Absentinsomniac

Ron Paul

2010-07-30T19:53:00.000-07:00

Ron Paul may be one of the only candidates for president that could possibly put the U.S back on track. All of his ideas are backed up with reason, and he is one of the only politicians that sticks to what he says. Unlike almost all other politicians, I can't find anything horribly wrong with the guy. Hopefully, someday, maybe he will be elected and, maybe he will turn this backwards country around.

Just a brief summary of his views:

- The war on drugs should be ended.
- Audit or end the federal reserve.
- Cut Taxes considerably.
- Cut back on war.
- Uphold the constitution.
- Repeal the patriot act.
- Nonintervention

Ron Paul is against net neutrality, however he supports a free and open internet. He says that net neutrality is a federal regulation, and he believes that the federal government shouldn't be involved in this sort of feud. I'd rather see a federal regulation enforce net neutrality, however this is only my opinion and I can definitely see were Paul is coming from.

Anyway, decide for yourself.

Youth Rights

2010-07-01T12:46:00.000-07:00

Were should I start? I've been an activist for the youth rights movement for a long period of time now, and I believe it is one of todays great issues in society. There is a broad spectrum of issues that create the youth rights movement including curfews, the voting age,the drinking age, behavior modification, freedom of speech, youth transport mercenaries, students rights, education, and the line between parents authority and freedoms of the child. This, of course, is not at all a complete list of issues, but I feel it covers some of the most important ones. Youth rights is a legitimate movement that is working towards the destruction of laws and attitudes that are ageist, restraining on the basis of age, and other variables that determine it's status as a youth rights problem.

I encourage you to learn more about youth rights and spread the word as much as possible. Here are some useful links in your exploration of the youth rights movement:

www.launchpadmovement.com (My website)
www.school-survival.net
NYRA (National Youth Rights Association)
Pro Youth Pages
Youth Rights on Wikipedia

Our Changing Rights

2010-06-01T18:43:00.000-07:00

Supreme court rules on right to remain silent.

It seems as though the supreme court, and other government entities are able to modify and change some of our most closely held, and important rights. This is absolutely unacceptable. We can not afford to let the government audit our nations fundamental rights. The supreme court ruled that a suspect must state that he or she is remaining silent, instead of just remaining silent. This may not seem like a big deal, but it most certainly could lead to more radical changes in the future. Not to mention, stating that you intend to remain silent in and of itself makes you seem guilty.

Having to state that you intend to remain silent weakens the right. Not to mention the trickery officers use while interrogating suspects such as this example:

Two hours and 45 minutes later, an officer asked, "Do you believe in God?" Thompkins said yes. The officer then asked, "Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?" Thompkins said "Yes."

Which ended up incriminating the man. Suspects can be worn down during these types of interrogations, and when they give an answer, it isn't always the truth.

Net Neutrality

2010-05-26T22:56:00.000-07:00

I recently received an email stating that congress has signed and sent a couple of different letters to the FCC calling off the fight for net neutrality.

Here is the quote:

"74 House Democrats and 37 Senate Republicans have signed industry-written letters telling the FCC to abandon efforts to protect Internet users and stop big companies from blocking Internet traffic."

It seems as though we are loosing the fight for Net Neutrality. I don't think anyone is giving up, but the large corporations have vast amounts of resources to throw at this. Politicians are taking large contributions from these huge companies, and in return they are getting what they want, regardless of what the American people are asking for.

If you want to help, visit this site: Save the internet.

The impact of large corporations winning this fight will be tremendous, and it won't be pretty.

Should the U.S withdraw from the world?

2010-04-22T19:29:00.000-07:00

The U.S has military installations in a large number of countries that are not currently in active military situations. I have come up with a few decent reasons to have installations in other countries, but none of them are worth the amount we spend on these stations each year. There are other priorities we have to deal with which we should be spending the money on in the U.S. The U.S is stretched out enough as it is, we don't need to waste time throwing military forces all over the planet because we think it is our duty to protect EVERYONE.

I'm not saying we should withdraw all of our forces from active military zones. We have an obligation to finish what we started in military campaigns around the world, but I see no reason to have so many people stationed around the world were they are not necessarily needed. See this.

A map of military installations:

The priority of freedom in the U.S

2010-04-21T14:12:00.000-07:00

What is the priority level of freedom in the U.S? At some point we have no choice but to realize that the freedoms we enjoy are being willingly traded for protection, safety and of course money and power. One of the most obvious examples of this is the patriot act. During the post 9/11 era, paranoia reigned. Many were expecting to be attacked again, and it seems as though members of the government and corporate world took advantage of this to gain power. This act effectively gave the government means to supersede the constitution and gave the government some alarming power. Just a few of the things this act allows are tapping any phones desired, the ability to arrest anyone thought to be suspicious and can hold them as long as they want and spying on the public at will, just to list a few. If you haven't already I urge you to research the patriot act. Here are the top ten problems with the act. The NSA and other organizations within the U.S are constantly collecting data and scanning every conversation on phones and the internet.

This is not the only example of the government over stepping it's boundaries, thus infringing on our rights. There are many instances of this infringement, one particular instance that stands out to me are the Japanese confinement camps during WWII. This may seem like a long time ago, but some of the things we do today are not far off from that kind of action. Over a thousand middle eastern descendent's living in the U.S were captured and put into facilities during the war on terror, many of which are still in these camps. I have reason to believe that these arrests were not backed by sufficient investigation and proof. Even if we shut down these camps, can we say for sure that all of the unjustly arrested prisoners were released? I'm almost positive our government has classified hidden camps that "don't exist" in other countries and maybe even in our own.

So, should these violations of the constitution be accepted as a necessary precaution against terrorists even if it infringes on some of our rights? In my humble opinion, absolutely not! Giving up our freedom is giving up the very thing this country was founded on. This is giving up the very idea that helps us thrive as a country and as a world power. It is my firm belief that we should hold freedom above all other national priorities, and protect it. One quote comes to mind while on the subject, a powerful one that I believe should be looked up to.

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Wouldn't this endanger us and open us up for future attacks on the U.S? I doubt it. How many external successful non-american-lead terrorist attacks that have caused substantial damage have we faced in our history? Not a significant amount to justify such extreme action in my opinion. I fully realize how tragic the events that took place on 9/11 were. All the same the likely hood of another attack is small. And there are other ways of defending ourselves than spying on the american public. We do not need this sort of breach of our rights to stay reasonably safe in the U.S.

Do not forget that with power comes corruption. And with corruption comes disaster. There are grave risks that come along with giving the government this sort of power. Look at the power the government has over the public, and the potential for a totalitarian like state. The government has the technology, and the easily has the means to pull off a largely controlling state. I severely doubt the government will or even could regress into this type of ridiculousness. But all the same, it is a possibility that needs to be addressed. We should not let this sort of power be in the hands of the government.