Do you think that someone could steal 150 million dollars and get away with it?  Well, the truth is that such a theft is taking place every single hour of every single day.  The federal government is stealing 150 million dollars an hour from our children and our grandchildren and Barack Obama thinks that is a good thing.  The new Obama budget projects a $1.33 trillion federal budget deficit for the 2012 fiscal year.  That is significantly higher than the $1.15 trillion that the Congressional Budget Office was projecting because it includes a whole bunch of stimulus spending that the Obama administration plans to do.  So let’s do a little math.  When you divide $1.33 trillion by 365 days, you get 3.6438356 billion dollars.  So on average, the United States will be adding more than 3.6 billion dollars to the national debt every single day during fiscal 2012.  And when you divide $3.6438356 billion by 24 hours, you get 151.8 million dollars.  So on average, the U.S. national debt will be going up by more than 151 million dollars every single hour during fiscal 2012 if Obama has his way.  This is a theft from our children and our grandchildren that is so vast that it is almost unimaginable.

The 2012 budget deficit that the Obama administration is projecting would be equivalent to approximately 8.5 percent of GDP.  We simply cannot afford to be running these kinds of outrageous budget deficits year after year.

At the moment, the U.S. national debt is sitting at a grand total of$15,355,838,921,022.16.  That is an amount that is so large that it is hard to even put into words.

At this point our national debt is greater than 100% of our national GDP.  We are on the road to national financial disaster and yet our politicians keep piling up debt at a rate that is absolutely mind blowing.

The Obama administration is projecting that budget deficits will go down “in the future”, but that is what our politicians always do.  They always promise that the budget picture will improve “down the road”, but that never actually happens.

According to the Bush administration, we were supposed to be swimming in huge budget surpluses by now.

So how did that work out?

Our politicians always promise to cut spending, but it never actually comes to pass.  We are always told that cutting spending would be too damaging to the economy “right now” but that they will definitely start cutting things later on.

For example, just check out this recent quote from White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew….

CONTINUED at The American Dream.

McDonald’s restaurants (if you can even call them that) in Australia, having suffered from a recent spat of robberies (who the f*** robs a McDonald’s? Taco Bell or GTFO), have teamed up with security firm SelectaDNA to install sprayers above its doors that will douse robbers with an invisible mist of DNA. Why? To make them glow under blacklight for police identification. Wait, WHAT?

The newly introduced DNA will then seep harmlessly into his or her skin for two weeks (and clothes for six months) allowing the police to reveal the culprit using UV light.
The spray is both invisible and odorless, but even if the hapless highwayman notices the deoxyribonucleic acid rain cloud, SelectaDNA assures that its chemical concoction is “virtually impossible to remove.” Making matters worse for the offender is that each DNA sequence is unique to the location to which it was installed, meaning a successful forensic identification is 100% admissible in court. Basically, if you get caught in this stuff, you’re screwed.

No word if the DNA will cause you to mutate into a supervillain, but brobro in the picture there does look kinda like a Star Wars character, so that’s something. Not something I’d be willing to rob a McDonald’s to achieve, but I’m also smart enough to only rob Burger Kings. *putting on cardboard crown* NOW LEAD ME TO THE ROYAL TREASURE ROOM.

Source: Geekologie.

Pornographic toys, magazines and videos were stolen from a Linda sex shop, but the store’s owner is surprised by what wasn’t taken.

Kevin Couch owns Fantasy Factory across the street from a strip club, and Monday night someone broke into his adult store. But the culprits never touched the cash register.

“They just took the toys and left,” he said. “They didn’t take the money or anything so I was lost. The sheriff’s department was lost. When he saw all the stuff in here and he goes ‘that’s all they took?’ and I was like ‘yeah.’”

So Kevin thinks it was kids just trying to make a little mischief in forbidden territory.

“They see the adult store here, they can’t come in here they can’t purchase this stuff so they are bored and they break in and come in and take it at night when no one is here,” he said.

So far, there are no suspects, just a suspected age range: boys probably about 13 to 17 years old.

