Personally id rather watch paint dry than the so called candidates debates, but some listeners insist they are important and one sent me an article that seems to have come out of congressman Ron Paul’s camp. It refers to the recent republican candidate debate, but the criticisms elucidated are equally applicable to the democrats. Both parties cheat in favor of their good old boys, and none of the leadership of either party want to change anything of significance. That’s why they were chosen as party leaders. You do understand this don’t you? That old saying " when the people lead, the leaders may follow" is never more true than when observing the shenanigans of our major political parties. It’s the candidates on the fringes, both on the stage and on the political spectrum who have the new ideas, and god forbid they get enuff publicity to actually have an affect on an election. And as far as any fringe candidate actually being nominated by their party, are you kidding? Do you and I have the slightest say in who is nominated? Nada. It’s a stacked deck, a charade. They hand pick the presidential candidates for us, stage a theatrical event called a presidential election, and then cheat to try to get their boys elected instead of the other parties scoundrels. If the united states ever had a real fair presidential election, the candidates would be people like dennis Kucinich, mike gravel, and ron paul. Real candidates with radical programs to improve the life of regular Americans. How radical is that? We would be voting on getting out of iraq, sending more armorments to Israel, and wether we want our govt to institute health care for everyone. Instead we get bogus candidates and bogus issues. I found parts of this article interesting as it indicates some of the dirty tricks used by he people who chose our candidates for us. From the article:
there is dissatisfaction with the seating arrangements and time allotted to the candidates – with the so-called "first-tier" candidates being placed in the middle of the debate platform and the "second tier" candidates placed on the out edges. Let me translate. First tier candidates spout the party line and intend to maintain things just as they are. More of the same but with a different name attached. 2^nd tier candidates are those who actually want to change something rather than simply get themselves elected. Back to the article.
Observers close to the campaign who timed the various candidates’ contribution claim that second tier candidates such as Ron Paul received only half as much time to speak as the "first tier" candidates.
"If they are going to give some candidates more air time than others, then they should say so," one source pointed out. "But to maintain that these debates are intended to provide an across-the-board exchange of ideas fairly and openly, and then to take steps to minimize some viewpoints and candidates – that’s morally wrong." Wow, what a concept: morality. Like I said, I didn’t watch this fiasco, but if indeed some candidates got twice the air time as others, why hasn’t mainstream media mentioned that fact? Or is a lack of basic fairness no longer worth reporting?
What seems to have many Internet supporters of Ron Paul even more upset than the lack of air time is CNN’s treatment of candidate feedback after the debate. viewers have claimed that CNN put up a "visual’ score card after the debate but then promptly pulled it,. At the time it was pulled, viewers say that it showed Ron Paul winning the debate by a significant majority

This from laura lovelles column in gv union: According to the March issue of Lake of the pines News, resident goose populations can double every five years. With the human birth rate in LOP lagging sadly behind, our official language at lake of the pines may soon be honk-honk. This is a complicated issue, and one which needs to be addressed by the soon-to-be-elected new board members.

Next item: this from moveon.org: In the next few weeks, Congress could vote to DOUBLE the amount of greenhouse gases America produces from our cars and planes.¹

It sounds crazy. But Congress is rushing through a package that could lock us into liquid coal as our country's new energy source for transportation. For every mile driven, coal-based fuels produce as much as twice as many greenhouse gases as petroleum.² That means even a Prius would drive like a Hummer.

The coal industry has been lobbying for this break for years, and many in Congress don't understand the facts.

The legislation would take billions in taxpayer dollars to build up to 10 more dirty coal plants, provide taxpayer subsidies when the fuel can't compete on the open market, and guarantee that the government will buy this fuel no matter what.³

The industry promises to clean up after itself, but "clean coal" doesn't exist yet—it's pure fiction. While some technology is being tested to capture the greenhouse gas before it goes into the air, no one knows if it will work. But the plants will be built regardless.

To make matters worse, the financial outlook on this technology is shaky, which means taxpayers could be left holding the bag. According to an MIT study, we could spend $70 billion to replace just 10 percent of current gasoline use.⁴ And by the time we bring the technology to market, it is likely that cheaper, cleaner fuels will be available for less money.  

An OpEd in the Lexington Herald-Leader, in the heart of coal country, put it this way:

If you want to weigh in on either side of this issue, you can go to the web site moveon.org

Next item: a company is producing 3 tee shirt designs feature names of 3,155 fallen U.S. troops. Texas, Arizona, Oklahoma and Louisiana have outlawed their shirts. Florida is trying to ban them. An amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that passed in the House in Maywould ban their shirts nationwide. Ah, freedom of expression, alas we hardly knew yee. Say, what was it our troops are fighting and dying for in the sands of araby? In my fervor to support the troops, I think I forgot what freedoms they are defending. Evidentially not ours.

Next item: Well, here is another one of those stories that is either funny, ludicrous, or tragic, depending on how macabre your sense of humor happens to be.  The lawyers representing the families of four American Blackwater contractors killed in Fallujah make the case that the company's executives are suing the families to keep them quiet and to avoid any accountability.

