We should have a choice in where our money goes. Period.
Obviously in the world we don’t have a choice most times, because the government either takes your money without asking through taxation (which is theft, by the way), or throws you in jail for not involuntarily being opted in.
The same goes for health care. I should choose where my money goes. That can be handled by what employer I work for, or what insurance company I patronize. I might agree, or not agree, with certain aspects of health care, and some parts I might never utilize as a man, or as just who I am. Should I have to pay for those, involuntarily?
Obamacare, which is my main sticking point, takes away your choices, should you choose to opt-in. The other options? Get your own insurance, which is unreasonable for someone with a lower income because it’s so insanely high, or not get insurance at all, then by fined by Obamacare for not having insurance.
Is that freedom, for anyone? “You will have health care, or else we’ll take away parts of your income which goes toward you taking care of yourself on a daily basis.” The best way to be pro-choice AND pro-life is to let people decide exactly what they want to be part of, and not to penalize them if they don’t do something you agree with. I know that’s a fucking stretch in today’s world, but it’s a real goal, across the board.
The beauty of a fully voluntary society is that you simply have choices in what you do and where you put your energy, time, money, and self. Today, you don’t always have that choice. That bothers me. There’s no real healthy (!) competition in the health care and insurance industry. The differences in premiums, most times, are little to none. There’s no free market, and ease of choice right now. That bothers me. There’s nothing voluntary about it, unless you simply choose to not participate in getting insurance.
But we see where that gets ya.
Appearing on the latest episode of Yahoo News’ Katie Couric World 3.0, rapperLupe Fiascospoke out about the fallout from his controversial 2011 comments calling PresidentBarack Obamaa “terrorist.”
“I was immediately blackballed,” Fiasco told Couric. “I lost a lot of friends… Board members of my foundation [Lupe Fiasco Foundation] stepped down. I lost a lot of sponsorships. I had people threaten me.”
He still maintains his criticism of Obama, telling Couric: “My black president is Nelson Mandela. Africa has always had black presidents so, my scale, being a black president isn’t anything new. It’s new to America, yes, but I’m a global citizen, I look around the world. So my bar is someone who really fought for peace. Not someone who’s continuing wars around the world.”
Asked whether he regrets the comments, Fiasco flatly said: “No.”
Fiasco, bornWasalu Muhammad Jaco, is perhaps best known for his debut albumLupe Fiasco’s Food & Liquorwhich solidified his reputation for mixing accessible hip-hop production with provocative lyrics about Islam, terrorism, racism, and poverty. His outspoken nature led to controversy when he told CBS that Obama is the “biggest terrorist” for perpetuating U.S. foreign policies that radicalize and create more terrorists abroad.
While he has been a vocal critic of the current president, Fiasco told Couric he also points the finger at Obama’s predecessor: “We don’t mind pointing a finger at [George W. Bush],” he said, “but when we get [Obama] who, unfortunately, has to carry on some of those same policies, but he’s a great guy, it becomes a weird place for people to kind of critique.”
I’ve had people defriend me on Tumblr, Facebook, and in real life because of saying something against the president, and “not at least respecting the office”. Bitch, what?! Bush and Obama are exactly the same, and if anything Obama’s even worse. Now I know black folks are gonna hate me for it, call me racist, try to throw Bush up in my face (as if it’s a contest or something), or dismiss me, but if they’re blinded by the black, then they have their reward. That goes for anyone blindly following potus just because he’s potus. In a few years, we’ll all be called chauvinists or misogynistic because we bash on Hillary, if she’s put in power.
Why people are more faithful to some government who doesn’t give a shit aobut them, than their own friends and family who do is not only very telling, but very, very sad.
The plus is that the friends I’ve made because of being an anarchist more than make up for the sheep that are still in the herd. I’ve long supported Lupe Fiasco’s truth telling. Others have not.
Fuck Barack Obama. Fuck George Bush. Fuck whatever other slag they put in there. And fuck you for supporting them.
DO YOU GET IT YET?! The government is NOT YOUR FRIEND. The big brother almighty murderer-in-chief barry obama is NOT YOUR FRIEND. I don’t give a shit if he’s the first black whatever (he ain’t all black anyway). He’s a goddamn liar.
