Florida Court Rules ”Off Grid” Living Illegal

By Joshua Krause

Robin Speronis had been living in an off-grid home for many years without incident, until she was interviewed by a local FOX affiliate in November of 2013. Shortly thereafter, the city of Cape Coral tagged a “notice to vacate” on her property, due to multiple code violations, all of which stem from the fact that her home isn’t connected to water, sewage, or the electrical grid.

The city has tried to argue that she is in violation of the International Property Maintenance Code for relying on rainwater and solar panels, instead of utilities.

Since that time, Speronis has been fighting the courts for her right live off the grid. Magistrate Harold Eskins recently ruled that she can live without using water or electricity, but she still has to be connected to these utilities no matter what.

Despite his ruling, Eskins admitted to the press that the code may be unfair, “Reasonableness and code requirements don’t always go hand-in-hand.” Despite his supposed sympathies, he still feels compelled to enforce the code.

Still, Speronis has decided not to give up, and will continued to defend her case in court. Even if she doesn’t win, she has no plans to leave her home. “Even if they board the house up, I’m not leaving…They did the best they could when they took my dogs and arrested me. It fell apart because I’m unshakable.”  

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple, where this article first appeared. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger.

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

230 Comments on "Florida Court Rules ”Off Grid” Living Illegal"

  1. So, after they hook her up and then she doesn’t pay the bill for services she never contracted for and they shut them off–then what power will these bureaucrats have?

    • That’s where they will get her. That she is not paying.

      • Fees for water and electricity hookups, if not used, are very minimal–perhaps less than $20 for both per month. If she has solar panels, she can sell electricity back to the grid,perhaps enough to pay the hookup fees. No mention of the septic situation. Does she have compost toilet? Is it permissable (it is in many places). At any rate, paying 15-20 a month (and maybe earning that by selling back surplus energy) seems a small price to be left in peace. When I hooked up electricity recently (in Arizona) and used it for only 2 days, my bill was $8 for the month.

        answers.yahoo.com has several comments that it is legal everywhere to have off grid solar, with the reason for being on grid as both back up and to sell back surplus energy.

        Enlight-inc.com reports: ” As of March 22, 2014; after hours of ongoing research for the past year, I have checked all 50 state government websites and found that there is currently, no state government law in the U.S. that considers rainwater harvesting by individuals (homeowners) in a direct manor and bluntly, “against the law” for anyone and everyone….. After several hours of searching at the Florida state government’s site, I found nothing specifically prohibiting rain barrels, or rain water harvesting by individuals at the state level. I found that, in the Florida keys, rain water harvesting is the main source for all the water. Whether or not a person can “legally” set up rain barrels in this state will likely be determined mainly at the local level as of right now..” (Except for some limitations in Colorado and Washington and Utah with some restrictions and Nevada)

        Occupywallstreet.net reports the story differently “” Officials in the city of Cape Coral deemed her home “unsanitary,” Al Jazeera reports.
        In the end, she was found not guilty of not having a proper sewer or electrical system; but was guilty of not being hooked up to an approved water supply.”

        My view is that unless you like to tilt at windmills, it is not worth the wasted time when for a few bucks a month, you can hook up to the water system and then ignore it. There are more important injustices to fight and better ways to use your time. But if her battle helps bring about adjustments in the way the municipal code is employed, it may be worthwhile. I would rather spend my time fighting against criminal wars, degradation of the environment, and exploitation of labor. I once lived in a house I bought in Oregon 45 years ago (for $6,000) that had only an outhouse. No one gave a shit, but I installed a septic system because it’s cold in them there mountains!

        • The woman in question actually lives within the village limits and was using the town sewer lines. Not exactly ‘off grid’ if you live in the village. My electric is $20/mo. before I use a watt, and my water/sewer is $30/mo. before I use a drop of water

          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 12:51 pm |

            As I said, my bill in Arizona, with less than 2 days use, was $8 (including start up fees)…so it varies. With solar, this could easily be paid by feeding surplus back into the grid. It sounds like you could get by with $30 a month and maybe less if you sell back more energy than the $20 electricity fee.

            Where a live, a tiny community of h 500 households in the Santa Cruz mts, my vote just defeated a merger with a larger district (lost by 1 vote) and so now our basic monthly bill will rise to $100 a month plus usage. I cannot install solar because I live under a redwood canopy. This of course, is not typical. I will install solar on my ARizona house after I build a patio structure to place it on (log house with no rafters or attic is no go).

            Solar City in Arizona quoted me a price (and you have to either heat or cool most of the time) of $70 a month (zero down) to serve a house of 1600 sq ft.
            Any surplus can be sold back to reduce the bill. It’s a no brainer. Arizona power tried to get a bill to impose a $100 a month bill on those with solar (thus making it too costly) but the state agency only gave them $5 a month to be hooked up, easily repaid with feedback into the grid. Often, private corporations are much more tyrannical than government and govt is needed to retrain them. Their next move is to take over the state regulatory agency and push for a punitive fee, tho they are required by state law to increase their share of clean energy, which solar homes provide.

            My dream is solar to fuel home and electric vehicle and either my own septic or compost toilet and rainwater collection (or well run by solar). Work in progress.

      • Unpaid water bills usually result in property seizure. I would not be surprised if someone close to the city or county government has their eye on taking her home on the cheap.

  2. As long as she puts it in writing and provides it to the Utility, that she does not intend to pay for this service. The Utility company gives her the service at their own risk…. Let her give them notice, that by connecting to her home, the Utility Company waves all rights to financial compensation for services provided….

    • For TPTB, it’s not so much about $ as it is about being assimilated Borg-style to the global smartgrid – also tracking devices (smartphones), biometric identification, RFID in credit cards, etc. It’s an electronic prison.

      • So darn true. Now almost all credit cards are going to the “chip” card. I will keep one for emergencies, or for situations where there is no choice such as in buying online, but from here on out I will no longer use my credit card for routine purchases. It was never meant for that anyway. Still, it was interesting when I contacted Chase and told them I wanted to keep using my old card, not go to the new chipped card. They gave me the storyline about better security etc, wouldn’t admit it’s really about better tracking and increasing revenue from selling consumer data. Then they told me that if I didn’t take the chipped card I couldn’t charge anything at all, not even on the old card which has an expiration date in 2017. With that they walked away from a 45 yr old customer relationship. NOTHING is more sacred to these buzzards than the money to be made from tracking us and selling our private information.

    • That is also a good idea.

  3. Cape Coral is trying to kill her.

  4. So much for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in Cape Coral, but it is getting worse. Obama is currently strangling what little freedoms and rights we have left in this country.

    • Let us all know exactly how Obama is connected to this case.

      • Because every day he wakes up and takes a crap on the constitution and our right to pursue happiness

        • I think you mean Bush, who passed the Patriot Act and repealed the 800 yr old right of habeus corpus and lied to us and doubled the debt and collapsed the economy and lost 8 million jobs in 2 years and started two criminal wars killing 500,000 innocents…………..and who now paints dogs.

          • CMRedwood | June 3, 2015 at 4:54 pm |

            Bush and Obama are both puppets as you must well know as a retired political scientist. It was Clinton’s Secretary of State who slipped and told Leslie Stahl the draconian sanctions against Iraq, including food and medicine, resulting in the deaths of over 500,000 Iraqi children were “worth it”. Under Clinton, Rubin and Summers spearheaded the effective repeal of Glass Steagall setting the stage for the planned economic unraveling during Bush II’s reign. Years ago, even Chomsky admitted the office of POTUS had become ceremonial. FAR more than 500K innocents have been murdered by the Cabal.

          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 8:08 pm |

            Clinton’s sanctions led to the deaths of half a million children; Bush’s criminals wars led to the slaughter of half a million civilians. Obama’s crimes while serious, do not rise to that level. This does not excuse him but he does not belong in the lower rungs of hell that await Clinton and Bush.

          • William Keen | June 3, 2015 at 8:45 pm |

            dale ruff – RIGHT ON! CMRedwood — history is written by the winners. The real story here is that George H.W. Bush is STILL head of the CIA! You NEVER quit and the HEAD will never stop until he is dead. The CIA has killed more honest world leaders than history! Bush is the one who put O’B…S… in the Oval Office! Without Bush’s killer CIA agents, we would have a lot more ‘news’ every day.

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 6:21 pm |

            The killer CIA goes back to Allen Dulles under Eisenhower. I am reading the Brothers (Allen and Foster Dulles) and the CIA began covert wars, assassinations,etc long before Bush I took control of the CIA. I don’t get how Bush put O’B…S (???) in the Oval Office! The one guy who tried to break up the CIA, JFK, was murdered soon after he said he wanted to splinter it into a thousand pieces. Shsssssssshhhhhhh…………………..

          • Pathfinder0100 | June 3, 2015 at 6:07 pm |

            Bush is history!! O is NOW!!!!

          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 8:06 pm |

            Tell that to the families of the 500,000 civilians slaughtered by Bush’s criminal war. Tell that to the American taxpayers who must foot the bill for several trillion for the Iraq War. Tell it to the children born even today with grotesque birth defects from US use of uranium-tipped weapons. Tell it to the 5000 American families whose sons were killed in an unnecessary war, based on lies. And tell it to the 20 million people thrown onto foodstamps when Bush’s recession lost 8 million jobs (effecting 8 million families) in 2 years. The past is prelude, and the present is a result of the past. Bush should be locked up with his fellow war criminals.

          • fort9erdon | June 5, 2015 at 9:48 pm |

            Your version of history is bias, bias, bias, lefty bias, bias, spin, spin, spin, and lies. Yes from a lefty perspective, you believe it, but I can explain why. You listen to the biased, lying, spinning MSM, who wouldn’t know the truth if it bit them on the butt. You worry about the debt Bush ran up. Simple, Bush took over with a national debt of 5 trillion. When Bush left office it was about 9.5 trillion, which means Bush raised the national debt by 4 1/2 trillion with his 2 wars. Now what is the national debt? Over 18 trillion. Which means Obama has increased the debt by another 9 trillion in 6 1/2 years. Double Bush, … in less time!

            You lefty’s like to claim that Obama took over an economy that was losing 800,000 jobs a month. Then, you turn around and praise Obama for adding 7 million jobs. He might have, but if he did, they are menial, low wage, minimum wage jobs, and by all reports, that take into consideration the American worker, on average, now earns $4000.00 a year LESS than when Obama took over. You compare Bush’s 10.2% unemployment to Obama’s 5.4% unemployment, and you tout this as a great accomplishment. How is that even possible, that if you have created 7 million new jobs, WHY ARE THERE LESS PEOPLE WORKING TODAY THAN WHEN OBAMA TOOK OVER? The ONLY reason the unemployment rate has gone down at all is because folks have given up and stopped looking for a job. And when they stop looking, the government no longer counts them as unemployed, so the unemployment rate drops! The US government is great at “cooking the books”. Put another way, THEY LIE!

            For instance when the government figures out how much of a raise that Social Security folks will get annually, the take into consideration the rising cost of living. But, what is the 2 things that go up every year faster than anything else, normally in a year to year basis? Food and energy! But when they figure how much of a raise we get for cost of living increase, THEY DON’T CONSIDER THE COST OF FOOD AND ENERGY! FOOD AND ENERGY ARE LEFT OUT OF THE FORMULA??? WHAT???? FOOD AND ENERGY NEVER GO UP??? And again, the seniors, who are the most vulnerable to cost of living swings, get it in the butt AGAIN! So, next time you want the truth of any public report, CHECK IT OUT YOURSELF! DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH, BECAUSE THIS GOVERNMENT SCREWS YOU TO DEATH! THEY COOK THE BOOKS AND LIE! So, whats my point? My point is, Bush WAS NOT losing 800,000 jobs a month. THAT IS A DEMOCRATIC LIE!
            Obama has spent enough to double Bush’s spending in less time. But, of course, NOTHING is ever Obamas fault! Id sure like to see this commie no good SOB lying in state at room temperature. By natural causes of course.

          • dale ruff | June 5, 2015 at 10:37 pm |

            I will give you the objective facts, no spin. Debt is tallied not by when a new President takes office (since he inherits a debt is he bound, by law, to execute) but by fiscal year, by budgets. Bush had 8 budgets: when his first budget took effect 9/2001, the debt was 5.8 trillion; when his 8th debt ended 9/2009, the debt was 12. 8 trillion. Of this, Obama has gotten an appropriation from Congress for 200 billion, as the first installment of the Stimulus package, so the true debt which arose out of the last Bush budget was 12.6 trillion about 120% higher than when his 1st budget began.

            Obama’s budgets have gone from this 12..6T authorized in the Bush budget to about 18.1 trillion, about 45% increase in 6 1/2 years. Bush started with a surplus from Clinton and the CBO projected a 6 trillion surplus in the next 10 years, instead the debt rose over 100% during Bush’s 8 budget years.

            The 8th Bush budget had a deficit of 1.2 trillion. These are facts which you can check by going to the budgets and checking the deficits accumulated.

            This has nothing to do with spin or left or right wing. It is just how debt is attributed, based on the law, which runs budgets during a fiscal year from end of Sept to end of Sept each year. When a new President comes in, he inherits a budget he is obliged, by law, to execute (Nixon tried not to spend as authorized and got into a lot of trouble for violating the law). Thus, tho Bush took office in Jan 2001, he does not get credit for the surplus he inherited in the last Clinton budget; nor does Obama get tagged with the 1.2 Trillion deficit (it was 1.4 but .2 was added by Congress to the Bush budget) that resulted from the 8th Bush budget. In 2008, Bush proposed and asked for a 3.1 trillion appropriation from the Democratically controlled Congress, and they gave him exactly what he asked for, which he then approved (he has the right to veto). Because his economic staff (led by conservative Harvard economists) overestimated govt revenue and underestimated govt spending (they predicted a 450 billion deficit, but the economic collapse undermined their rosy predicitons), the deficit mushroomed to 1.2 trillion. This led to a final debt in 9/2009, when the last Bush budget expired, of 12.6 Trillion (I have reduced it by the .2 billion Congress added). These are the objective facts.

            Here is why Bush created such a huge debt. He was the first President in history to go to war while cutting taxes. Here is the result: “During the George W. Bush administration, the federal government spending was increased from $1789 billion to $2983 billion (70%) but the revenues were only increased from $2025 billion to $2524 billion (25%).” Wikipedia

            I agree with you that the jobs picture is distorted by the fact that of the 8 million jobs lost during the last 2 Bush budgets, (he lost private sector jobs, despite 23 million new Americans), many gave up and the labor participation rate is accordingly reduced, but it is also true that the demographic bulge of the Baby Boomers is creating a larger than normal exit from the labor market, as Boomers retire by the millions each year. That and worker discouragement gives a distorted picture to the jobs situation, which however is based on the same metrics used during previous Presidents. You can call it a lie if that comforts you, but the government is using the same metrics and they also publish the labor participation rate. When an economy collapses, as it did during the last 2 Bush budgets, it takes a long long time to recover and for job growth to increase enough to encourage workers to try to find jobs.

            When McDonald’s advertised nationally for 65,000 jobs, they got a million applications (for the crappiest jobs), leaving 935,000 unhired: that is how bad it is. During Clinton’s 8 years, 23 million jobs were created but Bush actually lost private sector jobs. And that will play out for a while longer.

            According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of jobs when the 1st Obama budget took effect was just under 130 million; today it is 141, 650,000.

            The labor participation rate, according to Republicans, is at its lowest rate (Lindsey Graham) but in fact it was lower during the longest most robust growth period in US history…1948-1978 (politifact.com). Politifact adds:

            “Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus blamed the shrinking participation rate on “the Obama economy,” but economists say most of the decline, which has been happening for more than a decade, is due to demographics, including the trend of baby boomers reaching retirement age and deciding to no longer work.”

            Here is a projection made in 2006; “Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 2006: Every year after 2000, the rate declined gradually, from 66.8 percent in 2001 to 66.0 percent in 2004 and 2005. According to the BLS projections, the overall participation rate will continue its gradual decrease each decade and reach 60.4 percent in 2050.” This is a natural result of the Boomer’s retiring, as well as fewer women working and more young folks going to college.

            Here is the CBO assessment: “CBO, November 2014: Of the 3 percentage-point decline in participation between the end of 2007 and the end of 2013, CBO estimates, about 1½ percentage points was the result of long-term trends, about 1 percentage point arose from temporary weakness in employment prospects and wages, and about one-half of a percentage point was attributable to unusual aspects of the slow recovery.”

            In summary: there are more jobs today than ever but the lowered labor participation rate is a combination of demographics, structural issues, and a weak recovery. It will continue, whoever is the next President.

            I have presented the best available data without spin or bias. No one can do more.

          • fort9erdon | June 6, 2015 at 12:45 am |

            That is pretty convincing and I do not have the mental capacity to argue with you, but if you would, please answer me this. I am an old guy, (70 my next birthday) living off of Railroad Retirement. I was disabled in 2006, and my retirement, and cost of living increases are granted at the same rate as Social Security. If SS gets a 1.25% increase, Railroad retirement tracks the same percentage. We all know that the cost of food, and the cost of energy are the two main contributors for increases in the actual cost of living going up. Why are these two items left out of the computations for determining our cost of living each year. The people at SS are screwing the hell out of the seniors. We pay into the system for over 50 years, (and RR retirees pay double what SS recipients paid during those years) and we are squeezed by inflation as everyone else is. But many, still in the labor pool, can pick up an overtime shift here and there to make extra money. Us retirees do not have that luxury. Our incomes are truly “fixed”. What we need is an HONEST evaluation, and if the cost of living goes up, INCLUDING THE COST OF ENERGY AND FOOD, then we need a raise that actually reflects what the cost of living honestly is. But what is the first thing that gets cut out of a budget. They will “slow down”, future cost of living increases, and balance the budget on the backs of seniors. This year, my cost of living increase was a whopping $24.00 a month, or a generous increase of $288.00 for the year. Guess what? My home owners insurance went up $41.00 bucks a month this year. So, if all the rest of my cost remain the same for the year, I only lost $17.00 bucks a month with this raise! Am I pissed? You bet, when Obama is hauling in Mexicans as fast as he can, in order to create more “instant democrats”, and giving money to them that he could be granting to us folks that actually paid into the system, and we have to continue deciding what to buy this month, …. our groceries or our meds. Obama and the democrats will give EVERYTHING to get these “refugees’ into the country while screwing to death us AMERICANS that actually can legally be here, and the “invaders” (YES, they are illegal invaders) get more than us who have paid in for 5 decades. Explain THAT to me! And I know, this is not specifically a democrat or republican problem, no, it is just an accepted fact that we are old, defenseless and can do nothing about it, politicians are using the money that should be coming to us, instead using to buy future votes, and I will add that Obama is the worst of the worst of politicians to do this as NO president has done this on the scale of Obama. So back to my original question before I went off and bloviated, vented and such, ….. why won’t the government give us an honest evaluation and a raise consistent with a true cost of living increase?

          • David L. Allison | October 21, 2015 at 10:08 pm |

            Now you are going to confuse the right wing zealots who have no capacity for integrating facts and actual data into their thinking. Please don’t stop explaining, though. Bystanders may actually learn things that they would not otherwise ever come into contact with and grow as a result.

          • livefree1200cc | November 11, 2015 at 7:37 pm |

            Everything you said about Bush is true, but you can’t possibly be so blind to not see Obama picked up where Bush left off – and started a few wars of his own! They are BOTH traitors to this country

          • Obama’s crimes pale compared to Bush’s.

          • Obama’s crimes pale before Bush’s……Bush slaughtered a million innocents based on lies.

          • livefree1200cc | November 12, 2015 at 5:11 pm |

            You’ll never hear me defend Bush

          • fort9erdon | June 3, 2015 at 7:01 pm |

            Your hatred for conservatives has blinded you to the truth, and in fact you spout unfounded fairy tales. I hope you seek the help you so desperately need. And regarding those two wars, ……. they were supported by the democrats as well, at the time! They were not criminal wars. They were in response to UN findings and with the permission of Congress. So, how the hell are they illegal? You live in la la land, doing good drugs!

          • livefree1200cc | June 4, 2015 at 9:19 am |

            Both of those wars were criminal. We went over and attacked two nations that hadn’t done anything to us. Sounds criminal to me

          • fort9erdon | June 4, 2015 at 2:54 pm |

            So we or Israel would be wrong for disarming Iran if they do in fact obtain a nuke. We would be wrong to go in and destroy their nuke facilities, until Bush’s “mushroom cloud” was evident. By your way of thinking one must allow their opponent to obtain the means to obliterate all human life before we put a stop to it? Sometimes there is a strong case for intervening in the affairs of a foreign government. And as far as there being no WMD’s in Iraq? We didn’t find them, but guess what,…. ISIS did. That was reported several months ago by several news organizations, but since it would have exonerated Bush for the Iraq war, the lefty, MSM ignored it and refused to report on it extensively.

          • livefree1200cc | June 4, 2015 at 8:39 pm |

            Yes it was/is wrong. You do realize that WE are the only country to ever nuke other PEOPLE?? The rest of the world should be trying to disarm US !!

          • fort9erdon | June 4, 2015 at 10:18 pm |

            Yes, and the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, saved over a million casualties, as opposed to invading the Japaneze mainland. WE were attacked by the Japs, they started it, we finished it, by saving a million American lives who would have been lost. Sometimes a nuking can be a good thing.

          • False. Japan was beaten and ready to surrender. Truman wanted to show the world that we were in charge so he mass murdered civilians. Also he had to justify all the money spent on the Manhattan Project. (What good is your new toy if you don’t get to play with it?) All war is psychotic and implemented by bankers who fund both sides for profit. WWII was an outgrowth of WWI which, if the royals were not so brain damaged from all the inbreeding, would never have happened or lasted as long as it did. You would do well to look beyond the Hollywood version of the world.

          • fort9erdon | June 5, 2015 at 9:25 pm |

            LudVanB, It is not a Hollywood version. Japan was beaten, yes, but still would NEVER surrender the homeland, being prepared to fight to the last man. Here is a link, to a true historical record, for your perusal. Japan would NEVER, EVER surrender their island homeland. You can read this whole historical data, in about 15 minutes. So please do so. The Allied forces had estimated that we would suffer over a million casualties if they were to try to invade the Japanese homeland. So it was not a desire to “play with your new toy”, but a sincere desire to make sure all the casualties were on the Japanese side by the use of this new, untested bomb. They didn’t even know if it would work. But, the 2 nukes worked, and saved a million American lives by nuking them. Was it worth it? ABSOLUTELY! There would be many millions of lives who would never be born if we had lost another million men. Many people alive today, would not be here, nor their decendents if those million men would have been lost to war. Here is your link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan

          • El toro poo poo! The Japanese always prepared for the “defense of the homeland” at any cost and would have NEVER surrendered, without an invasion!

          • From YOUR citation:

            Japanese leaders had always envisioned a negotiated settlement to the
            war. Their prewar planning expected a rapid expansion and consolidation,
            an eventual conflict with the United States, and finally a settlement
            in which they would be able to retain at least some new territory they
            had conquered.[23]
            By 1945, Japan’s leaders were in agreement that the war was going
            badly, but they disagreed over the best means to negotiate its end.
            There were two camps: the so-called “peace” camp favored a diplomatic
            initiative to persuade Joseph Stalin,
            the leader of the Soviet Union, to mediate a settlement between the
            Allies and Japan; and the hardliners who favored fighting one last
            “decisive” battle that would inflict so many casualties on the Allies
            that they would be willing to offer more lenient terms.[1] Both approaches were based on Japan’s experience in the Russo–Japanese War, forty years earlier, which consisted of a series of costly but largely indecisive battles, followed by the decisive naval Battle of Tsushima.[24]

            So from looking for a negotiated settlement to fighting to the last man….

          • His Excellency | November 12, 2015 at 8:39 am |

            Wrong. Imperial Japan’s response to the attack at Hiroshima was to call their top military scientist and ask him whether they could make such a bomb at a quick rate. Besides, warning fliers were sent to the target areas before the bombs were detonated. Stop repeating Comunist/Fascist revionist propaganda.

          • livefree1200cc | June 5, 2015 at 12:49 pm |

            I would agree if we hadn’t purposely aggravated the Japanese and practically begged them to bomb us. Then our fearless leaders stood back and LET them bomb Pearl Harbor. (just so we would have an excuse to get into a war that nobody in the US was behind until that point)

          • His Excellency | November 12, 2015 at 8:40 am |

            And surprise suicide attacks on military bases of a country not formally at war was justified to you?

          • livefree1200cc | November 12, 2015 at 11:32 am |

            So if the ‘Bin Laden tapes’ had been recorded from an ‘Al Qaeda’ sleeper
            cell in Canada, do you think we would have invaded Canada?

          • His Excellency | November 12, 2015 at 11:37 am |

            No. We would have asked Canada to extradite him. Canada is a strong American ally. The Taliban is an American adversary. That’s the difference.

          • livefree1200cc | November 12, 2015 at 5:00 pm |

            So you think its perfectly normal that we attacked another country (that never attacked us) without declaring war, we killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and put the American taxpayer on the hook for over a Trillion dollars spent? that’s (ONE THOUSAND BILLION)…..all for the supposed acts of a few people who aren’t even from Afghanistan?? I don’t even want to know how your brain works

          • His Excellency | November 12, 2015 at 5:13 pm |

            Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, which was ruled by the Taliban, which gave them shelter. What do you expect we do? Nothing?

          • livefree1200cc | November 12, 2015 at 5:17 pm |

            No we shouldn’t have done nothing, but we should have punished the government insiders that were behind 9/11, not cave people in a far away land that had nothing to do with it

          • His Excellency | November 12, 2015 at 6:11 pm |

            So you’re a truther, huh? Well then f**k you, you Communist propagandist! 9/11 was anything but an inside job. Fools like you view terrorists as “freedom fighters” and the free world as the “real terrorists”. Go away, you troll.

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 11:01 pm |

            Hilarious – the government troll calling me a troll – lol

          • David L. Allison | October 21, 2015 at 10:03 pm |

            There were no weapons of mass destruction, specifically the nuclear weapons that Bush & Cheney made up. The latest WikiLeaks distribution of the HRC emails prove clearly that Bush/Cheney and the British Prime Minister were planning the invasion of Iraq long before 9/11. The decayed poisons “discovered” by ISIS were no surprise to the USA since they were given to Iraq by the USA. Grow up and face reality. Bush & Cheney are war criminals and will be brought to justice if they are ever caught travelling in the civilized world of Europe.

          • yeah right. I have faced reality. The reality that this POS muzzie faux president currently sitting in the white house is destroying this country, deliberately, and using the constitution as his personal roll of toilet paper. THAT, sir, is reality!

          • David L. Allison | October 22, 2015 at 7:06 am |

            Stupid, non-responsive comment worthy of an ignorant right wing troll, which I am sure you must not be as most of them cannot either speak nor spell big words like constitution, let alone understand them.

          • Yes it was a “responsive” comment, as you took a shot at Bush/Cheney, so I took a more accurate shot at your “wonder boy”. And to you lefty’s “constitution” refers to taking a big dump, and not a founding document. Go ahead, I want to hear you defend all the actions of Obama as within the constitution. You might dislike Bush, but he NEVER did the damage to the constitution that the team of “wonder boy and Tranny girl”.

          • His Excellency | November 11, 2015 at 4:57 pm |

            Yes there were WMDs in Iraq. ISIS militants discovered loads of them last year. And Wikileaks is a Communist propaganda organization that lies a whole lot. And there were no preparations for the Iraq War back in 2001. The events leading up to the outbreak of the Iraq War in 2003 were a product of the truce that ended the first Gulf War, which was ignited when Sadam’s Iraq decided to invade and militarily occupy Kuwait. Funny how you forgot that inconvenient fact.

          • livefree1200cc | November 11, 2015 at 7:26 pm |

            Here is an inconvenient fact for you. We invaded Iraq in 2003 and our entire military presence could not find wmd’s. So somehow you think the discovery of wmd’s by a terrorist group (that we funded and created) over 10 years later is relevant?? HOW??

          • His Excellency | November 11, 2015 at 7:29 pm |

            Terrorists can traffic weapons to different countries quite well. Also, the New York Times journalists that leaked information on CIA and military operations in Iraq had negatively impacted their efforts to find the WMDs over the years.

          • David L. Allison | November 11, 2015 at 11:48 pm |

            So nice to find an activist troll out there who is happy to take advantage of a the fact that some of us actually use our real names and allow folks like you to troll across sites to make your irrational right wing attacks on individuals rather than discussing policies and programs.

            The only WMDs found in Iraq were those that were given to the Iraqi government by the United States government when a Republican was in office. But you really know that & just don’t mind posting lies.

            Your ability to cubbyhole all of your hatred into nice boxes is cute but ineffective. Communism, as you know, has nothing to do with WikiLeaks but is the model of transparency that was promised by our president but never took place.

            The second Iraq war was W’s way of getting back at Saddam for not bending over for Daddy Bush when we invaded Iraq the first time. Rhetoric is on your side. The facts are not. But then that is nothing new. You are a Republican,

          • His Excellency | November 12, 2015 at 6:24 am |

            Did you know that Saddam had tried to assassinate Bush Sr.? This was after Bush Sr. led an international coalition to expel Saddam’s forces from Kuwait after the Baathist dictatorship decided to invade and occupy its neighbor. Also, the Soviet Union and its bloc gave Saddam the WMDs, in fact, they gave him far more regular arms than the West did during the Iran-Iraq War. The Soviets gave arms to both sides during that war. After the Gulf War, in which a truce was in place, Saddam had violated 16 UN Security Council resolutions which were part of the truce. In 1998, he expelled the UN weapon inspectors that were there as part of the truce. Why did he do that if he wasn’t building WMDs? The fact was that Saddam was building WMDs. He built them and hid them very well. ISIS militants, many of whom were former Saddam regime officials, found the WMDs last year’s and are now in possession of them. These are facts that leftists like you distort. And Wikileaks is Communist propaganda. Why doesn’t Wikileaks expose the agenda of new-Communist Russia or Islamist Iran? Because Wikileaks is a Communist organization. That’s why.

          • livefree1200cc | November 11, 2015 at 7:29 pm |

            Stop watching so much TV, you’ll sleep a lot better. All of these bullcrap headlines from the Mid-East are there to keep you afraid and fuel your hate. Any problems there are over there today, we created by going there in the first place.

          • Whew!!! Thanks for giving me a “heads up”. I feel so much better knowing that the Iranians don’t actually chant “death to Israel”, and “Israel MUST be blown off the face of the planet”, and “Death to America”, and that the Iranians ARE NOT RESEARCHING to make a nuke, or that ISIS is just the “JV team”. You sir are just so full of $hit. Take your Muslim A$$, and go to #ell. Idiot! And just think, you got around to answering this from a column and comment ONLY 5 months old?????

          • livefree1200cc | November 12, 2015 at 1:36 am |

            If I was Palestinian I would be chanting death threats to Israel as well. If I lived anywhere in the Middle-East I would probably be chanting death to America. The whole world would be a better place if Israel was blown off the map, and we minded our own business, but I guess we are getting off topic. You are obviously FAR too invested in things that are none of our business.

          • His Excellency | November 11, 2015 at 5:01 pm |

            Al Qaeda was located in Afghanistan. So the 9/11 attacks were justified in your view, you Communist propagandist?

          • livefree1200cc | November 11, 2015 at 7:23 pm |

            The 9/11 Omission report says that the supposed terrorists were from Saudi Arabia so the answer to your question is no, we did not have justification to invade Afghanistan. Even if the ‘terrorists’ had been real and from Afghanistan that would still not be enough to invade an entire country for the actions of a few.

          • His Excellency | November 11, 2015 at 7:25 pm |

            Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan. The bin Laden tapes were recorded in Afghanistan. The 9/11 plot was planned by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. And the Taliban, which had been giving support to Al Qaeda, was based in Afghanistan. What else is there?

          • livefree1200cc | November 11, 2015 at 7:50 pm |

            You’re funny – so if the (fake) Bin Laden tapes had been recorded in Canada, do you think we would have invaded Canada??? You moron

          • His Excellency | November 11, 2015 at 7:53 pm |

            Only the bin Laden tapes weren’t fake. They were real, and they were recorded-first in Afghanistan and later in Pakistan.

          • livefree1200cc | November 11, 2015 at 8:09 pm |

            Lol – You’re killing me! So the same administration that lied about 9/11, lied about WMD’s and Dismantled our 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th amendments with the Patriot Act, told you the tapes were real……and you believed them??….. so sad. Now seriously – how do you know they were real? Because they were on TV??

          • His Excellency | November 11, 2015 at 8:34 pm |

            No amendments have been dismantled under Bush. But your beloved Radical-in-Chief, Obama, secretly wants to dismantle the 1st and 2nd amendments. And Bush did not lie on 9/11. You’re a Communist propagandist, pure and simple.

          • livefree1200cc | November 12, 2015 at 1:25 am |

            Wow, slow down my friend. What makes you think I support Obama ??? You are correct that the illegal alien usurper that sits in the white house is after #1 and #2. He has also purposely instigated countless racial divides in the country. He is also selling out US sovereignty with the TPP and the UN Arms Treaty. Obama is by far the worst President I have seen in office in my 50 years on this planet. Unfortunately Bush comes in at a close 2nd place.
            Between the Patriot Act and NDAA, wire-taps and warrant-less searches are ‘legal’ – dismantling the 4th amendment which clearly states ‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.’
            The Guantanamo indefinite detention without a lawyer dismantles the 5th amendment which among other things, states that ‘“due process of law” be part of any proceeding that denies a citizen “life, liberty or property”.
            The same detentions also dismantle the 6th amendment because it clearly states that
            ‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy
            the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the
            State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed’
            The use of torture destroys our 8th amendment, which clearly states that it ‘prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishment.’
            If you have a long love affair with Bush that is fine with me, but don’t tell me he was a good President because that is a bold lie.

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 10:01 am |

            I note a total absence of facts in your hateful post. Those who opine without facts are spouting “unfounded fairy tales.” If you have factual refutation of any claims I have made,present them: put up or shut up.

            Bush and team lied that there was “solid evidence” of WMDs and links to al Quada, and then covered up that lie, when it was exposed, by claiming “everone thought they did.”

            You have bought into this double lie. Here are the facts, and I challenge you to refute them with evidence: 1) The UN said there were no WMDs found and asked for a month or two to finish their on the ground inspections (Bush could not wait because the final report would have exposed his lies) 2. 60% of Congressional Democrats did not believe his lies and voted against giving him war authorization. 3. The major allies of the US (France, Germany, Italy and over 25 other nations) all rejected the lies and refused to participate.

            Only 40% of Democrats voted with the 97% of Republicans for war, so your claim is false!

            Criminal wars are wars which are started without solid evidence of imminent attack. There was no such solid evidence, tho Bush and his team claimed there was. Their intelligence cast doubt on the claims, and they were aware of that. The head of the UN called the war on Iraq “illegal” under international law. A war based on lies is a criminal war under any definition. This war was justified by the doctrine of pre-emptive war (“We cannot wait until the smoking gun is a mushroom cloud.” Bush and Rice both said). Eisenhower said this of pre-emptive war:”

            “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.”

            There was no solid evidence, so that was a lie. A war based on lies is a criminal war.

          • Mystic Light | June 4, 2015 at 3:05 pm |

            Interesting that you continue to blame Bush when he has been out of office for the last 6 1/2 years. Obama has made his own mistakes and errors that have absolutely NOTHING to do with Bush. Obama called ISIS a “JV” team even thought that JV team has now terrorized the world for the last year. Obama was smug when he directed Mitt Romney to give back his 1980’s foreign policy regarding Russia – Guess What? Russia is a true player and menace on the world with the LARGEST nuclear stockpile (STILL). Obama has divided and polarized this nation along racial, gender, sex, religion and political lines: Was against homosexual rights the first term in office and then had a “miraculous change of heart”. HA! He didn’t champion homosexual rights the first term because he wanted to be re-elected and knew that if he told the Truth he would not have been re-elected. What a Prevaricator he is! He told millions of people that they could keep their doctor and their premiums would go DOWN. Millions are finding out that the opposite is true. What was the economic growth for last quarter? .07%! THAT IS IT. LESS people are in the work pool in the last 40 years because they can’t find FULL time jobs with benefits. People are piecing together two and three PART time jobs with NO benefits. It’s the truth but people like you don’t want to hear it. ASK the millions of people in this nation that are truly struggling, but you and your apologist cronies don’t care. All you care about is your stupid party politics and winning. Nobody is winning, most in this nation have lost under this President…

          • David L. Allison | October 21, 2015 at 9:58 pm |

            I just want to thank you for posting factual information to undo the lies and misinformation of the rabid radical right wing folks posting on this site. It is refreshing to see data driving ignorance into the deep dark holes into which it warrants dumping and burying.

          • livefree1200cc | June 3, 2015 at 7:49 pm |

            Bush was a terrible president, I’ll give you that. He took this country up to 8 Trillion in debt and was in office when Biden’s Patriot Act was implemented. He was also completely complicit in 9/11. Obama took the debt from 8 Trillion to 18 Trillion and he’s not done yet. He also KEPT the Patriot Act alive during his years in office. Obama has incited racial violence and has tried his hardest to promote a civil war between blacks and whites. Obama has also not only kept Bush’s wars going, but started some of his own to boot. Every President still alive belongs in prison for the things they have done to this country. Especially the illegal alien currently sitting in the White House

          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 8:17 pm |

            Bush’s debt…..6.8 trillion.
            Businessinsider reported: “In 2001, the CBO projected that the total Clinton surplus of about $280 billion would balloon to $5.9 trillion worth of cumulative surpluses through 2011, when in reality the accumulated deficits reached $6 trillion at the end of that time period.”
            Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-clinton-surplus-became-a-6t-deficit-2013-1#ixzz3c3Uh4tFA

            Here’s the math: debt is not measured from when a President is sworn it but in term of the fiscal year, on which his budgets are based. When Bush’s first budget took effect in 9/2001 the national debt was 5.8 trillion; when his 8th and last budget ended in 9/2009, the national debt was 12. 8 trillion, of which only 200 billion was added by Obama (the first installment of his Stimulus package)…so the Bush budgets went from 5.8 to 12.6 billion, more than doubling the debt. In the same time, with 23 million new Americans (Clinton had helped add 23 million new jobs), Bush’s policies actually led to a loss of private sector jobs, tho the Federal government workforce grew, due to the 2 criminal multi-trillion dollar wars.

            The other self-proclaimed “fiscal conservative” was Reagan, who tripled the debt. Moral: beware of people running as fiscal conservatives–they break the bank!

          • livefree1200cc | June 4, 2015 at 9:25 am |

            Okay I stand corrected. Bush’s debt 6.8 Trillion. Obama will easily beat that. What is stopping him from being fiscally responsible? Answer – they are ALL criminals

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 9:51 am |

            There is a radical difference between wasting a projected surplus of 6 trillion with wasted debt of 6 trillion. Bush lost private sector jobs with his spending while under Obama, the US has created 7 million jobs. That is the difference between wasting money and investing it. Jobs both increase govt revenue and descrease govt costs.

            Bush inherited surpluses and the projection of trillions in surpluses. Obama inherited a collapsing economy, with 800K job losses a month and decreased govt revenue and increased costs.He increased the debt by about 120%, while losing jobs. Since Obama’s first budget took effect, his “share” of the debt has grown from 12.6 trillion (since he added 200B to the Bush budget) to 18 trillion, or 5.4 trillion in about 6 1/2 years. The deficits have dropped from 1.4 trillion to under 500 billion.

            So far, Obama has increased the debt by 43% so far and by the end of his lat budget it may be up to around 60%, or half the increase of Bush, while creating about 8 or 9 million jobs and cutting the debt/gdp ratio drastically.

            Politifact reports that while Bush increased govt spending by 10.2% per year, Obama has increased it by 1.4%, the lowest level since Eisenhower increased it by 3.6%. Five of the last 10 Presidents increased it over 8% (including Reagan) so we can conclude that Obama has increased the spending by the greatest rate in recent history, and is spending is less than half of the next least profligate spender (Eisenhower) and 7 times less than Bush. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

            “Obama will easily beat that.” Not if you look at the only meaningful measure of debt: it’s utility as an investment which increases jobs, revenue, and decreases spending. This is often put in shorthand as the ratio of debt to GDP. Either way, Obama’s performance is been outstanding, while Bush’s was totally wasted.

          • Shovel Ready | June 4, 2015 at 5:14 pm |

            Those jobs O created– weren’t most of them in the government sector? If so they will have contributed little to the wealth and health of the economy. Generally speaking, government jobs do not foster and increase in private sector employment, and its private sector jobs that produce healthy growth of the economy.

          • livefree1200cc | June 4, 2015 at 9:10 pm |

            You’re delusional if you think Obama has helped the country one iota. Also I don’t care about debt to GDP (that contains military spending). I care about the amount of debt added. There is a chart in here labelled ‘Change in debt from taking to leaving office’ – That chart tells me the whole story http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/07/the-story-behind-obama-and-the-national-debt-in-7-charts/

          • Shovel Ready | June 4, 2015 at 5:10 pm |

            I totally agree, especially with your last two sentences.

          • Richard StJohn | June 3, 2015 at 9:41 pm |

            Did you think of all that yourself or did you just recite the lines from Huff Post?

          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 9:46 pm |

            Unlike you, I was paying attention, and unlike you, I don’t need a website to recite from. I realize you are just trolling…so it’s all good.

          • Gamer First | June 4, 2015 at 11:40 am |

            To be fair every single democrat in office at the time voted for the war as well. And that is a recorded fact, not my opinion

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 11:59 am |

            That is inaccurate: here are the vote totals by Party:

            House vote:

            215 (96.4%) of 223 Republican Representatives voted for the resolution.
            82 (39.2%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted for the resolution.

            Senate vote

            Dems 29-for; 21 against (58% for)

            Repubs 99% voted for (48 for, 1 against).

            If you add up the votes of both chambers, Repubs voted 97% for, Dems 111 voted for, 145 against.or about 58% against. (Source: Wikipedia)

            “To be fair every single democrat in office at the time voted for the war as well. And that is a recorded fact, not my opinion.” That statement is a lie. as proven by

            107th Congress-2nd Session 455th Roll Call Vote of by members of the House of Representatives

            107th Congress-2nd Session 237th Roll Call Vote by members of the Senate.

            You bought the second lie meant to justify the first lie. I do not accuse you of lying but of gullibility and ignorance,believing a lie easily exposed by looking at the actual public voting archives. Are you outraged that Bush lied to you?

          • EAGLEKEEPER61 | June 4, 2015 at 5:07 pm |

            Lied to us? About what? Do you also believe that Obama hasn’t lied to us???

          • Shovel Ready | June 4, 2015 at 5:09 pm |

            Bush. Obama. Who cares? They are all the same: fascist Globalists.

          • Randy Smith | June 5, 2015 at 2:17 pm |

            I’m sure he was/is part of the prob, but have you not looked back further to see this goes way back. How the only source of money in the begining of this country dictated how our process of electing leadership in this country worked. With the establishment of an income tax this process should’ve changed to allow representation of those who are also now funding government. Instead we fund 2 parties controlled by wealth and representative of the wealthy, with no true representation of the majority. What I’m saying is, it is a rigged game, and no matter which of the 2 dominate parties you vote for, the people get poorer and less free.

            All of this finger pointing is just to keep all distracted away from what needs to be corrected so that they can continue to plunder us until we cannot stop them. Fighting amongst ourselves is stupid, and unless the majority figure this out, and recognizes who the enemy is, and what is the correct way to fix this problem, we are out of luck. Without recognition of these 2 points, the best we can do is to support organizations such as the A.C.L.J., N.R.A. and vote for what appear to be the least evil. But even that will just prolong it and not fix it. Till then just be content chasing your tails, as that is in reality what most are doing.

          • dale ruff | June 5, 2015 at 2:51 pm |

            This nation has always been ruled by the rich. The Founding Fathers, 95% of whom were rich slave owners, created a Constitution to thwart the democratic will of the People, whom they, as the elites, feared. In the first national elections literally only 1% (35,000) of rich white males were allowed to vote or run for office.

            Political liberty excuded 99%, and likewise today, the 1% rule (actuall the 1% of the 1% rule). The game IS rigged by wealth and both parties must compete by play the game, ,but the claim that both parties are the same is inaccurate. I will give a few critical examples: (Source: Congressional archives)
            1. The Iraq war, which cost trillions in debt and slaughtered half a million innocents, was supported in Congress by 97% of Republicans but 58% of Democrats voted against.
            2.Since WWII ended, all Dem Presidents have overseen more job growth, more economic growth, and a reduction of the debt burden (ratio of debt to GDP) while all Repub Presidents have overseen an increase in the debt burden.

            3. Dems support raising minimum wage, protecting SS and Medicare, collective bargaining rights, gun and immigration law reform, and campaign finance reform, almost unanimously. Repubs oppose almost unanimously.

            4. While there are major similarities in that both parties depend on large corporate donations, there are also major differences, and only one partysupports expanding aid to the working class and the poor, children, and the elderly and disabled. Only one party seeks campaign finance reform to reduce the influence of big money on the political process.

            5. The claim that both parties are the same leads to cynicism and low voter turnout, which objectively benefits one party: the Republicans, the party opposed to changing the law which puts money in charge of our politics and is the foundation of our oligarchy.

            THE NRA is an organization mostly funded by the gun makers for whom it serves as chief propagandists, spreading lies and disinformation. In fact, the NRA does not even represent its members of whom 3/4 support universal background checks, which the NRA opposes. The NRA., against its own members, serves the big gun makers, whose interest in in more profits at the expense of public safety.

            The ACLJ is a right wing Christian organization founded by Pat Robertson which is notable for its anti-Islamic campaigns, its opposition to the ACLU, and legal action to make legal public prayer (private has always been legal) legal in public schools, an obvious violation of the Constitution, as the courts have confirmed. They have supported laws in Uganda including bill in Uganda that would have implemented the death penalty for homosexuals.

            I find such organizations fundamentally at odds with the best American values of protecting public safety and tolerance.

            The solution to oligarchy is not organizations which represent wealthy weapons makers and work against the positions of their own members, or organizations which want to kill gays but genuine democracy based on the values our nation was founded on: equality and consent of the governed (a good definition of democracy). We do not need more guns and the killing of gays: we need democracy, a free and independent press, an independent judiciary, free elections not corrupted by big money, and a tolerance of dissent.

          • His Excellency | November 11, 2015 at 5:04 pm |

            They weren’t criminal wars. One of the wars was initiated in response to a regime that kept disobeying UN Security Council resolutions in place as a result of an unprovoked earlier war against another country over a decade earlier. The other war was in response to the 9/11 attacks, which I bet you sympathized with the fanatical perpetrators.

          • The only legal grounds for an attack is imminent threat (claims were lies) and approval of UN Security Council. Neither was the case. For that reason, the head of the UN declared the war “illegal.”.

            The claim Iraq was involved in 9/11 was a lie. Lies do not justify mass murder. The govt lied about 9/11, according to the 9/11 Commission. You have been lied to and are unaware of how you have been fooled. How pathetic. Your claim about me is pure libel.

        • Bush was terrible, terrible, terrible.

        • Please be specific.

          • livefree1200cc | June 6, 2015 at 8:29 pm |

            1) Open door illegal immigrant policies
            2) Obamacare
            3) Secret trade treaties TPP
            4) War by executive order
            5) Increasing socialism through massive give-away programs
            6) Divisive racial policies
            7) Anti 2nd amendment
            8) Hasn’t closed Guamtanamo
            9) Gave himself and exercised assassination privilege
            10) Hasn’t brought troops home

      • Obama is guilty of all evil! Just look at the color of his skin!

        • No, I hate his white half as much as his black half. I am an equal opportunity communist hater!

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 5:58 pm |

            You are deluded. You are a racist. You are a hater.

          • fort9erdon | June 4, 2015 at 8:10 pm |

            You live in la la land, are a low info voter, and demonstrate the IQ of a potato, …..maybe! You might have to go to summer school to make it to potato status. But, you are right about one thing, …I am a hater, ….. of communist, jihadi Muslims and arrogant gays willing to again, throw Christians to the lions for obeying the tenets of their faith, espoused in the bible.

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 8:30 pm |

            How sad that you have poisoned yourself with hatred and ignorance.

          • fort9erdon | June 4, 2015 at 10:20 pm |

            And it is also sad that you are merely poisoned by ignorance! I only hate enemy’s of America, such as Obama, a known communist!

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 10:36 pm |

            So, in your mind, 65 million Americans voted for a known communist. So most Americans are communists. I see why you are mentally disturbed and consumed with hatred being surrounded by a nation of communists. Hey, maybe it’s you who is the enemy of the American people? You think?

          • fort9erdon | June 4, 2015 at 11:57 pm |

            No, 65 million are not communists. You are attempting to outline my position with bullshit! The democratic party has been hijacked by the communist Party USA, but the majority of democrats are not even cosnizant of that. Our youth has been dumbed down and more accepting of “progressive (commie) ideas, through the use of the American public education system. Seems like mr. Kruchevs promise to make America communist without ever firing a shot is coming true. No, 65 million Americans did not vote for a known communist. They were duped, and voter fraud accounts for a significant number of those votes. Go ahead and tell me again, how democratic voter fraud is just a myth! Right!!!~

          • dale ruff | June 5, 2015 at 9:43 am |

            “The democratic party has been hijacked by the communist Party USA, but the majority of democrats are not even cosnizant of that….. No, 65 million Americans did not vote for a known communist. ”

            ??? Obama is a known communist but the majority did not know he was a communist??? So how many knew…and were most of his 65 million votes fraudulent (meaning what?)? They thought they were voting for McCain?

            Here is what Khruschev, reformer who revealed the crimes of Stalin and with whom Reagan worked out reductions in nuclear weapons said

            ” “Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will dig you in” We must take a shovel and dig a deep grave, and bury colonialism as deep as we can….your own working class will bury you.”

            I hesitate to disagree with someone with such insight but the Bush study which took five years found no signficant voter fraud. Was Bush also a Communist?

          • fort9erdon | June 5, 2015 at 10:06 pm |

            No, 65 million didn’t know they were voting for a communist. Some of you lefty dems are too stupid to even realize it now. How many times does he have to get shut down in the courts because of his “over reach:? Whats his record now? What, One win, yet 9 losses? And do you actually think his illegal alien actions are legal? Do you think him changing Obamacare law 22 times was merely “tweaking the law”, or was it making new law, which is unconstitutional for a president to do so. By the way, he can’t even legally “tweak” a law without Congress approving. But he does it anyway, knowing the ONLY remedy is impeachment, and with the current Senate, that just ain’t happening! No, Obama can count. He knows there are a sufficient number in the House to Impeach him, but NOT enough Senators to convict him of anything, given it takes 67 votes to convict. Without impeachment over his head, he simply runs roughshod over the Congress with impunity! And he has stacked enough judges on the federal judiciary, that he gets away with it for long periods of time. Luckily for the country these is still a conservative 5/4 majority that can be relied upon sometimes to rein in this communist ba$tard! Unfortunately, they somehow got to Roberts, and slipped Obamacare past the SCOTUS! Would still know what they threatened him with??? Your guy is dirty! You know it, ….. I know it, …. the world laughs at us, and the US of A goes down the $hitt*r because of this commie. I cannot figure out why you lefty dumba$$es put up with it. Yeah, it is a short lived victory, but your country is going down the tubes right ib front of you. Let me ask you one question in closing? If George W, Bush, ran roughshod over the Congress, and just made up laws, which would never get past congress, so he had his various agency’s implement those laws, by executive fiat, in the form of “regulations”, would you lefty’s put up with it, or would you be screaming to high heaven? I DARE you to answer that question honestly! No spin, no El Toro Poo Poo, just answer that honestly. Would you dems be screaming?

          • dale ruff | June 5, 2015 at 10:48 pm |

            You said Obama was a “known communist.” Now you say most people did not KNOW he was a communist. That seems a contradiction. You remind me of Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society, who said in The Politician in 1958: “… in my own firm opinion, the Communists have one of their own actually in the Presidency. For this third man, Eisenhower, there is only one possible word to describe his purposes and his actions. That word is treason.”

            He added:

            “In my opinion the chances are very strong that Milton Eisenhower is actually Dwight Eisenhower’s superior and boss within the Communist Party.”

            “We think that an objective survey of Eisenhower’s associates and appointments shows clever Communist brains, aided by willing Communist hands, always at work to give the Communists more power, and to weaken the anti-Communist resistance.”

            At the same time, Eisenhower was creating an anti-communist strategy against the USSR and in Asia, where he rejected the right of nations to be “neutral” and had the CIA, under Allen Dulles, plot the overthrow of Sukarno which led to a military dictatorship which slaughtered a million people within a short time. Eisenhower was, as historians confirm, the architect of the Cold War. Source: The Brothers, by Stephen Kinzer.

            A personal note: hatred first kills the hater. Take care.

          • fort9erdon | June 6, 2015 at 12:02 am |

            You are twisting my words. Right now, MANY because of his actions since re-election realize that Obama has an agenda. It is called the successful introduction of Socialist values to America. IT WAS NOT EVIDENT to everybody in his first term! But his actions since his reelection, and not having to worry about reelection anymore, it is apparent to many that he has a “communist” agenda with everything he does, WHICH WAS NOT EVIDENT IN HIS FIRST TERM. Some democrats, (with the brainwashing they have received in so called “public schools” the past 40 years or so) do not see anything wrong with what he is doing. They have been brainwashed and dumbed down. Hence my theory that many dems are currently too stupid to realize they are accepting communism, under a “prettier” name! Obama himself and also Hillary, BOTH admit that they are “progressive”. Look up the history of being progressive. The communists themselves knew and understood that the American public would NEVER accept the word “communism”. So, with the help of a guy named Saul Alinsky, and his book, “Rules for Radicals”, a new name was figured out. That name is “progressive” and it is just a code word for communist. Alinsky set out a set of rules to make communism the “way of life” for Americans. Read the book, and then compare those “rules” to the actions of the democratic party, and specifically Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Hillary, Durbin, Rangle, a majority of the so called “black congressional caucus”, and more I am sure! I am sure this country has had many with a communist bent to their philosophy’s over the years. Eisenhower and brother Milton, may very well have those leanings. I doubt it, but OK, if you say so. But they are both dead and can do NOTHING to harm this country further. Obama and the current pack of commies are alive and well and CAN hurt us!

            I notice you completely skipped over/ignored my question to you, of what you would do and feel if a REPUBLICAN president so blatantly disregarded the constitution with just making up laws and implementing them at will, by having his various departments (EPA, DOJ, DHS, etc.) just write regulations to force things he could not get past Congress. WHAT WOULD YOU BE DOING IN THAT SITUATION? That is what republicans face daily with this son of a b*tch renegade president. I think the final “tell” to me was when the Communist Party USA, stated a couple of election cycles back that they “would no longer be running a candidate for President of the United States, because the Democrat party had taken up their agenda”. That is a fact. Look it up. You and every other democrat need to take a good hard look at “what is the America you really want”. Is it an America that no one works a 40 hour week anymore, so employers can get out of paying Obamacare? Is it that you want 25% of the population of Mexico to be in the United States illegally? Yes INS estimates there are at least 30 million and as many as 41 million illegal Mexicans in the US. With a population of 120 million in mexico, you do the math. We have 25 to 33 % of the total population of Mexico here already. And they will all be eligible for SS, medicare, Medicaid, education, medical and welfare, WITHOUT EVER PAYING INTO THE SYSTEM! And for what? So Obama can create 40 million “instant’ democrats. People vote their pocketbook. Mexicans are no different.

            Is this the America you and the democrats want?

            You think it is OK to force true Christians, to violate the tenets of their faith, and force them to choose, …..financial ruin, or give into gay sex, and accept it as normal? Especially since their is a solution that hurts no one. What is that? Legalize gay marriage. I don’t care if they want to screw squirrels. But do not force religious people to engage in, and accept these people’s business when there are plenty of gay bakers, gay florists, and gay photographers willing and able to privide the needed services. Democrats think it is OK to financially ruin a Christian, but would NEVER consider doing the same thing to a Muslim. Why is the Christian, in the cross hairs of this administration? A military Chaplin is no longer even able to utter the word “Jesus Christ” to his troops, because you on the left think that violates the first amendment???? Really? I defy you to show me where the words “separation of church and state appear ANYWHERE in our Constitution. I will save you the trouble of looking, ….. it ain’t there, but actually feel free to look. Who is doing this? DEMOCRATS UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF THIS ADMINISTRATION!

            You may think I am a hater. I am! I hate anyone who willfully sets out to destroy this America and turn it into a third world hell hole simply because of his background thinks America needs to be taken down a peg!

            And we haven’t even started talking about his non existent foreign policy, which is on the verge of 1. granting Iran a nuke, 2. killing many years of being an ally of Israel, THE ONLY DEMOCRACY in the middle east, and 3. thinks ISIS is only the “JV squad”, and only gives lip service to defeating them, ….. allows for the first time in 100 years,lip service to defeating them.lip

          • dale ruff | June 7, 2015 at 11:04 am |

            I did not twist your words. You are contradicting yourself, twisting your own words because they don’t make sense. The term progressive, which the Pew survey in Dec of 2011, found to be the most approved political label, goes back to the late 19th Century, when reformist Republicans fought against monopoly power.

            Progressives are not communists (unless over 60% of Americans are communists). Alinsky was not a communist. Anti-communism was the ideology of Hitler, Mussolini, and their US supporters like Sect of State John Foster Dulles. You should read Alinsky’s book: it sets out a way for non-violent actions to create democracy and social justice.

            Obama and Clinton are seen by most progressives as centrists. You are in a propaganda bubble that collapsed when the USSR dissolved 25 years ago. Now you are caught in an absurd claim that the Democrats are communists. It appear you refuse to take Yes for an answer and need a conspiracy of communists to rationalize your anger and hatred. If you had an ounce of sense, you would redirect your outrage to those who have lied to you, provoking in you such hatred…..the far right and the fascists who have always used anti-communism to justify their crimes.

            When the Republicans did trash the Constitution with the Patriot Act, crushing the 800 yr old right of habeus corpus, and stacking the courts, I protested. Did you?

            You are so far right lunatic there is no value in trying to reason with you. You are brainwashed with fascist ideas that you are too dense to even recognize their source. I wish you well.

          • fort9erdon | June 7, 2015 at 12:28 pm |

            to put it bluntly, you sir are full of crap. Obama is a communist, … Hillary is a communist, … Reid is a communist, … Watters is a communist, … Pelosi is an effing communist, ..,..Boxer is a communist, … Feinstein is a communist, The entire leadership of the democrat party is communist. That is the very reason “Communist USA”, the communist contingent in America does not run a candidate for president, and has not done so, again Quoting them, “Communist USA party will no longer put forth a candidate for president of the United States, because the democrat party has taken up our agenda”. Now, that is fact. And your claim that 60% of America is progressive is pure “El toro poo poo”! The reality is, is that 40% of America leans left, (commie), and 40% of America leans right (conservative) and 20% are “independent moderates in the middle”, and it is these moderates that control America, and the elections. And your claim that Obama and Hillary are centrist is laughable. They are WAAAAAaaaaaay to the left, and because of that “leftyness”, is the exact reason the dems congressional “heads” have been handed to them the last two election cycles, losing first control of the House, and in the next election they lost the Senate, because they are so far left the moderates are trying to bring us back to the middle.

            Do you have any idea, of what socialism stands for? The main thrust of socialism is the redistribution of wealth, whether one is willing to work for it or not! With the income tax system, welfare, Obamacare and all the “freebies” offered the lazy ba$tards, too lazy to work, America has become the biggest “redistributer of wealth” or socialist country on the planet. Where the government is responsible for your total well being, that is communism. Pull your cranium out of your rectum sir, smell the roses, get some air and look at the truth for a change!

          • dale ruff | June 8, 2015 at 9:30 am |

            According to the Pew survey released in Dec. 2011, the public’s view of political terms is progressive, with 67% approval. That, sir, is, a fact, not poo poo.

            “”Communist USA party will no longer put forth a candidate for president of the United States, because the democrat party has taken up our agenda” is a fake quote, easily detected by the fact that only the far right uses “democrat” as an adjective and a lack of a source.

            As for redistribution of wealth, since Reagan cuts tax rates for the rich (where most billionaires now pay a lower rate (some pay none, average is 17%, Romney revealed he paid 13%), so that teachers and cops pay a higher rate, the median wages have fallen over 40% (according to inflationcalculator) while the labor productivity and profits are up over 90% and the rich have nearly tripled their incomes and wealth. That, sir, is redistribution of wealth, known as socialism for the rich.

            I suggest you finish your vulgar insults and take a look at the lies you are believing and repeating.

      • He isn’t. He is the control freak-in-chief though, so I would bet most control freaks adore him, since it’s all about “follow the leader” to them. Creepy control freaks need to be Hayduked until they develop stress disorder and resign from their positions.

    • They’re all connected, not just Obama.

    • Obama just passed a law not allowing people to pee in their own yards. Frigging tyrant! How we miss the village idiot who now is painting dogs!

      • Oh, that’s right. The village idiot painting dogs isn’t charging $500,000 for a speech to pay-to-play like Bill Clinton is, right? Bush, the Younger and his wife are only in Africa aiding and assisting AIDS victims but you don’t want to hear about that. BBC did an article about Bush and his humanitarian efforts on that continent. Even Bono stepped up and praised Bush for his undying help in that fight. But of course, you hate so much, you can’t see the Truth of anyone that isn’t part of the Progressive Gangster Squad.

        • Bush gets up to 200K per speech…and he’s a lousy speaker. Clinton got $500k once; his normal fee is the same as Bush, and he is an accomplished speaker. But the champ was Reagan: “Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush, and his predecessor, Ronald Reagan, also gave paid speeches. Reagan took heat for accepting $2 million for two speeches in Japan”

          Since Bush killed 500,000 innocent people in Iraq in a criminal war based on lies, he will have to save a lot of people to make up for mass murder on a Hitlerian scale.

          I do hate mass murder, don’t you?

        • Bush can’t travel anyplace else: he will be arrested for war crimes. All the money he has spent on AIDS in Africa is OUR money, US taxpayer money. At least the Clinton’s aid programs are private money.

          Bush chose AIDS in Africa as his legacy, while killing half a million in a criminal war in Iraq and destroying the US economy while increasing the debt by 120% and losing private sector jobs, forcing 20 million onto foodstamps (from the 8 million lost jobs during his last 2 budgets).

          Fighting aids is a noble cause, as was the work of Hitler to fight cancer through an anti-smoking campaign and funding cancer research. In neither case, does it make up for the crimes against humanity of both.

          Under the same Nuremberg laws which sent the Nazis to be executed, Bush should be prosecuted. In my view, this is the greatest mistake Obama made: not to investigate and prosecute the lies and war crimes of the Bush regime, thus setting a precedent that leaders can lie and commit war crimes with impunity, the very definition of a dictatorship.

  5. What about the Amish they are not connected to the grid?

    • Good point

      • Very effective comments by Joseph, David and “livefree”. Everyone should copy and send this issue to their congresspersons, regardless of political party, and demand government (at all levels) to “back- off”. However, I do suspect she is in violation of the sewage issue in that “out-houses” and septic fields in most cities have been outlawed. , With my cell-phone, I no longer have/use a telephone line. I have my own water-well and am seriously exploring the solar energy arena.

        • I cut the phone and cable TV lines 10 years ago. I don’t miss paying to listen to their commercials. I have a cell phone but rarely use it. This year I am going to experiment with 500 watts of solar and a 700 watt windmill

          • Right on. Of course the internet has replaced phone and tv. By comparing Obama, a minor war criminal, with Bush, a major war criminal, you provide a kind of backhanded defense. It’s important to maintain important distinctions.

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 8:53 am |

            Bush is history, Obama is now. Obama is the one who keeps renewing the Patriot Act, brought us the NDAA, The UN Arms Treaty, and now the TPP. He is giving away American sovereignty. He is the one who gave himself assassination authority to American citizens without a trial. He is pushing for mass amnesty of 30 Million illegal aliens. He is the first President to be an illegal alien himself. We can’t do a thing about what Bush did to this country. We can complain that Obama is following the same strategy, and fighting the same immoral, unconstitutional wars as his predecessor.

          • The suffering and conflict resulting from the invasion of Iraq continues; the Patriot Act is renewed by Congress; the President vetoed the 2016 NDAA because “The president and Democrats have opposed the 2016 NDAA because it supports a $38 billion plus-up to defense through OCO, which skirts Budget Control Act caps.”

            His support for TPP is misguided but it is opposed mostly by Democrats and supported by Republicans. At any rate it cannot be compared to an illegal war which killed a million, mostly civilians..

            The claim he is an illegal alien shows the true right wing madness behind your thinking.

            We can and should investigate and prosecute Bush for war crimes; there is no statute of limitation. The idea that mass murder should be forgiven because it is “history” is a defense of war crimes.

            Obama’s bad moves in no way compare to the scale of Bush’s crimes against humanity, his lies about 9/11 and his destruction of the US economy. The effects of Bush’s crimes continue and the doubling of the debt they cost will never be paid off.

            I suspect you once supported Bush and belong to that lunatic fringe of racists who deny Obama’s legitimacy.

          • His Excellency | November 13, 2015 at 7:33 pm |

            Stop smearing Obama’s critics as “racists”. They’re not. But many of Bush’s critics are on the fringe left and completely deranged (does Bush Derangement Syndrome ring a bell?). Anyway, many of Cruz and Rubio’s critics are anti-Cuban American bigots who are also Castro fanatics.

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 11:16 pm |

            I personally don’t like Rubio because of his strong stance on giving amnesty to illegals. I couldn’t care less that he is Cuban. Neither Rubio or Cruz are ‘natural born’ citizens under the constitution and neither are actually eligible to be President according to the document. Yes we all know Obama got away with it – so you never know if everyone will turn their heads to these facts the same way they did with Obama or not

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 7:48 pm |

            Do you have early stage Alzheimers? I have repeatedly said I do not support anything Bush did while in office. I AGREE he should be tried for treason – along with every other living President of the US. Please try harder to keep your conversations straight. I was never a BUSH supporter. I have not voted for POTUS in the last 3 elections because there was no one on the ballot I could hold my nose and pull the lever for.

          • You are fact free. There are about 11-12 undocumented immigrants in the US, half of whom entered illegally but cannot obtain permission to stay. Obama’s directive was to defer deportation for those 4-5 million who are crime-free and have US citizen children.

            Undocumented workers pay taxes and according to all studies benefit the US economy without depressing wages or taking jobs from US citizens, who as proved in Alabama and Washington where draconian laws chased off immigrant labor, are unwilling to take short term jobs far from home for substandard wages. The crops rotted in the fields, driving farmers into bankruptcy, due to a lack of US workers willing to do what immigrant labor does (moving every few weeks, living in substandard shacks for substandard wages, no rights and no benefits). You clearly are brainwashed by the right wing fascists who first supported Bush and now claim his catastrophic rule is “history.”

