13 January 2013. RIA-Novosti Infographics. Our Children’s Rights

______________________________

The most important rights that our children possess based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

13 January 2013

RIA-Novosti

http://en.rian.ru/infographics/20130113/178693232/Childrens_rights.html

Editor’s Note:

The US Republican Party has stalled American ratification of this document… it’s the only major holdout in the entire world (all other states worldwide save for Niue, the Cook Islands, Somalia, and the South Sudan have ratified this document since 1989). What does that tell you about GOP troglodytes and their deluded ideology? Draw the proper conclusions from that, kids. They’re full of vincible ignorance… don’t waste your time arguing with such zipperheads.

BMD

25 December 2012. You Can’t Make Shit Like This Up… Mitt Romney’s Son Says He Never Actually Wanted to Be President

Romney never criticised the racism in the GOP… any questions?

______________________________

Editor’s Foreword:

Read the following. It’s mind-blowing in its self-centred pity and angst…

BMD

******

Mitt Romney‘s palpable discomfort during the 2012 election season has mostly been attributed to the fact that he’s (very likely) a robot. However, in a lengthy Boston Globe piece about what went wrong with the campaign, Romney’s eldest son Tagg offers a different explanation for his father’s poor performance… “He wanted to be president less than anyone I’ve met in my life. He had no desire to … run. If he could’ve found someone else to take his place… he would’ve been ecstatic to step aside”. The statement certainly seems to serve as a great “I told you so” moment for all those Republicans who endorsed genuinely fired-up people like Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum during the primaries, though the story also suggests the Romney campaign‘s issues extended well beyond his supposed lack of enthusiasm for the task.

The Globe‘s Michael Kranish (co-author of The Real Romney) confirms that those closest to Romney, such as Tagg and wife Ann, clashed with his staff over strategy, especially when it came to humanising the candidate. The story blames campaign manager Stuart Stevens for the unremitting focus on the dreary economy and the reluctance to share some of the more appealing elements of Romney’s biography with the public. When Tagg finally convinced RNC organisers to feature the grateful parents of a terminally-ill 14-year-old Mormon boy Romney once comforted, they were put onstage before any of the big networks even tuned in {Big deal. If the kid wasn’t a Mormon, that’d be news. It just proves that many Mormons are good to their own, but view us “Gentiles” as two-legged cockroaches: editor}.

There are also criticisms of the campaign’s infrastructure… the organisation employed a mere 500 paid workers nationwide (less than the Obama team dedicated to Florida alone) and failed to make good use of social media and other technology. As Romney’s digital director Zac Moffatt explained, they simply didn’t have as much time as Obama did to prepare. Moffatt recalled worrying about early on, “Can we do 80 percent of what the Obama campaign is doing, in 20 percent of the time, at 10 percent of the cost?” Tagg also told the Globe that his father hopes to use what he learned during the campaign to help Republican leaders make changes to the way the party is run, saying, “Having been through it, you know so much more than when you haven’t”. Perhaps, the first thing Romney should suggest for the next go-around is picking a nominee who actually wants to be there.

23 December 2012

Andre Tartar

New York

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/12/mitts-son-says-he-never-wanted-to-be-president.html

******     

Editor’s Afterword:

”I really didn’t want to be president!” If that were so, why did Wet Willy run? Why did he spend millions of his own money and millions of the Republican Party’s money? Why did he order fireworks in Boston, as he was convinced that he was going to win? In short, GIGO all around. Wet Willy’s nothing but a spoilt brat who never grew up. His corporate daddy bought him a phony “clergy” deferment in the Vietnam War and gave him the seed-stake to enter business… that is, Wet Willy had the ways greased for him and he never had to do anything for himself. This story tells you volumes about the Romneys. Aren’t you glad that the Prez did win the election? After all, Willard didn’t want it… his son said so…

What a bunch of sore losers and incompetent tossers…

BMD

Will Big Money Save Mitt Romney and the GOP?

______________________________

With both Republican and Democratic conventions approaching, the American presidential campaign is getting nastier day by day. As it happens, most of the scandals in the campaign circulate around the opposition GOP. In fact, any minor slip on the part of any minimally-noticeable Republican politician causes hell in the media. Whilst on a trip to Israel, a group of GOP lawmakers drank heavily, and they went skinny-dipping in the Red Sea. They weren’t debauched, they weren’t on an official mission… they didn’t even offend anybody nor did they desecrate a holy place. They were enjoying themselves in their leisure time. However, the row following the incident went as far as getting the FBI involved in the investigation in order to determine whether there was any impropriety. As a means of defence, GOP House leaders reprimanded their own members.