And you wonder why I’m an anarchist? You ask me why I’ve purposely never gotten a vaccine shot as an adult in my life? Read on…
(NaturalNews) The White House has officially admitted that fake vaccination programs have been used by the United States as a cover for covertly stealing DNA samples from the public as part of the so-called “war on terror.” The aim of the scheme, carried out in the Middle East, was to use DNA analysis to identify suspected terrorists who would then be targeted to be killed by the United States.
As the New York Times reported in 2011, “In the months before Osama bin Laden was killed, the Central Intelligence Agency ran a phony vaccination program in Abbottabad, Pakistan, as a ruse to obtain DNA evidence from members of Bin Laden’s family thought to be holed up in an expansive compound there.” (1)
"CIA agents recruited a senior Pakistani doctor to organize the vaccine drive in Abbottabad, even starting the "project" in a poorer part of town to make it look more authentic," reports The Guardian (2).
This scheme, first unveiled in 2011, is the first time in history that the U.S. government has been forced to admit using a “public health” activity to secretly and illegally harvest DNA from the public in an attempt to assassinate one individual.
How exactly could a vaccination program harvest DNA from people? It’s a simple matter, really. As The Guardian explains, “nurses could have been trained to withdraw some blood in the needle after administrating the drug.”
White House says it will stop using fake vaccination programs to gather DNA and kill people
Now the White House says it will no longer use fake vaccination campaigns as a tactic in the “war on terror.” And the people of the world are supposed to automatically trust this promise even though it comes from the exact same regime that ran the deceptive vaccination operation in the first place.
It’s almost as if the White House is saying, “Yeah, we ran a fake vaccination op; we harvested the DNA of your children; we lied to your people under the cover of public health and we got caught… but NOW you can trust us! We promise!”
This seemingly ludicrous promise just surfaced this week as part of a White House announcement that the United States would “not use vaccination programs as cover for spy operations,” according to Yahoo News. (3)
The White House is concerned that because of the CIA’s use of fake vaccination programs in the past, people in the Middle East no longer trust vaccines. (Gasp! Imagine that!) This has nearly the entire medical establishment freaked out, terrified that somebody somewhere might say “No!” to vaccines and thereby destroy the entire human civilization with polio. Click here to read my recent story on W.H.O. fear mongering and hysterics surrounding the fabricated polio “global health emergency.”
According to Yahoo News, White House anti-terrorism advisor Lisa Monaco has now relayed this new claim to the deans of 13 public health schools in the United States. She reportedly added, “the agency will not seek to obtain or exploit DNA or other genetic material acquired through such programs,” once again confirming the CIA had been using fake vaccination programs to acquire DNA samples in order to track down human targets for termination.
All this validates the true description that vaccines have been used as weapons of war against individuals the United States considers to be its enemies.
I remember reporting on this several years ago and being called a “conspiracy theorist” for doing so. Yet once again, the facts have emerged that proved us correct in being intelligent conspiracy analysts who investigate deception in the world.
As I’ve since written, anyone who believes there are no such thing as conspiracies is mentally retarded. The White House, in fact, is openly admitted it ran a “vaccine conspiracy” as a tactic of warfare. (A “conspiracy” merely consists of two or more people plotting to deceive others. This fake vaccination scheme was, by definition, an elaborate conspiracy.)
Pakistan and the WHO’s polio fearmongering
But now the backlash against the fake immunization scheme has U.S. officials in a panic. They now realize they’ve discredited all trust in western vaccines. After all, if the White House now admits using fake vaccination ops to coverly gather DNA evidence, what’s to stop the U.S. from using fake vaccination programs to accomplish other nefarious things like injecting people with stealth cancer viruses?
Oops, that already happened. It happened right here in the United States, in fact, when 98 million Americans were found to have been injected with polio vaccines contaminated with cancer-causing viruses. In order to make sure no one learned about this deadly vaccine snafu, the CDC quietly removed all accounts of this history from its website.