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 7:35 pm |

            I assume you meant 11-12 MILLION not just 11-12 illegals. That number is NOT people who entered illegally by the way, you may want to check your ‘facts’ again. Those 12 million are people who came here LEGALLY and have overstayed their welcome. That is why we know they are here, because they never went home after their work, student, etc., visas expired. The other 20 million have sneaked across the border and no one knows for sure just how many there are her. I guarantee you will find a handful in every single town across America though. It would be very ignorant to think these people aren’t depressing US wages and taking jobs that US citizens would do. You obviously watch much too much TV.
            Nothing about an illegal alien helps the country in any way whatsoever. They are immediately a strain on the US taxpayer from the moment they use their SNAP card, abuse the ‘free’ health care(emergency room visits/anchor baby births), or burden our school systems. You already know I will not defend one thing Bush ever did so your accusation of ‘right wing brainwashing’ is right out there with your left wing propaganda.

          • Yes, 11-12 million undocumented immigrants…..half of whom entered legally but then stayed after their visas, etc expired. There are no 30 million undocumented immigrants; all sources count about 12 milliion, with over 30 million legal immigrants.

            All studies show that undocumented immigrant labor has not depressed US wages, since they take jobs US citizens will not take. You can fact check this.

            No illegal immigrants can get SNAP cards or any other form of welfare.

            US citizen children can get foodstamps, and Medicaid, but not their undocumented workers. The anchor baby myth is a lie perpetrated by racists.

            You clearly are a victim of right wing brainwashing.

            pewreasearch.org reports “There were 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. in 2014. The population has remained essentially stable for five years, and currently makes up 3.5% of the nation’s population. The number of unauthorized immigrants peaked in 2007 at 12.2 million, when this group was 4% of the U.S. population.”

            pew is the most respected research group on immigration.

            As for welfare for illegals, the law states that the undocumented are ineligible.

            Here are some other facts:

            1. Undocumented workers have a lower incarceration/crime rate than US citizens.

            2. Undocumented workers pay taxes and subsidize programs like SS and Medicare from which they cannot collect by tens of billions.

            “Collectively, they paid an estimated $10.6 billion to state and local taxes in 2010, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), a research organization that works on tax policy issues. Contributions varied by state. In Montana they contributed $2 million. In California, more than $2.2 billion. On average they pay about 6.4% of their income in state and local taxes, ITEP said.

            A 2007 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the impact of undocumented immigrants on the budgets of local and state governments cited IRS figures showing that 50% to 75% of the about 11 million unauthorized U.S. immigrants file and pay income taxes each year.” money.cnn.com

            This does not include the 100 billion they have paid in payroll taxes in the past 10 years. “. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), unauthorized immigrants — who are not eligible to receive Social Security benefits — have paid an eye-popping $100 billion into the fund over the past decade.

            “They are paying an estimated $15 billion a year into Social Security with no intention of ever collecting benefits,” Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the SSA told CNNMoney. “Without the estimated 3.1 million undocumented immigrants paying into the system, Social Security would have entered persistent shortfall of tax revenue to cover payouts starting in 2009,” he said.

            As the baby boom generation ages and retires, immigrant workers are key to shoring up Social Security and counteracting the effects of the decline in U.S.-born workers paying into the system, Goss said.

            Without immigrants, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects that the system will no longer be able to pay the full promised benefits by 2037.

            Legalizing the undocumented would increase government revenue:

            “A 2013 CBO analysis of the failed bipartisan bill introduced by the so-called “gang of 8″ that would have created a path to legal status for many undocumented immigrants found that increasing legal immigration would increase government spending on refundable tax credits, Medicaid and health insurance subsidies, among other federal benefits. But it would also create even more tax revenue by way of income and payroll taxes. That could reduce deficits by $175 billion over the first 10 years and by at least $700 billion in the second decade.

            ITEP estimates that allowing certain immigrants to stay in the country and work legally would boost state and local tax contributions by $2 billion a year.” money.cnn.com

            Forbes.com reports: AUG 28, 2015

            Illegal Immigrants Don’t Lower Our Wages Or Take Our Jobs

            “The conventional wisdom says illegal immigrants take American jobs and lower American wages.

            That conventional wisdom is wrong.

            According to an April 2015 symposium on the effects of illegal immigrants in the Southern Economic Journal, illegal immigrants actually raise wages for documented/native workers.”

            These are the facts established by objective studies; the lies you are promoting are nothing but racist right wing myths, which provide an emotional therapy for groups of natives who are suffering economically and find undocumented workers an easy scapegoat.

            Finally also from the money.cnn report: “Undocumented immigrants do not qualify for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and most other public benefits. Most of these programs require proof of legal immigration status and under the 1996 welfare law, even legal immigrants cannot receive these benefits until they have been in the United States for more than five years.”

            I suggest you take out your frustration on the sources which have lied to you, not people like me who are telling you the documented truth!

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 9:59 pm |

            If you actually believe anything you typed there isn’t much I can do to
            help you. The truth is that the average inflation adjusted income in America has gone down in the last 30 years. We had more money to spend in the 70’s even though we made much less.
            You seem to have your mind made up, however you may want to listen to these videos. This guy sites all sources and is quite knowledgeable on the subjects he talks
            about. Search on youtube:

            ‘The Truth About Illegal Immigrants: Was Donald Trump Right?
            Stefan Molyneux

            He also has this one:

            62% of Illegal Immigrant Households on Welfare | Steven Camarota and Stefan Molyneux

          • What I wrote is based on documented sources and does not require belief.

            Media income in the US has gone down over 40% since Reagan destroyed the labor movement, which used collective bargaining to leverage higher wages as productivity and profits rose. Since 1989, household income has been flat only because households work many more hours to compensate for lower wages. In the same period, productivity and profits are up nearly 100% and the income of the top 1% has rised by nearly 300%. None of this is a result of immigrant labor which works for substandard wages, without rights, for corporations which are happy to exploit workers without any legal status. California, which has the most vibrant economy in the US (ad 8th largest economy in the world, and much larger than any other state, also has the most undocumented workers. The states with the most undocumented workers also have the most robust economies. You can fact check any of this….it is knowledge not belief.

            As for Trump, he said Mexicans were rapists and criminals but undocumented workers have a 30% lower incarceration/crime rate than US citizens. He visited a border town and said he was in grave danger. In fact, border cities have lower crime rates than inland cities and the largest, San Diego, is the safest large city in the US. He also said the Mexican govt sends its worst….in fact, the goverment sends no one; many immigrants come as a result of US trade policies which destroyed their agricultural jobs and since 2008 the number of undocumented workers has decreased slightly.

            Trump also said undoc immigrants are using welfare; they are not. Only US citizens and legal immigrants here 5 years can use govt assistance. Your sources, and Trump, are lying to you. You should be outraged at being so used. The Center for Immigration Studies is a well-known right wing anti-immigrant propaganda organization, with ties to white supremacist and other racist groups.

            “One of CIS’s founders, John Tanton, a retired ophthamologist from Michigan and known anti-immgration activist, was also behind Numbers USA, an immigration reduction organization that, according to The New York Times, helped kill President George W. Bush’s attempt at comprehensive immigration reform in 2007. Another one of Tanton’s groups, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, helped draft Arizona’s controversial SB-1070, permitting police to detain illegal immigrants. Numbers USA, FAIR, and CIS were all part of the effort that successfully defeated the DREAM Act in the Senate in 2010.

            Since 1995, CIS has been led by Mark Krikorian, “A longtime columnist at the conservative National Review …… According to the SPLC, Krikorian accepted an invitation to speak alongside known Holocaust denier Nick Griffin and so-called “racial realist” Jared Taylor at the Michigan State chapter of Young Americans for Freedom in 2007, despite the group having recently made news for orchestrating such offensive events as “Catch an Illegal Immigrant Day,” a “Koran Desecration” competition, and covering the campus in “Gays Spread AIDS fliers.” the dailybeast

            The CIS has a right wing anti-immigrant agenda and its “research” is meant to provide ammunition to demonize unauthorized immigrants.

            The claim that 62% of “illegal” households use at least one welfare program ignores the context that over 5 million US citizen children lived in such households and were, therefore, legally eligible for foodstamps or Medicaid (only for them, not their parents) in 2013, according to data collected in the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) [2] in 2013..

            Passel, Jeffrey S., and Cohn, D’Vera, Number of babies born in the U.S. to undocumented immigrants declines. Pew Research Center, September 11, 2015. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/09/11/number-of-babies-born-in-u-s-to-undocumented-immigrants-declines/

            Other than programs for which US citizens are eligible, household members who are not citizens or who have no such children are, by law, unable to obtain welfare assistance. That’s a fact.

            That these families with US citizen children see their children qualify for welfare is a result of the lack of legal status and resulting substandard wages of the adults.

            Here is a direct quote from the CIS website: ”

            To summarize, the CIS says there are about “a total of 3.4 million households headed by illegal immigrants ” These household have, according to the Census, just over 5 million US citizens eligible for welfare based on household income. So the 62% is a reflectiion of the fact that many households led by undocumented immigrants have children who are US citizens and the fact that most undocumented workers are exploited, due to lack of legal status, with low wages, making their citizen children eligible for SNAP, Medicaid, etc.

            A simple solution: legalize all non-criminal, employed immigrants with US citizen children which will enable them to unionize and demand higher wages, which will reduce dependence on welfare for their children. Raise the minimum wage for all workers and you will see welfare programs reduced, as well as higher government revenue (and thus less debt). Treat those without legal protection as human beings with rights and stop believing the lies of the fascist right, which today throughout Europe as well as the US uses immigrant bashing as its primary organizing tool, scapegoatng immigrants for the evils of society created in fact by the plutocratic rule of the wealthy, who profit from exploited workers without status or rights.

            I don’t expect you to listen to reliable research or dismiss rightwing fake non-partisan studies…….because you have been brainwashed to blame unauthorized immigrants for crimes they have not committed. This propaganda ploy, which Trump has used, gathers support from those financially insecure like yourself who wish to blame those beneath them instead of understanding that as those on the bottom rise, all rise. I feel sorry for you. You have been used as a tool by the right wing propagandists and are unable to admit you have been exploited and duped. This is how Republicans get people to vote against their own interests, with lies myths, and deceptions.

            If you look at income levels, you will find that natives who are poor are on welfare as much or more than households led by the undocumented. The problem is not immigrants but the lack of a process of legalization and poverty induced by keeping people from the rights that go with legal status. You are next, my friend.
            I urge you to revolt against the manipulators who have filled your mind with lies and your heart with coldness towards the most exploited segment of the American society. It’s not too late: wake up!

          • livefree1200cc | November 14, 2015 at 12:15 am |

            Yes, of course government records MUST be truthful, after all they would NEVER lie to us (sarc). Like the way unemployment is now measured (not counting the millions still out of work but no longer are collecting benefits) Or like the way inflation is calculated a new way that doesn’t take into consideration gasoline, heating fuels and food prices……

            I’ve seen 1st hand what illegals do when they get here. I know many of them work under the table and pay zero taxes. I know most of them send over 80% of their pay back to Mexico where it doesn’t help the US economy any way whatsoever – it hurts us. I’ve talked with them and heard their stories. I’ve tipped beers with them at the local pub and even hired one once for a painting job. He asked me every day for a week if I needed help and finally I gave in. They are usually excellent workers, Sergio sure was. Many of them are really nice folks too. After reviewing all of the facts, I have made up my mind on the subject. Seriously though, if you expect me to debate you, you need watch the very interesting videos I suggested, as it offers a completely different perspective from your viewpoint (also explained far better than I can do it). Until then, I’m done with you on this topic.

          • Govt records are often distorted, as with unemploymet, but the information I cited on immigration is not refuted by any evidence.

            It is as wrong to dismiss all government data as to believe all of it.

            As for your experience with unauthorized immigrants, it is anecdotal and does not qualify as reliable data.

            As for those who work “under the table,” they still pay sales taxes and if they rent or own property, property taxes (which are included in rent costs).

            As for the effect of undocumented workers “Economists generally argue that immigration helps the U.S. economy by adding young workers to the workforce. The Brookings Institution’s Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney wrote last year that “on average, immigrant workers increase the opportunities and incomes of Americans.” And in addition, the payroll taxes they payt subsidize our SS and Medicare programs.

            ” the ratio between immigrant use of public benefits and the amount of taxes they pay is consistently favorable to the U.S. In one estimate, immigrants earn about $240 billion a year, pay about $90 billion a year in taxes, and use about $5 billion in public benefits. In another cut of the data, immigrant tax payments total $20 to $30 billion more than the amount of government services they use.(Source: “Questioning Immigration Policy – Can We Afford to Open Our Arms?”, Friends Committee on National Legislation Document #G-606-DOM, January 25, 1996. http:www.fas.org/pub/gen/fcnl/immigra.html)

            “In addition to the consumer spending of immigrant households, immigrants and their businesses contribute $162 billion in tax revenue to U.S. federal, state, and local governments. While it is true that immigrants remit billions of dollars a year to their home countries, this is one of the most targeted and effective forms of direct foreign investment.
            (Source: http://www.cato.org/research/articles/griswold-020218.html)

            There are no free goodies; only US citizens qualify for welfare, and the amount unathorized workers pay in taxes far outweighs the costs for emergency medical treatment and education.

            Immigrants take jobs and opportunity away from Americans.

            The largest wave of immigration to the U.S. since the early 1900s coincided with our lowest national unemployment rate and fastest economic growth.”

            I will note that sources I use such as pew and cato are not government agencies and the US Census Bureau has a record of accurate reporting. To dismiss all evidence which contradicts your right wing lies as based on government lies is a cheap shot and an obvious dodge.

            “A Pew Research Center report, based on a five-year study from 2007 to 2012, found that the size of the illegal immigrant workforce has remained at 5.1 percent of all workers, even though the total number of illegal immigrants has fallen from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007 to about 11.2 million in 2012.”

            marketplace.org reports that in 2012 there were about 140 million America workers employed; 5% of 140 is 7 million undocumented workers in regular jobs (not day laborers, under the table etc) of the 11 million total. This evidence refutes your “impression” that most undoc immigrants work “under the table.” Most work in agriculture, construction, slaughterhouses, and restaurant and hotel services with regular paychecks and paying payroll taxes from which they will never collect.

            I read the articles by the CIS on immigration and accept that of the 3.5 million households led by an undocumented immigrant, that 62% participate in welfare such as SNAP or Medicaid due to the 5 million US citizen children who qualify. If you adjust for income, you will find that low income natives have a higher rate of welfare participation (ie nearly 100%). Household members who are not citizens do NOT qualify for welfare…so a family of 3 with one US citizen child can, if income is in the poverty level get foodstamps of about $120 a month for the one child. No one else gets foodstamps. Likewise for Medicaid.

            In summary, undocumented immigrants are illegal not for lack of wanting the protections of legal status but due to unwillingness of Republicans in Congress to create a legalization process, aided and abetted by anti-immigrant propaganda organizations like the CIS. They perform jobs Americans will not do (seasonal, substandard wages, constant moving from state to state and the most dangerous jobs in cobstruction and slaughterhouses) pad our social programs with payroll taxes from which they cannot benefit and add to aggregate demand (spending on housing, food, etc) which creates jobs. They have a 30% lower crime level (based on incarceration data) than US citizens, and their level of welfare for citizen children, is much lower than that of natives, adjusted for income levels.

            The solution is simple: legalization, granting of legal rights and protections, but who benefits from their lack of legal status? The corporations and businesses which profit from exploiting workers without rights. And that is why Republicans refuse to create a legalization process, because they are paid by the corporations which exploit immigrant labor to maintain the status quo.

            Wake up, friend.

          • livefree1200cc | November 14, 2015 at 12:28 am |

            ‘Media income in the US has gone down over 40% since Reagan destroyed the labor movement’

            I just have to add this as you seem to have forgotten to mention it. Reagan was also at the helm when the first batch of amnesties were pushed through – along with a promise to fix the border. If I recall it was only 2-3 million at the time. The border was never fixed, the flow of illegals increased to what we have today. Basically an open border and free goodies for anyone who can swim. We now have something like a 1/4 of the Mexican population living here! Watch the videos that I suggested

          • His Excellency | November 13, 2015 at 2:25 pm |

            The wars were not unconstitutional. Congress voted for them.

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 7:19 pm |

            Yes….and no. Congress has not DECLARED war on another country since WW2. An undeclared war is an unconstitutional war. The US has invaded dozens of countries since WW2, never declaring war. True, the Afghanistan ‘war’ was voted on, but war was never declared. It couldn’t have been, Afghanistan never attacked us. Many congressmen were duped into believing that these wars were somehow retribution for the false flag attacks on 9/11. That is not why we went there, corporate profits in the region were the motives. The Iraq ‘war’ was based on the blatant lie of wmd’s. The truth was that the only wmd’s they had there were ones we sold them. We have ZERO business meddling in these country’s affairs, but there we are.

          • His Excellency | November 13, 2015 at 7:26 pm |

            The Taliban was the ruling regime in Afghanistan. They declared war on us first. Anyway, you are repeating Soviet propaganda about Americn foreign policy. The Soviet Union had invaded many more countries directly or indirectly since its establishment in 1917. It had always been an illegitimate regime.

          • livefree1200cc | November 13, 2015 at 7:42 pm |

            ‘The Soviet Union invaded many more countries directly or indirectly since its establishment in 1917’

            I am assuming you were trying to make a point in there somewhere….what was it? We don’t live in the Soviet Union and what goes on there is none of our business – as long as they aren’t attacking us. Are you using their example of bad behavior to justify ours? As far as I know, the US was not one of the countries that the Soviets invaded.

            Oh, and the ‘Taliban’ did no such thing. I am not repeating anyone’s propaganda, my statements are either fact or my own personal opinion. As far as I know I am still legally entitled to have an opinion in America

          • His Excellency | November 13, 2015 at 8:18 pm |

            Yes. You are entitled to your opinion. This is one of many great things about America and the rest of the free world. In Communist, Islamist and Baathist states, having an independent opinion results in incarceration.

          • Not only did the Taliban NOT declare war on the US, up until just before 9/11, the US and corporations (with such negotiators as Cheney and Condi Rice) were working out a pipeline deal with the Taliban and they were invited to visit with US dignitaries in Texas.

            After 9/11, the Taliban offered 3 times to turn bin Laden over to a neutral nation for trial if shown any evidence he was responsible for 9/11. Since there was none (as Bush, Rumsfeld, and Rice and the FBI have admitted), Bush ignored this request, in accordance with international law, and attacked anyone, allowing bin Laden to escape once he was “in sight.” The motive no doubt was the intense business relations between the Bushes and the bin Laden family.

            If the US had evidence, it would have been presented, but in its absence, they ignored a reasonable demand and committed a war crime, attacking a nation which is not an imminent threat and which is trying to hand over bin Laden for trial. The US did not want a trial because it would have come out publicly that bin Laden had received funding and arms from the US and was, in fact, a CIA asset.

            These facts are hardly Soviet propaganda (there has been no Soviet Union since 1991). The US aided the jihadists to attack the pro-Russian secular/progressive Afghan government, thus giving rise to the Taliban and al Quada. The events of 2001 had zero to do with the long dissolved USSR but everything to do with the collapse of the pipeline talks and the US desire to go to war and take control of Afghanistan for geopolitical reasons.

            This is not Soviet propaganda but documented fact. Check the newspaper reports from 2001 about the Taliban offers to turn over bin Laden for trial and the previous US support for the Taliban, as well as how bin Laden was allowed to escape when the US command told the US troops to stand down when bin Laden was sighted and the incompetent (they would not fight at night, for instance, a good time to escape) Afghan forces were told to take over. You can fact check any of this not in Pravda but the NY Times, the Guardian, Reuters, and any other media source.

            The US supports illegitimate regimes currently in Libya, Egypt, Ukraine, and other nations. I would like to see your source for the absurd claim that the Taliban declared war on “us” first.

            Here is a sample of the headlines you missed about the Taliban offering to turn over bin Laden

            Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over | World …

            http://www.theguardian.com › World › Afghanistan

            The GuardianOct 14, 2001 – President George Bush rejected as “non-negotiable” an offer by theTaliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States …

            Bush Rejects Taliban Bin Laden Offer – Washington Post


            The Washington PostOct 14, 2001 – Kabir’s offer came a day after the Taliban’s supreme leader rebuffed a … was no move to “hand over anyone” and accused the United States of …

            U.S. Rejects New Taliban Offer – ABC News


            The United States today rejected yet another offer by Afghanistan’s ruling Taliban to turn over Osama bin Laden for trial in a third country if the U.S. presents …

            Taliban ‘offered bin Laden trial before 9/11’ – Al Jazeera …


            Al JazeeraSep 11, 2011 – Taliban’s last foreign minister says the group offered bin Laden for trial … They kept demanding we hand him over, but we had no relations with …”

            You must have been napping.

          • His Excellency | November 13, 2015 at 8:34 pm |

            Bush wanted bin Laden to be handed over directly to the U.S. because 9/11 happened on U.S. soil. He should had been directly extradited. The Taliban protected his regime. Almost everything else you post is pure Communist propaganda. And the U.S. did not aid Al Qaeda during the Soviet-Afghan War. The Soviets had sponsored a coup that brought a Communist puppet state to power in Afghanistan. It’s nice how you defend the Soviet empire and its many crimes, just like you defend neo-Communist Russia’s invasion of Georgia and the theft of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and the installation of client regimes in those regions. You also support new-Communist Russia’s theft of Crimea from Ukraine. Anyway, the Obama administration supported the tyrannical Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt and cut funding to the Egyptian military when that military responded to the people’s demands that the tyrannical Brotherhood must be removed from power. Stop posting Communist propaganda.

          • You are inventing fictions to cover your ignorance of the truth. If Bush wanted bin Laden, why did he let him go at Bora Bora and then later say he was no longer interested in bin Laden and dissolved the bin Laden unit?

            Communism died in 1991 and we are talking about 2001, friend.

            That the Taliban offered to turn over bin Laden for trial is a fact; that Bush did not want to have bin Laden go to trial had two reasons: 1) it would make null his justification for an invasion and 2) it would have exposed US support for bin Laden. If the Taliban were protecting bin Laden, why did they offer 3 times to turn him over for trial?

            Clearly, you are making up fictions to avoid dealing with the truth.

            Your libelous claims about my sources (I gave them…none is Communist) demonstrates your lack of both moral character and intellectual integrity. Bush himself admitted that bin Laden was not responsible for 9/11, as did the FBI. I suggest you attack them as promoting Soviet propaganda.

            Here is how much Bush wanted to bring bin Laden to the US:

            ” Bush told him that capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.”

            And just six months after 9/11, Bush suggested in a press conference that Bin Laden was not a top priority for his administration. Asked whether Bush thought capturing Bin Laden was important, Bush scolded those who cared about Bin Laden for not “understand[ing] the scope of the mission” because Bin Laden was just “one person,” whom Bush said, “I really just don’t spend that much time on“:

            Who knows if he’s hiding in some cave or not. We haven’t heard from him in a long time. The idea of focusing on one person really indicates to me people don’t understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. He’s just a person who’s been marginalized. … I don’t know where he is. I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you.”

            Wake up! You have been lied to and you are defending the liars.

          • His Excellency | November 14, 2015 at 4:59 am |

            Bush never said any of the above. You are lying again, you Communist a**hole. Bin Laden was a top priority for the Bush administration. Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. And Communism is still alive. Just because the Soviet Union had collapsed doesn’t mean that the sick ideology is dead. You truthers are the real revisionists. Go away, you troll.

          • Your comment is truthful and powerful!

          • Bush lied to Congress; a vote, based on lies, is not binding anymore than any other contract where fraud is involved. If Congress votes for an attack which violates international law, that does not make it legal; it means Congress is complicit in a war crime.

          • His Excellency | November 13, 2015 at 8:19 pm |

            Bush did not lie to Congress. He told the truth. Saddam had violated 17 UN Security Council resolutions.

        • All but 4 states allow off the grid (4 have some restrictions) and the Federal govt has zero to do with it. This is local laws.

          BTW, you are exposing your brain to pulsing radiation from your cell phone.

          To end restrictive laws, the pressure must be on country and municipal officials, not federal. If you have solar, you can make money feeding back surplus to the grid, more than paying for the hook up fee. Your own water well is a great benefit. You can power it (and your car) with solar.

          But not to fry your brain, you should get a land phone with cords, since the cordless base sends out 24/7 pulsing radiation. It’s cheaper in most cases than a cell phone. Do you have wifi…that also uses RFs.

          Wires have their advantages, if you value your health.
          Go solar now!

          • Paul Dragotto | June 3, 2015 at 2:57 pm |


          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 8:01 pm |

            I can’t hear you when you yell! I have studied the research on the EMF from cell phones and it is dangerous. About 1 in 2 people now get cancer; it used to be 1 in 10. Almost no one uses the speakers and you are still a foot or two away from pulsing radiation. There is no way to be “TO (SIC) RADICAL” ABOUT the evidence of harm from emfs especially since a recent study found that college students have their phones operating 8-10 hrs a day (much with apps) and store them in pockets next to their body.

            ewg.org reports: “EWG scientists have analyzed 10 scientific studies documenting evidence that cell phone radiation exposure leads to slower, fewer and shorter-lived sperm.
            A team led by Dr. Nora D. Volkow, a pioneering brain imaging scientist who heads the National Institute on Drug Abuse,has reported that cell phone radiofrequency radiation alters brain activity in human subjects.
            The study, published by the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association, is the first investigation to document changes in brain glucose metabolism after cell phone use.

            Recent studies link cell phone radiation to:

            Brain cancer: Two research groups independently analyzed all data from 25 original studies of cell phone users, and identified a 50 to 90 percent increase in risk for two types of brain tumors: glioma and acoustic neuroma (Hardell 2009, Kundi 2009).

            Salivary gland tumors: An Israeli study found an increased risk of 50 to 60 percent for salivary gland tumors among people with highest cell phone use (Sadetzki 2008).

            Behavioral problems: A study of 13,159 Danish children showed 80 percent elevated risk for emotional and hyperactivity problems among young children who use cell phones and whose mothers also used cell phones during pregnancy (Divan 2008).

            Migraines and vertigo: A study of 420,095 Danish adults showed that long-term cell phone users were 10 to 20 percent more likely to be hospitalized for migraines and vertigo than people who took up cell phones more recently. (Schuz 2009).”

            Etc. Dismiss these studies (and many more) at your own peril.

          • Shovel Ready | June 4, 2015 at 5:27 pm |

            No, he isn’t being too radical. In Europe young children are not allowed to use or own these phones because the radiation does so much damage to a growing brain. It’s only in America where corporate profits trump health and safety, and where parents are too disengaged to read and understand the facts about cell phone dangers, that kids are put in harm’s way for the flimsy purpose of “connectivity.”

          • A recent survey found college students use their cell phones about 10 hrs a day (mostly with aps). You almost never see anyone use a speaker. I think it wise to listen to the research which shows increased brain cancer with frequent use and concerns about long term use, similar to tobacco which takes decades to kill you.

            You are already yelling (caps) so I assume your brain is already diseased.

          • Shovel Ready | June 4, 2015 at 5:22 pm |

            Dale, I agree with your warning about cell phones. It applies to cordless phones, and wi-fi as well. What surprised me is that you talk about selling power back to the utility grid, and that requires a smart meter, which is another dangerous EMF producing device. Besides the dangerous field effects, the smart meters have been claimed to meter the electricity incorrectly, and worse, damage household appliances and even start fires.

