The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label Alex Jones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alex Jones. Show all posts

Friday, October 25, 2013

Believing The GOP Fiscal Hype Is Killing The Middle Class And Burying The Poor



MSNBC's Ari Melber effectively refutes GOP mantra and "false fiscal" propaganda.  If you are a high information voter, this information is probably not new to you.  If you are a bit less informed, you may actually believe GOP mantra, and you may also exist as fodder for GOP election wins.  Wins, that have yet proven beneficial to the US economy and less beneficial people who live on the lower end of the following info graphic.

The following infographic illustrates the end game for people who have bought hook-line-and sinker into GOP fiscal policy  A policy labeled "trickle-down" by Ronald Reagan.  The policy is more aptly named supply-side economics. 

Mother Jones...... (linger on  left chart in "Winners Take All Section" below and think back to which US President took office in 1981). We do not see a trickle.


A huge share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244.

The richest controls 2/3 of America's net worth

Note: The 2007 data (the most current) doesn't reflect the impact of the housing market crash. In 2007, the bottom 60% of Americans had 65% of their net worth tied up in their homes. The top 1%, in contrast, had just 10%. The housing crisis has no doubt further swelled the share of total net worth held by the superrich.


The superrich have grabbed the bulk of the past three decades' gains.

Aevrage Household income before taxes.


A Harvard business prof and a behavioral economist recently asked more than 5,000 Americans how they thought wealth is distributed in the United States. Most thought that it’s more balanced than it actually is. Asked to choose their ideal distribution of wealth, 92% picked one that was even more equitable.

Average Income by Family, distributed by income group.
Download: PDF (large) | JPG (smaller) 


Why Washington is closer to Wall Street than Main Street.

median net worth of american families, median net worth for mebers of congress, your odds of being a millionaire, member of congress's odds of being a millionaire
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)$451.1 million
Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.)$435.4 million
Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.)$366.2 million
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)$294.9 million
Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.)$285.1 million
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)$283.1 million
Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wisc.)$231.2 million
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas)$201.5 million
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)$136.2 million
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)$108.1 million
10 Richest Members of Congress 100% Voted to extend the cuts
Congressional data from 2009. Family net worth data from 2007. Sources: Center for Responsive Politics; US Census; Edward Wolff, Bard College.
Download: PDF (large) | JPG (smaller) 


For a healthy few, it's getting better all the time.


How much income have you given up for the top 1 percent?

 See More at Mother Jones

MSNBC The Cycle's Ari Melber address another clear case of GOP mind-induction.  Be careful, it is time to de-hypnotize yourself.

We often write about the LIVs (low information voter/people). We write as such based in what may be a misguided belief that people are unaware. There is a antipodal state that is truly tragic.  What about the prospect people who sit and watch Fox News, and, or, listen to Alex Jones, Limbaugh and Beck, do not care about the data depicted above? 

Let's hope the full 47% of people who voted for Mitt Romney are in the antipodal state. That ever-present abyss called a Great Depression looms and it looms very near one major error in fiscals policy, or practice. 

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Soldiers For Peace International: Guns

Cross posted from......



I swore I was not going to write about the gun debate that has followed the latest mass murder. It seemed an exercise in futility. Trying to convince people that they are wrong on gun control is like trying to influence their views on abortion. Attitudes and opinions are fixed on the issue. There is little chance that one more opinion will change them. Recently, the conversation took an interesting turn, one that is new to the ongoing debate on gun control. The idea that we have to have personal weapons to fight our own government went from being a fringe idea to a mainstream argument, defended by conservatives and many pro-second amendment liberals.

It has been obvious to every thinking American for some time that something is terribly wrong with our current government. If we could agree in what that was we might be able to fight it without resort to guns. The nation is nearly evenly divided between those who fear a socialist takeover and those who believe that the problem is growing corporate dominance of government to the extent that it is leading to fascism, if it has not already arrived. If we do not come to a common understanding of what has gone wrong with the US system of government, it is likely that the incidence of political violence will continue to increase until we are subject to a violent crackdown by the very police state that so many of us fear.

The argument that America is being taken over by socialists is laughable on its face. With the social safety net under attack and a bailout of the medical insurance industry being passed off as “near-universal health care,” nothing could be further from the truth. Funneling taxpayer dollars to corporations that ship jobs overseas, those that profit from denying needed health care and those that manufacture weapons for insanely expensive wars for corporate Empire is in fact a form of corporate welfare serving the interests of the rich over those of the American taxpayer. That is worth fighting a revolution over, but one that can only succeed if it is done so through nonviolent, democratic action. That is impossible if we cannot come to a consensus on how democracy works and how best to achieve it.

