Buy Xanax Without Prescription Best Prices Guaranteed

That's right people the president George W. Bush is a Satanist. I know he goes around saying Jesus this and Jesus that, but if you look at his actions not what he is saying it's clear he is a Satanist. The kind of Satanism I am refering to is the one founded by Anton LeVay. Its ethical teachings are on indivudalism, self-indulgence and "eye for an eye" morality. Looking at W's behavior over these past 6 years its clear that his philosophical beliefs are the same a Satanist. Satanists believe in individualism, the individual must enforce his own meaning in life and rise above the masses. Satanists do not worship Satan as a god, but rather themselves as one. They turn religious worship inward not outward. Now look at George Bush, he himself has said the he is the "decider" (sp?). Clearly he thinks he is above everyone else and doesn't listen to or care what other people think but makes decisions on his own. Look at the war in Iraq the majority of Americans do not support the war and neither does Congress, who represent the public, but George Bush still just listens to himself. Obviously George W. Bush has positioned himself as a god who sends people to die without any thought as to the consequences.  Self-indulgence is the next teaching. One of the first things George Bush said after 9-11 was that people shouldn't stop buying things and should keep the economy going. Basically don't think about all the people that died and how we can change what we've been doing to make a better world, but just keep thinking about yourself and pretend like nothing happened. He has also given massive tax cuts to the rich and made sure all his cronies have lucrative government contracts. His daughters also are self-idulgent just look how many times they have been caught boozing it up. George Bush just cares about his money and making the country better for the super rich. The last teaching is an "eye for and eye". This is much different than the Christian teaching of  love, compassion and sympathy for all. This law of retaliation states that you should only treat those who deserve it with love and compassion rather than everyone. After 9-11 George Bush stated that America would retaliate agaist those that caused the tragedy and led us into war against Afghanistan and Iraq. A Christian would have acted with love, sympathy and compassion and tried to find a peacful decision. George Bush as a Satanist though could not wait to start shooting and get revenge. As you can clearly see George W. Bush is a Satanist far more than the Christian that he claims to be. So for all those people who voted for him you really voted for the devil.

Tom Merriman and the “I-Team�, apparently Cleveland’s lame version of the A-Team, did a report on a local poet for Fox 8 News. Unsurprisingly the segment did not go well. They interviewed, well ambushed then later interviewed, Brian Yax, a local poet who goes by the name “Uncle Bad Touch�. Yax wrote poetry on raping and murdering women as well as children which were posted on his Myspace profile, which have been removed since the airing of the interview. Apparently the point of the interview was to make Yax look bad for writing this poetry and apologize for doing so. Quiet frankly the whole thing was ridiculous. So what if he writes offensive poetry? He’s 22 years old; of course he’s going to do offensive things. In case you didn’t notice the hair and the clothes, he wants attention, which is exactly what this dumb story gave him. I’m sure all of his friends told him how cool he was for getting on the news. At the end of the segment they talked about free speech and the stupid anchors asked what can be done about offensive speech like this. Obviously they are too stupid to realize that free speech was designed to protect offensive speech. Too many people say, “Well I’m all for free speech, but…�  There is no "but," people, either you are for free speech or you aren’t. The minute you start censoring things because you don’t like or agree with them then free speech goes out the window. I didn’t see anybody complain that the news is offensive. Quite frankly I was offended when Tom Merriman brought out the woman whose daughter was raped and murdered to “surprise� Yax and make him feel guilty. Way to use some one else’s pain and suffering to boost your ratings Tom. Tom criticized Yax for saying that he didn’t care that her daughter was murdered. Tom Merriman doesn’t really care either, but he sure pretended to be concerned during the interview. I’m sure a few hours later he totally forgot about her and her daughter and went onto the next person to exploit for ratings. Yax is a douche and his poetry is offensive and poorly written, but because of the First Amendment he has the right to express himself in anyway he wants as long as he doesn’t harm anyone else. The news puts images of murder, rape and violence on every night for entertainment and no one calls them out on it, so it is hypocritical for them to pick on one individual. Freedom of speech is an integral part of our country and if you don’t like it then you can exercise your freedom of speech and shut up.

Recently Bill SB 16 passed in the Ohio Senate and will be sent to the house for a vote next. The bill call prohibits all dancers working in strip clubs from “touching� any patrons and they must remain at least six feet away from them. It also calls for all strip clubs to close at 11:00 pm. This legislation will not surprisingly shut down most if not all strip clubs in Ohio.

This legislation was introduced by the activist group Citizens for Community Values. In addtion to not liking strip clubs, they also are against hotels that show adult movies, gambling and of course homosexuality. The refer to strip clubs on their website as, "And they have tried to paint nude strip clubs and other sex businesses as safe places of entertainment, rather than as the hotbed of criminal activity that our courts have recognized them to be." The group got a petition signed that introduced the bill to be voted on.

This is another example of a small special interest group going out of its way to influence public policy that the majority of the public does not agree with. There is already legislation for each community to decide if they want adult establishments, such as strip clubs in their community. This new legislation is unnecessary and takes away power from local governments. This new state wide regulation is totally unwarranted. There is also the freedom of speech issue that such a law would violate.

The CCV says they are trying to reduce “prostitution and violence towards women�, but shutting down strip clubs will not address either of those issues. All that will happen are the thousands of people that are employed by the stripping industry in Ohio will lose their jobs and patrons will go to other states for their entertainment. The CCV is on a religious moral crusade to get rid of something they don’t like. On their website they have information how you can get a similar bill submitted in your state. This is an example of rabble rousing for an issue that doesn’t exist. If stripping was such a problem wouldn’t legislation have already been proposed without waiting for a special interest group to submit it?

Several of the senators have said they felt pressure from them to pass the bill. The CCV has the voting record on their homepage so people can see who they should vote for. I for one will not vote for any of the senators who voted for the bill as, I do not feel that they had their constituent’s wishes in mind as much as their own reelection campaigns. Politicians need to stop listening to these special interest groups with their lobbyists and listen to the people who voted for them in office.

With this link you can find you local representative and email them your opinion on the bill. Here you can find the contact in formation for you state senator to contact them as well. Show the politicians that you have an opinion too and that a small minority does not speak for the majority of the public.

I don't think I can add anything to this. George W. Bush busts a move with some African dancers, via the Daily Show: More video of the move-busting... [youtube]FIuODSIuHLo[/youtube]

The House of Representatives has voted to expand democracy to American citizens in Washington DC. Over the past 200 years, through the Civil War, the end of slavery, the women's suffrage movement, two World Wars, and the defeat of the Soviet Union, America has neglected to expand voting rights to hundreds of thousands of its own citizens. Washington DC has no real representation in the House or the Senate. And despite this latest vote it's likely to stay that way. It doesn't look like the bill will pass in the Senate, and even if it does George W. Bush is likely to veto it. "It's unconstitutional!" is the whine from Republicans like Senator Mitch McConnell. You see, it's not because they are afraid that Washington DC residents will vote for Democrats, or because DC residents are largely poor and black. Of course they think everyone should have the right to vote! Of course they aren't elitists or racists! It's just that the procedural steps for granting suffrage properly is much more important to a democracy than, you know, actual democracy. How many times have we heard about spreading democracy from President Bush? In fact, spreading democracy was the reason we invaded Iraq in the first place, that is after we didn't find any weapons of mass destruction. Any President willing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to give Iraqis the vote should be leading this charge to give it to citizens of his own country. I will give the Republicans in the Senate and the President some credit - they are right to criticize this particular bill, just not for the wormy, hypocritical reasons they cite. This bill is a sort of compromise - it would give one House seat to DC and another to Republican-leaning Utah, which just missed getting another seat in the last census. While it's better than nothing, this bill still doesn't give DC residents any representation in the Senate. If Wyoming deserves two Senators, then so does DC. Perhaps an amendment really is the way to go, but I doubt these Senators would vote to propose one to the states. Instead of saying "I can't vote for this because it should be an amendment," they should just tell the truth: they don't want to give seats in Congress to all the people in DC because they tend to vote for the other side. Listen, there are a lot of political issues in this country that have two (or more) perfectly valid viewpoints. We can debate back and forth on gun control, the death penalty, tax rates, etc. to our heart's content. Representation in a democracy is a not one of these issues. The fact that we can get more votes to ban flag burning than to give DC residents representation is shameful, disgusting and undemocratic.