of a Governor

2008-12-09T10:01:00.000-08:00

I cannot help but celebrate that this individual was arrested for corruption. He got what he deserved for his deeds. He also denied the rights of alternative political parties such as the Libertarians and Greens to participate in Gubernatorial Debates in Illinois.

Que clase de alegria recibi cuando entere de las noticias del arresto de uno de los corruptos en la Clase Gobernante de Republicanos y Democratas cuyo nombre es Blagojevich. Que se espera de esta peste que nego los derechos a los Libertarios y Verdes.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=77948§ionid=3510203

http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/Gov.Blagojevich.Federal.2.883154.html

JIMMY CARTER VETE PARA LA PINGA

2008-11-24T10:46:00.000-08:00

Hoy recibimos noticias del asombro de Jimmy Carter acerca de la situacion en Zimbabwe. No estoy sorprendido pues este Redneck, Maricon, Racista, y Degenerado o sabia lo que estaba sucediendo o paso todo el tiempo metiendo su cabeza dentro de tu culo.

Tengo un consejo para Jimmy Carter, vete para la pinga. Mejor, mete tu cabeza dentro de tu culo para comer la mierda dentro del culo. VIVA LA REVOLUCION CONTRA LOS REPUBLICANOS Y DEMOCRATAS

Para los EEUU y El Continente Americano

2008-11-10T17:39:00.000-08:00

Los EEUU refiriendo a los que votaron para los Democratas y Republicanos [y para el Continente Americano y su Socialismo del Siglo XXI] son distincion de clase, etnia, raza, y gusto son los siguientes [incluyendo a los medios de comunicaciones]:
1. Mierda
2. Putas
3. Asesinos
4. Terroristas
5. Peos
6. Escoria
7. Drogadictos
8. Maricones
9. Tortilleras
10. Asesinos de Bebes y Ancianos
11. Cobardes
12. Retrasados Mentales
13. Vividores de Seguridad Social, Medicare, y Medicaid [tres tetas con la leche para sostener a los pendejos]
14. Pendejos
15. Amantes de la Violencia
16. Amantes del Odio
17. Envidioso
18. Chismosos
19. Chivatos
20. Brutos

Mi receta para ustedes es que deben meter su cabeza dentro de su culo para saborear la mierda por dentro

VIVA LA INDEPENDENCIA DE OHIO, LAKOTA OYATE, Y ALASKA DEL IMPERIALISMO YANQUI Y EL SOCIALISMO DEL SIGLO XXI

VOTE FOR AMERICA!!! VOTE FOR BARR!!!

2008-10-31T07:43:00.000-07:00

Over the past few weeks, it is obvious that the McCain campaign has lost and that Barack Obama may well be our next President. Ghosts and goblins don't scare me.

Barack Obama does.

Four years of Obama in the White House will lead to the largest movement toward socialism in American history.

Higher taxes, higher spending, government run health care, and elimination of private retirement plans are just a start.

At this point, only one candidate stands between the American taxpayers and unprecedented, massive growth in government and taxes: Bob Barr.
As John McCain has faded, the Bob Barr platform of lower taxes, smaller government, free markets and more personal freedom is catching fire.
Young voters, and especially first time voters, are flocking to Bob Barr in record numbers. But we need your help to continue this political tsunami that is going to make history next week.

In four days, the Washington establishment is going to hear from us. They are going to have to sit up and take notice that there is a large and angry segment of the voter population who are fed up with reckless spending, Wall Street Bailouts and corruption.

And our voters believe that BOTH the Republicans and Democrats are to blame.

Palin and her Acceptance Speech

2008-09-04T15:58:00.000-07:00

Mr Chairman, delegates, and fellow citizens: I am honoured to be considered for the nomination for Vice President of the United States...
I accept the call to help our nominee for president to serve and defend America by revealing my T‘s and A‘s.
I accept the challenge of a tough fight in this erection... against confident opponents... at a crucial hour for our country.
And I accept the privilege of serving with a man who has come through much hard ons... and met far graver challenges with Viagra. .. and knows how tough fights are won in the bedroom with me - the next president of the United States, John S McCain.

It was just a year ago when all the experts in Washington counted out our nominee because he refused to hedge his commitment to the security of the country he loves and since all of the experts were busy practicing the fine art of masturbation.
.
With their usual certitude while masturbating, they told us that all was lost - there was no hope for this candidate who said that he would rather lose an election than see his country lose a war. In the meantime, the experts continued their cerebral and actual masturbation.

But the pollsters and pundits overlooked just one thing when they wrote him off during their period of masturbation, crapping, and farting..
They overlooked the calibre of the man himself - the determination, resolve, the Viagra, Cialia, and sheer guts of Senator John McCain. The voters knew better.
And maybe that's because they realise there is a time for politics, a time to fart, a time to crap, a time to masturbate, a time for sex, a time to reveal my T’s and A’s, and a time for leadership... a time to campaign and a time to put our country first.
Our nominee for president is a true profile in courage, and people like that are hard to come by. I know I was chosen so that I could get laid.

He's a man who wore the uniform of this country for 22 years, and refused to break faith with those troops in Iraq who have now brought victory within sight even though we have a lot of troops with PTSD, desire of suicide, homicide, and self flagellation.
.
And as the mother of one of those troops with PTSD, desire of suicide, homicide, and self flagellation, that is exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief. I'm just one of many moms who'll say an extra prayer each night for our sons and daughters going into harm's way.

Our son Truck is 19.
And one week from tomorrow - 11 September - he'll deploy to Iraq with the army infantry in the service of his country and to be with with PTSD, desire of suicide, homicide, and self flagellation.
My nephew Kasey also enlisted, and serves on a carrier in the Persian Gulf. He did 30 women in one hour before going.

My family is proud of both of them and of all the fine men and women serving the country in uniform with PTSD, desire of suicide, homicide, and self flagellation
.
Truck is the eldest of our five children. In our family, it's two boys and three girls in between - my strong and kind-hearted daughters Bristol, Willow, and Piper.
And in April, my husband Todd and I welcomed our littlest one into the world, a perfectly beautiful baby boy named Trig. From the inside, no family ever seems typical.
That's how it is with us.
Our family has the same ups and downs as any other... the same challenges and the same joys.
Sometimes even the greatest joys bring challenge.
And children with special needs inspire a special love.
To the families of special needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters.
I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House.
Todd is a story all by himself.
He's a lifelong commercial fisherman... a production operator in the oil fields of Alaska's North Slope... a proud member of the United Steel Workers' Union... and world champion snow machine racer.
Throw in his Yup'ik Eskimo ancestry, and it all makes for quite a package. We met in high school, and two decades and five children later he's still my guy.
My mom and dad both worked at the elementary school in our small town. And among the many things I owe them is one simple lesson: that this is America, and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity.
My parents are here tonight, and I am so proud to be the daughter of Chuck and Sally Heath.

Long ago, a young farmer and haberdasher from Missouri followed an unlikely path to the vice-presidency. He practiced the fine art of farts.
A writer observed: "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity, and with his farts." I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman [a distant relative of a pretty boy called Truman Capote].
I grew up with those people and I am proud of being an ignorant bitch who got ahead by offering my vagina and breats to the highest bidder..
They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America ... who grow our food, run our factories, fight our wars, and blame foreigners and Independents for all of our misfortune..
They love their country, in good times and bad, and they're always proud of America to the point that we practice cannibalism on people who are in disagreement with us.

I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town living among the ignorant and backward. I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids' public education better even though the school system is a gasser.

When I ran for city council, I didn't need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too. Another reason why I did not need the focus groups and voter profiles because I had sex with all of them and they did not satisfy me enough.

Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.
And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.
I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organiser", except that you have actual responsibilities like managing hot dog eating contests, climbing the highest pole, and jumping into the cold lake butt naked. I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening except that we hate it when we are told the truth
.
We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.
As for my running mate, you can be certain that wherever he goes, and whoever is listening, John McCain is the same man.

I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment because they are not experts in the art of sexual intercourse. And I've learned quickly, these past few days, that if you're not a member in good standing of the fucking Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.
But here's a little news flash for all those asshole reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons which is to get laid, and not just to mingle with the right people with their ass in the air.

Politics isn't just a game of clashing parties and competing interests for the same penis for women, same breasts and vagina for men.
The right reason is to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than we found it while giving and receiving good sex in the process.
No one expects us to agree on everything.
But we are expected to govern with integrity, good will, clear convictions, and... a servant's heart which means extending our genitalia for the people.
I pledge to all Americans that I will carry myself in this spirit as vice president of the United States. This was the spirit that brought me to the governor's office, when I took on the asshole old politics as usual in Juneau... when I stood up to the asshole special interests, asshole the lobbyists, asshole big oil companies [even though I am President of an Oil Commission], and the asshole good-ol' boys network.
Sudden and relentless reform never sits well with asshole entrenched interests and asshole power brokers. That's why true reform is so hard to achieve.
But with the support of the citizens of Alaska, we shook things up.
And in short order we put the government of our state back on the side of the people.
I came to office promising major ethics reform, to end the culture of self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is the law.
While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for.
That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay. I also drive myself to work. And I thought we could muddle through without the governor's personal chef - although I've got to admit that sometimes my kids sure miss her.
I came to office promising to control spending - by request if possible and by veto if necessary.
Senator McCain also promises to use the power of veto in defence of the public interest of assholes - and as a chief executive, I can assure you it works.
Our state budget is under control. We have a surplus.
And I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending: nearly half a billion dollars in vetoes.
I suspended the state fuel tax, and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress.

I told the Congress "thanks, but no thanks," for that Masturbating Bridge to Nowhere.
If our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves. When oil and gas prices went up dramatically, and filled up the state treasury, I sent a large share of that revenue back where it belonged - directly to the people of Alaska.
And despite fierce opposition from asshole oil company lobbyists, who kind of liked things the way they were, we broke their monopoly on power and resources.
As governor, I insisted on competition and basic fairness to end their control of our state and return it to the people.
I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history.
And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly $40bn natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.
That pipeline, when the last section is laid and its valves are opened, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.
The stakes for our nation could not be higher.
When a hurricane strikes in the Gulf of Mexico, this country should not be so dependent on imported oil that we are forced to draw from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
And families cannot throw away more and more of their pay checks on gas and heating oil.
With asshole Russia wanting to control a vital pipeline in the Caucasus, and to divide and intimidate our European allies by using energy as a weapon, we cannot leave ourselves at the mercy of foreign suppliers.
To confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of world energy supplies... or that terrorists might strike again at the Abqaiq facility in Saudi Arabia... or that Venezuela might shut off its oil deliveries... we Americans need to produce more of our own oil and gas.
And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: we've got lots of both.
Our asshole opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America's energy problems - as if we all didn't know that already.
But the fact that drilling won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.
Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we're going to lay more pipelines... build more nuclear plants... create jobs with clean coal... and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources such as sustaining Castro, Chavez, and giving away free sex with condoms.
We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers.

I've noticed a pattern with our opponent. Maybe you have, too.
We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers. And there is much to like and admire about our opponent.

But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate.
This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word "victory" except when he's talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed... when the roar of the crowd fades away... when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our asshole opponent's plan?
What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger... take more of your money... give you more orders from Washington... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy... our opponent is against producing it.
Victory in Iraq is finally in sight... he wants to forfeit.
Asshole Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay... he wants to meet them without preconditions.
Asshole Al-Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America... he's worried that someone won't read them their rights? Government is too big... he wants to grow it.
Asshole Congress spends too much... he promises more. Taxes are too high... he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific.
The Asshole Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes... raise payroll taxes... raise investment income taxes... raise the death tax... raise business taxes... and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.
My sister Heather and her husband have just built a service station that's now opened for business - like millions of others who run small businesses.
How are they going to be any better off if taxes go up? Or maybe you're trying to keep your job at a plant in Michigan or Ohio... or create jobs with clean coal from Pennsylvania or West Virginia... or keep a small farm in the family right here in Minnesota.
How are you going to be better off if our opponent adds a massive tax burden to the American economy?

Here's how I look at the choice Americans face in this election.
In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.
They're the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed presidential seals.
Among politicians, there is the idealism of high-flown speechmaking, in which crowds are stirringly summoned to support great things.

And then there is the idealism of those leaders, like John McCain, who actually do great things. They're the ones who are good for more than talk... the ones we have always been able to count on to serve and defend America.
Senator McCain's record of actual achievement and reform helps explain why so many special interests, lobbyists, and comfortable committee chairmen in Congress have fought the prospect of a McCain presidency - from the primary election of 2000 to this very day.
Our asshole nominee doesn't run with the asshole Washington herd.
He's a man who's there to serve his country, and not just his party.
A leader who's not looking for a fight, but is not afraid of one either. Harry Reid, the Majority Leader of the current do-nothing Senate, not long ago summed up his feelings about our nominee.
He said, quote, "I can't stand John McCain." Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps no accolade we hear this week is better proof that we've chosen the right man. Clearly what the Majority Leader was driving at is that he can't stand up to John McCain.
That is only one more reason to take the maverick of the Senate and put him in the White House.

My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of "personal discovery." This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn't just need an organiser.
And though both asshole Senator Obama and asshole Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they are always, quote, "fighting for you," let us face the matter squarely.
There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you... in places where winning means survival and defeat means death... and that man is John McCain. In our day, politicians have readily shared much lesser tales of adversity than the nightmare world in which this man, and others equally brave, served and suffered for their country.
It's a long way from the fear and pain and squalor of a six-by-four cell in Hanoi to the Oval Office.
But if Senator McCain is elected president, that is the journey he will have made.
It's the journey of an upright and honourable man - the kind of fellow whose name you will find on war memorials in small towns across this country, only he was among those who came home.
To the most powerful office on earth, he would bring the compassion that comes from having once been powerless... the wisdom that comes even to the captives, by the grace of God... the special confidence of those who have seen evil, and seen how evil is overcome.
A fellow prisoner of war, a man named Tom Moe of Lancaster, Ohio, recalls looking through a pin-hole in his cell door as Lieutenant Commander John McCain was led down the hallway, by the guards, day after day.
As the story is told: "When McCain shuffled back from torturous interrogations, he would turn toward Moe's door and flash a grin and thumbs up" - as if to say, "We're going to pull through this." My fellow Americans, that is the kind of man America needs to see us through these next four years.
For a season, a gifted speaker can inspire with his words.
For a lifetime, John McCain has inspired with his deeds.
If character is the measure in this election... and hope the theme... and change the goal we share, then I ask you to join our cause. Join our cause and help America elect a great man as the next president of the United States.
Thank you all, and may God bless America.

FINAL DE LA NOVELA VICTORIA

2008-08-02T08:36:00.000-07:00

Fondo Musical: "Por Arriesgarnos" Interprete La Puta Jennifer Lopez y su Marido Aburrido Marc Antony

GERONIMO: Hay Mujeres que putean a los 30 ANOS. Hay Mujeres que putean a los 40 ANOS. Incluso Hay Mujeres que Putean a los 50, 60, y hasta 70 ANOS al estilo de la Rosita Fornes. Las Mujeres necesitan por naturaleza la pinga dentro del bollo. Tampoco las mujeres pueden tolerar a los maridos adulteros y viejo verdes. La Mujer tiene derecho a putear mientras los adulteros [incluso adulteras] deben METER SU CABEZA DENTRO DE SU CULO PARA COMER MIERDA. Ahora soy un bebe de 30 ANOS Templando La Puta Victoria con sus 50 ANOS. Espero estar libre de semen.

FIN DE LA MIERDA VICTORIA. PROXIMA NOVELA SERA SIN TETA Y BOLLO, NO HAY PARAISO

SISMO EN MIAMI FLORIDA

2008-08-02T08:35:00.001-07:00

SEGUN LAS ENCUESTAS DE UNIVISION 23:

1. DEMOCRATAS: 44%

2. INDEPENDIENTES: 34%

3. REPUBLICANOS: 22%

EARTHQUAKE IN MIAMI FLORIDA

2008-08-02T08:33:00.000-07:00

THE POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE IN MIAMI FLORIDA IS THE FOLLOWING:

ACCORDING TO UNIVISION 23

1. DEMOCRATS: 44%

2. INDEPENDENYS: 34%

3. REPUBLICANS: 22%

FCC Punishes Congress for Censorhsip

2008-08-02T08:32:00.000-07:00

Your hard work is paying off! Just one hour ago, the Federal Communications Commission voted to punish Comcast for violating Net Neutrality and blocking your right to do what you want on the Internet.

This win is yours. Defying every ounce of conventional wisdom in Washington, activists, bloggers, consumer advocates and everyday people have taken on a major corporation and won.

Today's vote at the FCC is also a precedent-setting victory that sends a powerful message to phone and cable companies that blocking access to the Internet will not be tolerated from this time forward.
News of this win is now being covered by every major news outlet as a turning point for Net Neutrality. Many more people are discovering our people-powered movement for a free and open Internet.

We need to capitalize on this momentum to grow the movement and ensure that Net Neutrality is protected on all 21st-century networks. Help us send a message to this Congress -- and the next one:

Join the Internet Freedom Movement: Stand Up and Be Counted

In the past two years, more than 1.6 million of you have already contacted Congress and the FCC. But that's not all. You have sacrificed time and energy speaking out at town meetings, collecting signatures on street corners and on campuses, and spreading the word via blogs, Facebook and house parties.
With your help today, signing this letter and forwarding it to friends, we can increase our ranks to more than 2 million.

Today's FCC victory is a milestone, but our work is far from done. Companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon are continuing to fight Net Neutrality using lobbyists, lawyers and campaign contributions. These special interests should not be allowed to set Internet policy for the nation.

Tell Congress: Keep the Internet Open for Everyone

The Internet's true greatness lies in those of us who use its level playing field to challenge the status quo, create and share new ideas, take part in our democracy and connect with others around the world -- without permission from any gatekeepers.
With your help and commitment, today's win will be just the first of many to protect innovation, free speech and democracy on the Internet.

Thank you!

Timothy Karr

Campaign Director

Free Press

www.freepress.net

www.savetheinternet.com

P.S. Help us spread the word about this important victory for Net Neutrality. Tell your friends and join SavetheInternet on Facebook and MySpace.

P.P.S. Want to learn more about this historic ruling by the FCC? Check out these great articles:

Historic Victory for Net Neutrality, at SavetheInternet.com
Comcast Unleashes the Lap Dogs, at Huffington Post

Kevin Martin’s Open Network Manifesto, at the New York Times
Adelstein and Copps: Voices at the FCC for a Free and Open Internet, at the Huffington Post

Sheehan: US leaders abuse executive powers: Afshin Rattansi, Press TV

2008-07-28T11:02:00.000-07:00

The following is Press TV's exclusive interview with Cindy Sheehan, a US congressional candidate widely seen around the world as an anti-war movement leader.

Press TV: When you began your campaign soon after the Iraq war and of course, after your son's death, you didn't really have the support of the American people, how do you think the American people's point of view about Iraq has been changed since you launched your campaign.

Sheehan: Since my son died, of course when Casey died, an overwhelming amount of Americans still approved of the war and still approved of George Bush and the time I have been doing my activism since he died and especially since august of 2005 when I was sitting in a ditch in Crawford Texas.

The shift in American opinion has shifted dramatically to being overwhelmingly now against the occupation of Iraq and against George Bush, he has a very low approval rating.

Congress's approval rating is even lower is only 9 percent and today like you said they had the hearing on executive abuse of power without being able to say George Bush's name, without being able to accuse him of any crimes or any lies.

They had this very weak hearing and of course we believe and I believe the American people are ready for some accountability, George Bush and Dick Cheney should be held accountable for the hundreds of thousands of deaths and the pain that they have caused in the world.

Press TV: Because of course you kind of bowed out last year, saying that you were exhausted and then you were running against Nancy Pelosi after the scooter Libby case? What role are you playing in all of this now?

Sheehan: Well, I really believe that even though the hearings were imperfect and they were very weak, I believe that my campaign which is picking up momentum and excitement in San Francisco was one of the reasons that Nancy Pelosi took the small baby step forward and said that the hearings and the House Judiciary Committee may happen.

There has been so many people working for impeachment, they have been lobbing John Coniers, they have been lobbying member of the House Judiciary Committee, they have been really working with Nancy Pelosi encouraging her to do this, but in the last few weeks or so my campaign, we're getting money pouring in and we're getting signatures pouring in to get me on the ballot and I think that happened because people in America are really disappointed with the lack of leadership in Congress to really take this country in a different direction.

In the past few weeks, congress has approved $163 billion more dollars for George Bush's occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. They have given George Bush the permission to spy on Americans without getting a warrant and they have given the telecom companies immunity from breaking those FAISA laws that have been in place since 1978, and even more importantly, people like Karl Rove and Harriet Mayors and Josh Bolton are able to resist congress and not show up for petition.

I mean when they have been subpoenaed they do not show up, the congress won't hold them in contempt, they won't use their powers to have them physically brought in….

Press TV: Why would the Congress do that? There was so much hope wasn't there? because people widely saw that the Democratic victory in Congress as being an anti-war vote, and yet the congress does not seem to be doing any thing about that, they voted for the surge and as you said they are not even doing anything about people failing to turn up after being subpoenaed.

Sheehan: Well, we do have some great testimony from people who are in Congress right now; I don't blame the entire Democratic Party for the weakness of the leaders, and for the actual complicity of the leaders.

We found out last December that Nancy Pelosi was briefed on George Bush's torture methods and what our country was doing to innocent human beings; waterboarding, the stress positions, the torture prisons, Nancy Pelosi and Jay Rockefeller in the senate and both of them have come out strongly against impeachment and we believe it is because congress is complicit in many of the crimes, especially the leadership in Congress.

They're briefed on what the president is going to do, they don't make a public stand against torture, they don't make a stand against warrantless wire-tapping or holding people, detaining people without their basic human rights of due process of a fair and speedy trial and to not be tortured.

So many times I believe that the two party system and the system is so correct that people who are in high leadership positions they can't do anything to resist the system because they are a part of it.

Press TV: And if it's so systemic, you were mentioning the wiretap program and people who have been saying that the Democratic convention is sponsored by AT&T, the company and a few other of those companies. We have been covering Obama's trip to Europe. He is of course very much in favor of the war in Afghanistan. Do you really see any difference can be made given the two party system?

Sheehan: Like the grassroots level, the Democrats here in America are very progressive. They want the same things that I think are important to this country.

They want the troops to come home from Iraq and Afghanistan, they want universal single pair healthcare, they want their environment clean, they want the United States to eliminate its addiction to fossil fuels so we can have peace and so we can have a clean environment and sustainable future.

The grassroots Democrats want that, but now if they say Barack Obama is their candidate they have to demand this from him. I don't think there is any difference between killing innocent people in Iraq and killing innocent people in Afghanistan.

The people of Afghanistan and indeed the government of Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11 and they were willing to give up Osama bin Laden to an international tribunal if the Unites States gave them the proper evidence, the proper warrants and the US refused to do that.

Now, two countries are destroyed. Thousands of American families have been devastated and over a million Iraqis and Afghans have been killed and or are refugees and their country is destroyed and I think somebody needs to be held accountable for that.

Press TV: Yes in deed, there was a wedding party of course and the ISAF massacre just days ago but Obama isn't for that. Isn't there a problem about being part of a grassroots movement…well I remember this Ralph Nader, the green party candidates, of course they don't really stand a chance of power in the United States, do they?

Sheehan: Well, the way the electoral system is set up right now is very hard and the way our media is, its very hard. Like Dennis Kucinich was a very strong anti-war, pro-peace, pro-impeachment candidate and he gets shut out of the debates. Ralph Nader gets shut out of the debates, Cynthia McKinney the green party candidate is a very strong candidate for peace and accountability and she gets shut out of media coverage.

So it's hard to get people to vote for you if they don't even know that you exist and in America unless you're on CNN or on the mainstream debates the people don't hear your position and that's very unfortunate.

