Debate Politics Forums - Blogs

Here is SEM!!

hour32drama — Tue, 21 May 2013 06:43:16 GMT

Talking about strategy for marketing for any entrepreneurship has a lot to do with its achievement or failure. It is common that, the nicest products can nosedive and the lesser products can have awsome results just because of a great marketing campaign. On the web, there are millions of people doing business by selling a host of products. In this digital era, to be successful in any business it is vital to have a web presence. You need the best marketing strategies to market your goods really well on the web. Using affordable search engine marketing is the best way to go about the marketing strategy on the web.
Every website works with a a set budget. Not expensive search engine (SEO) marketing is the best resource to go about the entire thing. If you have a web presence for your business, then you must make all efforts to tell everyone all about your site. How can anyone know if you do not tell them something about your business and its website? For promoting your site on the web, you can try search engine optimization. In search engine marketing you can commence pay per click advertising, affiliate marketing programs, Internet marketing and content optimization and management.
There are some ethical and unethical methods that can be used for promotion. It is up to you to decide what measures you want to adopt for popularizing your business. It all boils down to adopting the most effective search engine marketing strategy. Online visitors use the help of search engines to find anything online. So you must realize how important it is for your site to rank at the top of major search engines.
Before you actually go about starting any business on the web, you must conduct research properly. Conducting research means that you decide on a budget, decide on the marketing strategy and also find out who the target audience of your product it. Also through the research, find out what marketing strategy is working and what is not working. While choosing your marketing strategy, keep in mind the choice and preference of your target audience. What is the use of any search engine marketing strategy if you are not able to reach out to your prospective clients?
Having lots of optimized and relevant content is one affordable search engine marketing strategy that can be very easily adopted and implemented by any business. Content management is the process through which you can add new optimized content to your site. It is a fact that no one will come to see your site, if they do not get what they are looking for in adequate quantity. So make it a point to regularly add new features, pictures and fresh content to your site.
Undertaking affordable search engine marketing helps your business in two ways. First of all you can afford the marketing strategy within your limited budget. Secondly you adopted those marketing strategies that are bound to bring positive results to your business. There is a huge competition on the web and adopting affordable search engine marketing is the best way of going about it and coming out on top.
Visit the digital store to learn more.

Fake Boston House Raid Video Spreads Fear of Martial Law

ModerateGOP — Thu, 16 May 2013 01:56:36 GMT

The conspiracies won�t stop. Boston is now under martial law! Thanks to one video on YouTube that shows a police raid, with the title: Police perform house-to-house raids in Watertown MA ripping innocent families from their homes. The video in question has received over 1 Million hits on YouTube and also advertises a Facebook page called PoliceStateUSA. Yeah, that�s not questionable at all. What agenda do you suppose that is pushing?

Various Fear mongers say: It has begun. Ironically in a cult-like groupthink sort of way that is usually the standard for paulbots and obamabots! Watchers of Youtube beware. There is no reason for you to trust this video. There is no reason for you to trust the uploader. There is no reason for you to trust the title of the video and that it describes what is in fact going on. Infowars.com has promoted this video and other �interviews� about people claiming that they were abused by the cops in Boston during the so-called city wide lockdown. There is definitely no reason for you to trust ANYTHING that is on the Inforwars.com website!!!! They may seem sweet and innocent to the na�ve paulbots, but beware, they are also pushing their own agenda. What is it?

That agenda is fear! Headline making fear. Yes, they whine about the Mainstream media, that that is all that they do. The Mainstream media they claim brainwashes you and forces you to agree with them. Well guess what hypocrites? You are doing the same exact thing!!!

From hypocrisy-now.com

Fake Boston Youtube Video

A Norwegian ..."lawyer" (?) against the Luxembourg banking system

Sannlig — Tue, 14 May 2013 15:53:13 GMT

Mr. Herman Berge was condemned for having "manipulated" an elderly couple in paying him over 10 million Norwegian Crowns (abt. 1,2 million Euro), but he moved to Luxembourg during the legal proceedings, so the funds - notwithstanding Norwegian Court sentences, were never paid back. Mr. Berge applied for permanent residence in Luxembourg and invested his (or - most probably - his ...clients') money in real estate and others. Berge evidently lost money (like everybody else in those years!) in the investments he made, but claimed he had been "cheated" by his bank (would it be likely ?). In the meantime Norwegian Revenue Service knocked on his door, and other creditors (his own lawyer among others...) started lining up. It appears like Berge stopped payments on his house mortgage, and the bank simply went through with a forced sale. Herman Berge's articles against Luxembourg bank system should definitely be seen in a wider perspective to be correctly interpreted....

Corrections...about a Norwegian ..."lawyer".

Sannlig — Tue, 14 May 2013 15:29:09 GMT

Herman Berge has been presented as a Norwegian "lawyer" that "solved" a large private settlement case with the Norwegian State, as well as various case in the Human Rights Court in Strasbourg, for an elderly Norwegian couple. I would definitely suggest to read the information given in www.ameliariis.com.
Mr. H. Berge, although having studied law in Oslo, does not seem to have ever achieved his status as "lawyer", nor has he ever conducted the cases he claimed to have. On the contrary, Norwegian Courts seem to have condemned him for what appears like a fraudolent behavior against his former clients.

A new 'Genocide' and the evolution of a 'Lady Hitler' in Bangladesh

italiablue — Sat, 11 May 2013 01:09:56 GMT

On the night of 6th May 2013, the allied government forces attacked the sleeping protesters who earlier gathered around the Shapla Chattar in Dhaka to protest anti-Islam activities of some young bloggers.

Hours before the attack, the electricity supply was cut down, and the media men were removed. The allied forces comprising of the Police, RAB and BGB attacked on the innocent civilians who were sleeping around the Shapla Chattar after their protest during the day. There were indiscriminate shooting killing more than a thousand lives, as the eye witnesses assume. Many have sees dozens of trucks of dead bodies being carried away by the government forces in order to dispose of them!

From the Book of Amadeus

Amadeus — Wed, 08 May 2013 02:14:12 GMT

1. Always be thankful that you live in a liberal democracy rather than a conservative theocracy. Looking to choose an ideology? Start there.