The article is lengthy, so I wont read it. However, The list of high priced and very well connected lawyers blackwater has hired is impressive. Quoted from the article: Blackwater quickly adapted its battlefield tactics to the courtroom. It initially hired Fred F. Fielding, who is currently counsel to the President of the United States. It then hired Joseph E. Schmitz as its in-house counsel, who was formerly the Inspector General at the Pentagon. More recently, Blackwater employed Kenneth Starr, famed prosecutor in the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky scandal, to oppose the families. To add additional muscle, Blackwater hired Cofer Black, who was the Director of the CIA Counter- Terrorist Center. That’s quite a collection of high powered legal talent. It sort of makes the oj defense team look like rank amateurs.

After filing its suit against the dead men's estates, Blackwater demanded that its claim and the families' existing lawsuit be handled in a private arbitration. By suing the families in arbitration, Blackwater has attempted to move the examination of blackwaters wrongful conduct outside of the eye of the public and away from a jury. This comes at the same time when Congress is investigating Blackwater.

So, for all you out there that are considering joining a mercenary army like blackwater and making far more money than you can in the regular military, you might want to consider some of the side issues, like how they treat your families after you fail to make it back from a mission. Traveling to exotic foreign lands in order to kill ragheads you’ve never met can be fun and exciting, but it does have consequences, and don’t expect your employers to have your back. The difficult thing is that by all reports, the us military doesn’t treat its returning military much better. You know, I can sympathize with our testestrone filled youth, who, after being raised on a steady diet of tv violence and phony patriotism, just want to go out and kill bad guys for god and country, and now cant decide where the best career opportunities lie. It all sounds pretty good until some spoil sports remind you of that bridge in fallujah.

Next item: on the issue of net neutrality: savetheinternet.com says:Net Neutrality is essential to free speech, equal opportunity and economic innovation in America. Since the FCC removed this basic protection
in 2005, the top executives of phone and cable companies have stated their intention to become the Internet's gatekeepers and to discriminate against Web sites that don't pay their added tolls. This fundamental change would end the open Internet as we know it. It would damage my ability to connect with others, share information and participate in our 21st century democracy and economy. The FCC must ensure that broadband providers do not block, interfere with or discriminate against any lawful Internet traffic based on its ownership, source or destination. Comments to FCC are due by June 15, which is in 2 days. Here's an easy way to make your comment on this issue directly to the FCC. Well, commenting may be direct and easy but reading the link on air is anything but easy. I wont even try it. but you will find it on my web site, http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi

Next item: this is from whitney streibers web site: his wife, Anne Strieber has a comment on the immigration issue. "In Texas and California, ranchers and farmers are utterly dependent on illegal workers from Mexico—in fact, they cannot survive without them. When you drive down a dusty road to visit a working ranch in Texas, you'll often notice pairs of jeans arranged on the fence posts. These are a signal to Mexicans who have succeeded in making the dangerous border crossing that workers are wanted there. Everybody knows this, including the sheriff, and probably the local immigration officers as well. But they also know that if they enforce the law, their neighbors will starve."

Next item: this mornings bbc news reports that the sectarian violence in iraq, which began several years ago with the bombing of the holiest mosque in iraq, escalated yesterday with the bombing of 2 more mosques, these being mosques of the other faction. One has to ask who benefits most from this escalating factional violence in iraq, and its hard to avoid the conclusion that the Americans occupiers benefit the most. The more the Iraqis fight one another, the less time and energy they have for killing the occupiers, AND, the more reason for the US to continue its occupation, at the request of the desperate puppet govt it set up in iraq. so, one must ask, who really bombed the mosques?

Next item; this mornings kvmr morning news featured a speech made by Michael moore at last nites screening of his new film exposing the absurdity that is health insurance in the us. Moores speech was very powerful, very compelling. Moores key point was that there is no reason whatsoever for profit to be a part of health care. Ever. Conservatives love to claim that govt cant do anything right, and only private enterprise can give you what you want and need. So a major question is: Can the govt provide service for value? Moore offers the examples that your police and fire depts. are govt services. Your postal service is govt supported. We have one of the best and cheapest postal services in the world. No cop or fireman has to think about his depts. profits when coming to your aid. We can find many faults with our law enforcement agencies but at least they don’t withhold services if they think they cant make a profit from providing those services. The question becomes: were any calif legislators listening to moore, and how many have the cojones to do something about it. The answer is predictable. We the people will have to pass an inititive giving us govt funded health insurance. Our elected officials are too beholden to the medicine for profit industries. The health care industry is gearing up for a major battle over this one. Are we? Don’t be sucked into a conservative vs liberal argument. We all deserve to be free from worry about paying for health care. We all deserve to be free from catastrophic health care bills. In this, the greatest most powerful country on earth, you deserve this. What are you willing to do to get what you deserve?

Next item: