Vice President Joe Biden spoke out forcefully against the Iranian government Tuesday at the Rabbinical Assembly Convention meeting, saying actions taken by the Obama White House were preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. But the Romney campaign was quick to disagree.

Military assistance, coupled with financial and oil sanctions passed by the U.S. and the European Union, would cripple the Iranian economy, Biden promised.

“When we took office, let me remind you, there was virtually no international pressure on Iran. We were the problem,” Biden said. “We were diplomatically isolated in the world, in the region, in Europe.”

Biden continued, “We were neither fully respected by our friends nor feared by our opponents. Today is it starkly, starkly different.”

The other side of the aisle struck back at Biden’s comments, with GOP presidential candidate and presumptive nominee Mitt Romney’s Policy Director Lanhee Chen calling foul on the placement of blame, and stating the vice president’s words were “wrong and completely inappropriate.”

CONTINUED at CNN. Video at link.

Philip Zelikow, top adviser to Condoleezza Rice, talks to the Guardian about his top secret 2006 memo on interrogation

A senior Bush administration official and former head of the 9/11 Commission has described CIA interrogation techniques used on alleged terrorists as torture and said he warned in a secret memo at the height of the “war on terror” that they breached the US’s own war crimes laws.

Philip Zelikow, who was the US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice’s most senior official, told the Guardian that he now regards what officials euphemistically called “enhanced interrogation”, such as sleep deprivation and waterboarding, as torture – although he did not use that word at the time and is reluctant to use it now.

Zelikow, whose official position was counsellor to Rice, said he had her support on the issue. As the state department’s representative on the National Security Council committee considering legal issues around violent interrogations, he expressed his concerns at the time in a top secret 2006 memorandum.

The memo, to other members of the committee who represented the justice and defence departments and intelligence services, warned that the CIA’s use of waterboarding and other abuses were almost certainly in breach of US and international law. But the memo so alarmed the administration that it was immediately rejected and all copies were ordered destroyed.

A draft version of the memo, found at the state department, wasreleased this week following a freedom of information request by the National Security Archive in Washington.

Zelikow told the Guardian in an email exchange that while he did not use the word torture in the memo, he believes that is what the CIA was using. “I do regard the interrogation practices and conditions of confinement, taken together, as torture – in the ordinary layman’s use of this term. But … ‘torture’ is also a term with a carefully worded legal meaning and definition. So I tend to avoid talking about ‘torture’ because it would appear I’m accusing officials of criminal activity, which I’m not sure was the case,” he said.

“I have sometimes just referred to ‘physical torment’ instead, which seems expressive and is accurate.”

Zelikow said he is uncertain whether individuals in the CIA or other services are guilty of war crimes or have other criminal liability over the use of torture because they were told by the office of legal counsel, which provides legal advice to the president, that techniques such waterboarding, which causes the sensation of drowning, sleep deprivation and stress positions, were legal.

“For better or worse, but mainly better, to be a crime one must violate the law. To be an intentional crime … So the attorney general’s legal position telling officials their conduct is legal really did matter,” he said. “Had I been in the attorney general’s or OLC’s position in 2002, I would not have interpreted either the war crimes statute (as written then) or the torture statute in the way those officials interpreted them. But they made their choices and had the authority to make them.”

But he said he has little doubt that the methods were unacceptable. “I think what they did was wrong,” he said.

CONTINUEd at The Guardian.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

I’d hate to knock a whole state but man, what the fuck was South Carolina thinking? After a few debates and weeks of campaigning, the Palmetto State finally held their presidential primaries. After the smoke cleared, the sinister grin of Newt Gingrich was all anyone could see. The scariest part about all this is that South Carolina has a history of picking presidential candidates. Since 1980, the results of the South Carolina primaries have been game changing. In 1980 the winner was Reagan, who went on to win the presidency. In 1988 it was Bush I, who also won the presidency. In 1996 it was Bob Dole, who won the nomination but ultimately lost to Bill Clinton. In 2000 it was Bush II, who won the presidency. In 2008 it was McCain, who won the nomination but lost to Obama. So if history is any indicator, Gingrich will be the Republican nominee to go head-to-head with Barack Obama this fall. Then again, there’s a first time for everything and chances are, this is just some ridiculous coincidence.