2. The gun enthusiast�s solution to gun violence? Give everyone a gun, and be a faster draw than the bad guy. Also hope the bad guy isn�t wearing body armour.

3. Don�t delude yourself into thinking you�re an unbiased moderate if you agree with partisan hacks 95% of the time. You�re not fooling anyone.

4. An extreme view is not inherently irrational. Unless it is. Then it is extremely irrational. Or extremely immoral, as the case may be.

The definition of terrorism, is the United States a terrorist state?

Xslave — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 10:13:42 GMT

according to the FBI terrorism is defined as:

Definitions

There is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as �the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives� (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization. For the purpose of this report, the FBI will use the following definitions:

International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping. International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum. (FBI — Terrorism 2002/2005)

so the bombing of Pakistani citizens constitute a terrorist act?

While the European Union defines Terrorism as:

The framework decision harmonises the definition of terrorist offences in all EU countries by introducing a specific and common definition. Its concept of terrorism is a combination of two elements:

an objective element, as it refers to a list of instances of serious criminal conduct (murder, bodily injuries, hostage taking, extortion, fabrication of weapons, committing attacks, threatening to commit any of the above, etc.);
a subjective element, as these acts are deemed to be terrorist offences when committed with the aim of seriously intimidating a population, unduly compelling a government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation (Terrorist offences)

The Bush administration threatened to bomb Pakistan "back to the stone age" after the September 11 attacks if the country did not cooperate with America's war on Afghanistan (Bush threatened to bomb Pakistan, says Musharraf | World news | The Guardian)

ASUS Sucks!

Middleground — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:32:36 GMT

If you're thinking about buying an ASUS product, I implore you to think again.

Last October, my brother and I bought an ASUS table for my mother on her birthday. We went to Best Buy with the idea of getting her a Samsung or ipad, but the salesperson insisted that we look at the ASUS Transformer tablet. It seemed great, and, according to the sales clerk, was the best tablet on the market. Furthermore, it was cheaper than the other brands, so we were pleased walking out of the store!

The euphoria didn�t last long however. Not long after my mom got it, a rather large spidery cracked formed on the top left-hand side of the tablet. My mother claimed that it happened from the pressure of her thumb when pulling it out the recharger. For a few weeks, she kept quiet about it out of embarrassment, as she felt she was at fault.
When she finally told me, I though it peculiar that it cracked so easily. I have an ipad2 that ended up being none worse for wear after accidentally dropping it a few times. I can image that at some point or another, most people will experience some form of accident, especially considering that these tablets are fairly small and light. So, in essence, one would think that most companies would develop tablets that are fairly strong and durable. In fact, ASUS boasts that their screens are made with Corning Gorilla Glass. After viewing the promotional youtube video of this product (How tough is Corning� Gorilla� Glass 2? Corning puts it to the test. - YouTube), one is left with the impression that even Superman would have problems shattering the stuff. But alas, there we were with a useless, almost new, broken-screened tablet.

After doing some searching about the product on the internet, I felt a glimmer of hope that we could get the product repaired at no cost. See, according to numerous people on various sites, it appears that there was defect in the tablet, specifically in serial numbers which completely fell in line with the one purchased for my mother. Seems the cracks always formed in the top left-hand side of the defective tablets. So playing that new found angle, I contacted the company with strong hopes.

I was advised to fill out a form describing the damage and to package it up and mail it to a repair office in Texas. I was told that they would determine how the damage was done and get back to me. So I placed the tablet in its original box, wrapped it in bubble wrap, and place it in a much bigger box filled with Styrofoam peanuts. Cost for shipping? $30. Steep but worth it, I naively thought.

Three weeks pass and I heard nothing. Zip. Nada. Then, in the middle of February, while on vacation on London, I received an email from an ASUS repair department in �drumroll please� Markham, Ontario. WTH? According to their �experts,� it turns out the cracked glass was my mother�s fault. To make matters worse, there was a problem with the casing too. I don�t remember that issue, so I asked for reference photos as well as an answer to why I was dealing with someone less than 500 kms away instead of Texas, where the tablet was originally shipped. Aside from an apology for the shipping mistake, this is what I got:

Photo #1

Huh? That does not look familiar at all.

Photo #2

WTF? Now I know for sure this is wrong. Did they get my mom�s tablet mixed up with another?

Photo #3

I guess not, as I do recognize this, though the damage looks worse. Jeepers, what in the heck happened to it???

I was then told I had 48 hours to inform them what I wanted done. I had to wait almost a month, big deal, but golly-geez-darn, a big deadline was slapped on little ole me! Being in London, with another 5 days to go, I was put in a pickle to say the least. Luckily, because of the extra damage (that sounds kind of weird, doesn�t it?), they decided to give me some extra time and wait until I got home. �How very kind,� I sarcastically muttered to myself.
I was hoping I had been careful enough to have taken some photos of the tablet before sending (I honestly could not remember). Unfortunately, I did not. I searched my camera and computer valiantly, to no avail. I did, however, have a copy of the write-up (a description of the damage, in my words) that I had included in the sent original package. Nowhere did I mention the damage to the bottom right-hand side.

�How did it happen?� I thought to myself.

The way I had packaged the box in the original delivery, there was no way any further damage happened on its way to Texas. Even if the UPS guys decided to use it as a football and spike it after every touchdown, that tablet was going to be safe from further harm. So, it either happened at the Texas office, when it was re-shipped to Markham, or, in Markham.

When I brought it up to the customer representative in Markham when I got back to Canadian soil, she claimed she didn�t know anything about the extra damage. She then abruptly asked me if I was willing to go ahead with the almost $300 repair cost. I asked if they were willing to take responsibility for at least half of the damage (because of the defect, I was hoping for all, but at that point, I was willing to negotiate). She said she�d talk to her manager.

She got back to me the next day and said they were willing to knock off $7, the cost of the new casing. What a joke. So I told them I was not happy and extremely unhappy with the way everything was handled.

�Ship it back to me, unrepaired,� I told her.

So now, I have this useless tablet still sitting in the packaging. It was like I took $450 bucks and flushed it down a toilet. After speaking to a few IT people at work, they opined that ASUS has traditionally made substandard products. Sigh� I wish I would have consulted with them beforehand, but at least I know now to never buy any of their products again. And I will make damn sure my family/friends/colleagues know too.