To anyone with half a brain still functioning, however, it’s crystal clear that vaccines have already been used as weapons of war by the United States. This is openly admitted now by the White House along with a promise that “we won’t do it again.”
This is the same White House that promised nationwide GMO labeling, closing down secret military prisons and balancing the federal budget, by the way. In the category of “promises kept,” the present-day White House has achieved virtually nothing.
I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly Americans is to go around the world saying ‘we do it this way, so should you’.
I just don’t think it’s the role of the United States to walk into a country and say ‘we do it this way, so should you’.
If we’re an arrogant nation, they’ll resent us. If we’re a humble nation, but strong, they’ll welcome us."
George Bush, 2000 presidential debates with Al Gore.
Bet y’all forgot that George Bush. Apparently so did George Bush. If anything it shows the sheer hypocrisy of what anyone will say to get into office.
I told you. WE told you. But you chose to ignore the truth about the afro-messiah.
WASHINGTON — Facing the potential defeat of an appeals court nominee, the Obama administration decided Tuesday to publicly release much of a classified memo written by the nominee that signed off on the targeted killing an American accused of being a terrorist.
The solicitor general, Donald B. Verrilli Jr., made the call to release the secret memo — and not appeal a court order requiring its disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act — and informed Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. of his decision this week, according to two administration officials.
The White House was informed Tuesday. But the memo will not be released right away because officials said they needed time to redact it and to prepare an appeal asking the court not to reveal classified sections of afederal appeals court ruling last month requiring that most of the memo be made public.
The New York Times was a plaintiff in the case, and a parallel case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ruling told the government precisely which sections of the memo to release and which to redact.
The memo was written by David J. Barron, a Harvard Law professor and former acting chief of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, who is Mr. Obama’s choice to fill a vacancy on the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston.
As a Justice Department lawyer, Mr. Barron wrote two memos concluding that it would be lawful to kill Anwar al-Awlaki, a United States citizen living in Yemen, based on intelligence agencies’ conclusion that he was a senior operational terrorist plotting attacks against the United States and that his capture was not feasible. The lawsuit focused on the second and longer of those memos. Mr. Awlaki was killed by an American drone strike in September 2011.
Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, had promised to slow down Mr. Barron’s confirmation if the administration did not allow senators to view all of Mr. Barron’s memos or release redacted versions to the public.
The Senate was expected to take a procedural vote on Mr. Barron’s nomination on Wednesday, with a final confirmation vote tentatively scheduled for Thursday. Libertarian-leaning senators in both parties had expressed reservations about the nomination, and some conservatives also argued that he was too liberal on other issues.
A spokesman for Mr. Paul said the senator would still take the Senate floor on Wednesday for a filibuster-style protest of Mr. Barron’s nomination. In a statement released Tuesday night, Mr. Paul said, “There is no legal precedent for killing American citizens not directly involved in combat and any nominee who rubber stamps and grants such power to a president is not worthy of being placed one step away from the Supreme Court.”
Last year, Mr. Paul used the nomination of John O. Brennan to lead the Central Intelligence Agency to stage a nearly 13-hour filibuster. In that case, he was protesting the administration’s refusal to rule out the use of drone strikes on American soil in “extraordinary circumstances,” like the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The White House is hoping that its promise to release a redacted version of the main Awlaki memo may help Mr. Barron secure the 51 Democratic votes he needs to secure confirmation.
Senator Mark Udall, Democrat of Colorado, who is locked in a close re-election fight, had said he could not support the nomination if the White House did not release some of his legal opinions. After the administration’s announcement on Tuesday, he said he was “now able to support the nomination of David Barron.”UE READING THE MAIN STORY
This is a welcome development for government transparency and affirms that although the government does have the right to keep national security secrets, it does not get to have secret law,” Mr. Udall said. Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, called the decision “a very constructive step.”
Jameel Jaffer, an A.C.L.U. lawyer, said, “The government claims authority to carry out targeted killings of Americans deemed to threaten national security — the public surely has a right to know the breadth of the authority the government is claiming as well as the legal basis for that authority.”
“We’re hopeful that the decision to release the memo signals a broader shift in the government’s approach to transparency about this program,” he said.