Then, Todd Akin, a Republican congressman running for the US Senate in Missouri, made a remark about “legitimate rape” (whatever he meant by that). This blunder gave a pretext to all kinds of feminists and other liberals to launch a massive attack on all the basic principles the GOP stands for… including the issue of abortion, which was the context for Akin’s unfortunate remark. Despite requests for him to step down from prominent Republicans, including Mitt Romney, Todd Akin defended his right to go on with the Senate race, saying, “The good people of Missouri nominated me, and I’m not a quitter”. The fact that the whole Republican campaign, and not only his personal Senate race, can easily be (and already is) pictured as a “war on women” doesn’t seem to bother him.

These are just two of too many examples showing how eager the liberal media community in the US is to grasp on any silly blunder made by the Republicans… and this definitely works. All the recent polls… both on the state and national level… give little grounds for Mitt Romney to hope for election. The choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate only highlights Romney’s predicament Romney. During the primaries, Romney underwent attacks from the right; he had to put up an intense struggle with Tea Party-leaning contenders. This even produced the impression that, in November, Republican right-wingers would lack enthusiasm, and Romney’s feared that they’d simply sit out the election. Obviously, such considerations must have been behind the choice of conservative darling Paul Ryan as the vice-presidential candidate. However, the problem is that, in November, it’s not Tea Partiers that’ll matter, but rather independent voters. To this end, the choice Romney and his team made is hardly helpful. All the polls show that choosing Ryan had little, no, or even a negative impact on Romney’s ratings.

Nevertheless, there’s still one aspect that may seem inexplicable in such circumstances. For a third month in a row, Romney’s outpacing Obama in fund-raising, and, by the time of November elections, is likely to break Obama’s record of 2008. Nevertheless, one must note that Obama was running on a wave of strong anti-Bush sentiment and his own popularity, and his victory was predetermined long before the election. The current situation is far from that of 2008. Obama lost some of his popularity, but not to the extent George W Bush had by the end of his tenure. Romney doesn’t possess even half of Obama’s personal charisma. Therefore, if anything IS predetermined in the current race, it’s Obama’s re-election. Then, why should one invest in the probable loser? One simple explanation, which is hardly an explanation at all, is that Romney’s supported by the richest segment of society; therefore, he’s able to raise more money than his opponent does. However, this is hardly the case…  even big business, which generally favours Republicans, wouldn’t spend so much without any hope of getting something in return.

The only plausible explanation is that American presidential campaigns aren’t simply sponsored by big businesses, they’re part of big business, which evolved in full compliance with the Olympic (Olympics, by the way, also have nothing to do with sports, being part of big business, too) motto, l’important c’est de participer (It’s [more] important to participate [than to win]). The very fact of big money’s participation in the campaign is a matter of PR and commercial advertising, therefore, it doesn’t really matter for the sponsors whether the particular candidate wins or not. Their mission is different… it’s to keep him in the spotlight as long as possible, and scandals like the ones surrounding GOP lawmakers in Israel or Todd Akin’s silly remark, whilst ruining Romney’s chances for election, raise the stakes of his campaign’s investors.

21 August 2012

Boris Volkhonsky

Voice of Russia World Service

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_08_21/Will-big-money-save-Mitt-Romney-and-the-GOP/

Romney Tax Flap Highlights American Transparency Debate

______________________________

How much is enough? Three months ahead of the American presidential elections, wealthy Republican challenger Mitt Romney is resisting pressure from his opponent, President Barack Obama, to disclose more personal income tax records. The tussle between the Republican challenger and the Democratic incumbent brings into sharp focus a question at the heart of American politics today… “How much private financial data must we require a candidate for public office to provide for voters?” Romney says release of his tax records for the past two years is enough; Obama’s campaign says the former head of a hedge fund, whose personal net worth is approximately 250 million dollars (8 billion Roubles. 200 million Euros. 160 million UK Pounds), must release more data in the name of “transparency”.

On Thursday, Romney told reporters, “Over the past 10 years I never paid less than 13 percent” in income tax, again, insisting that he wouldn’t release for public scrutiny anything beyond the 2010 and 2011 tax returns he’s already published. His remark came after US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, citing an unnamed “source” in the investment firm Romney once headed, said recently that Romney took advantage of loopholes, and paid no taxes on his substantial income for 10 years. Romney rejected that claim as “totally false”, and his wife, Ann Romney, reiterated in an interview last week with NBC News, that her husband would release no more personal tax information to the public before the 6 November election. Romney told Bloomberg Businessweek earlier this month, “We have a process in this country, which was established by law, which provides for the transparency which candidates are required to meet. I have met with that requirement with full financial disclosure of all my investments”.

In contrast, Obama released 12 years of his personal tax records. His supporters imply that Romney refused to publish more of his own records because he has something to hide, and analysts say he’s in a political quandary on the issue. Joseph Thorndike, director of the Tax History Project at Tax Analysts, a publisher focusing on tax policy, explained, “Mitt Romney isn’t the skimpiest, and he isn’t the most forthcoming, but he’s definitely on the skimpy end of the spectrum when it comes to disclosure”.

The law doesn’t require American presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns, and there are no hard-and-fast rules dictating how many they should release. Historians and political scientists state that in the half century since the practise began, the number of tax returns candidates choose to disclose has fluctuated greatly. When Romney’s father, George Romney, the former governor of Michigan, ran unsuccessfully for president in 1968, for example, he released 12 years of tax returns to the public. However, the practice of releasing tax returns didn’t become entrenched in American presidential politics until 1973, when President Richard Nixon, embroiled in the Watergate scandal that would result in his resignation, opened up his tax returns for the previous four years. Thorndike said, “Every president after that chose to release tax information in the interest of keeping things looking clean, and most major party candidates have released returns as well”.

Craig Holman, a veteran expert on governmental ethics with Public Citizen, a non-profit consumer advocacy group said that American presidential and vice presidential candidates are required to file personal financial disclosure reports, but the information divulged in these publicly available documents is extremely vague, noting, “Tax returns are much more explicit in revealing conflicts of interest”. Presidential candidates in Russia are required to submit publicly accessible declarations of their assets and income, and former President Dmitri Medvedev… now, the prime minister… signed a decree in 2009 mandating senior officials to release this information also. However, Ivan Ninenko, deputy director of Transparency International in Russia, said that both statutes leave room for a candidate or official to keep wealth hidden from the public.

In the USA, presidential candidates’ personal finances can impact voter opinion significantly in connection with the candidate’s broader reputation, according to Marc Hetherington, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University who has written extensively on the role of trust in American politics, pointing up, “Attacks against someone always work better when they play into an existing narrative about the person, and the existing narrative about Mitt Romney is that he’s a little slippery as relates to his positions on issues… and that he’s well off”. In a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted last month, 44 percent of respondents said they believed additional tax returns released by Romney would reveal damaging information about the candidate, whilst 42 percent said they believe the additional returns would not include anything detrimental to his White House bid. The poll had a margin of error of five percent.

Jamie Chandler, a political scientist at Hunter College in New York City, said, “If Romney released his taxes at this point, he’d be putting himself on the defensive in responding to the president’s attacks. You don’t want to yield to the opponent’s calls for you to do something”. Obama’s campaign last week offered a “deal” on the tax issue to Romney, calling on the Republican to release five years of his personal tax returns in exchange for putting the matter to rest as a campaign issue. Chandler stated that the furore over Romney’s tax returns might fade from public view following Romney’s selection of Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate. Democrats will likely find a “bigger political bang for their buck” attacking Ryan’s contentious plans for the federal budget, which critics say would negatively impact the middle class and the poor whilst providing tax breaks for the wealthy.

20 August 2012

James Schreck

RIA-Novosti

http://en.ria.ru/world/20120820/175326123.html

Editor’s Note:

George Romney released 12 years of his personal tax records (as did the Prez)… his son, Wafflin’ Willy, refused to release more than two years worth of his records. This shows to all but the slow learners that Willy has contempt for the public, that he’s secretive, and that’s he a wilful and juvenile brat. The only reason for refusing to release these records is that Willy’s hiding something. If he were elected (not probable, but if he were), he’d reinstate the policy of torture at secret black sites abroad, and he’d make Joe McCarthy look like a kindergartener, insofar as smearing people is concerned. A vote for Willy is a vote for “the public be damned”.

