reading popularly now . .

Time Travel Wish can't get no satisfaction! No money to promote discovery, bummed.

Time Travel Wish can't get no satisfaction! No money to promote discovery, bummed.
4.28.16 request for communication answered. Undeniable circumstance and physical evidence.

VERY IMPORTANT: The "J Symbol" of Christmas 2020

VERY IMPORTANT: The "J Symbol" of Christmas 2020
Also from me: Welcome to the 21st Century and the Greatest Discovery Since Fire.

NASA and the metallic looking glove with their insignia

NASA and the metallic looking glove with their insignia
NASA had a hand in this. They must have met the Being, Satan, and struck a deal for ...

World Radiation Report

World Radiation Report
They are warning us by using this TIME TRAVELED IMAGE. I'm certain now, that's a global radiation report. The end will happen.

2 undeniably related communications.

2 undeniably related communications.
2 undeniably related communications

Now IT IS VISIBLE for the WORLD to SEE and have HOPE!

Now IT IS VISIBLE for the WORLD to SEE and have HOPE!
Now IT IS VISIBLE for the WORLD to SEE and have HOPE!

an amateur can spell amatuer either way he likes at Time Travel Wish and Paradox One, the discovery

an amateur can spell amatuer either way he likes at Time Travel Wish and Paradox One, the discovery
True: Successful before it was created, Time Travel Wish and Paradox One, the discovery


Saturday, March 22, 2014

Morning Journal: National Wingnut Association, How Straight am I, Efficiency of Dating Thin Sisters, Medicaid Expansion & Immoral Governors, Honorable Use of Military, Premature Obamacare Attacks, Shoot Me if, Self Honesty, Ignorance Paradox

My hyper-controlled vegetable garden, 2002.
1. One day the National Rifle Association will be remembered with a fondness similar to our memories of the Ku Klux Klan or the cigarette makers.

 2. I'm so straight (sexually) that when I see a set of male genitals in pornography ([alternative text here] I've heard about male genitals being in pornagraphy), the first thing I think of is "the space program needs more funding." And perhaps "I haven't been fishing in a while." Sometimes I think "fire fighting is cool."

 3. Thirty years ago as a young invincible I was an occasional black-out drinker. I think I once went to an ac/dc concert in Washington D.C. and blacked out most of the experience. I was with a guy named Chuck who I had been hanging out with and getting into various trouble with for several months. Chuck knew these two thin sisters (I said t-h-i-n not twin sisters) and I think they came to the concert with us. But they were not just thin, they were Karen Carpenter thin, like they had been eating food void of nutrition like rocks for breakfast and lunch all their lives. Anyway, taking both of them to the concert was not a problem with dating economics since the two of them together were like one person. Like one mouth to feed, half as much alcohol for each of them, half has much attention needed to be paid to either of them. Unfortunately I don't recall if I was intimate with either at one time or both of them at the same time. That memory is just one half naked blurry reasonably sized woman, who I knew were actually two skinny women!  And what a shame to see a great concert like ac/dc and black-out the event!

4. Being a stubborn conservative governor who has refused to accept the expanded Medicaid program funds is like refusing to install poor citizens' vehicle air bags even though doing so would be free of cost. Where you know the bags could save lives and unnecessary suffering if installed. How many busted heads occurring among what segment of the population are enough to keep under the radar of the press and then get-away with - governors assholes? For these governors it's about sticking to their anti-federal government philosophy of conservatism at the cost of the suffering of the silent population who could use that Medicaid funding a great deal.

5. If I were commander in chief of the most powerful and globally extended military force in the world I would . . 

A. Shift hundreds of billions in annual Pentagon funding into research and development toward a large and effective space fighter fleet. Hundreds of single pilot multiple use fighter craft that can fly very fast in atmosphere or space, that can land vertically, that can pivot 180 degrees upon an enemy. I would involve all capable nations in following suit. Not only could we then defend the planet but the craft can be the workhorses of space, towing everything needed in space from satellites to equipment and personnel to colonize the Moon and Mars. They could also destroy incoming planetary bodies like asteroids and meteors, or falling spacecraft. Technical hint for the pentagon: pilots encapsulated in fluid can take far more g-force especially if that fluid container is computer pressure by chamber controlled!

B. Intervene with troops or air support in other nations only in these circumstances:
1. Starvation and or genocide is occurring due to war. In this worthy and honorable cause I would use all available military means, beginning with taking-out whatever leadership is causing the suffering, to alleviate the suffering. I would establish two or more international refugee zones which would be strongly militarily guarded near each point of refugee populating. If a warlord needs to be taken-out I would revive the mass paratroop drop behind enemy lines technique of overwhelming the enemy. 2. If a burgeoning democracy is falling apart and military solutions could keep it together. For example in Egypt in 2012, I would have supported the current regime, as corrupt as it may have been, because elections were coming. I would have rapidly deployed a carrier battle group to the coast of Alexandria to let the Egyptian army know we do not support revolt. I would do these things because having as many democracies as possible in the world is the single best known way to reduce the frequency of war and thus human suffering. A worthy and honorable cause and a good use for unbeatable military power.   

 6. For any conservative group or think-tank to exclaim "Obama care has been a failure," is just stupidity. It implies the program is in full effect - and the truth is far from it, as tens of millions of uninsured have yet to brave their way forward and sign-up. It implies that enough of the program has been working long enough for experts and economists to have any opinion worth any merit - or an opinion that can be deduced true by reasoning. Imagine you're a conservative in America, you actually want millions to not have good health care, because they'll have shit insurance or none under conservative proposals for Health Savings Accounts, and other such rubbish speculative health care delivery systems.

7. This is my declaration of sound mind: If I'm dying, and I indicate that I'm going to heaven, somebody please shoot me or smother me with a pillow. Because I'll be acting like a delusional fool during my last time on Earth, and I won't go-out a blithering fool.

8. It is also lying to be dishonest with your self. Therefore we must show respect to ourselves and get "intellectually honest," about everything of which we deceive ourselves about. We must discover these lies and get them the f*&k out.

9. Example of mental illness stigma by institutional delivery: "I told my psychiatrist something a few weeks ago and she looked at me like I was crazy!" Or, "I saw my new physician the other day, he looked down at my chart, then looked up at me like I was crazy!" Or, "I asked the shoe sales lady if she had it in a wide size, she looked at me like I was crazy!"

10. The great and unsolvable paradox preventing human progress involves ignorance. That a great many people do not know they have it makes decreasing ignorance like trying to drink a lake fed by a river. So we must find a way to educate all humans using high technology beginning at the fetal stage of development, ensuring that children are born knowledgeable. Unfortunately many of the new smart-babies will be smart-assed and manipulative and conniving little shits. Perhaps we could send those babies to colonize Mars?   

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

The Priority to Accomplish as Much Good as Soon as Possible Must be Public Campaign Financing Now

by Unknown.

Unrestricted sums of money given to political candidates cannot be considered free speech if the ability to speak in the same manner and level of access of the majority of citizens is impossible, and the unaffordable speech of the masses attempting to express ideas is made valueless to our candidates and irrelevant. This is not freedom despite the warped perspective of Republican dispensers of empty and non reasonable rhetoric and evidence less economic hypothesis. It is the legal corruption of the tool of democracy. It is definitely a form of oppression of the masses. Now all the masses of the United States have left is their anger, their ideology, their philosophies. Precious things thought to be protected by the first amendment, thought so by James Madison when he wrote it. Money and it's spending in political campaigns was not a concern of the founders, read on.

It is time we give something kind to the American voter which also ensures democracy as a sound government structure we can all trust, for the first time in our history. It is time that every vote really did count - but not just every vote, every person whether he or she chooses to vote or not. A thing the founders never thought would be necessary.

The founders were men who foresaw that only white land owning and merchant men would be voting and that campaign funding would never be an issue due to it's largesse because that scenario was unfortunately, not conceived of. Because, campaigning at the time involved free activities like letter writing to newspapers, speaking publicly and so forth. Our constitution lacks the following seemingly as if by purpose but more likely due to eighteenth century ignorance and an innocent narrow view (normal for it's time) of what the future might be: no mention of any limits or ceilings on campaign money that could be raised by candidates and sitting politicians. No mentions of who or what controls that purse/bank. No restrictions of from who, from what interests, from conflicting interests. No mention of who keeps the money after a campaign. This absence must have been noticed when a conservative Supreme Court ruled in the affirmative for Citizens United vs. the United States.The Super Pacs now born of that decision will make democracy further and further from representative to us all. A point not understood by the conservative court.

We have proven beyond a doubt that our current electoral campaign finance system mostly does not work for anyone but the wealthy. This inequity is why United States representative democracy has never truly been in place. If you think that historically what works well for the wealthy, works well for you in the long run, then you may not agree with this solution.

The route to Public Campaign Financing has to be a new Constitutional Amendment, because obviously Constitutional amendments are not ruled unconstitutional except by another amendment. 

The anger and disappointment over our Supreme Courts' decision in Citizens United verses the United States, is swelling the ranks of democratic activists and unifying them toward a goal of a Constitutional Amendment to repeal Citizens' United.  I say whoa. Citizens United is horrible, but lets use this opportunity to both fix Citizens United and correct something long over due that will reap benefits for democracy well beyond just the repeal of Citizens United. Public Campaign Financing would remove the target for every corporation and superpac benefiting from Citizens United. Many democracies around the world are succeeding using their own form of Public Campaign Financing. There have been several periods of time in our recent political history where Public Campaign Financing was offered by many people as a solution to the corruption and misrepresentation and under representation that occurs constantly under our current system of campaign financing. The call for Public Campaign Financing is so old it is almost traditional American rhetoric.

"The greatest moral question which now confronts us is: Shall the trusts and corporations be prevented from contributing money to control or aid in controlling elections?" 
-Defeated Presidential candidate Judge Alton Parker, 1904.

I support overturning Citizens United - and it's underlying warped philosophy that corporations are people. But it is foolish to NOT make use of the huge energy and anger in all political parties currently to finally create Public Campaign Financing, which would cause Citizens United to become MOOT and introduce full representative democracy where over 100 million non voting eligible citizens finally become represented. The advantages of PCF are numerous and the arguments against these advantages are very hard to make. The whole proposal for PCF makes so much logical sense it makes the effort to introduce a constitutional amendment to defeat Citizens United look trivial in comparison.

Candidate campaigning has been tainted by the dollars of the few wealthy over the interests of the poorer many since our inception. I don't need to mention examples of the corruption, the resulting absence of representation, the conflicts of our interest created by massive dollar amount campaigns. I won't mention the many examples of decades of fighting against large money donors to get our congress to do something, anything. I don't need to mention that after that fight, when we think we are about to get something with all of our interests in mind, that we get watered down half measures of legislation that are partially representative of us all.

Nearly 50% of our federal representatives, 261 members of Congress, are millionaires. Among us the numbers of millionaires are 3 - 4%. The first priority on their first day as elected representatives is to start raising money to get re-elected. A US Senator from a rural state will have to raise on average $20,000 per week once elected to prepare for re-election. That Senator will have to ration his time for meetings with those most able to re-elect him, not time finding solutions to our problems. Our two presidential candidates will spend nearly $1 billion on this election, up hundreds of millions of dollars from the last general election.

How much are we spending on elections? From Ryan Borek, Executive Director, Take A Stand PAC: "In 2010, researchers believe approximately $4 Billion was spent on the midterm election. 2008's Presidential Election cost over $1.7 Billion not including other elections, and likely topped over $5 Billion. The off years such as 2009 tend to lag significantly behind at around $2 Billion. The average US Senate race costs around $4-7 Million, with the average US House race costing $2-6 Million. State elections cost significantly less, usually around $500,000. Local elections can cost as little as $5,000 depending mostly on filing fees. It is difficult to ascertain exact costs as the system is not designed to keep track of state or local spending in any central location. You can find the exact spending for any single federal candidate at, however you would need to contact each individual state's election office to find the spending on a state or local candidate."

Per person based on current population and the above estimate of $5 bilion per year, a standard General Election would cost approximately $15.87 each. Who would not be willing to pay $16 per year to better ensure real representation for all of us, without conflicts of interest, without corruption of our elected officials?

In the ruling of the Supreme Court in the now famous "Citizens United," corporations were given the status of an individual in the practice of petitioning government their grievances and exercising free-speech. Essentially in the invisible center of every corporation lies a being, a being that pays taxes and wants legislation that favors them, as if they were individuals with unalienable rights like us.

This interpretation of free speech and who or what can participate monetarily in our elections was greatly damaging to representation in that it tipped the scales even more toward more robust representation of those of greatest means. It was not enough that the entire executive board of a corporation is entitled to use free speech and vote their minds as individuals, now an invisible new being in the middle of the conference table is able to pool its larger amount of resources and out-bark the general populace or any target population they may, thereby manipulating all of our futures unrepresentatively.

Enter the only best answer: the 100% public financing of every electoral campaign in the United States of America. Below is educated speculation of what happens after Constitutional Amendment number twenty-eight that mandates this change, has gone into effect:

1. With literally no more purse for the coinage of the lobbyists to be dropped into at our elected representatives offices, the lobbyists for corporations and unions and smaller governments get real jobs in the private industry and vanish in one day from Capital Hill never to be seen again, so long as the 28th Amendment is the law of the land. Citizens United and all other rules as they pertain to corporations or any lobby, will matter no more because all campaign material and money must come from the public fund only, and gifts to our representatives and candidates will remain illegal.

I explained to Tuvok as best as I could (in dog spkeak)
the methodology of our current campaign
financing system, but all I could get
from him was "dog bone." So there it is,
Public Campaign Financing will definitely
 lead to increased dog bones. Because when
 working people are finally represented fairly,
wages will rise to meet the needs of every family,
 and increased packages of dog bones will be purchased.
Some lobbyists find a job in a related field practicing an American tradition: marching around all day outdoors in front of the capital building carrying protest signs advertising slogans about issues. No wooden handles allowed guys! Stay within the yellow tape please!

2. Do the corporations or the unions still have free speech, representation, the ability to give money toward campaigns? Yes of course! The public fund for electoral campaigns is also contributed to from corporations made of individuals who pay a flat rate toward the public campaign fund, just like the citizen who pays the same exact rate who may own a small house right-next-door to the multi-billion dollar corporation. If a corporation is a person and that person is entitled to the free speech act of giving to a political campaign, then under Public Campaign Financing that person/corporation has given, with taxes, toward the political campaign, just like every body else under the new 28th Amendment.

This is a new shared representation in free speech ability the nation has never known. The "individualist" corporations' argument will then have to be "we have more money so we want to be able to give more money because we are more important to the nation than the little people!" And perhaps "This is not unfair to the great majority of the population!" Opinions that will be hidden from us and that the public would find distasteful.

3. Equal campaign funding for equal candidates everywhere. Knowing that your competition has not one more dollar than you do to spend on the campaign, makes the issues and your position on them far more important than ever before in determining a winner. As a representative you won't know who to support more on any one issue unless you delve into your constituency for real information on the issues. Information you then use without influence in dollars, while keeping in mind that it's your stand on the issues that will get you re-elected.

4. Equal political air-time. The media will have to abide by the rules just like individuals. They can not use outside funding for any political propaganda unless it is from the Public Campaign Fund. And they can not get that money until campaign time. Like Great Britain we have restricted the number of calendar days before the election in which television and radio and newspaper advertising can be displayed by anyone in favor of in opposition to a campaign or an issue of political purpose. Perhaps 60 days prior to election. When the millionaires' public relations manager calls the television network to try to gain advantage in an election, the manager would tell him or her "Sorry but you can't advertise for a political issue or a candidate until September 4th of this year and then you'll have to prove your money comes from the Public Campaign Fund. My hands are tied by the 28th Amendment. If you like we can interview you at any time, but your opposition gets an interview also."

Is it not time for the frenzied race to the top of Capital Hill lead by the wealthiest to end? How much more evidence needs to pile-up for us all to admit the system as we know it, as it's structured, does not work? The Founders did not imagine our present could become this bad, I'm sure. We are not the few land owner, white, businessmen voters and congressmen the framers did imagine, any longer. In attempting to fix our electoral system few if any better solutions exist. Any answer must eliminate the power of the big-money contributors and return our nation to the people.
But this seems unconstitutional! . . .

Keep in mind successful Constitutional amendments are not ruled unconstitutional except by another amendment. The purpose of the First Amendment is not damaged by Public Campaign Financing. The goal of representative democracy is shared and more fairly distributed, rendering the political speech concept of our free speech more representative and so more powerful than before.

If public funding of election campaigns is somehow unconstitutional then since 1976 checking a box on your income tax return that gives $1-2 to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, is also unconstitutional. Because that is nothing more than what Public Campaign Financing does, it's our government managing and collecting a fund for election campaigns specifically. So, prove that philosophy unconstitutional.


The clarion call out of the windows of our homes should be "It's my money and I want my politician back!"

Please sign the online petition!

Please post critical and constructive criticism in the comments section below. I will try to answer every question.

Thank you. Grace on the United States.