Equal Marriage Rights

digsbe — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:47:58 GMT

In lieu of all the avatars floating around depicting pro-SSM and declaring it a right I've decided to make my own to represent that states have the right to define marriage and it's voters equal right to have their opinion on the issue put into law. The purple background is a blend of red and blue, representing the red and blue states and their view on the issue. The blue bar represents a male and the pink bar represents a female behind a background that suggests either viewpoint is legal, valid and should not be infringed upon. It is my opinion that it should remain legal for a state to uphold traditional marriage or for a state to redefine marriage to include same sex relationships. Same sex marriage is a states' rights issue and should remain that way. I do not believe that it is a violation of Constitutional rights or illegal discrimination for a state to uphold the traditional definition of marriage that has been the default in America for hundreds of years or that they should be forced to redefine marriage to include same sex relationships. Likewise, states should also be allowed to redefine marriage to include same sex marriage.

I personally support SSM at the state level, but I also respect the rights of others and their right to vote and amend state constitutions that legally uphold traditional marriage or redefine it to include SSM. I support equal rights, Democracy and the will of the states to freely set marriage policy. DOMA should be ruled unconstitutional because it infringes upon the rights of voters and states that have redefined marriage to include same sex relationships. Likewise, state constitutional amendments upholding traditional marriage should also be allowed to remain nor should those states be forced to honor same sex marriages performed in states or nations where it is legal unless the state chooses to do so.

Is Government Immoral?: Stefan Molyneux vs Tom Willcutts

Mr. Invisible — Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:19:59 GMT

A tale of Ecofarm

Jredbaron96 — Thu, 21 Mar 2013 12:13:00 GMT

As we all know, ecofarm came into existence in the 3rd planetary alignment of the the Milky Way Galaxy. The comet transporting Ecofarm all the way from the Andromeda Galaxy soon descended to Earth, where it broke up in the upper atmosphere. From the crumbling rock, ice and dirt, a small basket, with a green balloon attached to slow it's descent, made it's way down to Earth. As it landed in Kingston, USA, the basket was greeted by a hear of Elephants. (Don't ask me how a herd of Elephants got into Kingston, just-just shut up, okay?) From birth, Ecofarm had an innate love for ecology, which he quickly learned all he could.

After moving to Miami, Ecofarm took up crime fighting, becoming known as the Green Farmer (Kick-ass name, eh?). After traveling across the world, earning degrees in ecology-related fields, fighting crime, rescuing Chelsea Clinton from a group of confused Bulgarians, Ecofarm then moved to Keyna. From there, he became a simple farmer. But every now and then, duty would call, and he'd take up his old cape and charge out into the night, to fight crime once more.

That's all I could think up in five minutes.

Legitimate Politics Vs Lunatic Politics

crissamartin — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 04:51:26 GMT

Gary Kasparov and Bobbie Fischer were both former chess champions who got involved in politics, but in very different ways. Whereas Kasparov, as a leader of Russia's pro-democracy opposition, became involved in politics in a credible way, Fischer became involved in politics in a lunatic way, sending a letter to Osama Bin Laden and claiming that America was run by "hook-nosed Jews." This brings to bear another subject: Where is the line drawn between credible politics and lunatic politics?

Lyndon LaRouche has had quite a bit of influence in some circles with his conspiracy theories about London bankers running the world. Glenn Beck and Alex Jones have been howling for years about a "Satanic New World Order conspiracy." In Russia, there are a lot of people who like to shout about a "kike-Masonic conspiracy" to destroy Russia. There are militias in America who think that they could stand up to the most powerful military in the world's history. And then of course there are holocaust deniers and global warming deniers. In all cases we see lunatic politics that have had far more influence than they ever deserved to have.

Meanwhile there are many legitimate political movements that are seen as lunatic. The environmentalists constantly get accused of lunacy, but they have a real point. The health of the environment and the health of the planet are not only important in themselves, they are also important because they impact significantly on people's lifestyle, and inattention to the environment causes vast loss of life and property. Berkeley is called "Berzerkeley," but it has been a major source of insightful political thought. Many people involved in women's rights are seen as loony, but much of feminist thought has merit and much of its research is solid. The alternative healing community are seen as lunatics, but many of them have come up with highly useful and intelligent things.

There should be a viable standard to determine what is legitimate and what is crazy. And the main aspect of that is that it has to accord with fact. Russia's human rights abuses - an issue that Kasparov focuses upon - is factual. America being run by "hooked-nosed Jews" is not. Likewise, global warming is factual; Holocaust is factual; environmental deterioration is factual. There is no "kike-Masonic conspiracy" to destroy Russia, there is no "Satanic New World Order Conspiracy" against America, and while banks can certainly be expected to wield influence in politics, so do all sorts of other entities, and it is ridiculous to claim the London banks to be a monolithic tyrannical force that runs the whole world.

Holy **** is this a blog?

Jredbaron96 — Mon, 18 Mar 2013 17:17:16 GMT

Oh cool, I have a blog!

The Filibuster Timeline:

ModerateGOP — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 04:07:09 GMT

Want to know the full story?

Being the thorough researcher I am, unfortunately, I can only find limited sources questioning Rand�s Stand. Instead of brushing them away, like most members of my party. I actually listened to what some far left media outlets had to say about Rand�s Filibuster. I was shocked when all of them actually praised him. The only media talking head that agrees with me is Lawrence O�Donnell. Before the filibuster I had no idea who he was. The ultimate nail in the coffin for me was when Code Pink, the anti-war, anti-gun, leftist movement said that Rand Paul �Made a valiant effort,� and plan to meet with him in his office to discuss something. Isn�t that more scary than Rand Paul�s conspiracy theory?

I digress we need to get right to the facts and really straighten out what happened so that people can stop taking this nonsense seriously.

January 25, 2013: Rand Paul addresses this question in one of his first letters to Mr. John Brennan who was being considered and now is CIA Director �How many U.S. citizens have been intentionally killed by U.S. drone strikes since 2008?� He asks quite a lot of other questions in the same manner that paultards always ask questions. I recognize the methodology do you?

February 12, 2013: Not happy with Brennan�s speed. Rand Paul decides to bombard him with even more questions pertaining to more unlikely scenarios: �Do you believe that the president has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil? What about the use of lethal force against a non-U.S. person on U.S. soil?� Yes, Rand Paul asks the question to Brennan almost a month before his filibuster!