Before we got to Iowa, we were told how important it was. We were also told the same thing about New Hampshire. Initially, Mitt Romney won both those states but after those genius Iowans realized that they forgot how to count right, they declared Rick Santorum the winner, thus solidifying his position as the frontrunner. But wait, Mitt won New Hampshire, which we were told made him the frontrunner. Now Newt has won South Carolina and we’re told that means he’ll be the nominee. Man, all this bullshit is confusing. I mean, how can you say that any of these men are the frontrunner? Each one has only won one state out of fifty and there are forty-seven that still have to vote. The problem is, all this rhetoric is just media hype – trying to shape the public opinion while capitalizing on weekly ratings spikes. Right now, this race is anyone’s game, except for Santorum because even if he did win the nomination, he’d get slaughtered by Obama. The truth is, South Carolina will eventually be wrong. You can buy into this weird Palmetto State and media hyped superstition all you want but statistically the tide will eventually turn.

So Newt Gingrich won South Carolina (40 percent), Mitt Romney got second (28 percent), Rick Santorum got third (17 percent) and in what is a showing of how unintelligent South Carolinians are – Ron Paul got fourth place (13 percent). The results of this primary prove unequivocally that South Carolina is for statists. Then again, looking at this primary situation as a whole, maybe something odd is going on. Now it is no secret that I am a Ron Paul guy and truthfully, I don’t want to come off as a sore loser. In fact, I have been of the belief that Mitt Romney was going to win this thing since before anyone even announced their bid last year. The problem is, Paul has gotten the shaft so far and based off of everything I’ve seen, it’s hard to understand why. Let me explain in more detail.

To start, Ron Paul was favored to win Iowa going into their archaic caucuses but to everyone’s surprise and shock, Rick Santorum rose from his bottomless pit and took the state by storm. Santorum, who had used up all of his resources in that state, still hadn’t made enough of an impact to even put a dent in Iowa. However, when the votes were tallied and then tallied again because the state admittedly fucked up, Santorum was the winner. Romney was in second and the projected favorite, Dr. Paul, was in third ahead of Gingrich and Perry. How did Santorum, an almost unknown candidate with no real support, win Iowa? Between the ballots being collected and counted at a secret location behind closed doors as well as the fact that there was already alleged fraud with the “dead voters” and the fact that they changed their results two weeks later makes this whole process look sketchy. I’m not saying that Paul won the state but shit just doesn’t add up.

In New Hampshire, Mitt Romney was the hands down favorite and in the end, he came through and won the state with Ron Paul not too far behind in second place. Huntsman won third place and then dropped out to support Romney. Gingrich and Santorum were both at the bottom with Rick Perry who dropped out not to long after these results. Thankfully, Santorum was knocked back down to Earth and Newt Gingrich had two bad finishes in a row. Leaving New Hampshire, Mitt Romney was the frontrunner with Ron Paul right on his heels. It had become a two-man race and frankly, I still believe it is, regardless of South Carolina’s results. However, let’s look at that situation.

The South Carolina portion of this journey is also pretty odd. In the first debate in Myrtle Beach, rude South Carolinians were booing Ron Paul and his explanation of the “golden rule”. Oh, how very Christian of them! The second debate in Charleston was quite different however. The other three candidates, as well as the media, tried to limit Dr. Paul’s time and when this was apparent, the crowd went apeshit and booed for Paul to have a chance to answer some of the questions that they weren’t giving him. If anything, this gave Paul supporters some hope that the game was changing in the Palmetto State. The tip of the iceberg came when each of Dr. Paul’s events in the state were packed full of thousands of enthusiastic supporters. No other candidate traveling the state could compete with the level of love Paul was generating. Elsewhere, just a day before the primary results in South Carolina, Newt Gingrich had to cancel an event due to complete lack of interest. In fact, here’s what was reported in the Associated Press:

Newt Gingrich has cancelled a campaign appearance in South Carolina because of poor attendance.

The Republican presidential candidate was scheduled to speak to the Southern Republican Leadership on Friday. But a campaign spokesman told reporters that he would no longer be appearing due to poor attendance.

There were just a few dozen people in the audience at the College of Charleston’s arena, where the event was taking place.