Press TV: And finally Cindy Sheehan, Iran…Obama was again making comments about Iran. I think he has made them in every city that he visited on this tour. We have had so many comments coming from the White House leaks, press reports, pressure in the IAEA, leaks from Vienna, do you think the US people would be able to have a stomach for war on Iran?

Sheehan: Well I think that of course the corporate media and the administration they are pushing for an invasion of Iran and I want to trust Mohamed ElBaradei from the IAEA commission who said there were no weapon of mass destruction in Iraq and he turned out to be correct and he has said that Iran is not enriching uranium for a nuclear bomb program that theirs is a peaceful program for energy, and Iran is a sovereign country, if they want to - I don't agree with nuclear power as a form of energy but if the government of Iran, if the people of Iran want that - they should be able to with the proper restraints and with the proper oversight. And the IAEA is the perfect group to do that and to make sure that Iran's nuclear program stays for energy purposes.

But then nobody talks about the fact that Israel has nuclear bombs, nobody talks about the fact that the United States has an overwhelming nuclear arsenal and we have to start talking about that, disarming all nuclear weapons, using alternative forms of energy, solar energy and wind energy and clean fuel for our power needs, and not to use nuclear power which are the very dirty and dangerous form of energy.

Sheehan: US leaders abuse executive powers
Sat, 26 Jul 2008 19:32:27
By Afshin Rattansi, Press TV,
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=64841§ionid=3510302

Green Party USA: Obama/Mc Cain are Wasted Votes

2008-07-28T06:54:00.000-07:00

GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES
http://www.gp.org

Monday, July 28, 2008

Contacts:
Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty@greens.org
Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene@gp.org

Greens warn that antiwar Americans will waste their votes if they vote for Obama, citing his positions on Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and the Middle East

• Votes for Green nominees McKinney and Clemente will build a permanent alternative to the bipartisan war agenda, say Green Party leaders

WASHINGTON, DC -- Green Party leaders said today that antiwar voters will not get an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by voting for presumed Democratic nominee Barack Obama on Election Day.

Green leaders urged Americans who oppose the wars started by the Bush Administration with bipartisan support in Congress to vote instead for Green nominee Cynthia McKinney, running mate Rosa Clemente, and Green congressional candidates.

"Millions of voters plan to vote for Barack Obama in the hope that he'll bring peace to Iraq and other nations in the region," said Omar N. López, Green candidate for the US House in Illinois (4th District) (http://www.omarlopez2008.org). "But his positions are really 'McCain-Lite' -- he'll continue many of the same belligerent foreign policies as the Bush-Cheney Administration that John McCain would. Mr. Obama supports a larger military in terms of both spending and personnel. We want to stop the US from being the world's bully, and instead fund a peace dividend to deal with the economic, energy, and global warming crises."

"We appeal to voters to take a look at the Green Party's 'Peace Slate' of candidates, with Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente on the Green presidential ticket. A vote for a candidate who doesn't represent your own ideals is a vote wasted," said Mr. López.

Green Party leaders compared the Green antiwar agenda to Barack Obama's positions:

IRAQ

• Despite the popular impression that Sen. Obama intends to end the Iraq War, he plans only to reduce troops over a 16-month period. He would maintain an 'under the radar' occupation to protect US interests, which is code for the US and British corporate demand for control over Iraqi oil. (No-bid contracts have already been anounced for ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, and Total.) Sen. Obama promises to shift troops around the region, placing US forces in countries surrounding Iraq.

• The Green Party and Green candidates support an immediate and full withdrawal of US troops and military contractors from Iraq, and control over Iraqi oil resources returned to the Iraqi people.
http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=37
http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=18

AFGHANISTAN

• Sen. Obama intends to expand the disastrous US war on Afghanistan, which has already left the country in ruins and continues to destabilize the region.

• Greens support full US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, and an internationally cooperative investigation and prosecution of those behind the 9/11 attacks.
http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=37
http://gp.org/press/pr_2006_09_11.shtml

ISRAEL-PALESTINE

• Sen. Obama has repeatedly promised unqualified and uncritical support for Israel, despite the Israeli government's illegal occupation of Palestinian lands and massive abuses of human rights, including Israel's recent violation of a pledge to the US not to construct new homes in a West Bank settlement (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/24/israelandthepalestinians.middleeast).

• Greens have called for the withholding of all US assistance, especially billions of dollars in military aid, until Israel reverses its current policies and adheres to international law, human rights protections, and UN directives, including withdrawal from occupied lands and recognition of the Palestinian right of return.
http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=61

IRAN

• Despite promises of diplomacy, Sen. Obama has signed on to the Bush Administration's threat of a US or US-backed Israeli assault on Iran, even though intelligence confirms that the Iranian government is not using its nuclear power to build weapons.

• Greens have warned that an attack on Iran would bring untold consequences, including a greater regional or global conflict, and that the threat itself is an incentive for Iran and other nations to seek a nuclear arsenal. Greens call for an end to such threats, for diplomacy and friendship with Iran, and for an aggressive effort towards regional and global nuclear disarmament, noting the menace posed by Israel's and Pakistan's possession of nuclear weapons.
http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=67
http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2007_10_08.shtml

The Green Party has also urged impeachment and criminal investigation of the Bush-Cheney Administration's numerous abuses of power in launching the Iraq invasion as well as other actions. Barack Obama and the Democratic leadership have rejected all attempts to hold the latter accountable for its crimes.

As US Representative from Georgia in 2006, Cynthia McKinney was the first member of Congress to introduce motions for impeachment.

"Many Obama supporters don't realize that the differences between Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain on foreign policy are actually quite narrow and based on the same assumptions. Both believe that the US has a right to occupy other countries, place political demands on their leaders, and take control of their resources. But other voices are getting frozen out of the debate, including the Green nominees for the White House and Congress, whose campaigns are building America's permanent peace party alternative," said Carol Brouillet, Green candidate for Congress in California's District 14 and founder of the Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance (http://www.communitycurrency.org).

MORE INFORMATION

Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org
202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN
Fax 202-319-7193
• Green candidate database for 2008 and other campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml
• Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml
• Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers
• Green Party ballot access page http://www.gp.org/2008-elections

Cynthia McKinney/Rosa Clemente 'Power to the People' Campaign for the White House http://www.runcynthiarun.org

2008 Green National Convention, July 10-13 in Chicago, Illinois http://www.greenparty2008.org

Rogue Nation by Charley Reese

2008-07-28T06:53:00.000-07:00

Rogue Nation
by Charley Reese

DIGG THIS
One gets the impression that there are some people in Washington who believe that Israel or the U.S. can bomb Iran's nuclear reactors, fly home, and it will be mission complete.

It makes you wonder if perhaps there is a virus going around that is gradually making people stupid. If we or Israel attack Iran, we will have a new war on our hands. The Iranians are not going to shrug off an attack and say, "You naughty boys, you."

Consider how much trouble Iraq has given us. Some 4,000 dead and 29,000 wounded, a half a trillion dollars in cost and still climbing, and five years later, we cannot say that the country is pacified.

Iraq is a small country compared with Iran. Iran has about 70 million people. Its western mountains border the Persian Gulf. In other words, its missiles and guns look down on the U.S. ships below it. And it has lots of missiles, from short-range to intermediate-range (around 2,200 kilometers).

More to the point, it has been equipped by Russia with the fastest anti-ship missile on the planet. The SS-N-22 Sunburn can travel at Mach 3 at high altitude and at Mach 2.2 at low altitude. That is faster than anything in our arsenal.

Iran's conventional forces include an army of 540,000 men and 300,000 reserves, including 120,000 Iranian Guards especially trained in unconventional warfare. It has more than 1,600 main battle tanks and 21,000 other armored combat vehicles. It has 3,200 artillery pieces, three submarines, 59 surface warships and 10 amphibious ships.

It's been receiving help in arming itself from China, North Korea and Russia. Unlike Iraq, Iran's forces have not been worn down with bombing, wars and sanctions. It also has a new anti-aircraft defense system from Russia that I've heard is pretty snazzy.

So, if you think we or Israel can attack Iran and not expect retaliation, I'd have to say with regret that you are a moron. If you think we could easily handle Iran in an all-out war, I'd have to promote you to idiot.

Attacking Iran would be folly, but we seem to be living in the Age of Folly. Morons and idiots took us into an unjustified war against Iraq before we had finished the job in Afghanistan. Now we have troops tied down in both countries.

China has a tremendous investment and interest in Iran and would likely see an attack as a threat to its national interests. China could strike a large blow against the U.S. just by dumping the financial paper we have foolishly allowed the Chinese to pile up, thanks to the trade deficit.

For some years now, I've worried that we seem to be more and more like Colonial England – arrogant, racist, overestimating our own capacity and underestimating that of our enemies. As the fate of the British Empire demonstrates, that is a fatal flaw.

The British never dreamed that the "little yellow people" could come ashore by land and take Singapore from the rear or that they would sink the pride of the British fleet, but they did both.

I suppose no one in Washington can imagine the Iranians sinking one of our carriers in the Persian Gulf. How'd you like to be the president who has to tell the American people that we've lost a carrier for the first time since World War II?

Exactly how the Iranians will respond to an attack, I don't know, but they will respond. In keeping with our present policy, our attack on Iran would be illegal, since under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

Who would have thought that we would become the rogue nation committing acts of aggression around the globe?

June 30, 2008

Charley Reese [send him mail] has been a journalist for 49 years.
© 2008 by King Features Syndicate, Inc.

Carta Historica Cuba 1959

2008-07-28T06:52:00.000-07:00

Carta Abierta al pueblo de Cuba del Comandante Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz (Ex-Jefe de la FAR)

En este espacio del Diario Las Américas, le doy cabida a la carta que el 21 de octubre de 1959 lanzara sobre Cuba el que fuera jefe de la Fuerza Aérea Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, donde denunciaba los propósitos del hoy moribundo comunista Fidel Castro. Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz acaba de fallecer arrancándose la vida de un disparo sobre su angustiado corazón. Su denuncia no fue suficiente para despertar la conciencia nacional sobre lo que iba a pasar con la naciente Revolución que bajó de la Sierra Maestra.
Armando Pérez Roura

Cada día que pasa aparece una nueva mentira para calumniar y vejar a quien por amor a la Patria y a la libertad, más que a su propia vida, una vez mas renunció a todo. No creo que el pueblo de Cuba pueda jamás olvidar quiénes fueron Martí, Maceo, Máximo Gómez y todos aquellos gloriosos mambises, especialmente José Martí, ese cubano grande y generoso que predicó siempre amor y benevolencia para con el prójimo, quien ni para sus propios enemigos albergaba en su corazón odios ni rencores, luchando con¬tra éstos en forma que lo enaltecía, con la frente enhiesta, con la verdad en los labios que brotaba de su corazón.

Pueblo de Cuba, este humilde cubano que jamás ha hecho otra cosa que defenderte, que luchar sin descanso, velando celosamente por tu libertad, solo quiere hacer llegar a tí unas cuantas verdades que pueden ser puestas en la balanza de tu propio juicio y frente a las mentiras y calumnias de quien tanto esperas y tanto esperaba yo.

Debo puntualizarte primero que jamás he atacado a nadie en particular sino que he señalado y repudiado la infiltración y presencia de comunistas en el gobierno. Sólo por éste hecho se me ha llamado traidor, desertor, cobarde, nepotista y se ha llegado al increíble cinismo de hacerme responsable de los últimos y lamentables accidentes de aviación acontecidos en Cuba. Se me ha tildado de incapacitado, sin embargo, el propio Fidel, el día que me acusó públicamente, reconoció que el 70% de las armas que se llevaron a ambos frentes las llevé yo… y hay ciertas personas que se atreven a publi¬car que yo renuncié a la jefatura de la FAR porque quería más dinero y porque no tenía meritos revolucionarios. ¿Entonces a quien debemos creer, a Fidel o a esa persona que lo desmiente?

Este humilde servidor del pueblo de Cuba, comenzó a trabajar dando pico y pala a la edad de 14 años mientras se costeaba sus estudios de mecánica de aviación; a los 18 años ya era mecánico y piloto y a los 20 años era piloto de una línea aérea. Raúl Castro me ha llamado “pepillito” y yo me pregunto cuándo ese señor se ha ganado el pan con el sudor de su frente! ¿Cuándo ha tenido “callos” en las manos de trabajar? En todo caso él era el “pepillito” que jamás ha mojado la tierra con su sudor.

Debo aclararte, pueblo de Cuba, que esas armas que llevé al Segundo Frente Frank País y a la Sierra Maestra, no lo hice por Raúl ni por Fidel. Definitivamente NO! Lo hi¬ce por Cuba, lo hice por devolver a mi Patria las libertades perdidas, NO PARA PERPE¬TUAR EL CAUDILLISMO. NO MAS JEFES INDIOS! Hace falta conciencia ciudadana! CADA HOMBRE UN VOTO! Con una Constitución que garantice y restablezca las libertades y los derechos humanos.

Pueblo de Cuba, yo no puedo ni podré jamás traicionarte. Yo me honro en ser descen¬diente directo de un hombre que todo lo dio por tí durante toda su vida, hasta el último segundo: JOSE MARTI. El tiempo te demostrará que yo soy un cubano bien nacido, que mi madre es una SANTA y mi padre, a quien también han calumniado llamándolo macha¬dista, siendo él uno de los primeros oficiales de honor que se rebelaron contra el dic¬tador Machado y quien en el año 1930 fuera condenado a dos años de prisión que cumplió, quien luchó siempre sin claudicar contra Batista, quien fue honrado y lo demuestra el hecho de que nada tiene hoy en día, excepto una conciencia muy limpia ante los ojos de Dios y una moral muy alta que los batistianos de antes y los seudorevolucionarios de última hora pretenden mancillar con viles calumnias, es un hombre digno y decente.

Muchos se habrán preguntado qué me llevó a tomar la determinación de renunciar a mi cargo. Pues bien Uds. conocen y escuchan sobre las ideas y pensamientos izquierdis¬tas de Fidel, Raúl, Guevara, etc., a través de la Radio y la Televisión. Uds. no han podido, como pude yo, escuchar de los propios labios de Fidel sus intenciones de in¬troducir un sistema como el que existe en Rusia. En mi presencia en un vuelo de re¬greso de la Sierra Maestra escuché como Fidel conversaba con Núñez Jiménez, Alfredo Guevara y la Srta. Celia Sánchez, diciéndoles que el mantendría engañado al pueblo de Cuba y lo mantendría a su favor mientras ganaba tiempo con el objeto de organizarse militarmente para que cuando el pueblo comprendiera el engaño, poder dominarlo por la fuerza y que entonces mataría, si fuere necesario, no a un grupito sino a mas de cuarenta mil personas para lograr sus propósitos. -Yo juro ante Dios que esto es cierto y el tiempo se encargará de demostrarlo. Fidel se ha convertido en el nuevo dictador de Cuba. Un dictador que hace creer al pueblo que es éste el que manda. Sin embargo, que alguien se atreva a discrepar con su modo de pensar y entonces será tildado de contrarrevolucionario y hasta de batistiano y trujillista.

Pueblo de Cuba, ¿quieres comprobar si eres tú quien manda realmente en Cuba? Pídele a Fidel que elimine a todos los comunistas que ocupan cargos importantes en el Gobierno y en las Fuerzas Armadas y que convoque a elecciones. ¿Por que no hacerlo si él puede ganar a través del VOTO casi todas las posiciones en el Gobierno? ¿Sabes por qué Fidel no te aconseja esto? Sencillamente porque él quiere introducir en Cuba un nuevo sistema politico-social que se llama COMUNISMO. ¿Sabes por qué Fidel está destruyendo la Economía Nacional sin importarle un bledo el hambre y la miseria que el pueblo de Cuba pueda pasar? Porque pretende que todo pertenezca al Estado. En otras palabras, quiere implantar el sistema COMUNISTA en Cuba.

FIDEL MIENTE! sí, miente vilmente y a mí me consta. Muchas veces lo oí en privado decir todo lo contrario de lo que decía al pueblo. Ejemplo: “ARMAS PARA QUE”. A espaldas del pueblo mientras pregonaba: “ARMAS PARA QUE” compraba en Bélgica mas de 50,000 fusiles, 22,000 Garands que llegaron de Italia, barcos de guerra en Alemania y aviones Hawker Hunters que está comprando en Inglaterra, todo lo cual importa más de TREINTA MILLONES DE DOLARES. Hay en Cuba actualmente mas de 100,000 fusiles-ametralladoras, los tanques, barcos y cañones que tenía Batista y todavía se está comprando más. “ARMAS PARA QUE”, Fidel? Esos TREINTA MILLONES DE DOLARES que son DIVISAS también, extraídos del Tesoro de un país lleno de niños hambrientos, bien pudieron invertirse en mejorar la Economía Nacional, abrir nuevas industrias, colegios, etc.

Quizás diga para justificarse que esas armas son para defender la Revolución “verde olivo” y negará que con sólo un puñado de armas y hombres nosotros conquistamos la victoria. No le bastaba a Fidel las armas que tenía Batista para mantener su dictadura? Miente Fidel al decir que no hay comunistas en el Gobierno. Esto no lo puede admitir aún pues las milicias juveniles no han sido debidamente adoctrinadas y entrenadas… Fidel no ataca de frente. Ataca como sólo los comunistas saben hacerlo. Como “buen camarada” utiliza el conocido sistema de destruir mediante difamaciones la reputación de quienes se le oponen, aunque para ello tenga que descender a utilizar la vil mentira y la calumnia, pues según los comunistas: El fin justifica los medios.

Para concluir, sólo quiero decirle al pueblo de Cuba que le pida a Dios que Fidel rectifique y que reconozca a tiempo todo lo daño que le está haciendo a Cuba. Que dé un paso definitivo hacia adelante, subsanando sus errores y cambiando su política. A tí Fidel, sólo te digo que recapacites. TIENES AUN LA OPORTUNIDAD de hacerlo y de ser lo que en realidad nuestro pueblo cree ahora que eres. Pon en práctica nuestra Constitución democrática, no te ciegues ni te endioses. No dejes que la adulonería y el servilismo de quienes te rodean te impida ver la verdad. Renuncia a ser un dictador más en Cuba y una nueva decepción en las paginas de nuestra historia. No crees más odios entre los cubanos, respeta la sangre de nuestros mambises y la de nuestros compañeros que te dieron el poder y que no la derramaron para que ahora introduzcas el COMUNISMO en Cuba, conjuntamente con Raúl, el Che, Núñez Jiménez, etc.

Con toda la gravedad y responsabilidad del caso te digo que si no te retractas y eliminas el comunismo, comenzaré a combatirte como combatí a Batista, Pedraza, Masferrer y demás camarilla enemigos de Cuba, porque tú, Fidel Castro Ruz, al igual que ellos, te has virado contra los altos destinos de nuestra Patria y has demostrado, con tu actuación indigna e hipócrita, ser el verdadero TRAIDOR A LA LEGITIMA REVOLUCION.

21 de Octubre de 1959
Fdo. COMANDANTE PEDRO LUIS DIAZ LANZ. EX -JEFE DE LA FAR

Officer sues LAPD [Los Angeles Police Department]

2008-07-28T06:51:00.002-07:00

Officer sues LAPD [Los Angeles Police Department] alleging discrimination for off-duty Bible quotation

Los Angeles, Jul 8, 2008 / 05:38 am (CNA).- A police sergeant who has served as an officer for nearly sixteen years has filed suit against the Los Angeles Police Department, alleging he was illegally demoted and repeatedly denied promotions for his off-duty remarks citing Scripture verses critical of homosexual acts.

The lawsuit alleges that the LAPD has “historically discriminated against LAPD officers that engage in protected activity and continues to discriminate against officers that cite from the Holy Bible.”

Sgt. Eric Holyfield, who when off-duty is also a senior pastor at the Gospel Word of Life Apostolic Church, made the remarks on September 29, 2006 during his delivery of a eulogy at the funeral of Officer Nathaniel Warthon Jr. at a private chapel in Whittier, the California Catholic Daily reports. As he eulogized his fellow officer, Holyfield identified himself as a sergeant and Wharton’s supervisor, according to the suit, but was clad in black clergy attire rather than his uniform.

The officer’s family had requested Holyfield, who was on vacation and off-duty at the time, deliver the eulogy.

In the eulogy Holyfield quoted various Scripture passages, including First Corinthians Chapter 6 which reads in the King James Version, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminates, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the Kingdom of God.”

Holyfield’s lawsuit, which was filed on June 19 in Los Angeles Superior Court, described the incident, saying “Holyfield quoted those chapters and verses, as well as others as he explained the following general statements, i.e., men should not lie with men; women should not lie with women; to do so was an abomination or sinful; one must repent or be condemned to hell…”

The funeral was not sponsored by the LAPD, but several high-ranking officers attended, including Deputy Chief Charles Beck. The lawsuit alleges that Beck said Holyfield “made disparaging remarks about homosexuals, lesbians and adulterers during his sermon,” which is against LAPD policy. The suit claims Deputy Chief Beck “acted on his religious biases and initiated a formal complaint against Holyfield.”

In early October, 2006, Holyfield received a phone call from his immediate supervisor, Capt. James Craig, while at home on vacation. Craig told Holyfield he had received “a number of complaints concerning you in regard to the funeral. Police officers, community members, clergy people, and as a result, I’m going to have to move you.”
Holyfield was removed from his duties as Officer in Charge of Community Relations, which the lawsuit describes as a “coveted assignment.”
According to Holyfield, he tried to argue that departmental policy did not apply because the statements were in a church outside the city, he was wearing civilian clothes and he was on vacation. He argued that the funeral was not “an extension of the workplace.”
Craig told Holyfield he would be returned to the detective division, allegedly saying, “you need to revert back to detectives or I’ll have to put you in patrol.”

Holyfield claims he has been denied promotions at least nine times because of his religious beliefs.

According to the California Catholic Daily, the suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages, lost wages, attorney’s fees, and a permanent injunction against the LAPD prohibiting similar actions against its officers in the future.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13157

"The Green Party is the Imperative"

2008-07-28T06:51:00.001-07:00

"The Green Party is the Imperative"
On July 12th, the Green Party nominated former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Hip-Hop activist and journalist Rosa Clemente as presidential and vice presidential contenders on the Green Party ballot line. By doing so the Green Party nominated the first all women-of-color slate to run a national ticket in U.S. history. The campaign has less than two weeks to qualify for federal matching funds for this election cycle.

Speaking at the Green Party convention, Congresswoman McKinney said: "I'm looking forward to what we can build together. Our country has been hijacked and it will take all of us working together, going into places we've never been in order to spread the news that there is a political party that means what it says and does what it means".
To do that, we need your help . Go to www.runcynthiarun.org to get involved. During her acceptance speech at the Convention, Rosa Clemente said: "The Green Party is no longer the alternative, the Green Party is the imperative". You know it's true, help spread the word click here to tell a friend.

Cynthia McKinney speech at the Green Party convention:
http://exposureroom.com/members/cseeman.aspx/assets/e257ce0e6da7472c9df4e5f9532d2a6e/
TELL A FRIEND: click here.
PS: The campaign has less than two weeks to qualify for federal matching funds for this election cycle. Go to www.runcynthiarun.org to find out how you can make it happen

HOLLYWOOD II

2008-07-26T20:12:00.000-07:00

Housing Bill Like 'Painting a Collapsing House'

2008-07-26T09:17:00.002-07:00

July 25, 2008
Contact: Andrew Davis
E-mail: andrew.davis@lp.org
Phone: 202-731-0002

FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY:
Housing Bill Like 'Painting a Collapsing House'

Washington, D.C. - The Libertarian Party is calling for the Senate to block a measure that seeks to stabilize the housing market at a cost of $300 billion. "The bill is an atrocity, pure and simple," says Libertarian Party National Chairman William Redpath.