February 14, 2013: President Obama stages Google Hangout to �answer� questions about the State of the Union Address. Lee Doren a conservative asks Obama about the Drone question and Obama answered with this: �First of all, I think, there�s never been a drone used on an American citizen on American soil. And, you know, we respect and have a whole bunch of safeguards in terms of how we conduct counterterrorism operations outside the United States. The rules outside the United States are going to be different then the rules inside the United States. In part because our capacity to, for example, to capture a terrorist inside the United States are very different then in the foothills or mountains of Afghanistan or Pakistan.
But what I think is absolutely true is that it is not sufficient for citizens to just take my word for it that we are doing the right thing. I am the head of the executive branch. And what we've done so far is to try to work with Congress on oversight issues. But part of what I am going to have to work with congress on is to make sure that whatever it is we�re providing congress, that we have mechanisms to also make sure that the public understands what�s going on, what the constraints are, what the legal parameters are. And that is something that I take very seriously. I am not someone who believes that the president has the authority to do whatever he wants, or whatever she wants, whenever they want, just under the guise of counterterrorism. There have to be legal checks and balances on it.�

February 14, 2013, 10:00 AM: The US Senate convenes to discuss the nomination of Charles Timothy Hagel, of Nebraska, to be Secretary of Defense.

February 14, 2013, 11:35 AM: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Blasts Republicans for trying to stage a filibuster due to lack of answers relating to their Benghazi conspiracy.
�My Republican colleagues had led us to believe they would not filibuster Senator Chuck Hagel�s confirmation of as Secretary of Defense. But that has changed. Now, Senate Republicans have made it clear they intend to mount a full-scale filibuster, and block the Senate from holding a final passage vote on Senator Hagel�s nomination. Make no mistake: Republicans are trying to defeat Senator Hagel�s nomination by filibustering while submitting extraneous requests that will never be satisfied.�

February 14, 2013, 4:17 PM: Senate begins voting to invoke cloture on Hagel�s nomination. It failed, 58-40 1 voting present

February 14, 2013: Rand Paul issues statement on his website in defense of his support for John Kerry and why he placed a hold on John Brennan as Director of the CIA until he answers the Drone question� Notice nothing about Hagel? He only questioned Hagel�s financial activities outside the Senate. Rand Paul says in his statement about Brennan�s nomination, not Hagel�s that, �until [Brennan] answers the question of whether or not the President can kill American citizens through the drone strike program on U.S. soil."

February 14, 2013: Brennan responds. As if to make Rand realize how silly his question is. "This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so."

February 20, 2013: As if Rand Paul has not gotten the message yet, he sends another letter to Brennan. �I once again request you answer the following question: Do you believe that the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial? I believe the only acceptable answer to this is no.�

February 26, 2013, 4:31 PM: Senator Hagel is confirmed as Secretary of Defense.

March 4, 2013: Attorney General Eric Holder responds to Rand Paul. He states: �As members of this Administration have previously indicated, the US. Government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so. As a policy matter, moreover, we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat. We have a long history of using the criminal justice system to incapacitate individuals located in our country who pose a threat to the United States and its interests abroad. Hundreds of individuals have been arrested and convicted of terrorism-related offenses in our federal courts.
The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront�� Holder goes on to state that each President if dealt with a situation where they may have to use a drone in a 9/11 situation will have to consider all of the circumstances of the situation at hand and consider the advice of his advisers before he would make that legal and ethical decision.

March 6, 2013: In a contentious Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Senator Ted Cruz asked General Holder, various hypothetical drone use scenarios. �After much gymnastics, I am glad to hear that it is the opinion of the Department of Justice that it would be unconstitutional to kill a US citizen on US soil if that individual did not post an imminent threat,� Cruz said. �That statement has not been easily forthcoming.�

March 6�7, 2013: According to Rand Paul�s Wikipedia page: Paul engaged in a talking filibuster to block voting on the nomination of John O. Brennan as the Director of the CIA, questioning Barack Obama and administration�s use of drones, and the stated legal justification for hypothetical lethal use within the United States. Paul held the floor for 12 hours and 52 minutes.

March 7, 2013: Eric Holder responds to Rand Paul�s new question, "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" He answered with a simple two letter word. No.

March 7, 2013: John Brennan confirmed as CIA Director 63-34.

I have seen various interviews with Rand Paul since his filibuster. He himself seems confused about when he started questioning the drone issue. It wouldn�t surprise me, as it took a good few hours for me to sort out this nonsense. At times he says he�s been asking questions for months, but in a suspicious fundraising letter that he sent out to supporters, hours after his grandstanding scheme, he said that he has only been asking the question for a week. While he tells his tea party and paultard base that the question was about, John smith getting killed by a drone while emailing his buddy in the middle east. As was made clear by President Obama that is not and never was the issue, and it is actually a little bit racist. I�m surprised the liberals didn�t pick up on this. They sure do seem to care a lot about those targeted racial profilings happening all over Arizona� Is Rand Paul insisting that Obama is targeting all Americans who have Middle Eastern or �Muslim� friends with drones??? How outlandish can this guy be? Obama is one of the people calling for a new Muslim Peace Era! Remember many of his supporters believe Obama is a Muslim and is working with the terrorists! So would Obama have to target himself with a drone??

CONTINUED BELOW IN THE COMMENT SECTION. RAN OUT OF SPACE SORRY.

Anti-Ron Paul Bot: The Filibuster Timeline:

Rand Paul's Media Blitz:

ModerateGOP — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 18:44:26 GMT

You�d think after thirteen hours of talking about random nonsense Senator Rand Paul would be tired. Heck no! Republicans and Conservatives are kidding themselves if they think that Rand Paul�s filibuster will be the wakeup call that they think it is. From the brainless, anti-obama, party of no losers that have praised Rand Paul�s �courage� to �Stand up for liberty,� comes a shocking restart of the Revolution Movement that was last seen during Ron Paul�s dismal 2012 campaign. Unfortunately, �Stand With Rand� was trending worldwide on twitter last night! People, this won�t be the restart of the Republican Party. This will be the end of it, as paultards now have a new found respect among the most social conservatives.