The weird thing about this is that primary elections are typically decided by the enthusiasm as of a candidate’s supporters, as most people don’t even bother voting in primaries. The fact of the matter is, Ron Paul has the most enthusiastic supporters of any candidate I’ve ever seen in my lifetime. Theoretically, he should be killing these primaries, especially against douchenuggets like Rick Santorum. Yet somehow, this enthusiasm doesn’t seem to be enough to really tip the scales. However, how do people like Gingrich and Santorum, who have little to no enthusiastic support, keep on getting these life-preservers thrown to them to keep them afloat? Who’s throwing the life-preservers and where are they getting them from?

Is there a conspiracy? Who knows? You have to admit that this is all strange though. The truth is, even though Paul finished last in South Carolina and all his critics are pushing for him to exit the race, it doesn’t really change the fact that in his loss he still had some success. As he said in his speech after the primary, his campaign racked up four-to-five times more votes in South Carolina than they did just four years prior. So in that short time, Ron Paul’s message has grown 400-500 percent! The real reason why he is running is to promote the message of freedom and liberty and even though he finished last, the fact that the message has grown so much is a huge success! It’s not just in South Carolina however, Ron Paul’s message is growing at an alarming rate everywhere he goes. He might not have won any states yet but he has opened the eyes of more and more people and in the end, even if he doesn’t get the nomination, people will be more aware and more vigilant. Hell, the door for Rand Paul might be opened pretty wide come 2016 or 2020.

Well, at least 13 percent of South Carolinians are okay in my book. The other 87 percent just voted for statists however and as far as I am concerned, they probably shouldn’t bitch about Obama so much when the person they voted for isn’t too far from being of the same progressive mold. Hell, if they checked the box next to “Rick Santorum”, their vote went to someone worse than our current king. It’s funny though, these Christian South Carolinians have picked their choice for president and it is a man who cheated on his first wife with his second wife who he cheated on with his third wife and then used the daughters of his first wife to convince the world that his second wife was lying about his third wife. That may have been a hard sentence to follow but Newt’s dick is a tricky motherfucker and getting his kids to lie for it is even worse. Considering this is so confusing may have just caused the South Carolinians to shut down and throw their vote away. I mean, if Miss South Carolina 2007 is any indicator of the best the state has to offer, they’re all screwed in that state.

Here’s a refresher, in case you forgot about Miss South Carolina:

Dumb as fuck.

Congressional officials said President Obama has used his recess appointment powers Wednesday to name a head for the controversial newConsumer Financial Protection Bureau in a move Republican lawmakers said amounted to an unconstitutional power grab.

Mr. Obama made the appointment of former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray even though theSenate, which has the power to confirm nominees, considers itself still in session.

But the White House argues Republican senators stonewalled the nominee for so long that Mr. Obama had no choice but to circumvent them.

In making the appointment, Mr. Obama rejected the precedent set by former President Clinton and the precedent Mr. Obama and his fellow Democrats set under President George W. Bush in 2007 and 2008.

“Although the Senate is not in recess, President Obama, in an unprecedented move, has arrogantly circumvented the American people,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican.

GOP House Speaker John A. Boehner called the move “an extraordinary and entirely unprecedented power grab by President Obama that defies centuries of practice and the legal advice of his own Justice Department.”
“The precedent that would be set by this cavalier action would have a devastating effect on the checks and balances that are enshrined in our Constitution,” the Ohio Republican said in a statement.
Administration officials told the Associated Press they anticipate the move may be challenged in court.

The president is expected to introduce Mr. Cordray during a trip to Ohio Wednesday, and in prepared remarks the AP reported Mr. Obama will callSenate Republicans’ ongoing blockade of his nomination “inexcusable.”

CONTINUED at the Washington Times.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Lately, talk show hosts, politicians and know-it-all politificionados have been in an uproar over the political rhetoric that is used against one another. These pimps of political correctness and sensitivity are boo-hoo-hooing over the fact that anything that can somehow be related to combat, guns or war simply has no place in political rhetoric. What these tear-soaked turd munchers fail to realize is that we’re a pretty toned down society compared to where we once were. That doesn’t matter to them though because they don’t really study history, they just blow unjustified and inaccurate claims out of their tired lame rosy asses. They are calling for an “era of civility” just like in the days of yesteryear. It’s time to man up and face reality kiddies!