It is easy to define democracy. The word translates literally as “government of the People.” That means government of, by and for the People. Not some people, but all people in the United States. If we cannot achieve consensus on what is best for all the people, we cannot create a government of the People. Instead, those who wield power over the government will continue to divide us until they ultimately conquer us. Those calling for revolution understand that it is our inalienable right and responsibility to resist a government that has become tyrannical. A government that is not for the People but for corporations and the wealthy individuals that control it cannot be said to be democratic.

Who then is the tyrant who dares challenge democracy in the US and the world? Many claim it is President Obama. On one side the radical Right argues that he intends to impose a socialist government that will dictate to the People. On the Left, the claim is made that there is no difference between Obama and George Bush in the arena of foreign policy and that he has been far too willing to sacrifice the interests of the People for the corporate interest that in fact wields control over both parties by virtue of controlling the corporate media and thereby the nature of political discourse. In fact, the blame lies squarely with a Congress that has abdicated its authority to an imperial Presidency, regardless of who is the figurehead in the White House in matters of war and peace. 

If we truly want a democratic revolution, the Left and Right must first agree on goals, lest the US become another failed state, at best degenerating into a power struggle between the leaders of the revolution but far more likely to result in the consolidation of power by those who control the police state. As the response to Occupy has shown, these are the powerful banking and oil industries that colluded with agents of the police state in infiltrating and undermining this popular movement. The only way to overcome the power of those who control the levers of government is to united around the idea that together we can create a government of, by and for the People only by ending the power of corporations and the rich to choose who we have to pick from to represent us in Congress. 

There is evidence that there will be a mass movement to hold candidates for Congress accountable to the People by making them declare whether they will support a constitutional amendment to ban corporate campaign expenditures and limit individual donations to influence the outcome of elections. There is a parallel movement to accomplish the same bylegislative changes to address corruption ofgovernment by monied interests, though many doubt that such an effort can succeed. Even if it does succeed in the short run, there is always the risk that a future Congress can be corrupted by the influence of the rich and powerful, while a constitutional amendment will ensure that future Congresses will not be able to hand the US government back to corporate interests.

Those who argue that we cannot reform government by working with politicians are missing the point: If we make support for a constitutional amendment the litmus test for candidates for Congress, we can and will elect a Congress that will put the interests of the People over those of the corporate interests that currently control it. This is the first step to electing a Congress that will work for peace through cutting the strings of those who manipulate US policy to wage endless war for corporate Empire while subjugating a population that is becoming increasingly aware of the threat this poses to its own freedom. 

If we keep in mind that 80% of both self-identified conservatives and liberals are opposed to Citizens United, citizens can unite to take back America for the People. The Pledge to Amend campaign is the way to join the Left and Right in the common cause of finally achieving democracy in America and the world. If we succeed the last, best hope for Mankind shall not perish from the Earth. Recent history has shown that democracy cannot be imposed at the point of a gun. If we come to understand that, there is yet hope that we can create it through the will of the People, using the democratic process that is at the heart of the freedoms for which so many have died.  


Thursday, January 10, 2013

Piers Morgan Petition Response and Jon Stewart

Alex Jones sat with Piers Morgan this week. If you have not observed the interaction, I have to things to say. First, it is embedded below (in part), and second you are either not watching news or you are watching Fox News. 

While watching video of the interviews, I was first informed that Jones actually started the "Deport Morgan" Petition that sits on White House Dot gov. 

The Obama Administration has responded to the petition (below).

OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TODeport British Citizen Piers Morgan for Attacking 2nd Amendment

When Discussing the Second Amendment, Keep the First in Mind Too

By Jay Carney
Thank you for participating in We the People to speak out on an issue that matters to you.
Let’s not let arguments over the Constitution’s Second Amendment violate the spirit of its First. President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. However, the Constitution not only guarantees an individual right to bear arms, but also enshrines the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press -- fundamental principles that are essential to our democracy. Americans may disagree on matters of public policy and express those disagreements vigorously, but no one should be punished by the government simply because he or she expressed a view on the Second Amendment -- or any other matter of public concern.
We recognize that the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, sparked an intense, and at times emotional, national conversation about the steps we can take as a country to reduce gun violence. In fact, your petition is one of many on the issue, and President Obama personally responded by sharing his viewson this important issue.
Look, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. This country has a strong tradition of gun ownership that's been handed down from generation to generation. Obviously across the country there are regional differences. There are differences between how people feel in urban areas and rural areas. And the fact is the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible -- they buy their guns legally and they use them safely, whether for hunting or sport shooting, collection or protection.
But you know what, I am also betting that the majority -- the vast majority -- of responsible, law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war. I'm willing to bet that they don't think that using a gun and using common sense are incompatible ideas -- that an unbalanced man shouldn't be able to get his hands on a military-style assault rifle so easily; that in this age of technology, we should be able to check someone's criminal records before he or she can check out at a gun show; that if we work harder to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be fewer atrocities like the one in Newtown -- or any of the lesser-known tragedies that visit small towns and big cities all across America every day.
Jay Carney is White House Press Secretary

The above response applies to the following 1 petition

Press Secretary Jay Carney's response, entitled "When Discussing the Second Amendment, Keep the First in Mind Too," was posted to the White House's website Wednesday. In it, Carney reminded Americans favoring Morgan's deportation that the Second Amendment, which guarantees "well-regulated militias" the right to bear arms, does not override the First Amendment, which guarantees the freedom of speech on American soil.
"Americans may disagree on matters of public policy and express those disagreements vigorously, but no one should be punished by the government simply because he or she expressed a view on the Second Amendment – or any other matter of public concern," the statement reads.
The statement includes a video of President Barack Obama speaking following the massacre in Newtown, and assures readers that "President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms."


The span and scope of the pro-gun spokespeople (for lack of a better word)

Emotional meltdown and appears unstable

Larry Pratt, CEO Guns for America, Condescending, arrogant and earning a paycheck......

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

The Daily GOP Ignominois: Alex Jones Reality TV

Alex Jones

Yes, you knew it would garner the Ignominious, now didn't you?

If you wish to see the perfect example of how America must be very careful about people who are given their vote, Piers Morgan's guest last evening was the prototype.

Morgan's guest was Alex Jones. Jones is reported to he be initiator of the petition to deport Piers Morgan out of the United States.  The Mediaite piece below provides additional details related to the Live CNN interview.  

I offer a few words about people who are so paranoid about having their weapons taken, they resort to actions that appear child-like.  As you watch Jones think of the child-like caught with his hands in the cookie jar.  The child cannot properly answer when asked a question about why his actions have generated a "No-No." You will notice evasion and an unwillingness or inability to provide a cogent answer. Morgan would soon find out the true extent of his unstable guest. 

YouTube via CNN

Mediaite Part 1 and Part 2 (we are posting accordingly based on YouTube's 7 plus minute version and Mediaite  video posts are 13 plus minutes total).


Piers Morgan Calls ‘Undignified’ Alex Jones ‘The Best Advertisement For Gun Control’

Last night, Piers Morgan went head-to-head with Alex Jones, the man who created the petition to deport him from the United States. The climax of the fiery debate came when Jones shouted at Morgan that “1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms! 

Piers Morgan spoke to POLITICO this morning about the highly charged interview, saying that Jones “was the best advertisement for gun control you could wish for.” He went on to say, “that kind of vitriol, hatred, and zealotry is really quite scary. I didn’t feel threatened by him, but I’m concerned that someone like him has that level of influence. There’s got to be a level of discourse that can rise above what happened last night. It was undignified, unedifying.” 

While Morgan did not feel afraid for his personal safety, he reiterated his fear of Jones’ media reach. “He said last night that his show now airs in 140 networks, he has a huge online presence — every day his message gets sent out to millions of Americans. Through vitriol and rhetoric he is able to spur heavy gun sales and ammunition sales. He works off of fear.” 

And though he was unable to have a reasonable conversation with Jones, he recognizes that there is some intelligence there. “He is clearly a smart guy under the craziness. Look, you could tell from the way he ranted that he’s not a stupid man. But that makes him more dangerous. There will be lots of people who follow him avidly who are not so intelligent, who believe everything he says.” 

Ultimately, Morgan’s encounter with Jones only strengthened his dedication to the gun control issue. “After every shooting, America goes back to normal. The media come off the story, nothing gets done, the pressure on politicians dissipates. My intent is simply to keep this issue boiling along until the politicians act on it. Something has to be done.” 

We can expect to see more debate about guns and their role in American society in the coming weeks and months. After the inevitable ratings increase from last night’s show, Piers Morgan’s gun discussion isn’t ending any time soon.

We cannot recall one example of or indication of the Obama Administration working to 'remove' firearms from the American populace. (The website is not a Left-leaning website)

“The single largest determining factor as to why gun sales have surged since early 2008 seems to be a collective fear surrounding the election of a big government anti-gun socialist as the final arbiter and protector of the U.S. Constitution.”
Slavo highlights the graphs below which depict how soaring gun sales are closely related with the election season.

Gun sales are also partly driven by the hunting season, but political and social upheavals undoubtedly play a huge role in the rush to purchase firearms. Sales have been riding high ever since Obama took office, including a significant rise in first time gun owners. The number of federally licensed retail gun dealers in the U.S. has also risen for the first time since 1993. 

In the aftermath of this summer’s ‘Batman massacre’, gun sales in some areas of the country spiked by almost 50 per cent.

Just before I left the web page, I noticed a few links to Piers Morgan interview and many comments.  I found quite a few comments that were not complimentary of Jones' interview on CNN.

Quite probably Jones hurt the pro-gun cause.