At Antipaulbot.com, I have catalogued various instances where paultards are damaging to the Republican Party and have proven that they no place among us. Apparently, Ron Paul�s son, doesn�t factor into this equation? The reason I have used the liberal attacks like �party of no,� and, �Brainless,� is because happening now, in all conservative camps across the nation Rand Paul is revered as a hero, for standing up against the �regime.� This all occurred as Republicans tried to have a cooperative dinner with President Obama for the first time. Anybody see a problem with loud mouths calling the Obama Administration a regime?

Yesterday as news of Rand�s Stand spread throughout conservative blogs and media channels, I couldn�t do anything but shake my head at the craziness that the Modern Day Republican Party has become. Despite efforts from some of us to make our party more sane and moderate, Rand Paul undid this single handedly as thousands tuned into the Rand Paul hour on C-Span and YouTube. What makes it worse is that now, everybody is talking about or to Rand Paul. Within hours of ending his filibuster to go to the bathroom, Rand Paul was at it again. Talking about how it felt to stand up to Obama and the regime on various far right talk shows (like Hannity, Rush etc�) and to anybody at Fox News who would take him. All that was missing was his buddy Alex Jones. If you didn�t know already, Rand Paul is now �seriously considering,� a run for President in 2016!

Remember, these are the same people who firmly believe that �establishment� Republicans, stole the election from his father and that they picked Romney so that even other social conservatives didn�t stand a chance. Senator John McCain seems to get the picture. He called Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Justin Amash, �Wacko Birds.� He doesn�t like that these freshmen wackos get all the media attention. I guess John �Benghazi� McCain seems to miss his time in the spotlight, or it seeped out of his memory, which is a high possibly. McCain is quite old.

There are many sane members of the Republican Party (Me included) that do believe that this filibuster will hurt us in the end. Imagine how a Democratic campaign can use this in an election? The left has always been critical of the drone policy and they aren't going to turn on Obama just because of Rand Paul. Just you watch, by next week this will be forgotten and Rand Paul will be attacked just like all the others, especially after he headlines CPAC: The conservative conference.

Anti-Ron Paul Bot: Rand Pauls Media Blitz:

Rand Paul Hijacks Congress for 13 Hours

ModerateGOP — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 19:24:05 GMT

Apparently Rand Paul has a sugar high and wants to flex his senatorial muscles. Single Handedly the Libertarian Senator from Kentucky who many on the right now hail as the front runner for the 2016 elections, stalled Congress yesterday as he talked for thirteen hours on the Senate Floor!

Despite cheers from all members of the paranoid conspiracy minded morons who think they follow politics, Rand Paul's filibuster included him eating dinner reading Alice in Wonderland as well as eating various candy bars while joking with Marco Rubio about water... President Obama and Eric Holder were laughing throughout the whole debacle because the very question that Rand Paul spent 14 hours trying to ask, was already answered numerous times by the Administration. President Obama will NOT use Drones on US Citizens. You see, he phrases this in a way that makes it seem that Obama is sitting in the oval office and just planning random attacks on random citizens. This was probably more damaging to the Republican Party than George Bush, Sarah Palin, and Oil combined!!! I'm ashamed that more people aren't criticizing Rand Paul for stalling the government for his own personal Television Show!

Let me know when Drones start attacking random people. This falls under black helicopter nonsense.

If you want to have some fun with the paultards on this one, please ask them the following questions:

As I mentioned last night, The Drone issue is one where libertarians twist and revise so much that it is sitting on the edge of paranoia and is once again, inconsistent with the libertarian message. Would it be better to send out US troops and use more government resources to find and/or prove that this suspected terrorist really is a terrorist? Then, you'd really see martial law and tanks in the streets!

Did Rand Paul ever mention the word terrorist? Remember the supposed Benghazi Conspiracy Theory? One where Obama refused to call it a terrorist attack? Well, how come that same standard isn�t given to crazy right wing kooks? Rand Paul never talked about terrorists in specific terms. That�s why this whole situation is ridiculous. Rand Paul is putting on a show! He is making a bunch of noise while the opposition just sits back and laughs. Rand Paul talks about US Citizens as if Obama wants to kill all of his opposition with drones. He is basically saying that drones are the new black helicopters! I am not kidding you.

Ask the paultard this question and they just leave you hanging. Do you know of any terrorist that has been targeted in the US on US soil, is currently dead because of US Drones and has not received a trial because he was killed by said Drone? It would be different if Rand Paul was accusing the Obama Administration of actually killing a US citizen that was not a terrorist and the government thought he was a terrorist. That is just plain old incompetence, and we have seen this before, from this administration AKA Benghazi.

I never believed in the whole, Drones are going to come and kill me thing. So forgive me for saying that Rand Paul is all going crazy about nothing. There are much more things to worry about then, if Obama wants to kill Fox News pundits with his drones. Of course he doesn't, otherwise he would have! I strongly believe however, that if an American Citizen cooperates with Al Qaeda or any other terrorist group in anyway, they lose all rights and can therefore be targeted!

It's that simple.

Rand Paul once again, fighting for rights of terrorists in the craziest what if scenario the man has yet to dream up: This is why we are considered the crazy party: What do you think about the hypothetical scenario where Obama just starts sending drones to paultards houses? I would love that!

Anti-Ron Paul Bot: Rand Paul Hijacks Congress for 13 Hours:

Obama's Drone Power:

ModerateGOP — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:43:52 GMT

Rand Paul once again, fighting for rights of terrorists in the craziest what if scenario the man has yet to dream up: This is why we are considered the crazy party: What do you think about the hypothetical scenario where Obama just starts sending drones to paultards houses? I would love that!

Power is a term that most people use very very lightly. So this year when Forbes released their most powerful people list, what Conservatives and Republicans wanted to see on that list was anybody other than President Barack Obama! He shouldn�t be number one, we cried! Its media propaganda at its highest level, others shouted over the airwaves.

Now, as we get deeper into Obama�s second term, what he has been planning from the start seems more likely every time Obama opens his mouth. A handful of varying degrees of conspiracy minded pundits have long predicted that Obama will become America�s first dictator. Many civil liberty advocates have used Obama's Drone Program to argue this fact. The ultimate thing that will make him King is according to them, the drones.