Introduction:

The Giffords shooting brought all of this out into the forefront. Every libtard maroon from the Beltway to Dagobah was in a bitch and rant session about how evil Sarah Palin was for having crosshairs on her website, even though liberal campaign king Bob Beckel admitted to inventing the crosshairs imagery for “targeting” districts back in the 1990′s. Of course the liberal websites that used that symbolism are not under fire because it is the conservative side of the line that is evil. Never mind that the fucking kid was a psycho shitbag that didn’t even have a real political ideology that made a lick of sense. But the conservatives are to blame because liberals are perfect. I’m a libertarian by the way, but libsnots lump us in with the conservatives because they don’t pay attention to anything other than making unicorns with their own poop.

Anyway, my rhetoric here is salty, I hope I’m not “shooting” myself in the foot already. I wouldn’t want to prematurely go to “war” with anyone who may have me in their “sights” before I can fully “hit” my point with the accuracy of a “sharpshooter”. I don’t want to get involved in a “crossfire” debate or anything over my rhetoric. I’m trying to tone it down here without “taking shots” at anyone specific, as I don’t want that to be interpreted into my calling for violence against a specific “target”. I think I’m failing at this already. Maybe I should “reload” and start over. Shit, I can’t get away from it!

Point is, this talk of how people should talk is fucking retarded. I’m not talking Leo DiCaprio in ‘Gilbert Grape’ retarded, I’m talking all out completely redonkulous people that listen to Black Eyed Peas retarded! Get the fuck over it homies and move on! Stop pointing the finger at everyone other than the dude that did the evil deed. Jared Loughner is responsible for the shooting not Sarah fucking Palin and Glenn assclown Beck! Muthafuckas is always looking for someone to blame besides the one who is to blame.

Now apart from my four paragraph rant, I want to show these libsicles why we are much more civilized than previous eras in this country. We aren’t on a path towards destruction in regards to our language, symbolism and expression. If anything, we’ve come a hell of a long fucking way than where we were in the days of our Founding Fathers. You think those cats were civil? Well then you must be smoking angeldust and rubbing heroin on your gums. Let me tell you about a crazy muthafucka named Aaron Burr, who was one of our many Founding Fathers.

CONTINUED at Original Post.

 *Written by Cody Bennett.

I’ve learned more about history in the four years after I graduated high school than I learned in all my twelve years of public education. I have no formal education outside of high school except for independent research that I’ve done out of curiosity and skepticism. The result is that I am better informed and more knowledgeable about a wider range of subjects than most college graduates. Not to sound my own horn, but toot, toot.

Anyway, my schooling experience was one of repressed curiosity and compulsory indoctrination—a constant struggle of trying to discover an identity and a creative voice in an environment that encouraged neither. I’m sure most people remember the angst and the awkwardness.

Well, I graduated in 2007. High school is four years behind me, and it’s probably a considerable amount of years behind all of you. It’s difficult to even maintain any sort of concern for the conditions we managed to escape, much less try to do anything about them. Except, right now as you read this there are millions of American teenagers putting up with the same system.

Standing up for the pledge…make sure to put your hand over your heart. Remain standing for the national anthem… Now for the morning announcements…for lunch we’ll be having flavorless slop…blah, blah, blah.

The toes tapping on linoleum floors. Pencils sliding across paper. The smell of dry-erase markers. The ringing of the bell at the beginning and end of every period. The same methodical march to-and-fro, day in, day out.

Oh, yes, and don’t forget to do your homework. It would be a shame if you didn’t do your homework.

The system we have now is archaic. It was designed for a different time. We keep trying to patch it up, to push it one more mile, to standardize just a little more. But it is unworkable. We are trying to give a tune up to a vehicle with blown head-gaskets. The approach modern progressives are taking toward education is one founded not upon reason, but insanity. The conservative approach isn’t much different. George W. Bush was responsible for the No Child Left Behind Act, which expanded standardized education on a national basis.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results. If someone is overdosing, you don’t give him more drugs, because that’s insane. Correct this problem, and the rest of America’s problems will be solved consequentially. By creating freedom and more choices in the realm of education, we can improve the economy, the environment, and our own individual lives. The answer is to get rid of standard-based, pass-fail regulations. The answer is to not look to the state for your education. The answer is self-education. It’s done wonders for me.