"The housing bill creates more regulation, more government and more mess, all with the taxpayer on the hook," says Redpath. "In the end, the government will have spent at least 300 billion dollars trying to solve a problem it created in the first place, without ever addressing why we are in this situation to begin with."

The solution to the housing prices is "time," says Redpath. "Only with time will the housing market straighten itself out," adding that government's intervention only exacerbates the problem.

Last week, the Libertarian Party issued a press statement saying that the two government-backed housing firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be left to fail if Congress refuses to remove its support.

"This housing bill is like Congress painting a collapsing house," says Libertarian Party spokesperson Andrew Davis. "It's just a pretty façade masking a ramshackle interior. Unfortunately, it's the taxpayer who's responsible for the bill, and it will be the taxpayer who suffers during the clean up."

Leaving the housing market untouched by government is not as scary as it sounds, says Davis, commenting that "people may think they need government help when really it only makes matters worse for them in the long run."

"The solution is not complicated," says Davis, "and it doesn't take a mountain of regulation and subsidies. All the government has to say is 'we'll let the forces of the market balance themselves out,' and then let it be. Anything else puts taxpayers on the hook for mistakes other people made."

The Libertarian Party is America's third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting www.LP.org. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

For more information on this issue, or to arrange a media interview, please call Andrew Davis at (202) 731-0002.

Impeach Bush

2008-07-26T09:17:00.001-07:00

Today, in the Judiciary Committee, we held a full day of hearings that focused entirely on the crimes of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, and featured testimony by Rep. Dennis Kucinich regarding his Articles of Impeachment against President Bush.

This is a great start – but I am far from satisfied. Following statements by Chairman John Conyers and the Ranking Republicans, I opened with a forceful call for genuine and immediate Impeachment Hearings for President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

The crimes of this Administration must be revealed and Bush and Cheney must be held accountable. Without Impeachment Hearings, we cannot break through the blatant and unprecedented efforts by President Bush to shut down legitimate oversight by this Congress.

As you know, President Bush has inappropriately and repeatedly invoked Executive Privilege to keep Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Josh Bolten, and other White House officials from complying with legal, Congressional Subpoenas.

I believe the only appropriate remedy is to hold Impeachment Hearings.

DONATE

While Inherent Contempt might dislodge some testimony or at least guarantee the appearance of witnesses, the larger concern is the President's outrageous abuse of Executive Privilege.

We have been down this road before: in 1973, Articles of Impeachment were introduced against President Nixon after he illegally tried to use Executive Privilege to bury evidence of his wrongdoings.

I fully recognize the significance of holding Impeachment Hearings, and I have not come to this position lightly – but when the President of the United States takes actions that amount to high crimes, we are left with no other option than to seek his impeachment and removal from office.

Our government was founded upon a delicate balance of powers – whereby one branch carefully checks the other branches to prevent a dangerous consolidation of power. President Bush's actions have totally destroyed this careful balance. Without these checks and balances, the President could run roughshod over any law and turn us into a nation...
...where wars can be waged based on lies
...and laws can be rewritten without the input of Congress or the American people.

Congress must end this disturbing pattern of behavior, and in these circumstances, the only option left is impeachment.

DONATE

This is not a partisan issue: Congress is a co-equal branch of government with the Executive, and it cannot allow this attack on our powers to go unanswered. To ignore these actions is tantamount to a willful concession of our rights as legislators. No Democrat, Republican, or Independent should allow Congress' powers to be so undermined.

Nor should Congress allow the calendar to determine whether we should ignore abuses of office. No President should be given immunity and free-reign just because there are only a few months left in their term.

Impeachment Hearings can be held very quickly – in a manner of weeks.

Although today we don't have the votes to impeach today – neither did the Judiciary Committee investigating President Nixon until AFTER hearings were held and the truth was revealed. We must put a halt to this historic Administrative power grab.

Congress has not lived up to its promises, and we can no longer credibly claim that impeachment would upset our agenda. Our agenda has not withstood presidential vetoes or senatorial filibusters. If we do nothing, this session will be remembered for our conceding the rightful and constitutional powers of Congress, and little more.

I am unbowed in my determination for Impeachment Hearings and I know you feel the same way.

Encourage your friends to stay updated and demonstrate their support by signing up at www.wexlerwantshearings.com.

As always, thank you for your kind emails, contributions, and encouragement.

Congressman Robert Wexler

HOLLYWOOD

2008-07-24T06:33:00.001-07:00

A REBUTTAL FOR JOHN BOEHNER

2008-07-24T06:30:00.000-07:00

A REBUTTAL FOR JOHN BOEHNER

After reading the Libertarian Press Release about fellow Ohioan John Boner, sorry I meant John Boehner; I have decided to issue my rebuttal to this individual and a response to the latest Libertarian Party Press Release.

John Boehner and his fellow Republicans including John Mc Cain [as well as the Democrats under Barack Obama] are evil. After all Boehner said that the Republicans were the lesser of the two evils. The Republicans and Democrats are evil [If Boehner says Republicans are the less of two evils than both parties must be evil] who only crave total control, runaway government, and putting what was once a great nation under peril. Is this the United States of America that we want for our future generations?

The Republicans and Democrats have created the economic mess including the mediocre response to victims of Hurricane Katrina which included Government Intervention. The Libertarians [on an individual basis] were there to help Katrina Victims. If the Libertarians had remained, New Orleans may have been restored to its former glory. At the present time, New Orleans appears like Bagdad.

The Republicans and Democrats engineered a regime change in Iraq based on a LIE. We are paying with the lives of soldiers and with an increasing censorship that waters down the Constitution and takes away our right to express ourselves. We have paid with hatred within families, dissolution of friendships and divided communities secondary to the foolishness of being Republican or Democrat.

The Housing Crisis and the Energy Crisis goes from bad to worse with each intervention by Washington. We pay for the mistakes that people make and our deficit increases. Our Inflation is increasing and our Infrastructure is deteriorating to the point that future generations may well curse us for leaving them in a position that currently exists in North Korea, Cuba, and Zimbabwe.

The people of the United States of America [my country of birth and where I was raised] are masters of their own destiny. This is the reason for the existence of the United States of America as written in the most thought provoking and revolutionary documents of humanity called The Declaration of Independence and the 1787 Constitution. While I respect the rights of others to commit suicide by voting Republican and Democrat, my right to support Bob Barr and the Libertarian Party must be respected.

I am supporting and voting for Bob Barr, Wayne Allyn Root, and the Libertarian Party because of the fact that the Republicans and Democrats are bankrupt and dying parties who are taking the United States of America with them. I can no longer accept the status quo as it is since it will lead our great country to end up as a failed state or in the dustbin of history like Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. In a worst case scenario, the United States of America could be defeated by the External Enemy secondary to the ignorance of its own people and be conquered by the External Enemy. For those who say that it cannot happen in America, please read your World History and look at what happened in Germany under Hitler, Cuba under Castro, and Zimbabwe under Mugabe taking into account that Hitler and Mugabe were elected.

I am supporting Bob Barr, Wayne Allyn Root, and the Libertarian Party since they represent the true interests of the United States and an adherence to the Constitution. Bob Barr, Wayne Allyn Root, and the Libertarian Party are against the excesses of Government Control and wants people to make decisions concerning their future without the need for Big Brother. Bob Barr, Wayne Allyn Root, and the Libertarian Party represent:

1. The rights of people who want to own a gun for their own defense.

2. A Sound Economic Policy without the presence of Alphabet Soup Departments such as FDIC, Federal Reserve, IMF, and WB [World Bank not Warner Brothers].

3. Withdrawal of all US Troops from the Middle East and Korea as well as a withdrawal of the US from International Organizations such as NATO, OAS, and UN [who have actually damaged our interests]. The American Troops stationed overseas as well as people willing to defend our borders can do a better job defending us.

4. Transparency in the Government within all levels [including Federal, State, County, and Municipal].

5. Term Limits for ALL Politicians. After all, the Government of the United States of America is based on the people being served instead of us playing butler and maid to a Republican and Democratic Party that has behaved in recent years like royalty.

My vote is for Bob Barr, Wayne Allyn Root, and the Libertarian Party since they are the ONLY SANE Solution to the problems facing America. In Liberty.

Boehner's voting comments reflect Republican failures

2008-07-24T06:28:00.000-07:00

July 23, 2008

Contact: Andrew Davis

E-mail: andrew.davis@lp.org

Phone: 202-731-0002

FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY:

Boehner's voting comments reflect Republican failures

Washington, D.C. - Libertarian Party spokesperson Andrew Davis called House Minority Leader John Boehner's (R-OH) comments about wasted votes "a symptom of the same delusion that cost Republicans control in 2006."

Answering a question from Reason's Dave Weigel about Bob Barr at a recent lunch hosted by The American Spectator and Americans for Tax Reform, Boehner stated, "A vote for Bob Barr—you might as well vote for Barack Obama," adding, "if you want to throw your vote away, that's fine, but that's what it would be."

Davis said that Boehner's comments "reflect the same fallacy of thought that has put America in its current situation, with neither Republicans or Democrats offering the solutions voters want to hear."

"If Boehner is content with simply being elected as the lesser of two evils, then it is apparent that he and his party have failed as public servants," says Davis. "Instead of dismissing third parties as 'long shots' or 'wasted votes,' Boehner should be figuring out the reasons why voters might pick Barr over McCain or Obama. It may be that voters finally realize that a wasted vote is one cast for a candidate that is part of the problematic establishment that has failed the American public election after election."

Davis also remarked that after the 2006 election, "one would think Republicans might wake up and smell the coffee," adding that John McCain is last thing Republicans need to restore the confidence of the American people in the GOP.

"In the eyes of voters, John McCain is a four-year extension of the Bush administration," says Davis. "Voters would rather vote for a third party candidate than a sure-shot at another four years of endless war, soaring deficits and a falling dollar."

The Libertarian Party is America's third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting www.LP.org. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

For more information on this issue, or to arrange a media interview, please call Andrew Davis at (202) 731-0002.

JOE GARCIA

2008-07-23T06:23:00.001-07:00

This weekend we will continue to grow our outreach to the residents of the district. We are beginning to make strides and we are really building this grassroots movement into a great campaign. I need your help to continue to push this movement forward and build on what we have. This weekend we have many opportunities for you to get involved and help change the direction of our community.
As many of you know since we’ve launched this campaign we have aggressively been canvassing neighborhoods in all parts of this district. This weekend we are launching a new phase in our grassroots campaign.
We will bring our campaign to the neighborhoods of Perrine on Saturday at 10:00a.m. and Sunday at 3:00p.m. in West Perrine Park located on 10301 SW 107th Ter. We will be walking the area. Please contact Mario Bailey at 205.246.3932 for more information.
We also will be hosting a walk in West Kendall. Please join us 10.00 am on Saturday and 12.00 pm on Sunday at Sugarwood Park located at SW 146th Ave and 99th Street. Please contact Gonzalo Funes at 305.987.3147 for more information.
If you have any questions or to RSVP to our events please feel free to contact Alex Deus at 305.588.2656. I hope to see you this weekend and thank you for your continued support.
Best,
Joe
www.joegarcia08.com
We have some big news we want to share with you.

The national Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has announced that it will be investing $1.4 million in TV commercials for South Florida’s congressional races.

This means that we are one of the hottest congressional races in the country and it’s all thanks to your support and commitment to our campaign.

While the momentum is on our side, we can be sure of one thing…

Mario Diaz-Balart is going to pull out all the stops to win. He’s even accepting thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from ExxonMobile, while families are paying $4.50 at the pump.

That’s why we need you to make a contribution right now:

http://joegarcia08.com/DCCC

Every day, our campaign builds strength, and what was once thought of as impossible feat--to beat an incumbent Republican in South Florida--is quickly becoming the most exciting race in the county.

And the stronger your support, the more that the DCCC will invest in this campaign.

We all know Washington is broken. It is about time we have a leader like Joe Garcia to help clean up the mess.

As Chairman of the Public Service Commission, Joe Garcia took on the lobbyists and the special interest groups and gave Florida’s families the largest energy rate cut in state history.

That’s the kind of independent leadership South Florida needs in Washington.

Make a contribution today and let’s fix Washington together:

http://joegarcia08.com/DCCC

Remember, unlike Mario Diaz-Balart, Joe Garcia doesn’t accept contributions from big oil companies. Our campaign is people-powered.

That’s why we’re counting on you.

Thank you so much for everything you do,

Republicans and Democrats Repress Libertarians!!!

2008-07-23T06:22:00.002-07:00

Dear Libertarian,

We emailed you five days ago about our need to raise 80 thousand dollars in eight days in order to make it on the ballot in eight different states.

Thanks to your generous support in pursuit of giving more choice to voters in Connecticut, Iowa, Kentucky, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Dakota, Washington and West Virginia, we have raised $45,000!

While this is a great start, we are still $35,000 short of what we need to conclude our drives in all of these eight states and only have a few days left to this drive.

Our presidential campaign is going strong, with constant media appearances in outlets across the nation, and we still have candidates volunteering to run for office in local and state races.

In case you haven't heard, our presidential candidate is now polling in
double digits in some states, and is polling 6 percent nationwide.

This could be the year the Libertarian Party makes history!

But we can only do this if we are on the ballot and voters have the
Libertarian choice.

Please consider a donation of $25, $50, $80 or $100 right now to help us finish our ballot access drive in these states. If you can donate more, or can only donate less, please do so!

We only have until this Friday to raise $80,000.

If you made a donation last time, we thank you! However, please consider another donation. With your help, we can bring ballot access to voters in these states, and in turn, help the Libertarian Party get Libertarians elected!

Thank you again for all your support, and we thank you for your dedication to liberty!

In Liberty,

SOCIAL DEMOCRATAS EN CUBA

2008-07-23T06:22:00.001-07:00

Felicito a los fundadores de Arco Progresista pero ellos deben unirse con la Cordinadora Social Democrata y El Movimiento Democrata Cristiano de Paya para obtener resultados contra los Castros y sus amos en EEUU

YES TO LIBERTARIANS!!!!

2008-07-23T06:21:00.002-07:00

Mr. Webb: Your articles about America are great. Yet as a US Citizen by birth and raised in America, my comments are based on the following. Unless there is a radical change in America with the Republicans and Democrats replaced by Libertarians and Greens via the Ballot Box, things will remain the same and the USA will cease to exist.

It does not matter who wins, we still have the same old system. If America wants change, it should replace the Republicans and Democrats with Barr [Libertarian] or Mc Kinney [Green]. Both have a great sense of humour.

Arrest George Bush, the Republicans, the Democrats, and all of the Old Left and Right in the Americas.

SOLIDARIDAD CON MEXICO Y TEXAS [HURACAN DOLLY]

2008-07-23T06:21:00.001-07:00

QUIERO EXPRESAR MI SOLIDARIDAD CON LOS PUEBLOS DE MEXICO Y TEXAS DEBIDO A LA AMENAZA DE HURACAN DOLLY.

SAY NO TO SUICIDE AND YES TO LIFE!!!!

2008-07-23T06:20:00.000-07:00

THE AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION WILL HAVE A 2008 OUT OF THE DARKNESS COMMUNITY WALK ON THE 1ST OF NOVEMBER 2008 AT TROPICAL PARK IN MIAMI FLORIDA. THE ADDRESS FOR TROPICAL PARK IS 7900 SW 40 ST.

REGISTRATION STARTS AT 9:00AM AND THE WALK STARTS AT 10:00AM.
1. WALK TO SAVE LIVES
2. WALK TO HONOUR LOVED ONES
3. WALK TO RAISE AWARENESS

FOR THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN DONATING, PLEASE MAKE YOUR CHECKS

PAYABLE TO THE
AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION
AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION
120 WALL STREET 22ND FLOOR
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005

YOU CAN ALSO REGISTER ONLINE AT
HTTP://OUTOFTHEDARKNESS.ORG

SAY NO TO SUICIDE

DIGA NO AL SUICIDIO Y SI A LA VIDA!!!!!!!!!

2008-07-23T06:19:00.000-07:00

LA FUNDACION ESTADOUNIDENSE PARA LA PREVENCION DEL SUICIDIO TENDRA UNA CAMINATA CONTRA EL SUICIDIO EN EL PARQUE TROPICAL [TROPICAL PARK] MIAMI FLORIDA.

LA FECHA DE LA CAMINATA SERA EL 1ER DE NOVIEMBRE 2008 A LAS 9:00AM. HAY QUE APOYAR ESTA CAUSA PARA SALVAR VIDAS, HONRAR AQUELLOS SERES QUERIDOS QUE SUICIDARON, Y PARA RECORDAR QUE EL SUICIDIO NO ES LA SOLUCION.
PUEDES REGISTRAR MEDIANTE LA VIA CIBERNETICA EN HTTP://OUTOFTHEDARKNESS.ORG
O MEDIANTE EL TELEFONO: 1-888-AFSP [2377] X 23

PUEDES APOYAR UN VOLUNTARIO PARTICIPANDO EN LA CAMINATA MEDIANTE LAS DONACIONES A
AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION
120 WALL STREET 22ND FLOOR
NEW YORK NEW YORK 10005

DIGA NO AL SUICIDIO !!!!!!!!!!!

Republicans and Democrats: Leave Press TV Alone

2008-07-22T18:45:00.000-07:00

While the world prepares for the Beijing Olympics in 2008 under the guise of “Forever Friends”, the Republican and Democratic Elite who ruin the United States of America under the guise of a so called “US Representative” Gus Bilirakis has decided to imitate Castro and Chavez by proposing a law called HR 1308 which would censor Press TV and IRIB. This proposal does not surprise me since the Republicans and Democrats as well as their puppets in Cuba and Venezuela are experts in censoring opposing viewpoints especially when it comes to the truth.

I have the honour of viewing Press TV as well as IRIB on the internet as well as on shortwave radio. On Press TV and IRIB, I have also seen different viewpoints while channels such MSNBC, CBS, NBC, FOX, and all other mainstream media with initials inside America repressing viewpoints that are not of the Republican and Democratic Origin.
I have not seen any proof of incitement to Anti American Violence in IRIB and Press TV. On the other hand, I have seen the Mainstream Media in America incite racial and ethnic hatred in their programmes since the Republicans and Democrats have been known as harbingers of hypocrisy and hate against anything they do not understand [including American Political Parties such as Libertarians and Greens].

The “US Representative” Bilirakis has the audacity to claim that IRIB and Press TV incites Americans to Islamic Radicalization yet many people in America have not become Muslim. In fact, many are waking up and finding Press TV and IRIB as a healthy and credible alternative to the trash that is coming out of stations such as CNN and FOX. Many people are waking up to the fact that they have been lied to, deceived, and abandoned by the Mainstream Media and the Governing Elite. If there is any radicalization, it was secondary to the indifferent attitude of the Republican and Democratic Adinistration to what happened to the victims of Hurricane Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005. Other reasons have been the encouragement of corruption and destruction of family values by the American Mainstream Media including the encouragement of false accusations against men and women with the intent on destroying families.

It is not enough to censor the true voices of freedom within America such as Ron Paul and Bob Barr, the Republican and Democratic Monsters that have sucked America dry wants to deprive the people of the United States of America of the freedom to listen to the media that they prefer. The right to listen to any viewpoints however disagreeable is part of the fabric of the US Constitution. The right to dissent against the Republicans and Democrats is also a part of the US Constitution. If the people of the United States of America does not have the will to do something, the world has the right [after all the USA Governing Elite intervened in Iraq] to force a regime change by peaceful means within the United States of America. It is with this reason that I support the efforts of Francis A. Boyle to represent Iran [and maybe IRIB and Press TV] if they should ever decide to initiate legal proceedings against the Republican and Democratic Clique in Washington. I express this thought as an individual who is a US Citizen by Birth and who still lives in America.

REFERENCE:
Gelken, Chris: “US Lawyer Seeks to Sue US Over Iran Threats”. Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=64435§ionid=3510302

Press TV: “US Representative Seeks to Blacklist Press TV”
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=64466§ionid=351020101

Bob Barr and West Virginia

2008-07-22T09:58:00.000-07:00

Dear friend,

Please excuse the rushed tone of this message but the situation is heating up in West Virginia.

When I wrote to you on Friday, I had until the close of business on Monday to raise $43,000.

I have good news and bad news.

The bad news is that we fell about $3,000 short of our goal.

The good news is that over 662 supporters donated to our effort and we were able to raise $40,030! Thank you!

Our campaign manager, Russ Verney, is a hard-nosed guy but he recognizes that the support is there and, while it's a long shot, we still have a chance to make it on the ballot in West Virginia.

Russ has given me the green light to continue the drive. We're going to go for it and I'll need your help more than ever.

I've been on the ground in WV for less than a week and have been able to get 18 petitioners hired, trained and working.

That's not enough, I need 30 more people by the end of the week.

I had been assured by the state employment agency that they would help hire local petitioners to fill the gap. That fell apart yesterday when they informed me that there was not much that they could do because of internal policies.

You've gotta love bureaucracy . . .

In order to make up the shortfall in manpower, I'm going to need to fly in more people immediately.

I'm going to make a big request that I need you to seriously consider. This is an "either/or" so please read and consider both options:

EITHER . . .

Visit the "Wild and Wonderful" state of West Virginia!
If you're willing to petition in West Virginia and can take time out of our schedule until August 1st. I need you here by Friday.

It's beautiful country, with nice people, and you'll be supporting a great cause.

If you can take the time to come to West Virginia for the duration (August 1) and are comfortable asking strangers to sign a piece of paper, please contact me immediately by calling 877-465-6080.

OR YOU CAN . . .

Sponsor a petitioner to travel to West Virginia!
If you cannot take the time out yourself, I completely understand, but you can still help in a very big way by sponsoring someone who can make this short-notice trip.

Each supporter that can petition for Barr/Root is going to cost at least $250 to travel plus about $50 a night at a not-so-luxurious hotel. Please make a donation and cover what you can.

A $50, $250 or even a contribution of $25 will help us cover these added expenses. Click here to donate.

Please give us a hand with this effort as there are only nine days left to get the job done.

THANK YOU for your continued support. We could not do this without you.

Very Respectfully,

Shane Cory
Deputy Campaign Manager
Bob Barr 2008
P.S. Please consider the two options above as soon as you can. To donate, click here.

Reynolds: Leave China Alone

2008-07-20T07:59:00.001-07:00

James Reynolds of the BBC News Service wrote an article about China and the Olympics which leaves much to be desired. He deals with the so called evictions that are occurring in Beijing in preparations for the Olympics. The following is my response to the ranting and raving of Mr. James Reynolds.

For Mr. James Reynolds: You article about the Chinese Government evicting people in Beijing is biased and unfair. I had the honour of visiting China around June and July 2008. It is unfair to condemn Beijing and the People's Republic of China for evictions while Banks, Governments, and Mortgage Companies [a great majority] in America have evicted people from their homes for defaulting on their loans or to make room for new buildings. Many people have received their compensation like in America.

According to the same institution called the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, and this is the following quote: "Beyond the epidemic of homelessness, which affects an estimated 3.5 million Americans every year, some 1.35 million of whom are children, millions more live in poor housing conditions that often rival those found in far less developed countries". The same Centre of Housing Rights and Evictions report also condemns the United States for the methods utilized in housing evictions

BBC News also reports about how in Cleveland, Ohio people have lost their homes secondary to defaulting on mortgages and/or promises of payment to move to alternative housing so that the developers and government can participate in the construction of new buildings. This is called Eminent Domain and Gentrification. The culprits are those who did not read the contract when refinancing or financing their houses. More culprits are financial institutions that did not explain to the customers in plain English and the Republicans and Democrats who have added fuel to the fire with interventions from the FDIC [Federal Deposit Insurance Commission], Fannie Maes, and Freddy Macs.