“If I was to do it I’d probably go for cash, not adult toys,” Linda resident Rodney Foster said. “I don’t really understand why somebody would take that, that’s kind of gross and weird.”

The thieves busted in by using a chunk of asphalt to crash through the door. It will cost Kevin about $800 to fix the door and he’s out about $150 worth of merchandise.

It’s the second time his store has been broken into in a year.

Source: CBS Sacramento. Video at link.

*Note.. that is not a picture of the store front, it’s just funny.

New Republican primary rules are going to make it basically impossible for any candidate to wrap up the Republican nomination very early in 2012.  In fact, the new Republican primary rules make a “brokered convention” much more likely and they also make it much more likely that the Republican establishment will attempt to steal the nomination away from a candidate that they do not like.  How exactly they would do this will be discussed later in the article.  The key is that most Republican primaries and caucuses will now allocate delegates using a proportional system rather than a “winner take all” system.  Back in 2008, John McCain did very well in early “winner take all” primaries and wrapped up the Republican nomination very, very quickly.  Nothing like that will happen in 2012.  In fact, if the field remains crowded it is going to be very difficult for any candidate to accumulate more than 50 percent of the delegates by the time the Republican national convention rolls around.  As will be discussed later on in this article, that would move the power into the hands of the Republican establishment.

First, let’s try to understand what these new changes are.  Sadly, it appears that even most Republican voters do not understand how things have changed.

The following rule was adopted by the Republican Party back in August 2010….

“Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis.”

This new rule means that delegates will be apportioned to candidates on a proportional basis in Republican caucuses and primaries that are conducted prior to April 1st.  One notable exception to this rule is Florida, which got approval to remain a “winner take all” state.  So Florida will be very important.

In addition, all of the states that are now using “proportional representation” do not allocate delegates the exact same way.  Each state has slightly different election rules.

But in general, in most of the primaries and caucuses held before April 1st, delegates will be awarded to multiple candidates instead of to just a single candidate.

Therefore, it now becomes much less important who wins each individual state.  Instead, the key is how many delegates a candidate picks up in each state.

The Republicans decided to go to such a system after watching the extended battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in 2008.  The following comes from a recent Huffington Post article….

CONTINUED at The American Dream.

The Occupy Wall Street protesters were allowed to remain in New York’s Zuccotti Park for two months, against the will of its private owners. They were clearly trespassers, indeed, much worse than garden variety trespassers, who almost always quickly leave. They were there prepared to stay indefinitely. In effect, they were literally attempting to steal the park from its lawful owners.

Nevertheless, they were allowed to remain, in the belief that to eject them would somehow constitute a violation of their freedom of speech. They had seized the park in order to denounce capitalism. Ejecting them, would have ended their use of the park for that purpose and thus, according to virtually everyone with a public voice, from New York’s Mayor to the lowliest media reporter, would have violated their freedom of speech.

A major lesson to be learned from the occupation is that hardly anyone nowadays understands the meaning of freedom of speech. Contrary to the prevailing view, freedom of speech is not the ability to say anything, anywhere, at any time. Actual freedom of speech is consistent withrespect for property rights. It presupposes that the speaker has the consent of the owners of any property he uses in speaking, such as the land, sound system, or lecture hall or radio or television studio that he uses.

Had the owners of Zuccotti Park invited the protesters to camp on their land and propound their ideas, and then the police had ejected them, the protesters’ freedom of speech would in fact have been violated. But that was not the case. The only actual violation of freedom present was the protesters’ violation of the freedom of the owners of Zuccotti park to use their property for their own purposes. The protesters did not violate specifically the freedom of speech of the owners, but they certainly did violate their freedom in general with respect to the use of Zuccotti Park. Had the owners wanted to invite some other person or group for the purpose of speaking, then the protesters would have violated the freedom of speech specifically, by means of their presence and their activities.