There has been more social change that has happened in the past five years than at any other time in world history besides for maybe the Seventeenth Century in Europe during a period known as the Age of Enlightenment. This was a period when great strides in science and the understanding of our universe first began to seep into cultural consciousness.

Now, with emerging new technologies and a social web we can connect with people faster than ever before. We can debate on issues and start huge revolutions in foreign countries. Facebook takes credit for sparking the Arab Spring, hailed by Obama and his team as Democracy! Conservatives like to say that Obama handled the Arab Spring horribly and they point out that it may be worse off and more corrupted than it was under previous dictators. But as we all know from 2012, elections have consequences.

Now, it seems more than ever that the civil liberties movement of the left wing faction of the libertarian party is vocally boisterous once again. Since the Sequester scare tactics are settling down, Rand Paul has introduced various warnings that Obama has the power to target American Citizens on US Soil. He phrases this in a way that makes it seem that Obama is sitting in the oval office and just planning random attacks on random citizens. If there is any proof that the libertarians have no idea how the government works, or what is in the constitution it is the drone situation.

The Drone issue is one where libertarians twist and revise so much that it is sitting on the edge of paranoia and is once again, inconsistent with the libertarian message. I cannot believe that a group of the most freedom loving activists would ever consider letting terrorists have the same freedoms as we do! The entire idea from Rand Paul�s universe is a crazy hypothetical scenario which as far as I am aware has never happened.

This is one of the only things I believe this President has handled well. The implementation of the Drone program while it has had its missteps with Iran capturing one of ours, it has gone on smoothly. The use of Drone attacks has destroyed many Al Qaeda sects and groups. I will like to see the program continue and advance under many other Presidents to come and each one of them will debate the issue of US usage.

Yet, the libertarians still insist on not the facts of the positives of the Drone issues. Their black helicopter (which is slowly turning into Black Drone) hysteria, is always and almost exclusively based on the what if scenarios.

Would it be fruitless to point out that the US Government has in place readied responses to every single national emergency possible? Or would they look for conspiracies there too?

http://www.antipaulbot.com/2013/03/o...one-power.html

The Coming Division within the Democrat Party

ModerateGOP — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 19:56:02 GMT

Everyone knows that the Republican Party is divided, is in utter chaos, and is on the verge of a collapse (which won�t really happen). The Republicans have four years to get their act together, but what of the Democratic Party?

I always like to bash Ron Paul supporters as continuing to work against my party and highlighting how silly and yet, how effective some of their divisive tactics are. Everyone loves to bash the Republicans and how disorganized they seem to be. As party leaders like to say, this is expected after an election.

As we saw with Bob Woodward the Democrats are masters at quickly getting rid of anybody who doesn�t agree fully with Obama�s agenda. I take that back, there are many examples of the media and the democrats tossing aside people who don�t agree with them. They just don�t like to focus on that division within their party, so it�s not discussed. This includes OWS, any celebrity that comes out as Republican, Jeremiah Wright and Van Jones along with a handful of top US Generals and Top Obama White House officials that were involved in major scandals or �mistakes� that were their fault and their fault alone! Top democrats don�t even like to describe themselves as liberal or progressive. There is currently a smear campaign that paints Woodward as insane and crazy, or past his prime, only because he said Obama lied about �the sequester� and that he felt threatened by a White House email. Yet, he is now the left�s new Sarah Palin!

This is because if Sarah Palin believes that Obama will be putting up Death Panels in every hospital on the top floor with executives that are paid for by Obamacare taxes, then most of the Republican Party has to believe this. This is because if Todd Akin believes that female bodies can suddenly protect itself from rapists all on their own, all of the Republican Party has to believe this! This is because, if a handful of creationists dare express their views which are religious in nature, and Republicans are mostly Christian and/or religious in nature, Quid Pro Quo, Republicans are Creationists!

So should we hold the liberals by the strands of their revisionist logic? Actually it is almost impossible to do this, because even though the Democrats seem to be well put together, they cannot be associated with any of their grassroots groups during any other time expect during elections. When you hear about protests for ideal liberal causes, the word liberal hardly comes up in the MSM. They might even find a way to bash the conservative opposition (which might not have anything to do with the story) and go on to explain how great these particular people are for sticking up for what they believe in.

I would like to know when liberal groups will wake up and figure out that they are being used! I think it will happen really soon. But not on a level that will impact Obama directly. He is protected by his own special interests and people that have been loyal to him for life. There are deep schisms within liberal, progressive, and black groups but criticism of the Obama administration is rare, and if it does happen, they are automatically quieted or Democrats lie and say they are not associated with that group.

In the past few weeks we are beginning to see the division within the Democrat Party and the liberals over topics like Drones and Sequestration. The media didn�t much like it when Obama blocked their access with him and Tiger Woods golfing. In the next few weeks Obama will alienate yet another grassroots group: The Environmental activists.

As I predicted back in November, Obama is getting really close to signing the Keystone Pipeline into Law. This will no doubt anger many Environmental Activists but they likely won�t pin the blame solely on Obama. Maybe a few communists will, because they don�t like him anyway. They will likely blame the State Department since it is giving the Keystone Pipeline the green light after investigation.

The past month, while political junkies were only paying attention to the budget battle in Congress, just a few feet away, there was a huge climate change rally in Washington DC. It went unnoticed as Obama went around scaring people about his new made up word, �sequestration.� Now the climate doomsayers are saying the same thing that they have always said about every past administration, �Obama isn�t paying enough attention to the environment.� They are angry at him for alienating them and buddying up and golfing with oil industry executives.

I believe Obama is preparing to embrace fracking. I think Obama realizes that the country needs more money! The government needs more money, and Obama policies, need more rich people. Fracking is the short term solution, to all Obama�s problems. Obama knows that the fracking industry is much more beneficial to industry than dangerous to the environment. Obama is getting ready to throw the Environmental activists under the bus. Much like Al Gore did, by the way.

On his way to Emperor, Monarch, or Dictator status, Obama needs to let some of the crazies go.

http://www.antipaulbot.com/2013/03/t...-democrat.html

Odd Things About Hybrid Cars

LowDown — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:42:46 GMT

I'm speaking here of the first generation Prius and Ford Fusion Hybrids among others. Different brands of hybrids can be different.

