Ederik Schneider Online

Monday, March 26, 2012

Los Angeles Times: Opinion: Robin Acarian: Campaign Gaffes: Is Foot-In-Mouth Disease Always Fatal to Campaigns?

Los Angeles Times: Opinion: Robin Acarian: Is Foot-In-Mouths Disease Always Fatal to Political Campaigns? 

This post was originally posted at FRS Real Life Journal on WordPress

Hopefully for Republican Party's sake, they'll decide on their presidential nominee before the cows come home, but they are a little hard to predict right now. They seem about as divided as the Democratic Party in 1972 trying to figure out which Progressive they were going to nominate. Between three Senators, Ed Muskie, George McGovern and Hubert Humphrey. 

They settled on Senator McGovern, even though telling the differences between these three men politically, was trying to tell the difference in color between a couple of red tomatoes. But unless the Obama Campaign is successful in communicating the political gaffes of lets, just for the hell of it Mitt Romney as their  GOP nominee, I flipped a coin that, it would be Mitt Romney, American voters will have forgotten about them, long before the general elections.
Good news that even though generally political gaffes made in presidential primaries aren’t remembered for the general election, whoever the GOP Nominee is. They will still be as addicted to making political gaffes. As Jim Morrison was addicted to alcohol or Rosie O’Donnell is addicted to food. Mitt Romney in the general election, will most likely say something like, "I’m not that rich, I only drive three Cadillacs, I don’t even own a Rolls Royce. I only own three homes, I’m friends with people who own ten. Really I’m not that rich, attack my friends instead". 
I can give you their numbers, they are some of my major contributors. Or Rick Santorum if Mitt Romney were to end his presidential campaign right before he’s nominated. And Rick becomes their presidential nominee. Well first of all if that happens, Republicans will hand in their Republican affiliation. But if that were to happen, he may say something like. "Women. Shouldn’t be allowed to work", the GOP Candidates right now are addicted to political gaffes. There’s more than enough to go around.
America I’m not sure is the only country in the World with a short attention span. But we have the shortest. Are attention span is a midget, so when some politician says something that five minutes later, they want to kick themselves in the balls for saying, or wish they hadn’t drank that extra scotch before giving that speech, take Rick Perry to use as an example, they managed to say something else thats ignorant right after that. That gets played up as well. 

Our politicians and political candidates are only as good as the people who elect them for the most part. From time to time we get leaders that stood out and look like God, at least in comparison to average Americans. Americans say dumb things all the time. But the difference is most of us aren't politicians and our, well bullshit isn't on the national news or web right after we say it unlike our politicians. Which is why they get to look like the assholes, because they represent the assholes who voted for them.  

Saturday, March 24, 2012

Los Angeles Times: Editorial: Life Without Parole is Too Harsh For Young Killers

Los Angeles Times: Editorial: Life Without Parole is Too Harsh For Young Killers

This post was originally posted at FRS FreeStateNow on WordPress

When we are talking about juvenile offenders, especially violent juvenile offenders, juveniles who’ve murdered, committed manslaughter. assault and battery, leaving their victims with indefinite damage, raped people and other horrible crimes, a couple of questions have to be answered. Can we afford to give up on these minors and just lock them up and watch them become better criminals in prison? What’s the proper punishment for them, that they deserve and isn’t too harsh? I believe in the notion do the crime, you do the time.

To let juvenile offenders off the hook, just because they are juveniles, is irresponsible and sends the wrong message. Whether its intentional or unintentional. That, “if you do the crime and are a juvenile, we’ll let you get away with it.” But I also I believe in fair sentencing and I’ll explain what I mean by that. Any juvenile who commits murder and then is convicted of it, has to be given a strong sentence and I don’t care how old they are when they commit murder. Or any other violent crime. And no I’m not talking about the death penalty, at least for Convicted Murderers under 21.

But we also can’t afford to give up on these juveniles either. We simply can’t afford that as a society, financially, or anything else. If you’re 15-16 when sentenced to prison, assuming you live a normal life as far as years, if you’re sentenced to a life sentence and survive it into your senior years, or longer, you could be looking at 50-60 years in prison at taxpayers expense. Also we don’t need any other career criminals in prison. We should be moving to get these inmates past this point in their lives, proper sentences.

The proper sentence for convicted murderers who were juvenile offenders, is 25-Life. Meaning they would only be eligible for parole, if they meet some basic standards in prison during those 25 years. They take responsibility for their crime, or crimes, they apologize for it. They finish and further their education in prison. High school diploma, or GED, a college, or vocational degree. They hold a good job in prison and have a good record there. They seek and complete the proper counseling while in prison. They have a good record while in prison. And they would have to complete all of these things. Just to be eligible for parole after 25 years. They wouldn’t automatically get a parole hearing after the 25 years.

Again life without parole for juvenile offenders, even violent offenders, is too much. And we can’t afford it, but at the same time they have to be properly sentenced so they are properly punished for their crimes. So with 25-Life and then be eligible for parole after certain conditions are met, would be the proper balance we would need with juvenile violent offenders.


Wednesday, March 14, 2012

The Atlantic: The Wire: Dino Grandoni: Jon Stewart Explains Comedy to FOX News: Like Trying to Explain Calculus to Fish

The Atlantic: The Wire: Dino Grandoni: Jon Stewart Explains Comedy to FOX News

This post was originally posted at FRS Daily Journal on WordPress

The only reason for me at least to watch FNC or Fox News Channel and for that matter to be “fair and balanced”, MSNBC prime time on weeknights, is to find out what’s not going on in the World. To get some comic relief and perhaps some ideas for my political satire. Because FNC is basically the RNC, laying out the positions and the spin of the Republican base. And MSNBC prime time Monday-Friday, is basically the mouthpiece for so-called Progressive not Liberal Democrats. 

The Democrats and so-called progressive third-parties, that don’t like President Obama and the Democratic Leadership. Because they aren’t “progressive enough” and aren’t socialist like themselves. Which is what they thought they were getting during the 2008 general elections. If you're going to listen to FNC seriously, not to make fun of it, but to actually find out what’s going on in the world, do yourself a big favor, check at least two other credible news sources. Like a good reporter and you better know what that is before you take FNC seriously. 
Because whether you're listening to Megyn Kelly, Sean Hannity, David Asman and others, Bill O’Reilly to a certain extent, but he isn’t as bad as the others, He does take on both sides, you're basically hearing what they want to tell you. What makes their political views look best and you're hearing a lot of political gossip. That's designed to hurt Democrats and that's what you get from Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz on MSNBC at the expense of Republicans. I swear I get more facts from The Onion something I read everyday than from FNC or Maddow and Schultz. 
Because The Onion is seriously about news satire and doesn't hide from that and they take stories that are true and make them as funny as possible by adding humor to them. When FNC says “Fair and Balanced”, you should take that as a joke that you would hear from The Onion. Because they are only “Fair and Balanced” to their own side.  


Saturday, March 10, 2012

Mises Media: Video: Gerard Casey: Libertarian Anarchy: Against The State

Mises Media: Video: Gerard Casey: Libertarian Anarchy: Against The State

Just to start off and I doubt I’m the first person to notice this and at risk of sounding awful and mean, doesn’t Gerard Casey, especially with that mustache, resemble Adolph Hitler?

I have a lot of respect for classical libertarianism, even as a Liberal. Even though I tend to disagree with it on foreign policy. Where Libertarians tend to be isolationists. Because libertarianism at its core is the real thing. And what it actually is about both economic and personal freedom. That Americans, have the right to live their own lives as long as they aren’t infringing on others freedom to live their own lives. And that it’s not anti-state, but anti-big state and anti-big government all together. So when Ron Paul says he’s against big government, you better believe him! And when Rick Santorum says he is against big government, you ask him, “so its okay with you if I watch an adult movie, or go to a club with dancers and so-forth?” Because he thinks those things should be outlawed, because he sees them as immoral. But Libertarians are the real thing when it comes to being against big government, because they actually are. And don’t just say they are against big government, because they believe it works for them politically.

It’s not Libertarianism in its real form that I’m against as a Liberal. Because real Libertarians are against big government. But they aren’t against government all together. And the key point being that people should be free to live their own lives. As long as they aren’t infringing on others to live there’s. So if two guys want to marry each other, Libertarians wouldn’t have a problem with that. Or if someone wants to go to an adult nightclub with strippers and so-forth, even male strippers, the Libertarian wouldn’t have a problem with that. But if someone breaks into someone else’s home without a good reason, or batters that person, or rapes that person, or does other things to infringe on innocent people’s freedom to live their lives, they believe that government has a role to protect us not from ourselves, but from people who would hurt us. See Libertarians, aren’t anti-government, but they are anti-big government. And believe that the government that we have today is too big and has too much responsibility when it comes to economic and personal issues.

People who I call Anarcho-Libertarians, who are Anarchists to be real about it. So I call them Anarcho-Libertarians, because even though they call themselves Libertarians, they aren’t just anti-big government, but they are anti-government period. And do not seem to have a role for government to do anything. And now even seem to believe that government arresting and prosecuting criminals who’ve hurt people, violates these criminals freedoms and constitutional rights. Freedom to do what, hurt innocent people? We do have the freedom to do that in this country. Americans tend to want big government out of our wallets, bedrooms, boardrooms and classrooms, out of our personal lives. But they do want government to disappear and not be there to do the things that we need it to do. And tend to believe in things like environmental protection and public education. But generally speaking, libertarianism in its real sense and not the anarcho version, has a real future in American politics.

The Gary Johnson‘s of the world have a real future in American politics. Because they are anti-big government. And even though they would like to see the Federal Government much smaller than it is today and would have to sell that to voters as far as how much smaller and why, they could succeed. Because they do believe there is a proper role of government and not looking to dismantle it. Just dismantle big government. But as far as Anarcho-Libertarians are concern, they are essentially Anarchists and are anti-government period. And perhaps would be better off moving to a country that doesn’t have any real government. Like Somalia and see how that works out for them.


Thursday, March 8, 2012

The Humble Libertarian: Opinion: Wes Messamore: Second Amendment Revolution: Maryland Handgun Ruling a Huge Victory For Gun Rights Advocates!

The Humble Libertarian: Opinion: Wes Messamore: Second Amendment Revolution: Maryland Court Ruling a Huge Victory For Gun Rights

This post was originally posted at FRS FreeStateNow on WordPress

Just to be clear I’m pro-2nd Amendment and I believe that all adults in the United States that are of sound mind and aren’t criminals and are capable of managing guns, then they should be able to do that if they choose to and can afford it. But as long as we know that they are capable of managing the gun or guns they want to purchase and if they are qualified to manage these guns, then they should have the right to do so. As a Liberal I believe in live and let live, that is we have to live together as a society whether we like it or not, we should just let people live their own lives. And as long as we aren’t hurting innocent people with what they are doing. And we aren’t stuck paying for the consequences of their decisions. Then we should let people live their own lives.