Nevertheless, by the logic of the prevailing view of freedom of speech, protesters in the future will be able to storm into lecture halls and/or seize radio and television stations in order to deliver their message and then claim that their freedom of speech is violated when the police come to eject them, even though the police in such cases would in fact be acting precisely in order to uphold the freedom of speech. Indeed, since the days of the so-called Free Speech Movement at Berkeley, back in the 1960s, disruptions of speeches delivered by invited guests have occurred repeatedly on college campuses, in the name of the alleged freedom of speech of the disrupters. No attention has been paid to the actual violation of the freedom of speech of the invited speakers.

The prevailing view of freedom of speech is a major threat to freedom of speech. Not only does it provide justification for actual violations of freedom of speech of the kinds just mentioned, but it also makes freedom of speech appear to be a fundamental enemy of rational communication. Speakers cannot address audiences, professors cannot lecture to students if disrupters are permitted to drown them out and then hide behind the claim that they do so in the name of freedom of speech. If the prevailing view of freedom of speech were correct, the ability of speakers to speak and professors to lecture would require accepting the principle of the need to violate freedom of speech.

Of course, the prevailing view is totally incorrect. Actual freedom of speech, based on respect for property owners’ rights to use their own property as they see fit, is the guarantor of rational communication. If the property rights of the owners of parks, lecture halls, and radio and television stations are respected, the disrupters will be ejected and very soon will no longer even bother to appear. Rational communication will then proceed without incident.

Upholding freedom of speech and rational communication requires a policy of no tolerance for the occupation of property against the will of its owners. Any such occupation is in violation of the owners’ freedom, including their freedom of speech. Protester-occupiers are enemies of freedom, including, above all, freedom of speech.

Source: the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Written by George Reisman.

Here I go again, preaching to the fucking choir because no one with half a brain cell needs to be informed and educated on the harsh reality of socialism. Truth be told, no one will want to be converted, that needs to be, until they’ve reached the bottom of the socialist barrel and even then the vast majority of socialist dipshits will still be reaching up waiting for big brother to reach down and give them a lift. Hell, if you’ve read my article ‘Capitalism: That Damned Dirty Word’ you.. Read More..

Via TheSwash.com

*Taken from the Huffington Post.

Over the past several months, businessman Herman Cain has spent tens of thousands of dollars in campaign cash on his own books and pamphlets, multiple outlets reported on Tuesday. The money — which went to Cain’s company T.H.E New Voice — represented a significant percentage of the total funds raised by his campaign.

Cain’s use of his presidential campaign as a means of personal enrichment has already attracted the attention of watchdog groups, which find his behavior troubling. David Donnelly, national campaigns director of the Public Campaign Action Fund, argued that it could represent an Federal Election Commission violation, since Cain would personally profit by driving his book up the bestseller list.

But the move is still not particularly surprising. Cain may be the most flagrant abuser of the practice — his schedule contains a relatively equal mix of campaign events and stops on his book tour — but he is hardly the only one. In late September, theWashington Post reported that fellow Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was intertwining his campaign activities with promotional stops for his and his wife’s books.

CONTINUED..

*Taken from the Huffington Post.

Presidential candidate Herman Cain swears he didn’t get the idea for his 999 tax plan from SimCity, but the makers of that video game are still having fun with the connection.

On Monday afternoon, Electronic Arts will be lowering the price of SimCity games on its websiteto $9.99 — a $10 discount — for a limited time.

It has also put out a video about the similarities between Cain’s plan and the default tax rates in the game SimCity 4, which were first noted by The Huffington Post.

CONTINUED..

*Taken from Seattle PI.

Did Herman Cain get the idea for his 9-9-9 tax proposal from a computer game?

That’s a question posed by The Huffington Post, which points out similarities between the GOP candidate’s plan and the simple tax system that residents lived under in the computer worlds of SimCity 4. SimCity, of course, is the hit game in which you get to develop and plan your own cities and protect them against disasters and attacks by giant monsters.

Cain, the former head of Godfather’s Pizza, has proposed a new and simpler tax code: a 9 percent corporate tax rate, a 9 percent income tax rate and a 9 percent national sales tax. The idea is catching fire with some conservative voters as Cain battles for the GOP nomination.

But here’s the funny part, according to the article:

CONTINUED..