Oh… Willy’s father worked together in amity with Walter Reuther… Willy’s a ravening anti-union lunatic. In this case, the apple DID fall far from the tree…

Special Note to Orthodox People:

The konvertsy are virtually all members of the Extreme Right. Key members of this cabal are Freddie M-G, Patrick Reardon, John Whiteford, Jonas Paffhausen, Rod Dreher, and Terrence Mattingly. They don’t raise a ruckus over Willy’s refusal to come clean. Does this mean that they approve of secrecy and skulduggery in high places, both in the church and in the state? Look at the history of the Church in the USA over the last ten years, and it’ll give you an answer. In short, the people named aren’t worthy of your respect or trust… they believe in dishonesty in both the Church and state, and that’s sad. Do note that most of those that I named are disciples of and deeply influenced by the questionable Gleb Podmoshensky… it does put their rants about “homosexuality in high places” in a different light, doesn’t it?

NO… don’t run a witch-hunt. That’d be falling into the same hole that these jabronies are in. However, DO note down who’s doing what, and do your best to remove them from positions of influence. That’s what grounded Christians do…

BMD

14 July 2012. A Point to Ponder… THIS is the “Invisible Hand of the Market”…

______________________________

THIS is the “invisible hand of the market” in its visible incarnation. It’s around our throats… and if you vote for the Grand Olde Phonies, this what’s awaiting all of us who aren’t part of the affluent effluent. After all, Mittens issues thundering threats at Iran and Venezuela… but he refused to serve his country during the Vietnam War (he fled to Darkest France as a “missionary” for two years). None dare call it self-absorbed hypocritical cowardice. Compared to that, the minor pecadilloes of the Occupy set pale into nothingness, don’t they? If you vote for Wafflin’ Willy, you vote for a man who refused to serve his country… and let some other poor sod go in his place. Any questions?

BMD

New York Senate Bill Seeks To End Anonymous Internet Posting… in a Completely Ass-Backwards Way

Here’s your typical poster with a “username”… what are they trying to hide?

______________________________

Anonymity is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the United States was founded, in part, thanks to Thomas Paine‘s anonymously-written, pro-revolution pamphlet Common Sense. On the other hand, 12-year-olds who post anonymously on the internet can be rather unpleasant and cause real problems by cyberbullying. Whether you think the good outweighs the bad, this news is troubling indeed… a far-reaching bill introduced in the New York State Senate could end the practise of posting online once and for all.

Introduced by New York State Senator Thomas F O’Mara (R-Big Flats), S6779 would require that any anonymous post online is subject to removal if the poster refuses to post… and verify… their legal name, their IP address, and their home address. The (likely well-intentioned) bill states:

A website administrator upon request shall remove any comments posted on his or her web site by an anonymous poster unless such anonymous poster agrees to attach his or her name to the post and confirms that his or her IP address, legal name, and home address are accurate. All website administrators shall have a contact number or e-mail address posted for such removal requests, clearly visible in any sections where comments are posted.

Critics are quick to point out how dangerous and ineffective the anti-privacy bill would be on the off-chance that it somehow passes. After all, IP addresses do nothing to verify a person’s identity, and including your home address on a controversial internet post could open you up to real-life threats. In effect, the bill is an online stalker’s dream. Of course, the most likely result of the bill’s passage would just be the full-scale elimination of all comment systems everywhere, because the system’s an unworkable burden on both the poster and the “web site administrators” who would need to respond to ludicrous take down requests at all times of the day.

24 May 2012

Yahoo News

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/york-senate-bill-seeks-end-anonymous-internet-posting-162549128.html;_ylt=AioEoUIxl4u9oJ2pvLqsZIxvaA8F;_ylu=X3oDMTNqaGtyc3RxBGNjb2RlA2N0LmMEcGtnAzBmZTg4Njk4LWNmYjMtMzM5MC1iMjUyLTFhOG

Editor’s Note:

This has about as much chance of passing the New York Senate (let alone getting past Shelly Silver’s Assembly) as a bill mandating the compulsory purchase of buggy whips or periwigs, and it’s just as useful. Frankly, the real point of this bill is that pols don’t like criticism… and they’ll do anything that they can to shut it down. That being said, anonymous posting is a curse… and Fr Vsevolod has attacked it more than once (rightly so).

I’ll give my Orthodox readers this observation… Monomakhos and OCATruth are full of juvenile poseurs and slinking power-brokers utilising “usernames”. I sign my legal name… and I need no legal compulsion to do so. That’s why my news is trustworthy. I stand behind it. What does that tell you about the lot at Monomakhos? Why do you even waste your time by logging on to it (I don’t… and I miss nothing of substance)? If they won’t sign their name, don’t give ‘em any cred… there, that’s it in a nutshell. Pass the jug and smile… the world hasn’t stopped being crank in the last 24…

BMD