The BBC also reported on the resignation of Alphonso Jackson as Housing Secretary for the United States of America after a three year stint secondary to irregularities in his position. The resignation occurred in the wake of prices that are falling, foreclosure mania, and abandoned houses.

I have something to tell James Reynolds, before criticizing China, please take a look at the housing crisis in America.

SOURCE:
COHRE: "USA: Housing as a Human Right"
http://www.cohre.org/usa
http://www.cohre.org/store/attachments/COHRE%20US%20Shadow%20Report%20to%20CERD.pdf

BBC TWO: "American Nightmare"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/this_world/7039470.stm

BBC News: "Top US Housing Official Resigns"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7323266.stm

Christ in Christmas

2008-07-20T07:58:00.001-07:00

Why should Christians not celebrate Christmas? Christmas is the beginning of a true revolution that occurred over 2000 years ago in a Manger in Bethlehem, Israel. It was in this era that Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem went to be counted in a census of the Roman Empire while Herod was a Puppet King [and possibly an ancestor of the Bushes, Castro, and Chavez] who was practicing all forms of immorality with the ancestors of Madonna, Rosie O Donnell, Portia La Rissa, Britney Spears, and Paris Hilton. The fact that Three Kings went to adore the Newborn King Jesus and there was proff in China that a Chinese Emperor went to adore the Newborn King was a Revolution in itself.

For too long, the Christians have had to turn the other cheek while Muslims could openly celebrate their feasts of Eid. While I do not want to criticize the Islamic Population, I would like to point out that they celebrate their holidays publicly in America while Christians cannot celebrate in America because of ridiculous laws based on a political correctness that has sprawled out of control. The same Muslims that celebrate Eid in the Americas celebrate their holidays in their countries while Christians cannot celebrate [in some extent] in the Middle East. Of course, there has been exceptions in Iran and Pakistan.

The Buddhists and Jews can celebrate but we cannot say Merry Christmas. We have to say Happy Holidays in order to be politically correct. This is unfair and discriminatory against the Christian Faith of which I subscribe to. This also goes against my belief of the Live and Let Live Policy in which people are accepted for what they are on the inside and can celebrate as long as nothing and no one is infringed on. My Live and Let Live Policy is based on the thoughts of Deng Xiaoping who once said: "Who Cares if a Cat is Black or White, as long as it catches Mice". The fact that Christians be prohibited from celebrating Christmas not only goes against my beliefs that I have expressed but goes against the grain of human nature.

May the world including those inside the United States of America be reminded of the following: that America is a predominantly Christian Nation and that Christmas should be celebrated and exalted as a religious holiday, a revolution in which peace not war predominates, and as a Winter Festival. If there are people inside the United States of America who do not want to accept this reality, my suggestion is to pack your luggage, bags, Taliban like clothing, and take the next airplane and return to where you came from so that you could celebrate what you want to celebrate.

Indiana, Horning, and Foreclosure

2008-07-20T07:57:00.000-07:00

After reading the article about Indiana leading the nation in foreclosed homes, I have decided to add a little fire to the fuel in the literal sense. The problems with the Housing Crisis in Indiana as well as other states in the American Union lies in three aspects. The first aspect is in the people. The second aspect is in the government. The third aspect lies in the fact that there are unscrupulous people who work in banking institutions who will do anything for a commission.

The first subject to be discussed is the responsibility of the people. The people who bouy homes should at least read the contract including the final and hidden lines. The people have the right to ask the banking institution to clarify any of the words or actions in the contract before signing on the dotted line. If the people have any doubt, they should consult a lawyer or a legal service.

The second subject has been the Government with its excessive intervention and the use of tax dollars to finance foolish adventures in the Middle East while America and Indiana is crashing to the ground. This does not have to be the case. The Government with its foolish concepts of the FDIC, Freddy Macs, and Fannie Maes are nothing more than props to help people who were not responsible in the first place to use public money to extricate themselves from the position they find themselves in.

The third aspect have been certain employees that work in banks and lending institutions who are more worried about making a commission by selling anything to an unsuspecting customer. These people invent many lies and the purchaser falls for it and then the purchaser loses the house, the money, and still has to make payments on the foreclosure of the house and the foreclosed house itself.

The solution lies primarily in the people of Indiana. I challenge the Hoosiers to use common sense when they vote for a Governor. The Hoosiers should throw out the Republicans and Democrats who have made these myriad financial rules and replace them with the Libertarian Party of Indiana under the guidance of Andy Horning. This is the beginning of a transformation in which common sense reigns without the excess of rules, regulations, and bureaucratic obstacles. The rest will follow with the state and the banking institutions obeying the wishes of the governed instead of the other way around.
Of course, responsibility should be instilled in the world [including Hoosiers] without regard to race, creed, colour, ethnicity, and class

Christ in Christmas

2008-07-20T07:56:00.000-07:00

Andy Horning = Indiana

2008-07-18T19:20:00.001-07:00

SUPERDELL MAKES SENSE FOR UTAH!!!!!!!!

2008-07-18T19:18:00.001-07:00

For ABC 11 WTVD in North Carolina

2008-07-18T19:02:00.001-07:00

Given that you are a public news outlet, how can you justify denying one of the qualified candidates a voice? Isn't that an in-kind political contribution?

Threats against Barr in South Carolina

2008-07-18T16:34:00.000-07:00

Dear friend,

I urgently need your help.

I'm in Charleston, West Virginia attempting to get Bob Barr on the ballot. When I arrived early Wednesday morning, I didn't think it would be possible, but I had to give it a shot.

We're headed toward 48 state ballot access. Only West Virginia and Oklahoma are problems. However, there is hope in Oklahoma as we have just filed a lawsuit to get Bob Barr and Wayne Root on the ballot there.

If we win that case, only West Virginia will stand in our way of 50 state ballot access - an apex of achievement for a third-party candidate and something the media cannot ignore.

But here's my problem.

There is no active Libertarian Party in West Virginia and a very limited pool of volunteers.

I have had to bring in out-of-state petitioners from across the nation to get this drive done.

So far I have 13 petitioners on the ground and another nine on their way.

I didn't think we would have the manpower to get the drive done, but now I think it's a possibility. I have enough petitioners in the state and on their way to collect enough signatures by our August 1st deadline.

But I won't have the money to finish the drive if I don't raise $43,000 by close of business on Monday.

Russ Verney, our campaign manager, wrote to me this morning and instructed me to shut down the drive if I cannot raise the funds by COB Monday.

So far this month, we're raised less than $100,000. We're even off pace from our June fundraising totals.

The campaign cannot afford this ballot drive as I write this. We would have to choose between basic campaign operations or the possibility of 50 state ballot access.

Russ has to make a tough call on this drive but he did give me 96 hours to raise the funds to continue the effort.
I ask that you keep this drive alive by helping me raise $43,000 by close of business on Monday.

Please make an emergency donation to fund the West Virginia ballot access drive right now. Please give generously by clicking here.

My friend, I've only been in this state for a few days and we need to be on the ballot here.

When I arrived in West Virginia it was 2:30 in the morning. I pulled into a hotel parking lot and a restaurant owner and one of her patrons were standing outside smoking a cigarette.

They didn't look too happy.

As it turns out, just a few weeks earlier the county had banned smoking in all "enclosed workplaces" including bars and restaurants.

I'm not a smoker, but it's the property owner's decision to allow or disallow smoking on their premises - it is not a county bureaucrats' decision.

When I explained libertarian philosophy to them and told them about our candidate Bob Barr, their eyes lit up.

They did not know that there is an alternative to the two-party system. They didn't know that there is a party that respects an individual's rights and personal decisions.

Since then, I've talked to many more folks in this state and the same holds true. We need to give West Virginians a better choice and the only way to do that is to get Bob Barr on the ballot.

Please donate today and help me keep this drive alive. I have two weeks left to pull it off and I sincerely need your support.

A gift of $50, $100, $250 or more would be a significant help. If you can't give $50, give $5 or $10. Every dollar gets us one step closer to getting a pro-liberty candidate on the ballot in what could be our final ballot access hurdle.

Thank you for all that you do.

In Liberty,

Shane Cory
Deputy Campaign Manager
Bob Barr 2008

Eight States. Eight Days. Eighty thousand dollars.

2008-07-18T12:15:00.001-07:00

Eight States. Eight Days. Eighty thousand dollars.

From the Libertarian Party:

Dear Fellow Libertarian:

Eight States. Eight Days. Eighty thousand dollars.

That's our goal for the next eight days as we face tough deadlines in eight states across the nation, and we're $80,000 short of what we need to finish the ballot access drives in these states.

We're putting out an urgent request for volunteers to collect petition signatures, and for generous Americans willing to donate to our ballot access struggle that will give voters the choice they deserve in November.

Why is ballot access important, and why should you donate to our "80 for 8 in 8" drive?

More choices on the ballot means voters have the ability to pick the best candidate--not just the lesser of two evils. Ballot access means competition, and competition means better candidates get elected.

Ballot access does not just benefit third partiesit benefits all Americans!

We need your help to put Bob Barr on the ballot for the Libertarian Party, and help get many of our other candidates on the ballot for voters as well.

Voters need more choice as Republicans and Democrats continue to fail the American people.

Voters need to hear the Libertarian message that Bob Barr and our other fine candidates are spreading across the nation.

Voters need to see another choice on the ballot instead of the just the political establishment.

Voters need you.

Please donate $25, $50, $80 or even $100 right now to help get the Libertarian Party on the ballot in these eight states in the next eight days. If you can donate more, or can only donate less, please do so right now! Every dollar that you donate, and every hour that you dedicate towards ballot access works towards giving voters more choice in 2008.

The goal of $80,000 in the next eight days will be hard to reach, but with your help, it is all but impossible!

Can you help us today?

Thank you for all that you have done for liberty, and continue to do so.

In liberty,

Bill Redpath
National Chairman
Libertarian National Committee

P.S. If you are receiving this message and are not currently a member of the Libertarian Party, please consider signing up today! We have had more than 1,500 members sign up in the past two months, and continue to grow larger each day!

NOTICIAS/NEWS

2008-07-17T18:08:00.000-07:00

A PARTIR DEL 1ER DE AGOSTO DE 2008, EL FORASTERO DE OHIO SERA UN BLOG UNICA Y EXCLUSIVA PARA LA POLITICA.

AFTER THE 1ST OF AUGUST 2008, EL FORASTERO DE OHIO/OHIO STRANGER WILL BE A POLITICAL BLOG.

APOYO A LOS PEOS/SUPPORT FARTING

2008-07-11T08:55:00.000-07:00

Jackson and Obama

2008-07-10T04:46:00.000-07:00

"I want to cut his nuts off"
Jesse Jackson commenting about Obama in Fox News

"Quiero castrarlo"
Comentarios de Jesse Jackson acerca de Obama durante una entrevista en la Cadena Noticiera Fox

MELTDOWN OF A JOURNALIST: THE STORY OF ALYCIA LANE AND KYW TV PENNSYLVANIA

2008-06-20T11:07:00.000-07:00

MELTDOWN OF A JOURNALIST: THE STORY OF ALYCIA LANE AND KYW TV PENNSYLVANIA

At a time of increasing globalization, it is easy to see the people even in the press. The US Mainstream Media has been no exception as the melodrama of Alycia Lane VS KYW TV [A CBS Affiliate in Philadelphia Pennsylvania] plays itself out. It appears that there are news reporters who like being in the news instead of reporting the news. We have to look at the other side of the coin, Western Society [including the United States of America] have raised the stature of the news reporter do that of a personality in the style of Hollywood. In fact, many news stations have participated in the attempt to create a false God with the television journalist blurring the distinction between professional and private lives. It did not have to be that way since there was a time when the news reporter from Radio, TV, and Print was respected and Professional as well as Private Life was separated. I am also using references since this melodrama has been highly controversial.

I read about Alycia Lane suing CBS 3.com for being wrongfully terminated and decided to write about it. There have been many things that have been written about Alycia Lane. One of the comments written about her has been “how being associated with Alycia Lane can be dangerous to anyone with a job”. The story about CBS 3 News Reporter Larry Mendte opening the E Mail of Alycia Lane and revealing the contents gave Philadelphia better entertainment than soap operas and the primaries. Mr. Mendte’s unprofessional behaviour also leads to his termination and an investigation into the affair by the FBI as well as the confiscation of Ms. Lane’s computer by the above mentioned institution. If what Mr. Mendte did was true, he could be convicted under Federal Law since the reading of private E Mails is a Federal Crime. It has also been news that Alycia Lane’s boyfriend Chris Booker was terminated by Q 102 even though he remains popular.

There have been stories about Alycia Lane being arrested after punching a police officer and being acquitted after being told by prosecutors to “stay out of trouble for six months and perform community service”. Alycia Lane also erred in judgment by sending a private E Mail with provocative photos to NFL Network News Reporter Rick Eisen. The E Mail and provocative photos were discovered by Mr. Eisen’s Wife Suzy Shuster [who occasionally reports about College American Football for ABC [American Broadcasting Corporation]. CBS 3.com even asked Ms. Lane to interview and discuss her personal problems with Dr. Phil [depending on which version]. An attempt to contact CBS 3 concerning the termination of Alycia Lane and the lawsuit for wrongful termination was answered by the following: “We cannot comment on the case”. Attempts to establish contact with the people involved in this melodrama have been without success.

Alycia Lane appeared to have everything in life as a journalist. Alycia Lane is bilingual and is a US Latin who was born in Lake Grove, New York on the tenth of May in the year 1972. Alycia Lane was born to a Welsh Father and a Puerto Rican Mother. Alycia Lane graduated from the Medill School of Journalism of Northwestern University with a Master’s Degree in Broadcast Journalism as well as being an Undergraduate of the State University of New York at Albany. Alycia Lane is also a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.

Alycia Lane has worked for stations such as KSNT of Topeka, Kansas, as well as News 12 in the Bronx, New York City, New York. It was in News 12 where she made her mark in journalism covering the 1999 death of Amadou Diallo in the hands of New York Police Officers. Alycia Lane went on to work for WSVN 7 as well as WTVJ [an NBC Affiliate] in Miami Florida before moving to Philadelphia Pennsylvania to work in KYW TV.

Alycia Lane during her work with KYW TV managed to earn an Emmy Award for her television special “Holiday Traditions”. How can Alycia Lane suffer the way she did in spite of her accomplishments? Is it possible for a journalist to suffer a meltdown in the same fashion as other professionals?

I cannot enter the mind of a professional in meltdown but there is the possibility that Alycia Lane started her meltdown after moving to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. One could only imagine the abuse probably based on her ethnicity by the establishment including the US Mainstream Media. Journalism like most professions can be brutal even on the most resilient personalities especially minorities who work in the US Mainstream Media.

My criticism of Alycia Lane is for her lack of judgment when she E Mailed a Television Presenter [who is married] her provocative photos. It is a sin and an act of poor judgment to send provocative photos to a married person. Alycia Lane violated the Sacrament of Marriage with that miscue. The second error was assaulting a police officer. While the New York Police may have their defects, assaulting a police officer in the United States of America and other parts of the world is wrong and is punishable. I wish Alycia Lane the best in her endeavors and hope she has learned from her experience in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I also hope that CBS 3.com in Philadelphia Pennsylvania learn from their experience not to treat their employees as paper cups that can be discarded later on.

REFERENCE:
“Fired Philadelphia newscaster sues former employer”; Robrish, Dan; Associated Press, June 19, 2008 at 11:38PM; WTOP News.com
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=114&sid=1425452 Assessed on the 20th of June 2008

“Ex-Ch. 2 newsman Larry Mendte off the air in Philadelphia after FBI search” Chicago Tribune; 10:19 AM CDT, June 2, 2008
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-larry-mendte-080602,0,5803960.story Assessed on the 20th of June 2008
“Knowing Alycia Lane Can Be Dangerous to Your Job” Fischer, John; June 2, 2008: About.com http://philadelphia.about.com/b/2008/06/02/knowing-alycia-lane-can-be-dangerous-to-your-job.htm Assessed on the 20th of June 2008

“Bikini E Mail Rattles TV Wife” New York Post; Page Six; Johnson, Richard
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05012007/gossip/pagesix/pagesix.htm Assessed on the 20th of June 2008
“Alycia Lane Arrested Punches Cop”: Celona, Larry; Fenner, Austin; Geller, Andy; New York Post.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12162007/news/regionalnews/alycia_lane_arrested__punches_cop_545795.htm Assessed on the 20th of June 2008

Dyango En Concierto en Cuba

2008-06-16T18:58:00.000-07:00

STOP SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IN CALIFORNIA

2008-06-16T12:34:00.001-07:00

STOP SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IN CALIFORNIA

We've succeeded in the first phase of the most critical battle in the nation over the future of marriage. On Monday, the Secretary of State of California certified that we had the signatures necessary to get the California Marriage Amendment on the ballot. Thanks to the efforts of everyone who prayed, donated, volunteered, circulated or signed the California Marriage Amendment petition, the voters of California will have the chance to overrule our Supreme Court and protect marriage in our state.

But now we face an epic and historic battle over the future of marriage. It will affect us all, whether or not we live in California. If we don't pass the California Marriage Amendment you can be sure that same-sex couples will travel to California from other states, return to their own states and sue to overturn their home states' marriage laws. California is a pathway to same-sex marriage around the country and is the epicenter of the fight over the future of marriage in this country. It's as simple as that.

And the other side knows this all too well. Already our opponents are vowing to raise at least 15 million dollars to bury marriage in California. Already they have received a $500,000.00 lead grant from the Human Rights Campaign. They will use this money to launch a massive air war on television and radio to spread misrepresentations and lies about the amendment.

Will we have the resources to stop them? What happens next is up to you. We don't have Hollywood millionaires or billionaire software moguls to fund our efforts. We depend on hard-working men and woman like you who are willing to give generously to stop the attack on your values. Will you take your stand today? Make your most generous donation of $50, $100, $250, $500 or more to NOM California.

Just a few short weeks ago four California judges with a wave of their arrogant pens overruled common sense, 2000 years of human history, the consensus of every major faith tradition . . . and even democracy itself.

That's right. Four judges in black robes overruled the more than four million Californians who voted for Prop 22 in 2000 to protect marriage as the union of husband and wife.

Four judges announced that the majority of California voters--and all of us Americans who see marriage as the sacred bond between husband and wife--are just like bigots who opposed interracial marriages.

Here's the good news: we don't have to take this outrageous ruling lying down. We now have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to overrule these judges by changing our state constitution and making clear that we will not take their judicial arrogance lying down.

At NOM California, we knew this decision was coming. So we dropped everything this January to work with Protect Marriage to put a marriage amendment on the ballot in time to give ordinary Americans like you the power to fight back against activist judges. The Associated Press, National Review Online, and Human Events have all highlighted how NOM California's efforts were crucial in getting the signatures necessary to get on the ballot in November.

Now we must tirelessly work together toward victory in the next phase of our effort: ensuring that over half of California voters vote yes on protecting marriage. Will you take your stand today for marriage by making your most generous $50, $100, $250, $500 or larger donation today?

How important is overruling California's outrageous judges? Stuart Taylor is one of the most respected legal writers of his generation--and he's a liberal who supports same-sex marriage if passed democratically.

Here's what this honest liberal legal expert called the California court's ruling: "dishonest" "slick sophistry," "exuding impatience bordering on contempt for government by the people," and even "a deeply disingenuous dodge, if not a bald-faced lie, to conceal from gullible voters the fact that the decision was a raw exercise in judicial policy-making with no connection to the words or intent of the state constitution."

Just how helpless and gullible do these high-and-mighty judges think we are? Do they really think they can just rewrite marriage, our constitution, and other cherished values--and there's nothing we can or will do about it?

We must fight back against judicial tyranny with every fiber of our being, in California and across this great country.

We don't have millionaire Hollywood actors or billionaire software moguls backing our efforts. Whether we win or lose depends upon your prayers and generosity. Will you give generously today?

If this decision stands, judges everywhere will be emboldened to rewrite state and federal constitutions to impose their twisted values on the rest of us.

So Taylor warns: "Can court-ordered erasure of 'In God We Trust' from U.S. currency, and perhaps a judicial rewrite of the National Anthem, be far behind?"

If these arrogant judges are not put in their place, judges will be emboldened to "invent federal constitutional rights not only to gay marriage but also to Medicaid abortions, physician-assisted suicide, human cloning," striking down "laws making English the official language," "voucher for poor kids to attend parochial schools," and as he says, even "more."

More?

Yes. There's more. Four judges in California just declared a new culture war on people of faith in this country. They grossly abused their power as judges to order our own government to teach our children and grandchildren--using our own taxpayer dollars--that our deeply cherished values are just bigotry.

Can you imagine what Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. would think about having the civil rights movement he fought and died for twisted in this way? (And not a single African-American judge on that court, by the way.)

Think about that: The Supreme Court of California has just found that the common-sense definition of marriage is itself a form of bigotry, the legal and moral equivalent of racism.

How will this impact you and your children and grandchildren?

We know from the experience of other states that if we don't overturn this decision, there will be attacks on our beliefs, our religious institutions, and our civil rights.

For example, Christian adoption agencies could be ordered by law to treat same-sex unions just the same as marriages; Christian charities and schools could face new attacks on their tax-exempt status, and other government penalties for deeply-held religious views.

Sound far-fetched? Alarmist? No, it's already happening--here in the United States.

In Massachusetts, Catholic Charities was ordered by the government to place children with same-sex couples or go out of business. In New Jersey, a Methodist organization just lost part of its state property tax exemption because it won't let civil union ceremonies take place on a church-owned beachfront pavilion.

How long will it take for the state of California to order a church to employ same-sex "married" teachers in Christian schools? Well, already in England, a Christian bishop was told he could not fire a principal of a Christian elementary school who entered a same-sex union, because that would be "discrimination."

This California ruling is not some academic exercise; it's a direct attack on the religious liberty of Christians as well as every other faith tradition that sees marriage as the union of husband and wife.

The real question is: Will you fight back or will you take it lying down?

We need your help to stand up for marriage, for the rights of people of faith, and for constitutional democracy itself.

This is a fight we can win. The latest LA Times poll shows that Californians are horrified by this court decision. The LA Times poll wording was clear and showed that support for the California Marriage Amendment was at 54 percent. While same-sex "marriage" activists are trying to use a single Field Poll with biased wording to convince the country that Californians support same-sex marriage, we know the truth: our state understands that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

But we can't rest on our laurels. Already gay millionaires, Hollywood bigwigs and the mainstream media are flooding the airwaves with one-sided propaganda.

We need resources to fight back, to stand up for God's own truth, for common sense, for marriage as the union of husband and wife, and for the next generation's right to know and be known by their own mother and father.

Will you take your stand and donate today?

Together we can overturn this Supreme Court decision and send shockwaves throughout the country. Imagine the national repercussions when we show that even in "liberal" California marriage can win and win big when the people have the chance to vote.

And we're not the only ones who understand how important a victory in November will be to the future of American society. And how, with the right resources, we can and will win. Listen to the leading same-sex marriage advocacy group's own words about the importance of the battle in California.

"The right wing has successfully gathered more than 1.1 million signatures for the anti-LGBT initiative, which makes it likely to qualify for this November's ballot. . . . In just 24 short weeks, our celebration of victory would turn into mourning a terrible loss."
The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund

Our opponents have vowed to spend $15 million to defeat the amendment. Will we have the same resources to combat their lies? You can make sure that we do by donating today!

The only way we can lose is if we refuse to fight back. How else can 2% of the population defeat a 60% majority? They are betting folks like you and me will be too scared, gullible, apathetic, or intimidated to stand up for marriage.

But we won't let that happen, will we?

I have two urgent requests for you today:

1) Can you make a gift of $50, $100, $250, $500 or even more today? The next two months are critical as we map out a media plan and campaign budget for the fall.

2) Can you forward this message to 5 of your friends through our FRIENDS ASKING FRIENDS PROGRAM, asking them to join our cause? We need all the help we can get! You can even set up a Friends Asking Friends page of your own at our website where you can encourage your social networks to give to protect marriage. Get started with our FRIENDS ASKING FRIENDS program today!

Help make sure that arrogant judges who label our faith as bigotry will not have the last word. With your generous help, we will take the fight for marriage to the people of California this November and we will win.

God bless,

Una Puta

2008-06-13T11:04:00.001-07:00

El Peo: Benjamin Franklin [1781]

2008-06-11T08:31:00.001-07:00

Benjamin Franklin, [uno de los fundadores de los EEUU]; escribio un articulo antes de la Academia Real de la Ciencia. El titulo del articulo: “Fart Proudly” merece ser traducido en el idioma de Alvarez Guedes y otros autores contemporaneos tomando en cuenta que la ONU [Organizacion de las Naciones Unidas] quieren que el mundo sea sometido a los Protocolos de Kioto [que prohibe el peo]. He aqui la version contemporanea del articulo del procer de los EEUU, Benjamin Franklin.

CABALLEROS:
Estudiando sus propuestas, queria hablar de un tema prohibido en nuestra sociedad. Ha sido discutido entre cientificos, politicos, y la clase obrera pues es parte de la sociedad colectiva. Estoy hablando del Peo.

El Peo es producto de las sustancias ingerida por el ser humano mezclado con los jugos gastrico y hepatico en los intestinos. El Peo contiene productos como el Indol y Escatol por eso y mucho mas, el olor y el sonido. El Peo es parte de la naturaleza humana y debemos conceder el derecho de tirarlo en publico. Si no sale el Peo del Culo, el Ser Humano esta mal en todas las esferas. El Peo es parte integral de los Derechos Civiles y Humanos de la Ciudadania. El Peo no debe ser regulado por un Gobierno.

El Ser Humano es responsable por las comidas ingeridas pues de aquellas comidas salen el Peo con olores Fuertes y/o debiles. El Ser Humano es responsable por las comidas ingeridas pues de aquellas comidas salen el Peo con Sonido Fuerte y/o debil. El Peo es la expresion maxima de la Libertad y Felicidad. El Peo es Bello. El Peo es Necesario en nuestra vida cotidiana. El Peo es Ecologico y Organico. VIVA EL PEO!!!!!

Benjamin Franklin, c. 1781

ANATOMIA DE LA JUSTICIA

2008-06-10T11:26:00.001-07:00

ANATOMIA DE LA JUSTICIA

PRELUDIO

Estoy escuchando el juego entre Espa~na contra Rusia en la Copa Euro 2008 mediante mi ordenador. El juego fue transmitido en vivo desde Austria mediante la cadena de la RTVE [Radio Television Espa~nola]. Queria una Victoria contra Rusia porque Espa~na lo merece y debido a las injusticias de Rusia hacia la Madre Patria. Como lo digo, Rusia robo $660,000,000 en oro de Espa~na durante la Guerra Civil Espa~nola y no lo quieren devolver. Estoy contento de que la justicia sigue imponiendo.

PRIMERA MITAD

La Primera Mitad comenzo con Espa~na triunfante y pujante. Espa~na tenia posesion del juego y el terreno mientras Rusia paso por los malos ratos a pesar de ser buen jugadores. David Villa era el rey de la Primera Mitad con sus goles sorpredentes, limpio, y nitido. David Villa aprovecho de una apertura donde el portero ruso ni siquiera penso donde puede existir una posibilidad de un gol para su primer gol. En el segundo intento, David Villa pateo la pelota entre las piernas del ruso Igor Akinfeyev para anotar su gol. Asi termino la primera mitad.

SEGUNDA MITAD

Espa~na comenzo con el tercer gol de David Villa volviendo loco al ruso Roman Shirokov. Shirokov miro un lado con Vila pateando al lado opuesto. Desgraciadamente. Los rusos despertaron con el primer gol de Roman Pavlyuchenko. Espa~na debe estar en un estado de alerta contra la amenaza rusa. Todavia sigue el juego aunque hemos gozado de la ventaja. Durante el juego, algunos comentaristas en los foros deportivo de la BBC de Londres estan hablando de las posibilidades del equipo Villa y Torres jugando para los equipos ingleses Liverpool o Arsenal. Todo depende en el desenvolvimiento de la contienda entre Espa~na y Rusia con el progreso de la Madre Patria en el Grupo D. Se puede apreciar que los sustitutos en el equipo ruso no estan a favor de los rusos mientras Espa~na no tenia que utilizar los sustitutos.Casi al final de la segunda mitad, David Villa ayudo a Cesc Fabregas sorprender al ruso Igor Akinfeyev lanzando la pelota quince yardas para anotar el ultimo gol. En verdad se hizo la justicia.

TOTAL

Rusia jugo desorganizado con una especie de rigidez mientras Espa~na jugo limpio, nitido, y organizado. David Villa merece un premio pues llevo las riendas de Espa~na hacia la Victoria. Todo depende de los juegos contra Grecia y Suecia pero me alegro que perdieron los rusos.

Espa~na 4-1 Rusia

Espa~na: 9/10

Rusia: 1/10

Espa~na VS Rusia [Preludio de Euro 2008]

2008-06-10T09:30:00.001-07:00

Hoy en el 10 de Junio de 2008, Espa~na enfrentara al equipo ruso para la Copa Euro 2008. Los expertos deportivos [en las emisoras de habla inglesa] dan a los rusos como victorioso en la contienda. Los expertos deportivos en las emisoras de habla inglesa no quieren reconocer los sacrificios del futbol espa~nol ni su historia gloriosa. Estoy con Espa~na en este encuentro historico.

Estoy con Espa~na pues es mi sangre y aunque paso por mucho, jamas olvidare de que en la decada de los 1930's durante la fatidica Republica; hubo intentos en rusificar a la nacion espa~nola y repetir lo mismo en Euskadi, Catalunya, y Galiza. Para aquellos que no lo quieren creer, los rusos robaron de Espa~na los $660,000,000.00 en Oro. Hubo Iglesias y Hogares destruidos por turbas. Incluso hubo incidentes de personas muertos por practicar la Fe Catolica. Jamas olvidare de los inocentes incluyendo sacerdotes, monjas, y feligreses muertos por creer en Dios.

Jamas olvidare que Rusia participo en el saqueo y la destuccion de las Perlas de las Antillas. Jamas olvidare como Rusia destruyo la felicidad en Cuba con la ayuda de sus titeres. Jamas olvidare que Rusia nos coloco casi en el precipicio de una Tercera Guerra Mundial. En los deportes, Rusia no son expertos en jugar con las manos limpias. Una vez, Manchester United jugo un juego de exhibicion en Rusia. La respuesta de los elementos anti sociales dentro de Rusia fue un asalto verbal y fisico a los hinchas de Manchester United.

Aunque perdono Rusia, es bueno entender como son los rusos concerniente a su historia en todas las esferas incluyendo los deportes. Incluso por el incidente contra los hinchas de Manchester United, yo queria la expulsion de Rusia de la Liga Europea y de la FIFA. Arriba Espa~na!!!!!

El Verano

2008-06-05T11:46:00.000-07:00

Panties

2008-06-05T11:44:00.000-07:00

COMENTARIO PARA UN REPUBLICANO + DEMOCRATA

2008-06-05T11:39:00.000-07:00

Comentario de Un Republicano, Democrata

2008-06-05T11:38:00.002-07:00

PMS 24-7

2008-06-05T11:38:00.001-07:00

Boobs

2008-06-05T11:37:00.000-07:00

Farts

2008-06-05T11:36:00.000-07:00

La Mierda

2008-06-04T12:56:00.000-07:00

La mierda que anda de mano en mano
para que la quiero yo,
comela quien la merece
que para mí se acabó.

Otro se halla en el jardín
gozando la misma mierda
como yo fui el primero
no me queda ni un peo.

Anda y dícele a la puta de Ohio
dícele que digo yo
que la mierda que esta gozando
primero la comi.

Homenaje a Peo Cagada

2008-06-04T12:49:00.000-07:00

Aprendimos a repudiarte,desde la histórica
bajeza,donde el sol de tu comemierderia,
le puso cerco a la muerte.

Aquí se queda la clara,la
entrañable transparencia,de tu miserable
presencia,comandante Peo Cagada y sus amos
Castrados en La Habana y Washington.

Tu mano de sangre y debil,sobre la historia
dispara,cuando todo Santa
Clara,se despierta para
verte y mandarte para la mierda.

Aquí se queda la clara,la
entrañable transparencia,de tu bajeza
comandante Peo Cagada y sus amos Castrados
en La Habana y Washington.

Vienes quemando la brisa,con soles de
Mierda,para plantar la
bandera,con la luz de tu
comemierderia.

Aquí se queda la clara,la
entrañable transparencia,de tu bajeza
comandante Peo Cagada y sus amos Castrados
en La Habana y Washington.

Tu cobardia y inexperiencia revolucionaria,
te conduce a nueva empresa con sus amos Castrados
en La Habana y Washington,donde esperan la cobardia
y el infierno.

Por los menos nosotros los Libertarios
gozamos de la dignidad que no existe en
la Vieja Guardia Izquierda y Derecha.

Aquí se queda la clara,la
entrañable transparencia,de tu bajeza
comandante Peo Cagada y sus amos Castrados
en La Habana y Washington.

El Derecho de Cagar en Paz

2008-06-04T12:43:00.000-07:00

El Derecho de Cagar en Paz

El derecho de Cagar en Paz,
Puta Pelosi y Pendejo Bush,
que golpea a toda la humanidad,
con la mierda llamada el
Protocolo de Kioto.

El derecho de cagar en paz.

El Ser Humano es una naturaleza
que necesita el derecho de tirar
un peo y cagar para sobrevivir.

El Peo y La Mierda son una explosión
que funde todo el clamor para salir
del culo.
El derecho de cagar en paz.

Puta Pelosi, y Pendejo Bush nuestra canción
es fuego de puro amor hacia el peo y el
derecho de cagar.

El Peo y La Mierda son el canto universal,
y parte de la cadena de la vida que hará
triunfar el derecho de cagar en paz.

La Puta Mamada

2008-06-04T12:33:00.000-07:00

Te recuerdo Mamada

Te recuerdo Mamada, con las tetas
mojada, corriendo a
la fábrica donde trabajaba Manuel. La
sonrisa ancha, la lluvia en
el pelo, no importaba
nada, ibas a encontrarte con él, con
él, con él, con él, con
él y la pinga de Manuel dentro de tu bollo.

Son cinco minutos para templar. La vida es eterna en cinco
minutos. Suena la sirena de
vuelta al trabajo, y
tú caminando, lo iluminas todo con el sexo. Los cinco
minutos te hacen florecer como una puta.

Te recuerdo Mamada, con las tetas
mojada, corriendo a
la fábrica donde trabajaba Manuel. La
sonrisa ancha, la lluvia en
el pelo, no importaba
nada, ibas a encontrarte con él, con
él, con él, con él, con
él y la pinga de Manuel dentro de tu bollo.

Que partió a la mierda donde templaba
Que partió a la mierda, y en
cinco minutos quedó destrozado pues se
acabo el tiempo para templar. Suena la
sirena, de vuelta al trabajo.
Muchos no volvieron,
tampoco Manuel porque Manuel partio a
la mierda despues de templar a la puta
Mamada.

Te recuerdo Mamada, con las tetas
mojada, corriendo a
la fábrica donde trabajaba Manuel. La
sonrisa ancha, la lluvia en
el pelo, no importaba
nada, ibas a encontrarte con él, con
él, con él, con él, con
él y la pinga de Manuel dentro de tu bollo.

Paris Hilton

2008-06-01T09:22:00.001-07:00

MIERDA EN WASHINGTON

2008-06-01T08:51:00.001-07:00

SHARON STONE

2008-05-29T11:08:00.000-07:00

SHARON STONE

2008-05-29T11:07:00.000-07:00

Fin de Grant

2008-05-28T06:43:00.002-07:00

Entere mediante la cadena Press TV acerca de la despedida de Grant como tecnico de Chelsea. La razon fue por la derrota de Chelsea frente a Manchester United en la Liga de los Campeones en Rusia [tierra natal del Jefe de Chelsea Roman Abramovich]. El fin de Grant llego a pesar de que Chelsea quedo en segundo lugar en la Liga Inglesa, La Liga de los Campeonatos, y la Liga de la Copa Carling.

Me equivoque en apresurar a enjuiciar a Grant cuando reemplazo a Mourinho. Aunque prefiero Mourinho a Grant, considero que la epoca de Grant fue un desaste con el pobre puesto en una posicion dificil por un gerente que prefiere el dinero que el futbol. Incluso Roman Abramovich es gobernador de la provincia oriental de la region autonoma de Chukotka [a 30 minutos de los EEUU en Alaska]. Aunque gasto billones en esa provincia, dio descuentos a sus preferidos en la reconstruccion de esa provincia.

Abramovich habla una sola palabra y una sola ideologia: dinero y que se rinde su dinero en Chukotka como en Chelsea sin importar a quien pisotear. La perfeccion es necesaria para Abramovich y es una lastima. Grant fue otro victima de la injutsicia de Abramovich. Grant no tenia ni la licencia requerida para ser tecnico de Chelsea. Abramovich no le importaba pues queria victoria y dinero. Amo a Chelsea pero Abramovich es un due~no que ama mas el dinero que el futbol.

FIFA Expulsa a Irak

2008-05-28T06:43:00.001-07:00

La FIFA expulso a Irak del Futbol Internacional como respuesta a la decision del gobierno iraqui en disolver las asociaciones deportivas. La decision de FIFA fue acertada pues los deportes y la politica deben permancer separados. Espero que el gobierno iraqui se decide que los deportes y la politica deben ser separado pues lo perdedores son los fanaticos del futbol especialmente el equipo nacional de Irak [ganador de la Copa Asiatica despues de derrocar a Arabia Saudita].

Calentamiento Politico en Zimbabwe

2008-05-28T06:42:00.000-07:00

Parece que las cosas se han calentado en Zimbabwe con las elecciones de segunda vuelta con un aumento de la violencia contra los sacerdotes y lideres opositores. Aunque Mugabe prometio que entregaria la Presidencia si se pierde, La Junta Central Electoral [Zimbabwe Electoral Commission] estan destruyendo los boletos de la segunda vuelta. Mugabe [segun fuentes dentro del gobierno] viajo hacia Singapur para someterse a un tratamiento para el Cancer de la Prostata. La oposicion MDC [Movimiento para Un Cambio Democratico] pide que el pueblo acude a las urnas para ver si se acaba el gobierno de Mugabe. Veremos en que parara las cosas.

Barr y Root Presidente y Vice Presidente EEUU

2008-05-28T06:38:00.000-07:00

Mientras los Partidos Republicanos y Democratas estan buscando una resolucion para su crisis de Presidente y Vice Presidente, el Partido Libertario ya resolvio los problemas. El Partido Libertario escogio a Bob Barr para ser Candidato Presidencial despues de la votacion en la Quinta Vuelta. Despues, Wayne Allyn Root fue escogido como Vice Presidente en la Segunda Vuelta.

A diferencia de los Partidos Republicanos y Democratas con sus primarias y caucasos costosos, los Libertarios [aunque tienen primarias] escogen sus delegados a nivel municipal, del condado, y del estado para su convencion nacional. En el dia de la votacion de la Convencion Nacional, los candidatos son sometidos a un proceso riguroso de votacion hasta alcanzar mas de 50% del voto.

Barr y Root comenzaron su candidatura siendo marginado por la cadena de television anglo estadounidense CBS pues esa cadena favorece a los Republicanos y Democratas. Barr y Root estan a favor de un estado donde la gente son responsable por sus acciones, donde no hay exceso de gobierno, y una resolucion de los problemas a nivel local [por el mismo condado, ciudad, y estado sin interferencia federal]. Barr y Root creen que la guerra en Irak y los compromisos internacionales han da~nado a los EEUU y que los asuntos de los EEUU deben resolverse primero antes de resolver los problemas del mundo.

MARULANDA QEPD: AQUI ESTA TU CASA

2008-05-25T06:59:00.000-07:00

ANDY HORNING 2008

2008-05-24T06:20:00.000-07:00

EL CRIMEN DE LAS COMPANIAS DE PETROLEO, LOS REPUBLICANOS, Y LOS DEMOCRATAS

2008-05-24T06:19:00.000-07:00

Libertarian National Convention begins this week.Presidential nominee will be selected May 25

2008-05-19T12:31:00.001-07:00

May 19, 2008
Contact: Andrew Davis
E-mail: andrew.davis@lp.org

Office: 202-333-0008 ext. 225
Mobile: 202-731-0002

FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY:
Libertarian National Convention begins this week

Presidential nominee will be selected May 25

Washington, D.C. - The Libertarian Party will hold its biennial National Convention this week in Denver, where it will select its presidential nominee for the 2008 election. The convention will be held May 22 through 26.

"This is going to be a watershed year for the Libertarian Party," says Libertarian Party National Media Coordinator Andrew Davis. "Voter dissatisfaction with the major two parties is at an all time high, and people are looking to the Libertarian Party to provide a third choice on the ballot in 2008. Voters are tired of the 'business-as-usual' politics that they are hearing from John McCain and Barack Obama. Voters want another choice, and that choice will be the Libertarian Party."

In July of last year, the Washington Times featured a story on the Libertarian Party's growth of 18 percent from January of 2007 until then. By December, the Libertarian Party's numbers had soared by 25 percent over the course of a year.

This year, the Libertarian Party is boasting two former members of Congress who are now running for the Party's presidential nomination. Former GOP Congressman Bob Barr, who joined the Libertarian Party in 2006 and has since served on the Libertarian National Committee, and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel, who joined the party in March, are two of 14 contenders for the nomination.

For media interested in press credentials for covering the National Convention, please send an email request to Andrew.davis@lp.org.

The Libertarian Party is America's third largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting www.LP.org. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

For more information on the convention, or to arrange a media interview, please call Andrew Davis at (202) 333-0008 during normal business hours, or at (202) 731-0002 during any other time.

One On One With Munger

2008-05-19T12:27:00.001-07:00

I have invited Dr. Michael Munger to be interviewed by my blog and he accepted. Dr. Munger is the Libertarian Party Candidate for Governor of North Carolina in their upcoming elections in the fall of 2008.

1. What motivated you to run for Governor of North Carolina?

I have been a political scientist for nearly 25 years. I have testified before the U.S. Senate on campaign finance law,I have written books, and many articles about campaigns. But I have never seen a campaign from the inside. Then,once I started the campaign, I became very involved in the ballot access movement here. That is the most important issue, I think. But there are other issues I care about, including ending corporate welfare and ending capital punishment in our state.

2. Why does North Carolina have such restrictive ballot access laws?

It is a way of protecting the Democratic elite in the state. They aren't worried about Libertarians. They just want to keep the Greens off the ballot. The legislative majority is deeply cynical, and duplicitous here, and they are "Democrats" in name only. Their main concern is power.

3. What are your plans for North Carolina as Governor?

North Carolina has long been a leader in education, and in creating new jobs for its people. But we are losing that lead, through government intrusion into private decisions, and attempts by politicians to interfere with the market. We need lower taxes and less regulation, more choice and responsibility in education,and a refocus on communication and transportation infrastructure.

4. What can the Libertarian Party offer North Carolina that the Republicans and Democrats are unable or unwilling to offer?

There is no real difference between the state-sponsored parties. Both depend on the state for their existence, using public financing and the public purse to pay off their supporters. Both the Democrats and Republicans run on slightly different versions of the same platform: "Vote for me, and I'll give you
other peoples' money!" I would cut spending on make-work pork-barrel projects all over the state, increase the restrictive ceiling on charter schools, commute death sentences to life imprisonement without parole, and stop municipal aggression. North Carolina is one of only seven states that allows
involuntary annexation by cities, and that has to be stopped. Cities should not be able to annex country folk against their will.

5. What has been the response of the people of North Carolina to the concepts of the Libertarian Party?

Unfortunately for our nation, this is a great time for the Libertarian party. The reason is that the state-sponsored parties are doing such an awful job of running the country. When people get a chance to hear me, and understand that I want them to have the power to run their OWN lives, and to take responsibility for their OWN choices, most are excited and interested.

Still, we have a long way to go. We have to get our message out, and we have to raise money to do it. It is a shame that we had to waste all our money on the ballot access drive. The point of the law is clearly to ensure that we arrive breathless at the starting line, having dissipated all our resources.

6. Many within the Republican and Democratic Party have considered a vote for the Libertarian Party a wasted vote, what is your response to these critics?

Many voters are worried about "throwing away their vote" on a party that can't win. But I know that
if everyone who supports us privately would just vote for us publicly, we could win! Furthermore, voting for the lesser of two evils is the only way to REALLY waste your vote. There are so many votes that no one voter determines the outcome. So why not vote for your heart?

7. What made you decide to become a Libertarian?

I was registered Republican for a long time. But the Republicans never followed through on their promise to change big government. In fact, the Republicans in Congress, and the Republican President George Bush, have dramatically expanded government in nearly every way. I have always thought of myself as a "small l" libertarian. But the war in Iraq, and the huge spending increases on pork-barrel
projects by the Republican Congress, made me change my mind in 2003. I became a Libertarian after the war started, and the Republicans continued spending like drunken sailors on shore leave.

8. Since North Carolina has restrictive ballot access laws, what have the people of North Carolina done to attempt a change in these laws?

I have worked in court to change the law. I was an expert witness for the ACLU in a suit brought by the Green Party. That suit should be resolved in a week or two.
And we might just win!

9. Has the Munger Campaign or the Libertarian Party of North Carolina received any coverage from the Mainstream Media in your state or from any other media?

Lots! I have been on more than 20 television shows, and more than 40 radio shows. The newspapers in many of the major cities, including Charlotte, Winston-Salem, Greensboro, Durham, and Raleigh have all run lengthy features with pictures and background. I have no complaint about our treatment by the media. They have been quite fair.

10. How does the Munger Campaign feel at the present time?

Strong, and getting stronger. This is a great time to be a Libertarian. We are going places.

I would like to thank you Dr. Munger for taking the time to be interviewed. My Best Wishes for you and your campaign.