I'd always thought of hybrid cars as cars with an electric motor and big battery attached to the engine. But hybrid cars of this type are way different.

One odd thing about a hybrid car is that when you start it the engine doesn't come on. It turns on later when needed. Lights flash and an indicator tells you when the car is ready to drive.

Another odd thing about the hybrid transmission is that there are no gears in the sense of gears that change gear ratios. Instead there is a differential. You are no doubt familiar with how a differential works. A differential in the rear axel of a rear wheel drive car enables the wheels to vary their speeds inversely so that if one wheel is turning at 300 rpm the other is going 700 rpm, or if one is going 200 rmp the other is going 800 rmp, if one is going 0 rmp the other is going 1000 rmp. The speed of the two wheels added together equals the speed of the drive shaft.

Now imagine instead of wheels the differential is connected to two electric motors both of which can also act as generators. They are AC motors so their speeds can be controlled precisely. We can call one of them MS and the other MT. In this example the drive shaft would be connected directly to the engine and MT is also connected to the output so that it's in line with the transmission output shaft.

MG1 = MS in my discussion, MG2 = MT. The differential in the center is a planetary gear with S = sun gear, C = carrier, and R = ring. ICE = internal combusition engine. From Wikipedia.

Now, you step on the gas. The computer determines that the electric motors won't provide enough power for your jackrabbit start, and so the engine comes on and spins up to 1000 rmp. With the car stopped MT is at 0 rmp so MS is spinning at 1000 rmp, and it's generating electricity which can be used to charge the battery. That electricity is then fed to MT to provide torque. As the car speeds up MT spins faster and MS slows down. And so you go from high torque low speed on the output to high speed low torque just as changing gears in a standard transmission would do. Only no gears are being changed, its done electronically by controlling motor speeds. The engine provides mechanical power, too, that is blended with that of MT.

There is no reverse gear, either. Reverse drive is done by reversing the polarity of MT. Braking is done in part by tapping electricity from MT. The electricity is stored in a battery for times when the car can be run with the engine stopped.

There is no starter motor in a hybrid car. Instead one of the electric motors in the transmission is used to turn the engine. The engine turns off and on several times over the course of a commute to work.

The only difference between a regular hybrid and a plug in hybrid is the battery capacity, which is much higher in a plug in hybrid. A regular hybrid can only go a couple of miles on a charge while the higher capacity of the plug in hybrid enables it to go several miles, perhaps avoiding the need to run the engine at all. Hence charging it by pluggin it in.

Later versions of the Prius and Lexus hybrids have gears, a single gear ratio change from low to high on the output (drive shaft) which enables the transmission to run at lower revs and therefore more efficiently.

The Weirdest People in the World

Simon W. Moon — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 04:04:27 GMT

http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~henrich/pdfs/Weird_People_BBS_final02.pdf

The Weirdest People in the World
How representative are experimental findings from American university students? What do we really know about human psychology?

Short Abstract

Broad claims about human psychology and behavior based on narrow samples from Western societies are regularly published. Are such species‐generalizing claims justified? This review suggests not only substantial variability in experimental results across populations in basic domains, but that standard subjects are unusual compared with the rest of the species�outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, spatial reasoning, moral reasoning, thinking‐styles, and self‐concepts. This suggests (1) caution in addressing questions of human nature from this slice of humanity, and (2) that understanding human psychology will require broader subject pools. We close by proposing ways to address these challenges

Showdown in Iowa Plus Karl Rove Reacts:

ModerateGOP — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 18:34:23 GMT

As much as they would have liked to believe that they could continue to hold on to power in a state that is very important to Republicans, the paultard derevolution is slowly beginning to realize that without a leader, much like the Republican Party today, they cannot do much. This isn�t to say that they never really had much planned to begin with. They just wanted to win, win anything. They were desperate during the primaries to show some type of proof that the derevolution was spreading! Iowa was one of the states that they always cited as being the head of the paultard cult. Now, however, the paultards have been defeated and all their candidates that they chose were not elected.

If they ever really had any proof that wasn�t spread by fraudulent charts, hacked polls, or Youtube brainwashing methods, that the liberty movement was spreading, now it really is in decline. For, the Republican Party is uniquely tied with the Libertarians in the party in the sense that the libertarians are like parasites. Much like the Tea Party, they cannot survive without the big money republicans! That is a fact with both parties. Liberals, communists, socialists, and the black liberators cannot survive without the big money democrats and the Hollywood celebs.

So there we have it in Iowa�s Story County, which was won by Ron Paul in the 2012 election. The Story County GOP elected Dane Nealson as their new chairman on Monday. Nealson defeated Cory Adams, who was the sitting chair and had publicly endorsed Ron Paul in 2011.

A �Patriot� group on the other hand has depicted Republican Strategist Karl Rove as a Nazi in uniform during a mass email attack. The group called Active Engagement has since apologized and Mr. Rove forgave them. However, he made some very valid points last night on Hannity�s show.

He stated that for how much Rove�s Super-Pac Crossroads GPS gets attacked by Conservatives and Libertarians as well as the liberals who hate it, there are other organizations on the right, where corruption and money scandals happen daily! Rove does not pay himself any money from Crossroads, yet, as we have documented here on Antipaulbot.com many of the smaller libertarian super pacs have indeed practiced campaign corruption! The tea party is once again using liberal talking points to slander anybody that is trying to help mend this broken party in a way that is uniquely conservative and quite libertarian. We do not want another Akin and Murdoch screwing up our image when we are also taking hits from our liberal enemies! Rasmussen recently came out with a new poll saying that only 8% of the country identifies with the Tea Party movement. That message will no longer work, and what Karl Rove is trying to do is make sure that we pick Republicans that can actually win elections!

Another issue with the people who are attacking Crossroads is that they feel disenfranchised because they think Rove is a corrupt �war monger� as some liberaltarians like to say. I have asked this question to countless Tea Party sympathizers and paultarlds alike, but they all refuse to answer this, instead they attack �moderate� Republicans. Why should we pick people who say crazy things and who are unelectable? On this issue, like most, Karl Rove and I think exactly alike!

http://www.antipaulbot.com/2013/02/s...ve-reacts.html

Lesbian Feminism

Mr. Invisible — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:38:15 GMT

The attached piece is on lesbian feminism, it's origins and conflict with liberal feminism. This should be considered a rough draft as I am most likely going to go back and edit it.