Look: here is some history that I learned all by myself.

Until the middle of the 19^th Century, education was mostly localized and available only to the wealthy. However, rapid westward expansion, hoards of immigrants, and the Industrial Revolution began to make it apparent that the nation needed some sort of model for educating the children being born into this brave new world.

Horace Mann, in the 1840’s, began a campaign for what were called “common schools”. These schools would teach children basic skills such as reading, writing and math. Our grade schools today still carry similarities to the common schools of which Mann was so fond.

By 1851, Massachusetts passed legislation including compulsory attendance and standardize teacher certification tests. Within twenty years, 7.6 million kids were enrolled in common schools and the number of teachers in the nation had risen to 125,000. Less than a decade later, the number was up to 340,000.

The first Department of Education was established in 1867 after the National Teacher’s Association lobbied congress to establish a presidential cabinet office dedicated to national education concerns. The very next year the department was demoted to an office, becoming just a small bureau in the Department of the Interior.

With this kind of expansion going on, public schools turned into education factories, taking on the same functionality of the newly industrialized nation. To sum it up, kids were being taught in a merely intellectual manner based on the principles of the Enlightenment, but under a model that resembled the changes brought about by the Industrial Revolution. The principles of the Enlightenment, which tout liberty, reason and individual responsibility, would be in direct contrast with the pragmatic, collectivist, rank-in-file attitude of industrialization.

This is how America’s schools, nearly overnight, became authoritarian institutes requiring the standardized, compulsory education of all citizens. In other words, you don’t have a choice in the matter, because the federal government knows what is best for you. Since the beginning of the 20^th Century, our federal government has expanded public education to the point of crisis. And even though we’ve made advancements in the classroom as far as technology and curriculum, we still use the same sort of classroom model as we did over a century ago. All education reform that has had any major effect on the nation has always been in the direction of more standardized testing and more centralized political control of our schools. Yet, the system is still failing.

One reason I believe the system is failing is because the people who design the legislation aren’t the people in the classrooms. But the biggest reason it is failing is because we are using an out-dated model that doesn’t mix well with our fast-paced, information based culture.

Those are the problems. Here are the solutions.

Abolish the Department of Education. This is not a radical idea. It was a Republican Party policy for many years.

This can be done by local community activism, and hounding our representatives to actually put this issue on the table again. In Florida, a campaign for the federal deregulation of public schools, repeal of the No Child Left Behind Act, and an exemption from the Sunshine State Standards should be embarked upon. With those shackles released, I propose school vouchers in order to create competition between schools.

Check this: instead of what district you live in determining where you go to school and who gets the funding, parents will be given vouchers for the net-cost-per-year it takes to put a student through school. The parents can then choose their children’s school. If a school could operate under the cost of the voucher, the balance would roll over into the next year for that family. With the roll over money from the vouchers, parents could create a college fund for their children.

If adopted by the entire State of Florida, this model could eventually decentralize education for the entire nation. It would simultaneously create competition among the states for everything from colleges to pre-schools. The states with flawed models would ultimately fail, and through common sense they would adopt the models that succeed.

There is one thing that must be understood. My model doesn’t say anything about what standards schools should teach, nor do I mean to suggest any. For me, a teacher is merely someone who bestows knowledge upon others. I am a teacher. You probably are, too. We educate, and are educated every day. The truth, though, is that everyone is responsible for his own education at some point. If we want to change the way we educate the country, we have to change our attitudes. As individuals, we must take hold of our own minds and make our own decisions based on our own judgment. That is the capacity of an educated mind.

We must teach our children to do the same.

*Taken from Prison Planet. Written by Paul Joseph Watson.

During an appearance on CBS News’ Face the Nation on Sunday, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa acknowledged that an almost identical program to Fast and Furious, in which the federal government trafficked guns directly to suspected criminals, existed under the Bush administration.

Issa’s comments about a similar program being operational under the Bush administration appear at the 3:50 mark (in the video above).

“We know that, under the Bush administration, there were similar operations, but they were coordinated with Mexico,” Issa, R-Calif., said. “They made every effort to keep their eyes on the weapons the whole time. So we’re not, per se, saying that tracing weapons is a bad idea.”

CONTINUED..

My Two Cents: This felt fitting as today is the 10th anniversary of the Afghan War. End Two Cents.