Andy Horning for Governor

2008-05-15T17:28:00.001-07:00

No Treason by Lysander Spoon [Final Episode]

2008-05-15T17:27:00.001-07:00

No Treason No. VI: The Constitution of No Authority
[1870]
I.
The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago. [This essay was written in 1869.] And it can be supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. and the Constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any body but "the people" then existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to bind anybody but themselves. Let us see. Its language is:
We, the people of the United States (that is, the people then existing in the United States), in order to form a more perfect union, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
It is plain, in the first place, that this language, as an agreement, purports to be only what it at most really was, viz., a contract between the people then existing; and, of necessity, binding, as a contract, only upon those then existing. In the second place, the language neither expresses nor implies that they had any right or power, to bind their "posterity" to live under it. It does not say that their "posterity" will, shall, or must live under it. It only says, in effect, that their hopes and motives in adopting it were that it might prove useful to their posterity, as well as to themselves, by promoting their union, safety, tranquility, liberty, etc.
Suppose an agreement were entered into, in this form:
We, the people of Boston, agree to maintain a fort on Governor's Island, to protect ourselves and our posterity against invasion.
This agreement, as an agreement, would clearly bind nobody but the people then existing. Secondly, it would assert no right, power, or disposition, on their part, to compel their "posterity" to maintain such a fort. It would only indicate that the supposed welfare of their posterity was one of the motives that induced the original parties to enter into the agreement.
When a man says he is building a house for himself and his posterity, he does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of binding them, nor is it to be inferred that he is so foolish as to imagine that he has any right or power to bind them, to live in it. So far as they are concerned, he only means to be understood as saying that his hopes and motives, in building it, are that they, or at least some of them, may find it for their happiness to live in it.
So when a man says he is planting a tree for himself and his posterity, he does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of compelling them, nor is it to be inferred that he is such a simpleton as to imagine that he has any right or power to compel them, to eat the fruit. So far as they are concerned, he only means to say that his hopes and motives, in planting the tree, are that its fruit may be agreeable to them.
So it was with those who originally adopted the Constitution. Whatever may have been their personal intentions, the legal meaning of their language, so far as their "posterity" was concerned, simply was, that their hopes and motives, in entering into the agreement, were that it might prove useful and acceptable to their posterity; that it might promote their union, safety, tranquility, and welfare; and that it might tend "to secure to them the blessings of liberty." The language does not assert nor at all imply, any right, power, or disposition, on the part of the original parties to the agreement, to compel their "posterity" to live under it. If they had intended to bind their posterity to live under it, they should have said that their objective was, not "to secure to them the blessings of liberty," but to make slaves of them; for if their "posterity" are bound to live under it, they are nothing less than the slaves of their foolish, tyrannical, and dead grandfathers.
It cannot be said that the Constitution formed "the people of the United States," for all time, into a corporation. It does not speak of "the people" as a corporation, but as individuals. A corporation does not describe itself as "we," nor as "people," nor as "ourselves." Nor does a corporation, in legal language, have any "posterity." It supposes itself to have, and speaks of itself as having, perpetual existence, as a single individuality.
Moreover, no body of men, existing at any one time, have the power to create a perpetual corporation. A corporation can become practically perpetual only by the voluntary accession of new members, as the old ones die off. But for this voluntary accession of new members, the corporation necessarily dies with the death of those who originally composed it.
Legally speaking, therefore, there is, in the Constitution, nothing that professes or attempts to bind the "posterity" of those who established it.
If, then, those who established the Constitution, had no power to bind, and did not attempt to bind, their posterity, the question arises, whether their posterity have bound themselves. If they have done so, they can have done so in only one or both of these two ways, viz., by voting, and paying taxes.

II.
Let us consider these two matters, voting and tax paying, separately. And first of voting.
All the voting that has ever taken place under the Constitution, has been of such a kind that it not only did not pledge the whole people to support the Constitution, but it did not even pledge any one of them to do so, as the following considerations show.
1. In the very nature of things, the act of voting could bind nobody but the actual voters. But owing to the property qualifications required, it is probable that, during the first twenty or thirty years under the Constitution, not more than one-tenth, fifteenth, or perhaps twentieth of the whole population (black and white, men, women, and minors) were permitted to vote. Consequently, so far as voting was concerned, not more than one-tenth, fifteenth, or twentieth of those then existing, could have incurred any obligation to support the Constitution.
At the present time [1869], it is probable that not more than one-sixth of the whole population are permitted to vote. Consequently, so far as voting is concerned, the other five-sixths can have given no pledge that they will support the Constitution.
2. Of the one-sixth that are permitted to vote, probably not more than two-thirds (about one-ninth of the whole population) have usually voted. Many never vote at all. Many vote only once in two, three, five, or ten years, in periods of great excitement.
No one, by voting, can be said to pledge himself for any longer period than that for which he votes. If, for example, I vote for an officer who is to hold his office for only a year, I cannot be said to have thereby pledged myself to support the government beyond that term. Therefore, on the ground of actual voting, it probably cannot be said that more than one-ninth or one-eighth, of the whole population are usually under any pledge to support the Constitution. [In recent years, since 1940, the number of voters in elections has usually fluctuated between one-third and two-fifths of the populace.]
3. It cannot be said that, by voting, a man pledges himself to support the Constitution, unless the act of voting be a perfectly voluntary one on his part. Yet the act of voting cannot properly be called a voluntary one on the part of any very large number of those who do vote. It is rather a measure of necessity imposed upon them by others, than one of their own choice. On this point I repeat what was said in a former number, viz.:
In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is not to be taken as proof of consent, even for the time being. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his consent having even been asked a man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men practice this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these two. In self-defence, he attempts the former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, to save his own life in battle, a man takes the lives of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is one of his own choosing. Neither in contests with the ballot---which is a mere substitute for a bullet---because, as his only chance of self-preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to be inferred that the contest is one into which he voluntarily entered; that he voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, as a stake against those of others, to be lost or won by the mere power of numbers. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, in an exigency into which he had been forced by others, and in which no other means of self-defence offered, he, as a matter of necessity, used the only one that was left to him.
Doubtless the most miserable of men, under the most oppressive government in the world, if allowed the ballot, would use it, if they could see any chance of thereby meliorating their condition. But it would not, therefore, be a legitimate inference that the government itself, that crushes them, was one which they had voluntarily set up, or even consented to.
Therefore, a man's voting under the Constitution of the United States, is not to be taken as evidence that he ever freely assented to the Constitution, even for the time being. Consequently we have no proof that any very large portion, even of the actual voters of the United States, ever really and voluntarily consented to the Constitution, even for the time being. Nor can we ever have such proof, until every man is left perfectly free to consent, or not, without thereby subjecting himself or his property to be disturbed or injured by others.
As we can have no legal knowledge as to who votes from choice, and who from the necessity thus forced upon him, we can have no legal knowledge, as to any particular individual, that he voted from choice; or, consequently, that by voting, he consented, or pledged himself, to support the government. Legally speaking, therefore, the act of voting utterly fails to pledge any one to support the government. It utterly fails to prove that the government rests upon the voluntary support of anybody. On general principles of law and reason, it cannot be said that the government has any voluntary supporters at all, until it can be distinctly shown who its voluntary supporters are.
4. As taxation is made compulsory on all, whether they vote or not, a large proportion of those who vote, no doubt do so to prevent their own money being used against themselves; when, in fact, they would have gladly abstained from voting, if they could thereby have saved themselves from taxation alone, to say nothing of being saved from all the other usurpations and tyrannies of the government. To take a man's property without his consent, and then to infer his consent because he attempts, by voting, to prevent that property from being used to his injury, is a very insufficient proof of his consent to support the Constitution. It is, in fact, no proof at all. And as we can have no legal knowledge as to who the particular individuals are, if there are any, who are willing to be taxed for the sake of voting, we can have no legal knowledge that any particular individual consents to be taxed for the sake of voting; or, consequently, consents to support the Constitution.
5. At nearly all elections, votes are given for various candidates for the same office. Those who vote for the unsuccessful candidates cannot properly be said to have voted to sustain the Constitution. They may, with more reason, be supposed to have voted, not to support the Constitution, but specially to prevent the tyranny which they anticipate the successful candidate intends to practice upon them under color of the Constitution; and therefore may reasonably be supposed to have voted against the Constitution itself. This supposition is the more reasonable, inasmuch as such voting is the only mode allowed to them of expressing their dissent to the Constitution.
6. Many votes are usually given for candidates who have no prospect of success. Those who give such votes may reasonably be supposed to have voted as they did, with a special intention, not to support, but to obstruct the exection of, the Constitution; and, therefore, against the Constitution itself.
7. As all the different votes are given secretly (by secret ballot), there is no legal means of knowing, from the votes themselves, who votes for, and who votes against, the Constitution. Therefore, voting affords no legal evidence that any particular individual supports the Constitution. And where there can be no legal evidence that any particular individual supports the Constitution, it cannot legally be said that anybody supports it. It is clearly impossible to have any legal proof of the intentions of large numbers of men, where there can be no legal proof of the intentions of any particular one of them.
8. There being no legal proof of any man's intentions, in voting, we can only conjecture them. As a conjecture, it is probable, that a very large proportion of those who vote, do so on this principle, viz., that if, by voting, they could but get the government into their own hands (or that of their friends), and use its powers against their opponents, they would then willingly support the Constitution; but if their opponents are to have the power, and use it against them, then they would not willingly support the Constitution.
In short, men's voluntary support of the Constitution is doubtless, in most cases, wholly contingent upon the question whether, by means of the Constitution, they can make themselves masters, or are to be made slaves.
Such contingent consent as that is, in law and reason, no consent at all.
9. As everybody who supports the Constitution by voting (if there are any such) does so secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all personal responsibility for the acts of his agents or representatives, it cannot legally or reasonably be said that anybody at all supports the Constitution by voting. No man can reasonably or legally be said to do such a thing as assent to, or support, the Constitution, unless he does it openly, and in a way to make himself personally responsible for the acts of his agents, so long as they act within the limits of the power he delegates to them.
10. As all voting is secret (by secret ballot), and as all secret governments are necessarily only secret bands of robbers, tyrants, and murderers, the general fact that our government is practically carried on by means of such voting, only proves that there is among us a secret band of robbers, tyrants, and murderers, whose purpose is to rob, enslave, and, so far as necessary to accomplish their purposes, murder, the rest of the people. The simple fact of the existence of such a vand does nothing towards proving that "the people of the United States," or any one of them, voluntarily supports the Constitution.
For all the reasons that have now been given, voting furnishes no legal evidence as to who the particular individuals are (if there are any), who voluntarily support the Constitution. It therefore furnishes no legal evidence that anybody supports it voluntarily.
So far, therefore, as voting is concerned, the Constitution, legally speaking, has no supporters at all.
And, as a matter of fact, there is not the slightest probability that the Constitution has a single bona fide supporter in the country. That is to say, there is not the slightest probability that there is a single man in the country, who both understands what the Constitution really is, and sincerely supports it for what it really is.
The ostensible supporters of the Constitution, like the ostensible supporters of most other governments, are made up of three classes, viz.: 1. Knaves, a numerous and active class, who see in the government an instrument which they can use for their own aggrandizement or wealth. 2. Dupes---a large class, no doubt---each of whom, because he is allowed one voice out of millions in deciding what he may do with his own person and his own property, and because he is permitted to have the same voice in robbing, enslaving, and murdering others, that others have in robbing, enslaving, and murdering himself, is stupid enough to imagine that he is a "free man," a "sovereign"; that this is "a free government"; "a government of equal rights," "the best government on earth,"1 and such like absurdities. 3. A class who have some appreciation of the evils of government, but either do not see how to get rid of them, or do not choose to so far sacrifice their private interests as to give themselves seriously and earnestly to the work of making a change.
---------------------------------------------------------

1 Suppose it be "the best government on earth," does that prove its own goodness, or only the badness of all other governments?
---------------------------------------------------------

III.
The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution.
1. It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that that each man makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be protected.
But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: "Your money, or your life." And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.
The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.
The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a "protector," and that he takes men's money against their will, merely to enable him to "protect" those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful "sovereign," on account of the "protection" he affords you. He does not keep "protecting" you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.
The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves "the government," are directly the opposite of these of the single highwayman.
In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the responsibility of their acts. On the contrary, they secretly (by secret ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed. They say to the person thus designated:
Go to A_____ B_____, and say to him that "the government" has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property. If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him. If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of "the government," and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year. If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside. If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band.) If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder; convict him, and hang him. If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that "our country" is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and "save the country," cost what it may. Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed. See that the work of murder is thoroughly done; that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter. When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore.
It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid. And how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to "support the government," it needs no further argument to show.
2. Still another reason why the payment of taxes implies no consent, or pledge, to support the government, is that the taxpayer does not know, and has no means of knowing, who the particular individuals are who compose "the government." To him "the government" is a myth, an abstraction, an incorporeality, with which he can make no contract, and to which he can give no consent, and make no pledge. He knows it only through its pretended agents. "The government" itself he never sees. He knows indeed, by common report, that certain persons, of a certain age, are permitted to vote; and thus to make themselves parts of, or (if they choose) opponents of, the government, for the time being. But who of them do thus vote, and especially how each one votes (whether so as to aid or oppose the government), he does not know; the voting being all done secretly (by secret ballot). Who, therefore, practically compose "the government," for the time being, he has no means of knowing. Of course he can make no contract with them, give them no consent, and make them no pledge. Of necessity, therefore, his paying taxes to them implies, on his part, no contract, consent, or pledge to support them---that is, to support "the government," or the Constitution.
3. Not knowing who the particular individuals are, who call themselves "the government," the taxpayer does not know whom he pays his taxes to. All he knows is that a man comes to him, representing himself to be the agent of "the government"---that is, the agent of a secret band of robbers and murderers, who have taken to themselves the title of "the government," and have determined to kill everybody who refuses to give them whatever money they demand. To save his life, he gives up his money to this agent. But as this agent does not make his principals individually known to the taxpayer, the latter, after he has given up his money, knows no more who are "the government"---that is, who were the robbers---than he did before. To say, therefore, that by giving up his money to their agent, he entered into a voluntary contract with them, that he pledges himself to obey them, to support them, and to give them whatever money they should demand of him in the future, is simply ridiculous.
4. All political power, so called, rests practically upon this matter of money. Any number of scoundrels, having money enough to start with, can establish themselves as a "government"; because, with money, they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort more money; and also compel general obedience to their will. It is with government, as Caesar said it was in war, that money and soldiers mutually supported each other; that with money he could hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon money. With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money.
For this reason, whoever desires liberty, should understand these vital facts, viz.: 1. That every man who puts money into the hands of a "government" (so called), puts into its hands a sword which will be used against him, to extort more money from him, and also to keep him in subjection to its arbitrary will. 2. That those who will take his money, without his consent, in the first place, will use it for his further robbery and enslavement, if he presumes to resist their demands in the future. 3. That it is a perfect absurdity to suppose that any body of men would ever take a man's money without his consent, for any such object as they profess to take it for, viz., that of protecting him; for why should they wish to protect him, if he does not wish them to do so? To suppose that they would do so, is just as absurd as it would be to suppose that they would take his moeny without his consent, for the purpose of buying food or clothing for him, when he did not want it. 4. If a man wants "protection," he is competent to make his own bargains for it; and nobody has any occasion to rob him, in order to "protect" him against his will. 5. That the only security men can have for their political liberty, consists in their keeping their money in their own pockets, until they have assurances, perfectly satisfactory to themselves, that it will be used as they wish it to be used, for their benefit, and not for their injury. 6. That no government, so called, can reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably be supposed to have honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly upon voluntary support.
These facts are all so vital and so self-evident, that it cannot reasonably be supposed that any one will voluntarily pay money to a "government," for the purpose of securing its protection, unless he first make an explicit and purely voluntary contract with it for that purpose.
It is perfectly evident, therefore, that neither such voting, nor such payment of taxes, as actually takes place, proves anybody's consent, or obligation, to support the Constitution. Consequently we have no evidence at all that the Constitution is binding upon anybody, or that anybody is under any contract or obligation whatever to support it. And nobody is under any obligation to support it.

IV.
The Constitution not only binds nobody now, but it never did bind anybody. It never bound anybody, because it was never agreed to by anybody in such a manner as to make it, on general principles of law and reason, binding upon him.
It is a general principle of law and reason, that a written instrument binds no one until he has signed it. This principle is so inflexible a one, that even though a man is unable to write his name, he must still "make his mark," before he is bound by a written contract. This custom was established ages ago, when few men could write their names; when a clerk -- that is, a man who could write---was so rare and valuable a person, that even if he were guilty of high crimes, he was entitled to pardon, on the ground that the public could not afford to lose his services. Even at that time, a written contract must be signed; and men who could not write, either "made their mark," or signed their contracts by stamping their seals upon wax affixed to the parchment on which their contracts were written. Hence the custom of affixing seals, that has continued to this time.
The laws holds, and reason declares, that if a written instrument is not signed, the presumption must be that the party to be bound by it, did not choose to sign it, or to bind himself by it. And law and reason both give him until the last moment, in which to decide whether he will sign it, or not. Neither law nor reason requires or expects a man to agree to an instrument, until it is written; for until it is written, he cannot know its precise legal meaning. And when it is written, and he has had the opportunity to satisfy himself of its precise legal meaning, he is then expected to decide, and not before, whether he will agree to it or not. And if he do not then sign it, his reason is supposed to be, that he does not choose to enter into such a contract. The fact that the instrument was written for him to sign, or with the hope that he would sign it, goes for nothing.
Where would be the end of fraud and litigation, if one party could bring into court a written instrument, without any signature, and claim to have it enforced, upon the ground that it was written for another man to sign? that this other man had promised to sign it? that he ought to have signed it? that he had had the opportunity to sign it, if he would? but that he had refused or neglected to do so? Yet that is the most that could ever be said of the Constitution.SUP>2 The very judges, who profess to derive all their authority from the Constitution---from an instrument that nobody ever signed---would spurn any other instrument, not signed, that should be brought before them for adjudication.
---------------------------------------------------------
2 The very men who drafted it, never signed it in any way to bind themselves by it, as a contract. And not one of them probably ever would have signed it in any way to bind himself by it, as a contract.
---------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, a written instrument must, in law and reason, not only be signed, but must also be delivered to the party (or to some one for him), in whose favor it is made, before it can bind the party making it. The signing is of no effect, unless the instrument be also delivered. And a party is at perfect liberty to refuse to deliver a written instrument, after he has signed it. The Constitution was not only never signed by anybody, but it was never delivered by anybody, or to anybody's agent or attorney. It can therefore be of no more validity as a contract, then can any other instrument that was never signed or delivered.

V.
As further evidence of the general sense of mankind, as to the practical necessity there is that all men's important contracts, especially those of a permanent nature, should be both written and signed, the following facts are pertinent.
For nearly two hundred years---that is, since 1677---there has been on the statute book of England, and the same, in substance, if not precisely in letter, has been re-enacted, and is now in force, in nearly or quite all the States of this Union, a statute, the general object of which is to declare that no action shall be brought to enforce contracts of the more important class, unless they are put in writing, and signed by the parties to be held chargeable upon them. [At this point there is a footnote listing 34 states whose statute books Spooner had examined, all of which had variations of this English statute; the footnote also quotes part of the Massachussetts statute.]
The principle of the statute, be it observed, is, not merely that written contracts shall be signed, but also that all contracts, except for those specially exempted---generally those that are for small amounts, and are to remain in force for but a short time---shall be both written and signed.
The reason of the statute, on this point, is, that it is now so easy a thing for men to put their contracts in writing, and sign them, and their failure to do so opens the door to so much doubt, fraud, and litigation, that men who neglect to have their contracts---of any considerable importance -- written and signed, ought not to have the benefit of courts of justice to enforce them. And this reason is a wise one; and that experience has confirmed its wisdom and necessity, is demonstrated by the fact that it has been acted upon in England for nearly two hundred years, and has been so nearly universally adopted in this country, and that nobody thinks of repealing it.
We all know, too, how careful most men are to have their contracts written and signed, even when this statute does not require it. For example, most men, if they have money due them, of no larger amount than five or ten dollars, are careful to take a note for it. If they buy even a small bill of goods, paying for it at the time of delivery, they take a receipted bill for it. If they pay a small balance of a book account, or any other small debt previously contracted, they take a written receipt for it.
Furthermore, the law everywhere (probably) in our country, as well as in England, requires that a large class of contracts, such as wills, deeds, etc., shall not only be written and signed, but also sealed, witnessed, and acknowledged. And in the case of married women conveying their rights in real estate, the law, in many States, requires that the women shall be examined separate and apart from their husbands, and declare that they sign their contracts free of any fear or compulsion of their husbands.
Such are some of the precautions which the laws require, and which individuals---from motives of common prudence, even in cases not required by law---take, to put their contracts in writing, and have them signed, and, to guard against all uncertainties and controversies in regard to their meaning and validity. And yet we have what purports, or professes, or is claimed, to be a contract---the Constitution---made eighty years ago, by men who are now all dead, and who never had any power to bind US, but which (it is claimed) has nevertheless bound three generations of men, consisting of many millions, and which (it is claimed) will be binding upon all the millions that are to come; but which nobody ever signed, sealed, delivered, witnessed, or acknowledged; and which few persons, compared with the whole number that are claimed to be bound by it, have ever read, or even seen, or ever will read, or see. And of those who ever have read it, or ever will read it, scarcely any two, perhaps no two, have ever agreed, or ever will agree, as to what it means.
Moreover, this supposed contract, which would not be received in any court of justice sitting under its authority, if offered to prove a debt of five dollars, owing by one man to another, is one by which---as it is generally interpreted by those who pretend to administer it---all men, women and children throughout the country, and through all time, surrender not only all their property, but also their liberties, and even lives, into the hands of men who by this supposed contract, are expressly made wholly irresponsible for their disposal of them. And we are so insane, or so wicked, as to destroy property and lives without limit, in fighting to compel men to fulfill a supposed contract, which, inasmuch as it has never been signed by anybody, is, on general princples of law and reason---such principles as we are all governed by in regard to other contracts---the merest waste of paper, binding upon nobody, fit only to be thrown into the fire; or, if preserved, preserved only to serve as a witness and a warning of the folly and wickedness of mankind.

VI.
It is no exaggeration, but a literal truth, to say that, by the Constitution---not as I interpret it, but as it is interpreted by those who pretend to administer it---the properties, liberties, and lives of the entire people of the United States are surrendered unreservedly into the hands of men who, it is provided by the Constitution itself, shall never be "questioned" as to any disposal they make of them.
Thus the Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 6) provides that, "for any speech or debate (or vote), in either house, they (the senators and representatives) shall not be questioned in any other place."
The whole law-making power is given to these senators and representatives (when acting by a two-thirds vote);3 and this provision protects them from all responsibility for the laws they make.
---------------------------------------------------------
3 And this two-thirds vote may be but two-thirds of a quorum---that is two-thirds of a majority---instead of two-thirds of the whole.
---------------------------------------------------------
The Constitution also enables them to secure the execution of all their laws, by giving them power to withhold the salaries of, and to impeach and remove, all judicial and executive officers, who refuse to execute them.
Thus the whole power of the government is in their hands, and they are made utterly irresponsible for the use they make of it. What is this but absolute, irresponsible power?
It is no answer to this view of the case to say that these men are under oath to use their power only within certain limits; for what care they, or what should they care, for oaths or limits, when it is expressly provided, by the Constitution itself, that they shall never be "questioned," or held to any resonsibility whatever, for violating their oaths, or transgressing those limits?
Neither is it any answer to this view of the case to say that the men holding this absolute, irresponsible power, must be men chosen by the people (or portions of them) to hold it. A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. Neither are a people any the less slaves because permitted periodically to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible.4
---------------------------------------------------------
4 Of what appreciable value is it to any man, as an individual, that he is allowed a voice in choosing these public masters? His voice is only one of several millions.
---------------------------------------------------------
The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily implies the other. Neither can exist without the other. If, therefore, Congress have that absolute and irresponsible law-making power, which the Constitution---according to their interpretation of it---gives them, it can only be because they own us as property. If they own us as property, they are our masters, and their will is our law. If they do not own us as property, they are not our masters, and their will, as such, is of no authority over us.
But these men who claim and exercise this absolute and irresponsible dominion over us, dare not be consistent, and claim either to be our masters, or to own us as property. They say they are only our servants, agents, attorneys, and representatives. But this declaration involves an absurdity, a contradiction. No man can be my servant, agent, attorney, or representative, and be, at the same time, uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me for his acts. It is of no importance that I appointed him, and put all power in his hands. If I made him uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what power did I put in his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible one? or a limited and responsible one?
For still another reason they are neither our servants, agents, attorneys, nor representatives. And that reason is, that we do not make ourselves responsible for their acts. If a man is my servant, agent, or attorney, I necessarily make myself responsible for all his acts done within the limits of the power I have intrusted to him. If I have intrusted him, as my agent, with either absolute power, or any power at all, over the persons or properties of other men than myself, I thereby necessarily make myself responsible to those other persons for any injuries he may do them, so long as he acts within the limits of the power I have granted him. But no individual who may be injured in his person or property, by acts of Congress, can come to the individual electors, and hold them responsible for these acts of their so-called agents or representatives. This fact proves that these pretended agents of the people, of everybody, are really the agents of nobody.
If, then, nobody is individually responsible for the acts of Congress, the members of Congress are nobody's agents. And if they are nobody's agents, they are themselves individually responsible for their own acts, and for the acts of all whom they employ. And the authority they are exercising is simply their own individual authority; and, by the law of nature---the highest of all laws---anybody injured by their acts, anybody who is deprived by them of his property or his liberty, has the same right to hold them individually responsible, that he has to hold any other trespasser individually responsible. He has the same right to resist them, and their agents, that he has to resist any other trespassers.

VII.
It is plain, then, that on general principles of law and reason---such principles as we all act upon in courts of justice and in common life---the Constitution is no contract; that it binds nobody, and never did bind anybody; and that all those who pretend to act by its authority, are really acting without any legitimate authority at all; that, on general principles of law and reason, they are mere usurpers, and that everybody not only has the right, but is morally bound, to treat them as such.
If the people of this country wish to maintain such a government as the Constitution describes, there is no reason in the world why they should not sign the instrument itself, and thus make known their wishes in an open, authentic manner; in such manner as the common sense and experience of mankind have shown to be reasonable and necessary in such cases; and in such manner as to make themselves (as they ought to do) individually responsible for the acts of the government. But the people have never been asked to sign it. And the only reason why they have never been asked to sign it, has been that it has been known that they never would sign it; that they were neither such fools nor knaves as they must needs have been to be willing to sign it; that (at least as it has been practically interpreted) it is not what any sensible and honest man wants for himself; nor such as he has any right to impose upon others. It is, to all moral intents and purposes, as destitute of obligations as the compacts which robbers and thieves and pirates enter into with each other, but never sign.
If any considerable number of the people believe the Constitution to be good, why do they not sign it themselves, and make laws for, and administer them upon, each other; leaving all other persons (who do not interfere with them) in peace? Until they have tried the experiment for themselves, how can they have the face to impose the Constitution upon, or even to recommend it to, others? Plainly the reason for absurd and inconsistent conduct is that they want the Constitution, not solely for any honest or legitimate use it can be of to themselves or others, but for the dishonest and illegitimate power it gives them over the persons and properties of others. But for this latter reason, all their eulogiums on the Constitution, all their exhortations, and all their expenditures of money and blood to sustain it, would be wanting.

VIII.
The Constitution itself, then, being of no authority, on what authority does our government practically rest? On what ground can those who pretend to administer it, claim the right to seize men's property, to restrain them of their natural liberty of action, industry, and trade, and to kill all who deny their authority to dispose of men's properties, liberties, and lives at their pleasure or discretion?
The most they can say, in answer to this question, is, that some half, two-thirds, or three-fourths, of the male adults of the country have a tacit understanding that they will maintain a government under the Constitution; that they will select, by ballot, the persons to administer it; and that those persons who may receive a majority, or a plurality, of their ballots, shall act as their representatives, and administer the Constitution in their name, and by their authority.
But this tacit understanding (admitting it to exist) cannot at all justify the conclusion drawn from it. A tacit understanding between A, B, and C, that they will, by ballot, depute D as their agent, to deprive me of my property, liberty, or life, cannot at all authorize D to do so. He is none the less a robber, tyrant, and murderer, because he claims to act as their agent, than he would be if he avowedly acted on his own responsibility alone.
Neither am I bound to recognize him as their agent, nor can he legitimately claim to be their agent, when he brings no written authority from them accrediting him as such. I am under no obligation to take his word as to who his principals may be, or whether he has any. Bringing no credentials, I have a right to say he has no such authority even as he claims to have: and that he is therefore intending to rob, enslave, or murder me on his own account.
This tacit understanding, therefore, among the voters of the country, amounts to nothing as an authority to their agents. Neither do the ballots by which they select their agents, avail any more than does their tacit understanding; for their ballots are given in secret, and therefore in such a way as to avoid any personal responsibility for the acts of their agents.
No body of men can be said to authorize a man to act as their agent, to the injury of a third person, unless they do it in so open and authentic a manner as to make themselves personally responsible for his acts. None of the voters in this country appoint their political agents in any open, authentic manner, or in any manner to make themselves responsible for their acts. Therefore these pretended agents cannot legitimately claim to be really agents. Somebody must be responsible for the acts of these pretended agents; and if they cannot show any open and authentic credentials from their principals, they cannot, in law or reason, be said to have any principals. The maxim applies here, that what does not appear, does not exist. If they can show no principals, they have none.
But even these pretended agents do not themselves know who their pretended principals are. These latter act in secret; for acting by secret ballot is acting in secret as much as if they were to meet in secret conclave in the darkness of the night. And they are personally as much unknown to the agents they select, as they are to others. No pretended agent therefore can ever know by whose ballots he is selected, or consequently who his real principles are. Not knowing who his principles are, he has no right to say that he has any. He can, at most, say only that he is the agent of a secret band of robbers and murderers, who are bound by that faith which prevails among confederates in crime, to stand by him, if his acts, done in their name, shall be resisted.
Men honestly engaged in attempting to establish justice in the world, have no occasion thus to act in secret; or to appoint agents to do acts for which they (the principals) are not willing to be responsible.
The secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret government is a secret band of robbers and murderers. Open despotism is better than this. The single despot stands out in the face of all men, and says: I am the State: My will is law: I am your master: I take the responsibility of my acts: The only arbiter I acknowledge is the sword: If anyone denies my right, let him try conclusions with me.
But a secret government is little less than a government of assassins. Under it, a man knows not who his tyrants are, until they have struck, and perhaps not then. He may guess, beforehand, as to some of his immediate neighbors. But he really knows nothing. The man to whom he would most naturally fly for protection, may prove an enemy, when the time of trial comes.
This is the kind of government we have; and it is the only one we are likely to have, until men are ready to say: We will consent to no Constitution, except such an one as we are neither ashamed nor afraid to sign; and we will authorize no government to do anything in our name which we are not willing to be personally responsible for.

IX.
What is the motive to the secret ballot? This, and only this: Like other confederates in crime, those who use it are not friends, but enemies; and they are afraid to be known, and to have their individual doings known, even to each other. They can contrive to bring about a sufficient understanding to enable them to act in concert against other persons; but beyond this they have no confidence, and no friendship, among themselves. In fact, they are engaged quite as much in schemes for plundering each other, as in plundering those who are not of them. And it is perfectly well understood among them that the strongest party among them will, in certain contingencies, murder each other by the hundreds of thousands (as they lately did do) to accomplish their purposes against each other. Hence they dare not be known, and have their individual doings known, even to each other. And this is avowedly the only reason for the ballot: for a secret government; a government by secret bands of robbers and murderers. And we are insane enough to call this liberty! To be a member of this secret band of robbers and murderers is esteemed a privilege and an honor! Without this privilege, a man is considered a slave; but with it a free man! With it he is considered a free man, because he has the same power to secretly (by secret ballot) procure the robbery, enslavement, and murder of another man, and that other man has to procure his robbery, enslavement, and murder. And this they call equal rights!
If any number of men, many or few, claim the right to govern the people of this country, let them make and sign an open compact with each other to do so. Let them thus make themselves individually known to those whom they propose to govern. And let them thus openly take the legitimate responsibility of their acts. How many of those who now support the Constitution, will ever do this? How many will ever dare openly proclaim their right to govern? or take the legitimate responsibility of their acts? Not one!

X.
It is obvious that, on general principles of law and reason, there exists no such thing as a government created by, or resting upon, any consent, compact, or agreement of "the people of the United States" with each other; that the only visible, tangible, responsible government that exists, is that of a few individuals only, who act in concert, and call themselves by the several names of senators, representatives, presidents, judges, marshals, treasurers, collectors, generals, colonels, captains, etc., etc.
On general principles of law and reason, it is of no importance whatever that these few individuals profess to be the agents and representatives of "the people of the United States"; since they can show no credentials from the people themselves; they were never appointed as agents or representatives in any open, authentic manner; they do not themselves know, and have no means of knowing, and cannot prove, who their principals (as they call them) are individually; and consequently cannot, in law or reason, be said to have any principals at all.
It is obvious, too, that if these alleged principals ever did appoint these pretended agents, or representatives, they appointed them secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all personal responsibility for their acts; that, at most, these alleged principals put these pretended agents forward for the most criminal purposes, viz.: to plunder the people of their property, and restrain them of their liberty; and that the only authority that these alleged principals have for so doing, is simply a tacit understanding among themselves that they will imprison, shoot, or hang every man who resists the exactions and restraints which their agents or representatives may impose upon them.
Thus it is obvious that the only visible, tangible government we have is made up of these professed agents or representatives of a secret band of robbers and murderers, who, to cover up, or gloss over, their robberies and murders, have taken to themselves the title of "the people of the United States"; and who, on the pretense of being "the people of the United States," assert their right to subject to their dominion, and to control and dispose of at their pleasure, all property and persons found in the United States.

XI.
On general principles of law and reason, the oaths which these pretended agents of the people take "to support the Constitution," are of no validity or obligation. And why? For this, if for no other reason, viz., that they are given to nobody. There is no privity (as the lawyers say)---that is, no mutual recognition, consent, and agreement---between those who take these oaths, and any other persons.
If I go upon Boston Common, and in the presence of a hundred thousand people, men, women and children, with whom I have no contract upon the subject, take an oath that I will enforce upon them the laws of Moses, of Lycurgus, of Solon, of Justinian, or of Alfred, that oath is, on general principles of law and reason, of no obligation. It is of no obligation, not merely because it is intrinsically a criminal one, but also because it is given to nobody, and consequently pledges my faith to nobody. It is merely given to the winds.
It would not alter the case at all to say that, among these hundred thousand persons, in whose presence the oath was taken, there were two, three, or five thousand male adults, who had secretly---by secret ballot, and in a way to avoid making themselves individually known to me, or to the remainder of the hundred thousand---designated me as their agent to rule, control, plunder, and, if need be, murder, these hundred thousand people. The fact that they had designated me secretly, and in a manner to prevent my knowing them individually, prevents all privity between them and me; and consequently makes it impossible that there can be any contract, or pledge of faith, on my part towards them; for it is impossible that I can pledge my faith, in any legal sense, to a man whom I neither know, nor have any means of knowing, individually.
So far as I am concerned, then, these two, three, or five thousand persons are a secret band of robbers and murderers, who have secretly, and in a way to save themselves from all responsibility for my acts, designated me as their agent; and have, through some other agent, or pretended agent, made their wishes known to me. But being, nevertheless, individually unknown to me, and having no open, authentic contract with me, my oath is, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity as a pledge of faith to them. And being no pledge of faith to them, it is no pledge of faith to anybody. It is mere idle wind. At most, it is only a pledge of faith to an unknown band of robbers and murderers, whose instrument for plundering and murdering other people, I thus publicly confess myself to be. And it has no other obligation than a similar oath given to any other unknown body of pirates, robbers, and murderers.
For these reasons the oaths taken by members of Congress, "to support the Constitution," are, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity. They are not only criminal in themselves, and therefore void; but they are also void for the further reason that they are given to nobody.
It cannot be said that, in any legitimate or legal sense, they are given to "the people of the United States"; because neither the whole, nor any large proportion of the whole, people of the United States ever, either openly or secretly, appointed or designated these men as their agents to carry the Constitution into effect. The great body of the people---that is, men, women, and children---were never asked, or even permitted, to signify, in any formal manner, either openly or secretly, their choice or wish on the subject. The most that these members of Congress can say, in favor of their appointment, is simply this: Each one can say for himself:
I have evidence satisfactory to myself, that there exists, scattered throughout the country, a band of men, having a tacit understanding with each other, and calling themselves "the people of the United States," whose general purposes are to control and plunder each other, and all other persons in the country, and, so far as they can, even in neighboring countries; and to kill every man who shall attempt to defend his person and property against their schemes of plunder and dominion. Who these men are, individually, I have no certain means of knowing, for they sign no papers, and give no open, authentic evidence of their individual membership. They are not known individually even to each other. They are apparently as much afraid of being individually known to each other, as of being known to other persons. Hence they ordinarily have no mode either of exercising, or of making known, their individual membership, otherwise than by giving their votes secretly for certain agents to do their will.
But although these men are individually unknown, both to each other and to other persons, it is generally understood in the country that none but male persons, of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, can be members. It is also generally understood that all male persons, born in the country, having certain complexions, and (in some localities) certain amounts of property, and (in certain cases) even persons of foreign birth, are permitted to be members. But it appears that usually not more than one half, two-thirds, or in some cases, three-fourths, of all who are thus permitted to become members of the band, ever exercise, or consequently prove, their actual membership, in the only mode in which they ordinarily can exercise or prove it, viz., by giving their votes secretly for the officers or agents of the band. The number of these secret votes, so far as we have any account of them, varies greatly from year to year, thus tending to prove that the band, instead of being a permanent organization, is a merely pro tempore affair with those who choose to act with it for the time being.
The gross number of these secret votes, or what purports to be their gross number, in different localities, is occasionally published. Whether these reports are accurate or not, we have no means of knowing. It is generally supposed that great frauds are often committed in depositing them. They are understood to be received and counted by certain men, who are themselves appointed for that purpose by the same secret process by which all other officers and agents of the band are selected. According to the reports of these receivers of votes (for whose accuracy or honesty, however, I cannot vouch), and according to my best knowledge of the whole number of male persons "in my district," who (it is supposed) were permitted to vote, it would appear that one-half, two-thirds or three-fourths actually did vote. Who the men were, individually, who cast these votes, I have no knowledge, for the whole thing was done secretly. But of the secret votes thus given for what they call a "member of Congress," the receivers reported that I had a majority, or at least a larger number than any other one person. And it is only by virtue of such a designation that I am now here to act in concert with other persons similarly selected in other parts of the country.
It is understood among those who sent me here, that all persons so selected, will, on coming together at the City of Washington, take an oath in each other's presence "to support the Constitution of the United States." By this is meant a certain paper that was drawn up eighty years ago. It was never signed by anybody, and apparently has no obligation, and never had any obligation, as a contract. In fact, few persons ever read it, and doubtless much the largest number of those who voted for me and the others, never even saw it, or now pretend to know what it means. Nevertheless, it is often spoken of in the country as "the Constitution of the United States"; and for some reason or other, the men who sent me here, seem to expect that I, and all with whom I act, will swear to carry this Constitution into effect. I am therefore ready to take this oath, and to co-operate with all others, similarly selected, who are ready to take the same oath.
This is the most that any member of Congress can say in proof that he has any constituency; that he represents anybody; that his oath "to support the Constitution," is given to anybody, or pledges his faith to anybody. He has no open, written, or other authentic evidence, such as is required in all other cases, that he was ever appointed the agent or representative of anybody. He has no written power of attorney from any single individual. He has no such legal knowledge as is required in all other cases, by which he can identify a single one of those who pretend to have appointed him to represent them.
Of course his oath, professedly given to them, "to support the Constitution," is, on general principles of law and reason, an oath given to nobody. It pledges his faith to nobody. If he fails to fulfil his oath, not a single person can come forward, and say to him, you have betrayed me, or broken faith with me.
No one can come forward and say to him: I appointed you my attorney to act for me. I required you to swear that, as my attorney, you would support the Constitution. You promised me that you would do so; and now you have forfeited the oath you gave to me. No single individual can say this.
No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men, can come forward and say to him: We appointed you our attorney, to act forus. We required you to swear that, as our attorney, you would support the Constitution. You promised us that you would do so; and now you have forfeited the oath you gave to us.
No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men, can say this to him; because there is no such association or body of men in existence. If any one should assert that there is such an association, let him prove, if he can, who compose it. Let him produce, if he can, any open, written, or other authentic contract, signed or agreed to by these men; forming themselves into an association; making themselves known as such to the world; appointing him as their agent; and making themselves individually, or as an association, responsible for his acts, done by their authority. Until all this can be shown, no one can say that, in any legitimate sense, there is any such association; or that he is their agent; or that he ever gave his oath to them; or ever pledged his faith to them.
On general principles of law and reason, it would be a sufficient answer for him to say, to all individuals, and to all pretended associations of individuals, who should accuse him of a breach of faith to them:
I never knew you. Where is your evidence that you, either individually or collectively, ever appointed me your attorney? that you ever required me to swear to you, that, as your attorney, I would support the Constitution? or that I have now broken any faith that I ever pledged to you? You may, or you may not, be members of that secret band of robbers and murderers, who act in secret; appoint their agents by a secret ballot; who keep themselves individually unknown even to the agents they thus appoint; and who, therefore, cannot claim that they have any agents; or that any of their pretended agents ever gave his oath, or pledged his faith to them. I repudiate you altogether. My oath was given to others, with whom you have nothing to do; or it was idle wind, given only to the idle winds. Begone!

XII.
For the same reasons, the oaths of all the other pretended agents of this secret band of robbers and murderers are, on general principles of law and reason, equally destitute of obligation. They are given to nobody; but only to the winds.
The oaths of the tax-gatherers and treasurers of the band, are, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity. If any tax gatherer, for example, should put the money he receives into his own pocket, and refuse to part with it, the members of this band could not say to him: You collected that money as our agent, and for our uses; and you swore to pay it over to us, or to those we should appoint to receive it. You have betrayed us, and broken faith with us.
It would be a sufficient answer for him to say to them:
I never knew you. You never made yourselves individually known to me. I never game by oath to you, as individuals. You may, or you may not, be members of that secret band, who appoint agents to rob and murder other people; but who are cautious not to make themselves individually known, either to such agents, or to those whom their agents are commissioned to rob. If you are members of that band, you have given me no proof that you ever commissioned me to rob others for your benefit. I never knew you, as individuals, and of course never promised you that I would pay over to you the proceeds of my robberies. I committed my robberies on my own account, and for my own profit. If you thought I was fool enough to allow you to keep yourselves concealed, and use me as your tool for robbing other persons; or that I would take all the personal risk of the robberies, and pay over the proceeds to you, you were particularly simple. As I took all the risk of my robberies, I propose to take all the profits. Begone! You are fools, as well as villains. If I gave my oath to anybody, I gave it to other persons than you. But I really gave it to nobody. I only gave it to the winds. It answered my purposes at the time. It enabled me to get the money I was after, and now I propose to keep it. If you expected me to pay it over to you, you relied only upon that honor that is said to prevail among thieves. You now understand that that is a very poor reliance. I trust you may become wise enough to never rely upon it again. If I have any duty in the matter, it is to give back the money to those from whom I took it; not to pay it over to villains such as you.

XIII.
On general principles of law and reason, the oaths which foreigners take, on coming here, and being "naturalized" (as it is called), are of no validity. They are necessarily given to nobody; because there is no open, authentic association, to which they can join themselves; or to whom, as individuals, they can pledge their faith. No such association, or organization, as "the people of the United States," having ever been formed by any open, written, authentic, or voluntary contract, there is, on general principles of law and reason, no such association, or organization, in existence. And all oaths that purport to be given to such an association are necessarily given only to the winds. They cannot be said to be given to any man, or body of men, as individuals, because no man, or body of men, can come forward with any proof that the oaths were given to them, as individuals, or to any association of which they are members. To say that there is a tacit understanding among a portion of the male adults of the country, that they will call themselves "the people of the United States," and that they will act in concert in subjecting the remainder of the people of the United States to their dominion; but that they will keep themselves personally concealed by doing all their acts secretly, is wholly insufficient, on general principles of law and reason, to prove the existence of any such association, or organization, as "the people of the United States"; or consequently to prove that the oaths of foreigners were given to any such association.

XIV.
On general principles of law and reason, all the oaths which, since the war, have been given by Southern men, that they will obey the laws of Congress, support the Union, and the like, are of no validity. Such oaths are invalid, not only because they were extorted by military power, and threats of confiscation, and because they are in contravention of men's natural right to do as they please about supporting the government, but also because they were given to nobody. They were nominally given to "the United States." But being nominally given to "the United States," they were necessarily given to nobody, because, on general principles of law and reason, there were no "United States," to whom the oaths could be given. That is to say, there was no open, authentic, avowed, legitimate association, corporation, or body of men, known as "the United States," or as "the people of the United States," to whom the oaths could have been given. If anybody says there was such a corporation, let him state who were the individuals that composed it, and how and when they became a corporation. Were Mr. A, Mr. B, and Mr. C members of it? If so, where are their signatures? Where the evidence of their membership? Where the record? Where the open, authentic proof? There is none. Therefore, in law and reason, there was no such corporation.
On general principles of law and reason, every corporation, association, or organized body of men, having a legitimate corporate existence, and legitimate corporate rights, must consist of certain known individuals, who can prove, by legitimate and reasonable evidence, their membership. But nothing of this kind can be proved in regard to the corporation, or body of men, who call themselves "the United States." Not a man of them, in all the Northern States, can prove by any legitimate evidence, such as is required to prove membership in other legal corporations, that he himself, or any other man whom he can name, is a member of any corporation or association called "the United States," or "the people of the United States," or, consequently, that there is any such corporation. And since no such corporation can be proved to exist, it cannot of course be proved that the oaths of Southern men were given to any such corporation. The most that can be claimed is that the oaths were given to a secret band of robbers and murderers, who called themselves "the United States," and extorted those oaths. But that is certainly not enough to prove that the oaths are of any obligation.

XV.
On general principles of law and reason, the oaths of soldiers, that they will serve a given number of years, that they will obey the the orders of their superior officers, that they will bear true allegiance to the government, and so forth, are of no obligation. Independently of the criminality of an oath, that, for a given number of years, he will kill all whom he may be commanded to kill, without exercising his own judgment or conscience as to the justice or necessity of such killing, there is this further reason why a soldier's oath is of no obligation, viz., that, like all the other oaths that have now been mentioned, it is given to nobody. There being, in no legitimate sense, any such corporation, or nation, as "the United States," nor, consequently, in any legitimate sense, any such government as "the government of the United States," a soldier's oath given to, or contract made with, such a nation or government, is necessarily an oath given to, or contract made with, nobody. Consequently such an oath or contract can be of no obligation.

XVI.
On general principles of law and reason, the treaties, so called, which purport to be entered into with other nations, by persons calling themselves ambassadors, secretaries, presidents, and senators of the United States, in the name, and in behalf, of "the people of the United States," are of no validity. These so-called ambassadors, secretaries, presidents, and senators, who claim to be the agents of "the people of the United States" for making these treaties, can show no open, written, or other authentic evidence that either the whole "people of the United States," or any other open, avowed, responsible body of men, calling themselves by that name, ever authorized these pretended ambassadors and others to make treaties in the name of, or binding upon any one of, "the people of the United States," or any other open, avowed, responsible body of men, calling themselves by that name, ever authorized these pretended ambassadors, secretaries, and others, in their name and behalf, to recognize certain other persons, calling themselves emperors, kings, queens, and the like, as the rightful rulers, sovereigns, masters, or representatives of the different peoples whom they assume to govern, to represent, and to bind.
The "nations," as they are called, with whom our pretended ambassadors, secretaries, presidents, and senators profess to make treaties, are as much myths as our own. On general principles of law and reason, there are no such "nations." That is to say, neither the whole people of England, for example, nor any open, avowed, responsible body of men, calling themselves by that name, ever, by any open, written, or other authentic contract with each other, formed themselves into any bona fide, legitimate association or organization, or authorized any king, queen, or other representative to make treaties in their name, or to bind them, either individually, or as an association, by such treaties.
Our pretended treaties, then, being made with no legitimate or bona fide nations, or representatives of nations, and being made, on our part, by persons who have no legitimate authority to act for us, have instrinsically no more validity than a pretended treaty made by the Man in the Moon with the king of the Pleiades.

XVII.
On general principles of law and reason, debts contracted in the name of "the United States," or of "the people of the United States," are of no validity. It is utterly absurd to pretend that debts to the amount of twenty-five hundred millions of dollars are binding upon thirty-five or forty millions of people [the approximate national debt and population in 1870], when there is not a particle of legitimate evidence---such as would be required to prove a private debt---that can be produced against any one of them, that either he, or his properly authorized attorney, ever contracted to pay one cent.
Certainly, neither the whole people of the United States, nor any number of them, ever separately or individually contracted to pay a cent of these debts.
Certainly, also, neither the whole people of the United States, nor any number of them, every, by any open, written, or other authentic and voluntary contract, united themselves as a firm, corporation, or association, by the name of "the United States," or "the people of the United States," and authorized their agents to contract debts in their name.
Certainly, too, there is in existence no such firm, corporation, or association as "the United States," or "the people of the United States," formed by any open, written, or other authentic and voluntary contract, and having corporate property with which to pay these debts.
How, then, is it possible, on any general principle of law or reason, that debts that are binding upon nobody individually, can be binding upon forty millions of people collectively, when, on general and legitimate principles of law and reason, these forty millions of people neither have, nor ever had, any corporate property? never made any corporate or individual contract? and neither have, nor ever had, any corporate existence?
Who, then, created these debts, in the name of "the United States"? Why, at most, only a few persons, calling themselves "members of Congress," etc., who pretended to represent "the people of the United States," but who really represented only a secret band of robbers and murderers, who wanted money to carry on the robberies and murders in which they were then engaged; and who intended to extort from the future people of the United States, by robbery and threats of murder (and real murder, if that should prove necessary), the means to pay these debts.
This band of robbers and murderers, who were the real principals in contracting these debts, is a secret one, because its members have never entered into any open, written, avowed, or authentic contract, by which they may be individually known to the world, or even to each other. Their real or pretended representatives, who contracted these debts in their name, were selected (if selected at all) for that purpose secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to furnish evidence against none of the principals individually; and these principals were really known individually neither to their pretended representatives who contracted these debts in their behalf, nor to those who lent the money. The money, therefore, was all borrowed and lent in the dark; that is, by men who did not see each other's faces, or know each other's names; who could not then, and cannot now, identify each other as principals in the transactions; and who consequently can prove no contract with each other.
Furthermore, the money was all lent and borrowed for criminal purposes; that is, for purposes of robbery and murder; and for this reason the contracts were all intrinsically void; and would have been so, even though the real parties, borrowers and lenders, had come face to face, and made their contracts openly, in their own proper names.
Furthermore, this secret band of robbers and murderers, who were the real borrowers of this money, having no legitimate corporate existence, have no corporate property with which to pay these debts. They do indeed pretend to own large tracts of wild lands, lying between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and between the Gulf of Mexico and the North Pole. But, on general principles of law and reason, they might as well pretend to own the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans themselves; or the atmosphere and the sunlight; and to hold them, and dispose of them, for the payment of these debts.
Having no corporate property with which to pay what purports to be their corporate debts, this secret band of robbers and murderers are really bankrupt. They have nothing to pay with. In fact, they do not propose to pay their debts otherwise than from the proceeds of their future robberies and murders. These are confessedly their sole reliance; and were known to be such by the lenders of the money, at the time the money was lent. And it was, therefore, virtually a part of the contract, that the money should be repaid only from the proceeds of these future robberies and murders. For this reason, if for no other, the contracts were void from the beginning.
In fact, these apparently two classes, borrowers and lenders, were really one and the same class. They borrowed and lent money from and to themselves. They themselves were not only part and parcel, but the very life and soul, of this secret band of robbers and murderers, who borrowed and spent the money. Individually they furnished money for a common enterprise; taking, in return, what purported to be corporate promises for individual loans. The only excuse they had for taking these so-called corporate promises of, for individual loans by, the same parties, was that they might have some apparent excuse for the future robberies of the band (that is, to pay the debts of the corporation), and that they might also know what shares they were to be respectively entitled to out of the proceeds of their future robberies.
Finally, if these debts had been created for the most innocent and honest purposes, and in the most open and honest manner, by the real parties to the contracts, these parties could thereby have bound nobody but themselves, and no property but their own. They could have bound nobody that should have come after them, and no property subsequently created by, or belonging to, other persons.

XVIII.
The Constitution having never been signed by anybody; and there being no other open, written, or authentic contract between any parties whatever, by virtue of which the United States government, so called, is maintained; and it being well known that none but male persons, of twenty-one years of age and upwards, are allowed any voice in the government; and it being also well known that a large number of these adult persons seldom or never vote at all; and that all those who do vote, do so secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to prevent their individual votes being known, either to the world, or even to each other; and consequently in a way to make no one openly responsible for the acts of their agents, or representatives---all these things being known, the questions arise: Who compose the real governing power in the country? Who are the men, the responsible men, who rob us of our property? Restrain us of our liberty? Subject us to their arbitrary dominion? And devastate our hooms, and shoot us down by the hundreds of thousands, if we resist? How shall we find these men? How shall we know them from others? How shall we defend ourselves and our property against them? Who, of our neighbors, are members of this secret band of robbers and murderers? How can we know which are their houses, that we may burn or demolish them? Which their property, that we may destroy it? Which their persons, that we may kill them, and rid the world and ourselves of such tyrants and monsters?
These are questions that must be answered, before men can be free; before they can protect themselves against this secret band of robbers and murderers, who now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.
The answer to these questions is, that only those who have the will and power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will civilized men be robbed, or enslaved.
Among savages, mere physical strength, on the part of one man, may enable him to rob, enslave, or kill another man. Among barbarians, mere physical strength, on the part of a body of men, disciplined, and acting in concert, though with very little money or other wealth, may, under some circumstances, enable them to rob, enslave, or kill another body of men, as numerous, or perhaps even more numerous, than themselves. And among both savages and barbarians, mere want may sometimes compel one man to sell himself as a slave to another. But with (so-called) civilized peoples, among whom knowledge, wealth, and the means of acting in concert, have becom diffusede; and who have invented such weapons and other means of defense as to render mere physical strength of less importance; and by whom soldiers in any requisite number, and other instrumentalities of war in any requisite amount, can always be had for money, the question of war, and consequently the question of power, is little else than a mere question of money. As a necessary consequence, those who stand ready to furnish this money, are the real rulers. It is so in Europe, and it is so in this country.
In Europe, the nominal rulers, the emperors and kings and parliaments, are anything but the real rulers of their respective countries. They are little or nothing else than mere tools, employed by the wealthy to rob, enslave, and (if need be) murder those who have less wealth, or none at all.
The Rosthchilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the representatives and agents---men who never think of lending a shilling to their next-door neighbors, for purposes of honest industry, unless upon the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest---stand ready, at all times, to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers and murderers, who call themselves governments, to be expended in shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and enslaved.
They lend their money in this manner, knowing that it is to be expended in murdering their fellow men, for simply seeking their liberty and their rights; knowing also that neither the interest nor the principal will ever be paid, except as it will be extorted under terror of the repetition of such murders as those for which the money lent is to be expended.
These money-lenders, the Rosthchilds, for example, say to themselves: If we lend a hundred millions sterling to the queen and parliament of England, it will enable them to murder twenty, fifty, or a hundred thousand people in England, Ireland, or India; and the terror inspired by such wholesale slaughter, will enable them to keep the whole people of those countries in subjection for twenty, or perhaps fifty, years to come; to control all their trade and industry; and to extort from them large amounts of money, under the name of taxes; and from the wealth thus extorted from them, they (the queen and parliament) can afford to pay us a higher rate of interest for our money than we can get in any other way. Or, if we lend this sum to the emperor of Austria, it will enable him to murder so many of his people as to strike terror into the rest, and thus enable him to keep them in subjection, and extort money from them, for twenty or fifty years to come. And they say the same in regard to the emperor of Russia, the king of Prussia, the emperor of France, or any other ruler, so called, who, in their judgment, will be able, by murdering a reasonable portion of his people, to keep the rest in subjection, and extort money from them, for a long time to come, to pay the interest and the principal of the money lent him.
And why are these men so ready to lend money for murdering their fellow men? Soley for this reason, viz., that such loans are considered better investments than loans for purposes of honest industry. They pay higher rates of interest; and it is less trouble to look after them. This is the whole matter.
The question of making these loans is, with these lenders, a mere question of pecuniary profit. They lend money to be expended in robbing, enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, solely because, on the whole, such loans pay better than any others. They are no respecters of persons, no superstitious fools, that reverence monarchs. They care no more for a king, or an emperor, than they do for a beggar, except as he is a better customer, and can pay them better interest for their money. If they doubt his ability to make his murders successful for maintaining his power, and thus extorting money from his people in future, they dismiss him unceremoniously as they would dismiss any other hopeless bankrupt, who should want to borrow money to save himself from open insolvency.
When these great lenders of blood-money, like the Rothschilds, have loaned vast sums in this way, for purposes of murder, to an emperor or a king, they sell out the bonds taken by them, in small amounts, to anybody, and everybody, who are disposed to buy them at satisfactory prices, to hold as investments. They (the Rothschilds) thus soon get back their money, with great profits; and are now ready to lend money in the same way again to any other robber and murderer, called an emperor or king, who, they think, is likely to be successful in his robberies and murders, and able to pay a good price for the money necessary to carry them on.
This business of lending blood-money is one of the most thoroughly sordid, cold-blooded, and criminal that was ever carried on, to any considerable extent, amongst human beings. It is like lending money to slave traders, or to common robbers and pirates, to be repaid out of their plunder. And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that ever lived.
When these emperors and kings, so-called, have obtained their loans, they proceed to hire and train immense numbers of professional murderers, called soldiers, and employ them in shooting down all who resist their demands for money. In fact, most of them keep large bodies of these murderers constantly in their service, as their only means of enforcing their extortions. There are now [1870], I think, four or five millions of these professional murderers constantly employed by the so-called sovereigns of Europe. The enslaved people are, of course, forced to support and pay all these murderers, as well as to submit to all the other extortions which these murderers are employed to enforce.
It is only in this way that most of the so-called governments of Europe are maintained. These so-called governments are in reality only great bands of robbers and murderers, organized, disciplined, and constantly on the alert. And the so-called sovereigns, in these different governments, are simply the heads, or chiefs, of different bands of robbers and murderers. And these heads or chiefs are dependent upon the lenders of blood-money for the means to carry on their robberies and murders. They could not sustain themselves a moment but for the loans made to them by these blood-money loan-mongers. And their first care is to maintain their credit with them; for they know their end is come, the instant their credit with them fails. Consequently the first proceeds of their extortions are scrupulously applied to the payment of the interest on their loans.
In addition to paying the interest on their bonds, they perhaps grant to the holders of them great monopolies in banking, like the Banks of England, of France, and of Vienna; with the agreement that these banks shall furnish money whenever, in sudden emergencies, it may be necessary to shoot down more of their people. Perhaps also, by means of tariffs on competing imports, they give great monopolies to certain branches of industry, in which these lenders of blood-money are engaged. They also, by unequal taxation, exempt wholly or partially the property of these loan-mongers, and throw corresponding burdens upon those who are too poor and weak to resist.
Thus it is evident that all these men, who call themselves by the high-sounding names of Emperors, Kings, Sovereigns, Monarchs, Most Christian Majesties, Most Catholic Majesties, High Mightinesses, Most Serene and Potent Princes, and the like, and who claim to rule "by the grace of God," by "Divine Right" -- that is, by special authority from Heaven---are intrinsically not only the merest miscreants and wretches, engaged solely in plundering, enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, but that they are also the merest hangers on, the servile, obsequious, fawning dependents and tools of these blood-money loan-mongers, on whom they rely for the means to carry on their crimes. These loan-mongers, like the Rothschilds, laugh in their sleeves, and say to themselves: These despicable creatures, who call themselves emperors, and kings, and majesties, and most serene and potent princes; who profess to wear crowns, and sit on thrones; who deck themselves with ribbons, and feathers, and jewels; and surround themselves with hired flatterers and lickspittles; and whom we suffer to strut around, and palm themselves off, upon fools and slaves, as sovereigns and lawgivers specially appointed by Almighty God; and to hold themselves out as the sole fountains of honors, and dignities, and wealth, and power---all these miscreants and imposters know that we make them, and use them; that in us they live, move, and have their being; that we require them (as the price of their positions) to take upon themselves all the labor, all the danger, and all the odium of all the crimes they commit for our profit; and that we will unmake them, strip them of their gewgaws, and send them out into the world as beggars, or give them over to the vengeance of the people they have enslaved, the moment they refuse to commit any crime we require of them, or to pay over to us such share of the proceeds of their robberies as we see fit to demand.

XIX.
Now, what is true in Europe, is substantially true in this country. The difference is the immaterial one, that, in this country, there is no visible, permanent head, or chief, of these robbers and murderers who call themselves "the government." That is to say, there is no one man, who calls himself the state, or even emperor, king, or sovereign; no one who claims that he and his children rule "by the Grace of God," by "Divine Right," or by special appointment from Heaven. There are only certain men, who call themselves presidents, senators, and representatives, and claim to be the authorized agents, for the time being, or for certain short periods, of all "the people of the United States"; but who can show no credentials, or powers of attorney, or any other open, authentic evidence that they are so; and who notoriously are not so; but are really only the agents of a secret band of robbers and murderers, whom they themselves do not know, and have no means of knowing, individually; but who, they trust, will openly or secretly, when the crisis comes, sustain them in all their usurpations and crimes.
What is important to be noticed is, that these so-called presidents, senators, and representatives, these pretended agents of all "the people of the United States," the moment their exactions meet with any formidable resistance from any portion of "the people" themselves, are obliged, like their co-robbers and murderers in Europe, to fly at once to the lenders of blood money, for the means to sustain their power. And they borrow their money on the same principle, and for the same purpose, viz., to be expended in shooting down all those "people of the United States"---their own constituents and principals, as they profess to call them---who resist the robberies and enslavements which these borrowers of the money are practising upon them. And they expect to repay the loans, if at all, only from the proceeds of the future robberies, which they anticipate it will be easy for them and their successors to perpetrate through a long series of years, upon their pretended principals, if they can but shoot down now some hundreds of thousands of them, and thus strike terror into the rest.
Perhaps the facts were never made more evident, in any country on the globe, than in our own, that these soulless blood-money loan-mongers are the real rulers; that they rule from the most sordid and mercenary motives; that the ostensible government, the presidents, senators, and representatives, so called, are merely their tools; and that no ideas of, or regard for, justice or liberty had anything to do in inducing them to lend their money for the war [i.e, the Civil War]. In proof of all this, look at the following facts.
Nearly a hundred years ago we professed to have got rid of all that religious superstition, inculcated by a servile and corrupt priesthood in Europe, that rulers, so called, derived their authority directly from Heaven; and that it was consequently a religious duty on the part of the people to obey them. We professed long ago to have learned that governments could rightfully exist only by the free will, and on the voluntary support, of those who might choose to sustain them. We all professed to have known long ago, that the only legitimate objects of government were the maintenance of liberty and justice equally for all. All this we had professed for nearly a hundred years. And we professed to look with pity and contempt upon those ignorant, superstitious, and enslaved peoples of Europe, who were so easily kept in subjection by the frauds and force of priests and kings.
Notwithstanding all this, that we had learned, and known, and professed, for nearly a century, these lenders of blood money had, for a long series of years previous to the war, been the willing accomplices of the slave-holders in perverting the government from the purposes of liberty and justice, to the greatest of crimes. They had been such accomplices for a purely pecuniary consideration, to wit, a control of the markets in the South; in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders themselves in industrial and commercial subjection to the manufacturers and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary considerations. But the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in the future -- that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain their industrial and commercial control over the South---that these Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the same, or greater, monopolies in the future. These---and not any love of liberty or justice---were the motives on which the money for the war was lent by the North. In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may.
On this principle, and from this motive, and not from any love of liberty, or justice, the money was lent in enormous amounts, and at enormous rates of interest. And it was only by means of these loans that the objects of the war were accomplished.
And now these lenders of blood-money demand their pay; and the government, so called, becomes their tool, their servile, slavish, villanous tool, to extort it from the labor of the enslaved people both of the North and South. It is to be extorted by every form of direct, and indirect, and unequal taxation. Not only the nominal debt and interest---enormous as the latter was---are to be paid in full; but these holders of the debt are to be paid still further---and perhaps doubly, triply, or quadruply paid---by such tariffs on imports as will enable our home manufacturers to realize enormous prices for their commodities; also by such monopolies in banking as will enable them to keep control of, and thus enslave and plunder, the industry and trade of the great body of the Northern people themselves. In short, the industrial and commercial slavery of the great body of the people, North and South, black and white, is the price which these lenders of blood money demand, and insist upon, and are determined to secure, in return for the money lent for the war.
This programme having been fully arranged and systematized, they put their sword into the hands of the chief murderer of the war, [undoubtedly a reference to General Grant, who had just become president] and charge him to carry their scheme into effect. And now he, speaking as their organ, says, "let us have peace."
The meaning of this is: Submit quietly to all the robbery and slavery wefs have arranged for you, and you can have "peace." But in case you resist, the same lenders of blood-money, who furnished the means to subdue the South, will furnish the means again to subdue you.
These are the terms on which alone this government, or, with few exceptions, any other, ever gives "peace" to its people.
The whole affair, on the part of those who furnished the money, has been, and now is, a deliberate scheme of robbery and murder; not merely to monopolize the markets of the South, but also to monopolize the currency, and thus control the industry and trade, and thus plunder and enslave the laborers, of both North and South. And Congress and the president are today the merest tools for these purposes. They are obliged to be, for they know that their own power, as rulers, so-called, is at an end, the moment their credit with the blood-money loan-mongers fails. They are like a bankrupt in the hands of an extortioner. They dare not say nay to any demand made upon them. And to hide at once, if possible, both their servility and crimes, they attempt to divert public attention, by crying out that they have "Abolished Slavery!" That they have "Saved the Country!" That they have "Preserved our Glorious Union!" and that, in now paying the "National Debt," as they call it (as if the people themselves, all of them who are to be taxed for its payment, had really and voluntarily joined in contracting it), they are simply "Maintaining the National Honor!"
By "maintaining the national honor," they mean simply that they themselves, open robbers and murderers, assume to be the nation, and will keep faith with those who lend them the money necessary to enable them to crush the great body of the people under their feet; and will faithfully appropriate, from the proceeds of their future robberies and murders, enough to pay all their loans, principal and interest.
The pretense that the "abolition of slavery" was either a motive or justification for the war, is a fraud of the same character with that of "maintaining the national honor." Who, but such usurpers, robbers, and murderers as they, ever established slavery? Or what government, except one resting upon the sword, like the one we now have, was ever capable of maintaining slavery? And why did these men abolish slavery? Not from any love of liberty in general---not as an act of justice to the black man himself, but only "as a war measure," and because they wanted his assistance, and that of his friends, in carrying on the war they had undertaken for maintaining and intensifying that political, commercial, and industrial slavery, to which they have subjected the great body of the people, both black and white. And yet these imposters now cry out that they have abolished the chattel slavery of the black man---although that was not the motive of the war---as if they thought they could thereby conceal, atone for, or justify that other slavery which they were fighting to perpetuate, and to render more rigorous and inexorable than it ever was before. There was no difference of principle---but only of degree---between the slavery they boast they have abolished, and the slavery they were fighting to preserve; for all restraints upon men's natural liberty, not necessary for the simple maintenance of justice, are of the nature of slavery, and differ from each other only in degree.
If their object had really been to abolish slavery, or maintain liberty or justice generally, they had only to say: All, whether white or black, who want the protection of this government, shall have it; and all who do not want it, will be left in peace, so long as they leave us in peace. Had they said this, slavery would necessarily have been abolished at once; the war would have been saved; and a thousand times nobler union than we have ever had would have been the result. It would have been a voluntary union of free men; such a union as will one day exist among all men, the world over, if the several nations, so called, shall ever get rid of the usurpers, robbers, and murderers, called governments, that now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.
Still another of the frauds of these men is, that they are now establishing, and that the war was designed to establish, "a government of consent." The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government of consent, is this---that it is one to which everybody must consent, or be shot. This idea was the dominant one on which the war was carried on; and it is the dominant one, now that we have got what is called "peace."
Their pretenses that they have "Saved the Country," and "Preserved our Glorious Union," are frauds like all the rest of their pretenses. By them they mean simply that they have subjugated, and maintained their power over, an unwilling people. This they call "Saving the Country"; as if an enslaved and subjugated people---or as if any people kept in subjection by the sword (as it is intended that all of us shall be hereafter)---could be said to have any country. This, too, they call "Preserving our Glorious Union"; as if there could be said to be any Union, glorious or inglorious, that was not voluntary. Or as if there could be said to be any union between masters and slaves; between those who conquer, and those who are subjugated.
All these cries of having "abolished slavery," of having "saved the country," of having "preserved the union," of establishing "a government of consent," and of "maintaining the national honor," are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats---so transparent that they ought to deceive no one -- when uttered as justifications for the war, or for the government that has suceeded the war, or for now compelling the people to pay the cost of the war, or for compelling anybody to support a government that he does not want.
The lesson taught by all these facts is this: As long as mankind continue to pay "national debts," so-called---that is, so long as they are such dupes and cowards as to pay for being cheated, plundered, enslaved, and murdered -- so long there will be enough to lend the money for those purposes; and with that money a plenty of tools, called soldiers, can be hired to keep them in subjection. But when they refuse any longer to pay for being thus cheated, plundered, enslaved, and murdered, they will cease to have cheats, and usurpers, and robbers, and murderers and blood-money loan-mongers for masters.

APPENDIX.
Inasmuch as the Constitution was never signed, nor agreed to, by anybody, as a contract, and therefore never bound anybody, and is now binding upon nobody; and is, moreover, such an one as no people can ever hereafter be expected to consent to, except as they may be forced to do so at the point of the bayonet, it is perhaps of no importance what its true legal meaning, as a contract, is. Nevertheless, the writer thinks it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize. He has heretofore written much, and could write much more, to prove that such is the truth. But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain---that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.

MORAL OF THE SOAP OPERA

“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” –Plato

LA NOVELA VICTORIA ES UNA MIERDA

2008-05-15T07:26:00.000-07:00

Victoria, la Novela de Telemundo protagonizado por Arturo Peniche y Victoria Ruffo es una mierda de primera categoria. Se trata de una Puta con Cincuenta Anos [mejor dicho a~nos] mandando a su Esposo de casi treinta anos [a~nos] p’al carajo por templar una puta casi veinte a~nos mas joven. La Puta Victoria comienza la Novela diciendo a su esposo: “Vete, Ella Esta Esperando”. Lo que sucede es que el Esposo frustrado no puede templar a la Puta Veintona y Victoria se convierte en una Puta Cincuentona templando un Peo Frustrado Treintona.

Al mismo tiempo, Victoria se reune con otras Putas Frustradas Cincuentona en el gran Experimento de templar a los Peos Frustrados con Treinta A~nos de Edad. El Peo Frustrado Treintona tiene sus problemas pues su Jefa [Otra Puta Treintona] quiere recibir la pinga del Peo Frustrado de Victoria mientras el hijo del Peo Frustrado [de Victoria] quiere mas a la Puta Treintona que a la Puta Victoria. Lo unico que vale la pena es poder ver a la actuacion de Diana Quijano. Diana Quijano es una actriz de primera categoria de teatro, y television que merece lo mejor que actuar en una novela de ultima categoria. Geraldine Bazan merece logros por su papel como hija desdichada y esposa frustrada de un borracho aunque no merece estar en esta novela que huele a masturbacion cerebral.

En los experimentos de puteria de Viejas de cinco decadas con peos frustrados de tres decadas, las criaturas pagan los platos rotos y Victoria logro un buen papel en destruir familias con su promocion de puteria de primera categoria. Dedico los peos y mierda que sale de mi culo a esa novela de puta como Victoria. Prefiero ver una obra de teatro, concierto de jazz, escribir articulos, escuchar las emisoras de onda corta y/o ordenador, y estar con mi esposa y hija en cosas positivas como en vez de ser torturado por mi esposa con la mierda llamada Victoria.