Attached Files

Media Blackout? - Rand Paul's Response:

ModerateGOP — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:27:02 GMT

The Paul's are Getting Desperate

You would think that after his kooky father Rand Paul wouldn�t be in the national spotlight. Nonetheless he is doing a better job at brainwashing people than his father ever did! Yet, Paultards everywhere insist that there was a national effort to kick Rand Paul out in favor of Rubio's speech, or just because they didn't like him. Please, if they didn't like him, they wouldn't have allowed him to do a speech!! Much less, waste money and resources trying to block him!

In a �tea party� response to the Establishment Republican Response of the State the Union Address, Rand Paul gave a speech that nobody watched, because it wasn�t aired on any single Cable Network! Including C-SPAN!!!! How he was able to do this speech, I have no idea. No Tea Party person I know even likes Rand Paul.

However, during this speech Rand Paul touched upon some things that should make people scratch their heads and say, he�s a tea party member??

1. "Both parties have been guilty of spending too much, of protecting their sacred cows, of backroom deals in which everyone up here wins, but every taxpayer loses."

So Rand will you now, condemn your father and yourself for doing the same things? Will you also condemn your super-pacs and your questionable eye practice? Why are you acting like you aren�t part of the party? Are you not a Republican? If so, why are you registered as one? Rand�s Speech with all his talk about bipartisanship actually contributes to the political division in Congress. Because he brands himself as outside of the republican mainstream, as in not Republican!

2. "If Congress refuses to obey its own rules, if Congress refuses to pass a budget, if Congress refuses to read the bills, then I say: Sweep the place clean. Limit their terms and send them home," Paul said.

I thought Tea Party members were against government regulations, especially when it comes to legislation? How is term limits a good punishment for people who are already breaking the law? Just as criminals won�t follow new gun laws, politicians aren�t going to follow laws that punish themselves.

These are just some of the issues I had with Rand Paul�s speech. Yet, you should see what his father is now trying to do. Because Ron Paul is so desperate for attention these days, (He should read my blog, I write plenty about him) he has decided to pair with a radio station, which will air 2 minute Ron Paul talking points!! Yeah, more subliminal brainwashing messages from Ron Paul about his libertarian utopia!!!!

Anti-Ron Paul Bot: Media Blackout?

New to this site

theHAZEisPURPLE — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 23:58:50 GMT

I'm new to this site so I figure I will just jump in and say several things that I am thinking about.

#1) I am in the Army for what it's worth...
#2) I think hunting is fine, although I don't do it.
#3) Due to being in the Army, I understand the propaganda. There is no such things as "assault" weapons. Accompanied with enough ammo, and any type of firearm is an "assault" weapon.
#4) I don't think that the answer to gun violence is to make sure everyone is carrying at all times, and I also don't think arming teachers is the answer.

More to say, but dinner is calling...

Going Viral:

ModerateGOP — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 23:08:08 GMT

Something evil is brewing in the deep dark corners of the web.

Facebook is full of spammers, trolls, advertisers, paulbots, and annoying philosophers who think that they know everything about the world! Couldn�t that describe everyone on Facebook though? Facebook groups and pages are even worse, because you have no idea if the people you are talking to are real or not.

Catfish a reality TV Show on MTV perfectly illustrates how weird online relationships can be and when met in real life, it gets even stranger. If a person posts a profile that isn�t exactly what they said, and they never are, then that puts strains on the relationship. Something such as a man being fifty pounds overweight while his profile was a picture of him in his prime in college could end the relationship right there. Because if they lied about that what else are they lying about? Sometimes when the potential lovers meet up for the first time, they find out that the person they thought they loved was actually their ex- boyfriend or girlfriend (doesn�t matter) getting back at them. Or it could be their ex�s friend. Or it could be a 40 year old fat lady when you thought it was going some sexy skinny model-type girl. The show goes through the process of looking up pictures using Google images and if a picture of that fake person is found on a different profile with a different name that is a red flag.

While Online dating sites claim that they have much success, can we as a suspecting public especially after Catfish can expose fake profiles, really be sure the dating websites are telling the truth? After all, they could just pay beautiful people to be in their ads and say they met online. Putting the conspiracy aside, I�m sure they had to hunt down the couples that really did find their true love so that they could appear in the advertisement, and I�m sure they get paid! Just like the people meeting their potential matches on Catfish probably get paid to do so as well. Otherwise why would they suddenly decide to go meet someone that they avoided meeting?

The problem, with the internet, and that�s one of its many attributes as well is that it can be too open! The internet now is a social hub and a hang out spot. If you go viral you are automatically respected by your friends and are labeled cool! It doesn�t matter what you did. You could create a company, you could get your recipes plugged by people on the food network, you could just hit the right keywords and your page gets 100,000 likes overnight. Doesn�t matter what the topic is you�re now cool! You�re now a sub-hipster celebrity.

The problem here I think is that liberals finally found a free market. It�s an art canvas where they can spread ideas rapidly from the comfort of their own home through cyberspace to millions of people around the world. Sounds great right? Well, like most lawless endeavors, there are bad eggs in them.

Directly after all the recent shootings both in Aurora and Newtown, Facebook fan pages were created supporting the actions of the shooters!!! Facebook fan pages instantly popped up in support of Christopher Dorner. He posted his �manifesto� �exposing� the corruption within the LAPD on Facebook and then he went on a murdering rampage. Being liberal in nature, many far left loonies on the social networking site and around celebrity circles and around the internet publicly or secretly support Dorner!

What is wrong with society these days? When a fourteen year old girl named Samantha Marie can go viral by posting a video of herself masturbating, and no media outlet picks it up and Facebook hasn�t done anything about it for days, something is definitely wrong here. Something evil is brewing in the deep dark corners of the web. With Facebook and how easy it is to go viral, it�s only going to get worse. With so many problems out there in the real world, people go into their groups, post pictures of themselves to get likes, and make themselves feel better when they blog about how life isn�t fair.

I have to ask, is this good for society? Do you believe that Facebook and social networking are good or are they mostly bad?

Anti-Ron Paul Bot: Going Viral: