[Most Recent Entries]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
Boston Conservatives' LiveJournal:
[ << Previous 20 ]
[ << Previous 20 ]
|Sunday, April 16th, 2006|
In 1971 OPEC had a meeting at which they decide that whereever oil is bought or sold, it may only be bought or sold in US dollars. This means that Mexico selling oil to China has to be sold in US dollars, Holland trading with Morrocco has to be done in US dollars, etc etc. What this means is for anyone to trade oil, they have to buy dollars. This is how the US can owe more money than any country in the history of the world, but doesn't have to pay anything back because since 1971, thanks to this OPEC agreement, the US effectively has a magic chequebook.
Imagine you're maxed out past your overdraft limit in every bank in the world, and have been for decades, but it doesn't matter because everyone still accepts your cheques and they never come back to the bank.
So what could possibly happen to the magic chequebook of the US dollar to bring all of that money back to chase Washington on Wall Street? Well, it almost happened.
On 30/10/2000, when a switch was made to a deposit account in the Wall Street branch of a French bank. This was the account handling the 2.3 million barrells of oil sold per day by Iraq under the "oil for food" scheme. The Iraqis said that they wanted to switch the account from being a dollars denominated account to a euro denominated account. The UN couldn't stop them, but it looked like a stupid thing to do at the time because the euro was only worth eighty cents to the dollar. They'd lose money on every barrell they sold. They'd bankrupt their country within a year. The Iraqis didn't care, they hated America so much that they didn't want to trade in their currency.
In 2001, the euro gained 25% against the dollar. The Iranians then decided to switch their central bank's reserve funds from dollars to euros too. This makes them member number two on the axis of evil list, with number one being the Iraqis who started the trend.
7/12/2002, North Korea declares that it's going to do ALL of it's trading in euros. Not just oil, but everything. They're quickly branded "Axis of evil" member number three.
In Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, the elected president, gains chainmanship of OPEC. He calls a meeting in Spain, in April of 2003 and on the table is the proposal that every single OPEC member stops trading in dollars and starts trading in euros. If that happened, that would be the federal reserve's worst nightmare because then every single central bank in every single country in the world has to abandon the dollar and start trading in euros. Such is the need for oil. All the dollars in those banks would be flushed out, the market would be awash with dollars and it would become a worthless currency. Worth less than toilet roll. The US would be back in it's 1920s and 1930s depression and this time they wouldn't have the Nazi party to invest in to save themselves.
|Wednesday, February 15th, 2006|
Wal-Mart Ordered to carry morning after pill.
"A Massachusetts regulatory board voted on Tuesday to require Wal-Mart stores to stock morning-after contraceptives, two weeks after three women in the state sued Wal-Mart for refusing to fill orders for the pills."
"According to the suit, Wal-Mart has previously said it was corporate policy not to stock emergency contraceptive medication, citing slow sales and low demand.
Fogleman has said the company "chooses not to carry many products for business reasons," giving low demand as one."
Supply and demand? What is this, like a free market or something?
What bothers me about this is not the pill itself, but the fact that the government is ordering a private company to carry a product. Since when does the State of Massachusetts have the right to order companies to have "commonly prescribed" medications? I thought that state does not this authority and all the information I have found refers to the law requiring hospitals to provide it. Maybe Wal-Mart is a hospital too now, but I'm sure it's possible.
Hypothetically, you own a store that sells pharmaceuticals. The State can order you to carry a product rather than allowing you to decide if you wish to. Normally you would decided because there is a demand for the product, and you would adjust your supply and price accordingly (I believe some ancient and forgotten system called capitalism had this idea). Now that the state can order you what to "carry", you will not be able base your supply on demand and therefor have no profit on that product. Now hypothetically assume you are morally opposed to the product you are being coerced and forced into selling, possibly for religious reasons. You are now forced to go against both economic well being and moral values causing not only a loss in profit, but face reincarnation into a lower caste or even more likely, eternal damnation.
All of this because three people decided to sue Wal-Mart for not carrying to pill known as "Plan B". All three held a news conference, presumably because they are super proud of their vexatious litigation. In other news, I will be suing Blockbuster for not carrying Attack of the Killer Tomatoes.
A further legal (ad hominem) analysis of the situation is revealing:http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/02/02/women_sue_wal_mart_over_morning_after_pill/
This picture tell us much about the real nature of the lawsuit. The woman in the center wears glasses and we have no idea how reliable her ability to find any pill is, without proof she was wearing them. To the left we have poorly dyed hair with almost an inch of dark roots showing. This must be very upsetting and this part of the lawsuit can be attributed to classic anger displacement: my hair is bad, WAAAAAAALMAAAART!. Now on the right side of the picture we have the speaker with the awful fashion sense. I suggest she return to the Scooby Doo gang where she will only harm farmers that try to hide hoards of gold.
|Wednesday, December 7th, 2005|
Saddam refuses to go to court
"An angry Saddam threatened at the end of the Tuesday court session to boycott the next day's proceedings after complaining that he and the seven other co-defendants had been mistreated by the "unjust court."
unjust court my ass....if i captured that son of a bitch i wouldhave killed him already and not given him a trail....hes lucky we are even given him a chance
"Saddam complained that he and the seven other defendants were tired and had been deprived of opportunities to shower, have a change of clothes, exercise or go for a smoke."
he doesnt disserve to have a shower or get a smoke, why should we let him do anything after everything that he has done. and then he says its terrorism...ha we will show him terrorism in the electric chair!
|Sunday, December 4th, 2005|
Instead of wasting time fighting over Christmas trees in public ect, people should focus on more important issues. Such as the budget or Supreme Court.
|Tuesday, November 22nd, 2005|
As posted to anti_righty conservatism Rejected it. http://www.livejournal.com/community/anti_righty/1154857.html
I Refuse to Belong to any Club That Would Have me as a Member!
Note, I say, would HAVE me as a member, were they not stupid red fascist cunts.
I now hate all BDSMers, polyamorists, pagans, Christians, men and women, who do not happen to be me or mine. Even the mine I'm not sure about.
It doesn't matter where I go, here in bloboinfoland or in concrete, I am flamed, flamed flamed. I literally think I should spray myself with flame retardent to avoid this. They would smell it, even through the internet and back the fuck off. I would smell it and it would make me too sick to fight.
I like the conservatives, in which the religious left is not included, because they are honest with me. They know the best way to express their hatred is to ignore me and thus let me be.
So, great, liberal dudes, you fucked up so hard, Like mrbogey
I am foced to the other side though it cannot be said to exist.
|Sunday, November 20th, 2005|
Lables arefor Canned Food
I would venture to say nearly everyone in Boston who isn't a red fascist is a conservative, but they just reject the label, as would I, if it didn't prevent me from talking to most human beings on the planet.
I consider myself a conservative capitalist, because capitalism is universally hardass and unfeeling,leaving us all to do our thing as long as we work and pay for it. It also acknowledges that directing the work of thers through ethical investing is work in itself.
In fact, there is no unethical investing, for taking advantage of someone else's low standard isnot unethical,merely ill-advised. But as the standard would not change even if there were more money,it willbeawhile before investor freeloading bites us in the ass.
Andso,I can be contentto be called a feminazi,abitch,an anarchist,afeminist,a liberal,anything at all if I am left alone in it,but at my core I am more conservative and isolationist than Buchanan.
|Wednesday, November 16th, 2005|
Bill softens bestiality statute
Massachusetts pols push measure lessening punishment for animal sex
Posted: November 16, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Four state legislators in Massachusetts have introduced a bill that would soften the crime of bestiality, a move pro-family activists say is a natural progression of the state's legalizing same-sex marriage.
Stated traditional-values organization Article 8: "State Sen. Cynthia Creem, Sen. Robert O'Leary, Rep. Michael Festa and Rep. David Linsky have some interesting things in common.
"They're all strongly endorsed by the state's three major powerful homosexual lobbying groups. … They're all Democrats. They're all vocal supporters of homosexual 'marriage' and whatever else the homosexual lobby bids them to do.
"And now all four have introduced Senate bill 938. Even the left-wing Weekly Dig can't believe that the Massachusetts Legislature is poised to go this far."
A story in Boston's Weekly Dig describes the legislation, entitled "An Act Relative to Archaic Crimes."
"The bill would strike down several sections of the current penal code criminalizing adultery, fornication and the advertisement of abortion," the reported stated. "It also repeals what appears to be a sodomy statute forbidding 'abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast.'
While the bill would keep bestiality technically illegal, it gives the option of less severe penalties. Previously, those convicted of "a sexual act on an animal" could receive up to 20 years in prison.
Explains the local weekly: "The new measure would give activist judges the option of slapping perps with a mere two and a half years in plush local jails, or even letting zoophiliacs walk with a $5,000 fine."
The bill was taken up during a public hearing Nov. 1 in the Legislature's Joint Committee on the Judiciary. Reportedly, no one from the public testified against the measure.
With the congressional Democrats questioning the validity of pre-war intelligence the Republican party has released a nice video on http://www.gop.com/
that shows several well known Democrats making the case for war.
What the video lacks is how information on long we waited before attacking (about 9 months), the international consensus that Iraq has weapons, and the ramifications of not finding weapons a.) we were wrong and there was a massive intelligence failure even after intense reform b.) that the weapons did exist but were moved
These are the important issues. Politicians in Congress will always be hypocrites but proving that they are accomplishes little (until election time comes around). The GOP should be focusing on disseminating the truth rather than debating it. There is no evidence at all, that the President deceived us into war.
|Tuesday, November 1st, 2005|
LJ community you guys might like
Do you like arguing? There is a funny community I post to called honestyisabitch
. You have to have a pretty thick skin because people like to flame and be assholes. However, there are usually pretty good things to argue about.
Check it out...I could always use a few more Conservatives there!
|Tuesday, October 25th, 2005|
I was wondering what everyone thinks about her nomination. The way I see it there are two issues people bring up:
1.) Some people believe that Harriet Miers is under-qualified and lacks the experience to be a justice on the Supreme Court because she was never a judge herself, and never argued before the Supreme Court as a lawyer.
2.) Some believe that Harriet Miers is an unacceptable choice because of her ambiguous political philosophy and because of political views she holds that they disagree with.
Bush probably tried to nominate an unknown because of his low public approval ratings. This is the same thing he did when he nominated Roberts as Chief Justice instead on battling for one of the well tested conservatives (Scalia or Thomas). If it turns out that Bush allowed a moderate onto the court's vital swing vote position, he could loose support in Congress and maybe even votes for the Republican Party in the 2006 elections.
The Constitution States that the President "shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court".
|Friday, September 2nd, 2005|
|Sunday, August 14th, 2005|
tax free weekend
all i have to say is that i feel the tax free weekend should be to those people who pay taxes and no one else, there were too many people who dont pay taxes in stores and i felt they didnt have the right, i knew these people didnt pay taxes from all the friggin children they had, you can just tell who is a loyal tax payer and who isnt
|Thursday, August 11th, 2005|
|Thursday, August 4th, 2005|
|Saturday, July 30th, 2005|
Far right Hitler
Nearly every time I encounter a left-right spectrum I see the same thing. On the far left there is communism then on the far right there is fascism. The examples always used are Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. This automatically gives the association of the right with the Nazis, who are the most hated people of all time. Meanwhile communism is framed as a mistake and not what Karl Marx had really wanted but the result of Stalin’s madness. From where I stand this makes an extremely slanted and incorrect view of reality.
The left right spectrum is supposed to be a visual aid for where people stand on what role the government should play. It is shown with left wanting more economic intervention and the right wanting more social intervention. This is deceptive though because neither conservative nor capitalism philosophies are typically based on controlling the personal lives of people. Even if the left right spectrum was accurate, the Nazis and Hitler would still not be right wing.
The Nazi party was also known as the National Socialist party and even though “right wing socialists” is an obvious oxymoron the notion still stands that they were right wing. Somehow dramatically increasing the size of government to control economic and social lives of people for the establishment of a utopian society just doesn’t seem that right wing to me. The Nazis were only called right wing in the first place because of Soviet propaganda.
In reality on the far left you have huge government and on the far right you have anarchy. The reason you hear otherwise is to frame conservatives as being philosophically closer to Nazi ideology to disqualify the ideas of capitalism. As a side note Marx’s communism was a classless utopian society where there was no government because everyone inherently got along. Some people would incorrectly call this anarchy when it is really just totalitarianism with people so brainwashed they oppress themselves.
|Wednesday, June 29th, 2005|
The supreme court ruling on the case in Connecticut where the government is trying to take land from people in order to develop for some businesses can be read here:http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/23jun20051201/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-108.pdf
Of particular interest are the dissenting opinions of Clarence Thomas and Sandra Day O'Conner. They both come out in strong opposition on the government taking someones property and redistributing it for economic gain to the community.
Check it out, it's pretty interesting. It's all long winded, but worth reading.
apologies... I didn't realize conservatives are so horny...
Anyone looking to find a sex partner in Boston?
Hey there! Are you looking to get laid? How bout a threesome? Looking for the perfect partners for that orgy fest you're planning at the Boston Common? How bout an unwary college freshman dying to get some dick? or pussy, for that matter?
ends to meet that special someone!!
(sidenote: conservatives seeking other conservatives to get political with are also welcome!!)
Do you want to meet cool Bostonians?
I just started a community where people in Boston can meet other people from Boston. Surprisingly, there isn't one already dedicated to simply meeting people in our beautiful city. So, I have 0 people signed up, besides myself. Please join. It would make me super happy. And you might end up making a really cool friend, or more.
Thank you and sorry for the advertisement.
|Friday, June 17th, 2005|
PROTEST ALERT: ACLU to hold rally at Statehouse
June 22nd, 10am. (wednesday)
Come down and protest the American Communist Lawyers Union's war on christianity, conservatism, and hetereosexualism.
Some ideas for signs:
"FREEDOM OF RELIGION DOES NOT MEAN FREEDOM *FROM* RELIGION"
"READING A BIBLE IS NOT A PUNISHABLE OFFENSE"
"AMERICA IS A CHRISTIAN NATION, LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT"
Info:The ACLU is organizing a lobbying effort and rally on June 22. The
purpose is to have the State Legislature pass a resolution affirming
the civil rights and liberties
(sic) of the people of Massachsusetts. 10AM Statehouse. Hearing on House Bill 1881 Gardner or room A2.
Check www.aclu-mass.org for location
Noon Rally, Boston Common, near the Statehouse.
|Thursday, June 16th, 2005|
Blue City Conservatives
GREAT article about being Republican/Conservative in a hellhole liberal city (Seattle in this case). The same thing goes for Boston, if not more.
Thanks to mauser
for this one.Blue City Conservatives
Meet Seattle's biggest closet cases: the Republicans next door.
by Matt RosenbergSays Seattle Republican Brian Ballard: "As soon as you come out as a Republican here, minds start to shut down. . . ."
Seattle's liberals and "progressives" need to grow up. Seattle's conservatives need to speak up. So far, the latter looks more likely. And what follows could prove worrisome for local Democrats. Their grip on Seattle politics might loosen considerably over the next decade. Especially if a low-key GOP marketing campaign now under way in Seattle helps more Republicans and others who vote for them to brave the tangible social risks of "coming out."
Moderate Republicans, of course, were once a strong presence in Seattle, through the 1960s and into the '70s. Their exemplar was Dan Evans, who rose from 43rd District state representative to governor, then U.S. senator. During those years, a host of other Seattle Republicans served in Olympia, on the City Council, and even in the mayor's office.
But Republicans largely faded from relevance in Seattle. There was Watergate and Nixon's resignation in shame. The '70s counterculture grew institutional roots in Seattle, as did politically active public employee unions. Seattle families fled for the suburbs to escape forced busing in Seattle Public Schools. More recently, a strident politics of liberal symbolism and public disorder codified municipal Seattle's disconnect from reality, and helped cow moderate and conservative voices. The City Council advanced emotional debates on topics such as the treatment of circus animals, the destruction of Eastern Washington dams, and even the permissibility of nuclear submarines at Seafair. During the ultimately disastrous tenure of one-term Mayor Paul Schell, the WTO and Mardi Gras riots showed an emasculated city unable to police itself for fear of seeming too authoritarian. ( Read the rest of the article...Collapse )