Topics – Page 15 – Zombies Uncensored

Trickle Down and Around Taxation

Trickle down taxation is when business push higher operation costs onto their customers. John Stossel’s article, “Obama: I Will Tax You to Punish Banks,” expresses the idea that taxes aren’t really paid by business–all taxation eventually trickles down to customers:

“In other words, the Obama Administration is going to punish those greedy banks by making it more expensive for you to borrow money. This is wrong on so many levels, it’s hard to know where to begin. Let’s start with a point made by Jamie Dimon, CEO at JP Morgan Chase: ‘Using tax policy to punish people is a bad idea…All businesses tend to pass their costs on to customers.'”

And from TheOneLaw on Trickle Down Taxation:

“Taxes on corporations are just passed on to the customer that purchases the products of that company. If that customer is another business it adds on its taxes and passes it along until it gets to the final consumer of the product.”

I agree with both of these articles, but want to point out not all the additional taxes are paid by customers. With high unemployment, businesses have the option of passing some of the tax burden onto their employees. Several companies have stopped matching 401(k) contributions and unpaid overtime is on the rise. Keep in mind the banking industry is regulated by Washington DC as to what they are allowed to charge customers. The taxation can be passed along with new hidden fees, but don’t be surprised to hear bank employees complaining about benefit and wage cuts.

With each new tax, sooner or later the tax shifts its way to the bottom, to the person that has no power to pass the tax farther along.

Scott Brown Defends Role In Romneycare – Damned if you do, Damned if you don’t

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1sLegdL4EQ

Scott Brown is running in the special election to replace U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy next Tuesday.

Scott Brown voted in favor of health care for all (Romneycare) in Massachusetts.

Here is Neil Cavuto questioning Brown about the vote to pass Romneycare. Listen for the Freudian slip at the very end of the clip.

“People have lost face in the process”

Republican Scott Brown having to own up for supporting failed government mandated health care has lost face in the process.

Big Pharma Pushing Hard For Health Care Bill

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5809Xe9-pg

Big pharmaceutical companies are donating heavily to Martha Coakley. If Coakley wins the special election to replace U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy on Tuesday, Coakley will vote for the passage of the health care reform bill. Pharmaceutical companies wouldn’t be backing Coakley if they didn’t stand to gain from passage of health care reform.

Words and Phrases in Political Commentary and What They Really Mean

Don’t take political commentary at face value. This list explains the code for commonly used words and phrases in political commentary and what they really mean or are trying to say.

Biased – Holds views I would never entertain for a second.

Bipartisanship – My ideas are good ones and the opposition is partisan, because they don’t agree with me.

Brainwashed – Fundamentalist views different from my own fundamentalist views.

Change – From a politician, it means, “I’m not an incumbent.”

Code for – I take nothing they say at face value.

Conservative – Somewhere to the right of my views.

Cover-up – Not emphasizing what I think is important.

Democracy – My opinion is in the majority; in this case its OK for 51% of the people to tell the other 49% what to do.

Disinformation – You should listen to my bias, not the other side’s bias.

Extremist – The views farthest away from my own, and I consider them dangerous.

Face value – I’m about to take what they said and change it into something completely different.

Fascist – Picks on different groups than I pick on.

French – Effeminate.

Fundamentalist – They have strongly held, opposing views I consider dangerous.

Hates America – Political opponent pointed out something negative about America.

Ignorant – Prefers a different flavor of propaganda.

Indoctrination – They teach kids things I would not.

Informal – Secret.

Liberal – Somewhere to the left of my views.

Parrot – This isn’t the first time I’ve heard this and disagreed with it.

Profit – From liberals it means bad vs. from conservatives it means good.

Racist – An opponent who made any reference to race.

Radical – The views farthest away from my own.

Regular American – People that think the same way as I do.

Seems to suggest – Like the definitions on this list. I heard what they said but I know its code for.

Selfish – Not giving me what I want.

Serve the people – Should be doing only what I want.

Socialist – Somewhere to the left of me.

Spam – I didn’t agree with that the first time I heard it.

Stratigist – Bullshit artist, spin doctor.

Wingnut – Views so far from my own, I can’t discuss them and will instead call them names.

Zombies Fed up with Discrimination

The latest round of race relations being discussed in the news has created a flurry of emails from zombies reminding me of how poorly they are treated in society. Zombies face an abundance of ignorance, intolerance, and hate on a daily basis. This is a summary of the most common racial intolerance zombies face.

Zombies are upset about the insensitive comments made towards how they stink, talk funny, are stupid, and are slow.

Zombies are tired of hearing , “All you zombies talk funny; it’s brains, not ‘braaaaaaaaaaains.’ Get a job, deadbeat zombie. Go back to Hell, where you came from. Kill a zombie for your mommie.” Humans can’t seem to say zombie without saying “stupid zombie.”

Backhanded compliments from humans: “You have nice skin, for a zombie. You are smart, for a braindead zombie. At least you aren’t French.”

There are no laws to protect zombies from discrimination. Zombies are barred from voting, jobs, homes, marrying, education, and police protection. Zombies are only protected while in a grave, and even there they have to defend themselves from necrophiliacs.

There is no double standard in the news where Zombies are concerned because there is only one standard. There aren’t any networks or news shows with a zombie bias. News programs don’t have hours of debate when a human makes a racially charged anti-zombie comment. No one has ever been asked to resign because of an off-color remark about zombies.

Hollywood clearly has an anti-zombie bias. Other undead creatures like ghosts and spirits are treated as heroes. How many love scenes have you seen between a zombie and a human? There are zero romances with zombies, but Vampires get laid all the time.

Zombies are racially profiled without fail. Humans don’t stop and ask themselves before chopping one in half, “Maybe this one isn’t a bad zombie?” If a human dare speak out in defense of zombies, they are quickly labeled a zombie-lover.

Just because they are Life-force challenged is no reason for the unequal treatment zombies receive in society.

Poll – Which Science Fiction Evil Computer Best Represents Washington DC?

What would things be like if congress were replaced with liberty-minded people? Would it do any good? It seems the bureaucracy has achieved a consciousness of its own, like a computer run amok in a Science Fiction story. Is anyone in Washington still in control? Can anyone pull the plug?

[poll id=”2″]

The list isn’t complete because computers controlling humanity is a common theme in Science Fiction. Please add any evil computers or thoughts on which computer best represents Washington DC in the comments section below.

Health Care Reform Bill – A Modern Advanced Civil Right?

Health care reform was sold with the argument that all Americans had the right to health care. How can something you are forced to do be considered a right? Call me mad, call me crazy, but I thought a right was something you could choose to do, or not do.

Imagine –

You were required to speak out.

You were forced to prove you are a member of a religious organization.

You were mandated to publish something.

You must own a weapon to defend yourself.

You had to peaceably assemble a certain amount of times each year.

Imagine if you didn’t do any of the above, you had to pay a 750 dollar fine for not exercising each of these rights.

This is the logic behind the health care reform bill: you have the right to health care insurance, and if you choose not to exercise this new right, you’ll pay a heavy penalty.

To sum it up, we are are being sold a lie that individual rights are an old-fashioned notion. A negative campaign is being waged that says America needs to change and be more like modern advanced countries that believe society as a whole has rights that supersede individual rights. Putting individual liberties first is only old-fashioned to Americans, because the rest of the world is still catching up with the concept. Ignoring individual rights is an age-old concept and that can hardly be described as modern or advanced.

Let me point out some less advertised features of these advanced countries American has been compared to. These are examples of what happens in countries where individual rights are placed behind society rights:

Canada – The Customs and Revenue Agency is responsible for determining which books, videos, comics, and other material should be allowed into the country.

Germany – Declared the Church of Scientology unconstitutional.

France – Wants fines for wearing burqas in public.

United Kingdom – Censors political speech and attitudes.

These countries should be examples of what not to do; they are example of the dangers of putting individual rights at the back of bus. Don’t look to them for examples on how to run America, because changing the definition of rights is not progress, it’s not advanced, and it is not a bright future.

The Department of Carrots and Sticks Mission Statement – Liberty through Behavior Modification

The phrase “carrots and sticks” appears in political discussion so often, the first results on Google for “carrots and sticks” are about politics and not about animal husbandry. The Beast of Burden is officially human.

Example: President Obama speaking about dealing with Iran

“If we show ourselves willing to talk and to offer carrots and sticks in order to deal with these pressing problems — and if Iran then rejects any overtures of that sort — it puts us in a stronger position to mobilize the international community to ratchet up pressure on Iran.”

A good way NOT to make progress with Iranians is by analogizing them to donkeys and the USA as their master.

This phrase is dehumanizing , in that carrots and sticks are used on beasts of burden by their masters. It is one of the few honest appraisals you’ll hear a politician utter on how they view the world. From their perspective, you and I and other nations are the dumb animals to be steered in the direction of their desires.

You don’t use carrots and sticks on someone you consider to be your equal. You wouldn’t threaten a neighbor with a club or bribe them with money to resolve a dispute. When you consider someone your equal, you let them decide how to act for themselves without coercion.

You don’t use carrots and sticks on your friends. If you were to say to a friend, “Come over to my home for a superbowl party; there’ll be lots of snacks for you if you come–and if you don’t show up, I’ll flatten your tires,” they won’t be your friend long.

You wouldn’t say to your spouse, “If you’ll lose some weight I’ll help clean up around the house, and if you don’t, I’ll have sex with someone else,” unless the goal was to divorce so you could have sex with someone else.

Politicians are loaded with these carrots and sticks; they’ve got them for health care, cap and trade, banks, buying cars, and the economy in general. Politicians see so much more work to be done, and have an arsenal of creative ideas to corral the masses. That’s what politicians do; they pat themselves on the back for thinking up new forms of behavior modification.

Why is it acceptable to use laws to modify other peoples’ behavior? We wouldn’t treat people we know and care about with a carrot and stick approach, so why is it considered acceptable to treat strangers this way?

Liberal Hypocrisy vs. Conservative Hypocrisy – the Damage is Done

The left and the right cherry pick principles to champion based upon marketing strategy, and not based upon any core principles. This cherry picking approach has been steadily destroying the principles each claim to defend. Here are some examples of liberal hypocrisy and conservative hypocrisy and the damage they have done:

Defending Liberty – banning unhealthy living (left) vs. banning euthanasia (right). Both the left and the right claim to defend your right to live your life however you like. The left wants to restrict you from shorting your life by unhealthy living and the right doesn’t want you to choose when you die. If there is one thing that shows you live in a free society, it’s the right to decide to end your life by either slow or quick means.

Defenders of Justice – hate crimes (left) vs. terrorism crimes (right). Hate crimes are committed to send political messages and terrorism is often about religious intolerance. How important is the motive for murdering strangers when deciding an appropriate punishment? When the left wants to treat terrorists according to established law, the right labels them “terrorist sympathizers.” When the right wants to treat hate crimes according to established law, the left labels them as “racists sympathizers.” There isn’t any difference between these types of crimes. The left and right each want to be the champions of protecting the people: they just pick different villains to terrify the public while ignoring the principles of justice.

Defending free speech – banning the N-word (left) vs. flag burning (right). Both the left and right claim to be defenders of free speech but it turns out each would restrict speech that offends. Generally speaking, the left would censor violence and the right would censor sex in movies, TV, music and video games.

Both the left and right follow the same underlying dynamic – if they don’t like something, you can make it go away by passing a law. They really believe the evils they see in society can be made to go away by passing a law or declaring war on it. They have declared war on terrorism, poverty, drugs, and racism. How are all these wars working out for you? When will people realize no government has the power to make things like terrorism and racism go away?

The results of liberal and conservative hypocritical governing speak for themselves. In championing their causes, they have blown up the economy, put more limits on freedom, put people out of work, made a mockery of the justice system, stuck us in endless wars and thrown the country into to debt for decades.

In theory, our elected officials are there to protect our freedom, but they forget to ask themselves a simple question, “Will this lead to more freedom or less freedom?” It doesn’t matter if the issue is fighting evil or doing good for others, the question of more or less freedom is always relevant. Maybe if the question is asked more often the damage they’ve done can be repaired.

If They Just Kept it From the Public, There is no Crime

Judge Andrew Napolitano explains the legal ramifications behind the emails between the Federal Reserve and AIG.

Lawyers with the Fed told AIG to withhold details of the money being lent to AIG, becasue AIG was handing billions over to Goldman Sachs.

The upsetting part in this is, as the Judge puts it, “If they just kept if from the public, there is no crime and Geithner may actually be commended for his political wisdom. If it was required to be reported in a document and not accurately reported, that would be the criminal event.”

Sneaking billions to the worlds richest investment bank is only considered a crime if the paperwork wasn’t filled out properly.