          • American Patriot | October 21, 2015 at 10:47 pm |

            Cellphone radiation is NOT ever going to cause any physical ailments!
            No cellphone has such ability, and NONE are always operating at high power, that is controlled by the cell site the phone is connected to at that time.
            The RSSI is measured and determines the link signal level required by the tower site to maintain solid communication with the handset.
            Fear mongering is ridiculous and wholly unwarranted!
            I do tower site work, own and operate UHF repeater systems, and also use 900 and’L’ band radio systems, and I have done so for decades.
            No health issues at all.
            You would need to be bombarded by high level signals for years, continuously before ANYTHING will show up.
            And I am talking about Kilowatts, not miliwatts, which is the normal level of just about every cellphone made.
            I fear a poorly shielded microwave oven, than I do any cellphone!

          • Long term use, especially in children, raises serious concerns for many scientists and researchers. As with smoking, it may take 30 or 40 years to develop cancer.

            “A letter released today, signed by 195 scientists from 39 countries, calls on the United Nations, the World Health Organization (WHO), and national governments to develop stricter controls on these and other products that create electromagnetic fields (EMF).

            “Based on peer-reviewed, published research, we have serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices,” reads the letter, whose signatories have collectively published more than 2,000 peer-reviewed papers on the subject.

            WHO classifies radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation (the type emitted by wifi routers and cellphones) as “possibly carcinogenic to humans”

            Most of the researchers who signed today’s appeal letter believe that there’s now enough evidence to classify radio-frequency EMF as “probably carcinogenic” or even just plain “carcinogenic,”

            Last year, French researchers found an almost three-fold increase in the incidence of brain cancer in people with more than 900 hours of lifetime cellphone use. Then, in March, Swedish researchers reported that the risk of being diagnosed with brain cancer increased by a factor of three in people who’d used cell or cordless phones for at least 25 years.

            Reports about a lack of scientific consensus on the health effects of cellphones, which have appeared in Slate, Wired, the Verge, and elsewhere are somewhat misleading, Moskowitz contends. In a 2009 review for the Journal of Clinical Oncology, he parsed cellphone studies based on the funding source and quality of the science. He found that low-quality and industry-funded studies tended not to associate cellphone use with a heightened risk of tumors, while high-quality and foundation- or public-funded studies usually found the opposite result. “This is very much like studying tobacco back in the 1950s,” he says. “The industry has co-opted many researchers.” http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/05/cellphone-emf-wifi-health-risks-scientists-letter

            I know a man who smoked until he died at 103. Does that prove tobacco is safe?
            You are committing the same fallacy and ignoring peer-reviewed research.

    • Good question.

    • Are they living in this jerkwater location in Florida?

    • This is a state issue. Amish have their “religious rights” that they can dutifully use to defend state interference. What I am confused about is the fact that it was a “magistrate” that made the ruling and apparently as of yet, an actual judge has not upheld the magistrates decision. I hope that Robin understands she has a right to appeal to an actual judge. Unless I am mistaken, she has 30 days to do so, and if she does not, the case can not be appealed. This is obviously a matter of a county that want’s their impact fees (taxes) for tying her into county (city) utilities. They also obviously want to discourage others from “going off the grid”.

      • “Amish have their “religious rights” that they can dutifully use to defend state interference”

        Ask the Branch Davidians how well that worked for them.

        • Apparently the Davidians had accidentally found and purposely took, a fresh CIA cocaine bale dropped from a plane a mile or so from their compound. The CIA removed all evidence – and I do mean ALL evidence (nothing but ashes remain)



        • “YOU CAN’T FORCE A PERSON TO PAY MONEY TO A COMPANY IF THEY DON’T NEED THE SERVICE.” I do understand and agree where you are coming from. But it is being done thru the courts with Obamacare.

          • dale ruff | June 4, 2015 at 6:08 pm |

            In 1798, the authors of the Constitution, in
            Congress, without one dissenting voice, passed a law forcing individuals to buy socialized healthcare, run by the government. These were all employed in the maritime trades. So clearly the Founding Fathers, unanimously, thought it proper to force individuals to pay for healthcare coverage (it was taken out of their wages as a payroll tax like Medicare.).

            The ACA model was designed by the right wing Heritage Foundation and promoted by the Republicans in Congress in the 90’s as the alternative to the Clinton plan. Republicans only turned against it when the Democrats adopted it.

            The Founding Fathers decided over 200 years ago you CAN force a person to pay for healthcare………………whether they need it or not. There is no one who will not need healthcare eventually. And clearly, it is constitutional. It’s the right wing plan. You can change it by promoting a single payer non-profit plan, which can be run by the government at 90% less overhead, still using private medicine as with Medicare, or by non-government consumer coops, of which there are now 23. If you have ever worked, you have paid for healthcare through the Medicare payroll tax. The government’s right to enforce a mandatory healthcare payments goes back 217 years…get used to it. You’ve lived with it all your life.

          • WRONG ON ALL COUNTS!. Show me some evidence, other than from Huffington Post. Here is evidence of your error. http://www.neurosurgical.com/medical_history_and_ethics/history/history_of_health_insurance.htm
            Moreover, do a little research at the Heritage Foundation and STOP with the liberal CRAP that your puppet masters teach you. The Heritage Foundation did offer an alternative but the liberal party picked it to pieces and added a penalty where the Heritage Foundation did not. Prove me wrong.

          • The Heritsge plan was to mandate coverage…by definition, a mandate uses state coercion, including seizing wages or other penalties….look it up. A mandate without penalties is not a mandate. The Republican plan insisted on mandating coverage. The Republican plan proposed in Nov 1993 made coverage a requirement. That’s public record…you are proven wrong.

          • “And make no mistake: Heritage and I actively oppose the individual mandate, including in an amicus brief filed in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court.” Quote from Stewart Butler from the Heritage Foundation. YOU are reading to many liberal media pieces and listening to Chris (big mouth) Matthews to much. Master liberal liar is he! The quote came from a USA today article which I attempted to post the link but don’t think they are going to approve. Look hard enough and you will find it IF you are interested in the truth. Anf if memory serves me right, you can find this on the Heritage website if you look hard enough since it was many years ago. NOW, SEEK TRUTH or keep on living the lies spewed by liberal media.

          • Heritage dened they invented the required mandate in their 1989 plan after the Democrats adopted their plan. In The Heritage Lectures: Assuring Affordable Healthcare for all Americans, written by Stuart Butler and published in 1989

        • Obama, who got millions from the banks in his campaign is hardly a communist or at least no more than Dwight Eisenhower or Micky Mouse. Obama has nothing to do with the codes that local communities adopt. Go talk to the Mayor and the City Board…it’s in their hands. But any opportunity, no matter how absurd, to call the black due a commie cannot be passed up.

          I can find no laws against racatering.


    • Most states do not require grid hook up; it is up to the codes adopted locally. If the lady in question, who IS hooked up to the septic system, moved out town, there are no state laws demanding a grid hook up. But she could pay her electric hookup bill by feeding energy back into the grid.

      • well at least we can agree here somewhat. This woman was in the village, hooked up to utilities, USING the sewer system – she was not off grid by any means. Anyone that wants to live off-grid needs to start by living somewhere that isn’t already hooked to the grid

  6. Tyranny is a deceiver, changing its mask with every new attack on our freedoms.

  7. Here is where it becomes a gray area. First of all, I applaud her self reliance and would love to do the same. Secondly, There is no reason why anyone should be forced to sign up with a PRIVATE utility if they choose not to. A PUBLIC utility is a bit different in that everyone uses it, even when not hooked up.

    The water meter tracks how much water comes into the home, but not what leaves. The water that leaves still has to be processed no matter be it from the tap or from a rain barrel. This is why your are technically billed ‘double’ for usage. Although I sympathize with her, she is still using the water system albeit in a very conscientious manner. Perhaps she should pay the hook up fee and then just turn off the water at the intake.

    • The government nor the utilities company own the water. Nor do they own the people, we own the Nation and the government.. It is brainwashed citizens such as yourself that are giving the police state it’s power.

      • At first I agreed with you – then I read on another site that she does live in the village and is using the sewer system. She is already ‘hooked up’, she just never had the water turned on when she moved in so they never started billing her. Seeing as how the sewer tax is usually 2X the water tax – she has been getting free sewer illegally for 2 years. I don’t believe she should have to be hooked up to either, but she is not only hooked up, she has been using the sewer. Just recently the town capped her sewer at the road so if she continues to use it – she will be in deep shiite – both literally and figuratively

    • First of all, she is NOT using the water system, that is the whole point. She isn’t using public water or sewer. A chemical toilet like those in RV’s would be sufficient for one person (and apparently already legal). Where I live, if the water at the meter is on at the street, then I get charged the same price whether I use 6 gallons or 6000 gallons of water. The first 6000 comes at a fixed price for everyone on the grid. Then that is doubled to pay for the sewer system costs(total@$30/month for me). So in her case she would be paying the water and sewer tax on 6000 gallons even if she only used 6 gallons. The electric is similar being that there is a $20 charge just for being hooked up to the grid, then the rest is metered.

      • I stand corrected – she IS using the sewer system and she does live in town – this article did not say this. I have to agree with your former comment that if she is using the sewer, she should pay for it. The electric is another story. The article I read said that the town went and capped her sewer so she couldn’t use it anymore!! Guess they mean business. I will say that if you want to live off the grid, you should at least move OUT OF THE CITY! lol

    • Sorry, you’re wrong. An individual or family with a private well and septic system does NOT use a “public utility” though they may be compelled by government extortionists to pay for it.


  8. WHAT INTERNATIONAL CODE!!!!!! There’s no international property maintenance code. Is this some kind of parody or another judge make bs up as they go?

  9. One crappy little town in Florida & their bought & paid for judge are making this determination. The home owner needs to take this to a higher court, outside of the Cape’s jurisdiction, win the case & then sue their ass off!

  10. There are people who’ve moved so far off of the grid that neither the NSA nor the IRS can find them.

  11. When self-sufficiency becomes a crime, it’s time for new government.

  12. Sue them for discrimination, harassment, trespassing, property damages, vandalism, stalking, etc… What jury would not award you your settlement?!

  13. Remember what happened to Tesla? The government and utilities are tightly wound and there should be some fear but this case is huge for America and her most independent citizens!
    God Bless America!

  14. What this really demonstrates is how completely asinine and retarded government and liberals are. On one hand the liberals are trying to destroy our energy delivery system to the point of causing black-outs, while at the same time prosecuting people like this woman whom have managed successfully and comfortably to live off the grid with much lower impact than any of these phony lying liberal slobs. The solution to this is conservative backed anarchy, where we drag every last liberal into the street and snuff’em, right there. Yep, just put out their lights and be done with them! Just think of how much we could diminish the impact of humanity on the environment if we rid the earth of every last liberal! Viva anarchy!

    • Conservative anarchy is doublespeak for corporate rule. Blaming liberals goes back to Hitler and Mussolini. Hitler followed through by killing the liberals, as you recommend. Nothing like fascist mass slaughter masked as “conservative anarchy.”

      • Like I said….. how retarded government and liberals are. You’re also big fat LIARS !!! Everyone knows Hitler was a decadent liberal closet case whom spent his entire adult life pissed off because he was a spurned artist rejected by an art school. I know it will be impossible dale ruff but you really should try to pull your head OUT OF your ass and get a dose of reality. Quit swathing yourself in the ever glorious lib-tard bullshit, grow your stupid ass up and be a man for once in your pathetic sniveling life. Or would that be just asking way damn too much?

  15. Corporate agenda over constitutional law. Now the government only cares about the bottom line of utility profits, and not about the choice of US citizens to live responsibly, without the need for outside involvement.

    • See my post: Arizona Power sought $100 a month fee for those with solar, but the government only gave them $5. Govt protected solar homes from greedy corporation, attempting to make solar too costly. IF govt doesn’t protect us from greedy corps, who will. Don’t let corps take over govt is the agenda. Make govt serve the people,not the corps. That is the struggle. When corporations take over govt (as Monsanto has taken over USDA, etc), we have fascism: “the merging of the interests of the corporations and the state. (Mussolini: Doctrine of Fascism/1931). He called it corporatocracy………….the rule of the corporations (whether direct or indirect).

      • The effect of this type of control will inevitably cause so much harm and loss of liberty, that the whole system will crumble very quickly. What they think will be a contingency plan to reign in the defectors will actually be turned right back on themselves.

        • Dan, please observe Orwell’s rules of precise language….I don’t which system you mean (the corporate system, the government, the take over of govt by the corporations?) nor who “they” are or who the defectors are. You might have a good point but it is blurred by vague references and unstated assumptions.

          • That was intentional. I was simply giving a possible scenario. I let the reader put two and two together, because going into detail about such situations never end on a positive note.

          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 1:48 pm |

            So being vague is the way to create change? Vagueness is how tyrants and propagandists mask the truth. I have no idea what you meant: is that a “positive” result? Say what you mean. Free speech is meaningless if it is so guarded as to lead to incomprehension. No one will come after you if you speak plainly. No one will understand you if you don’t.

          • The way to create change to an over-reaching, power hungry and a consistent, constitution violating federal government, just gets you labeled as a traitor, by those in power of it. There are ways of getting just accomplishments, without sacrificing your “freedom”. I wish that our government didn’t constantly violate our civil rights, but they do. It isn’t just one amendment either, it is all across the board, much of the time. There will be a reckoning, and it will come at the sacrifice of good men.

          • dale ruff | June 3, 2015 at 2:37 pm |

            You are ignoring that it is the dominant corporations which have taken over the government. The danger is not democratic government which we do not have, but a fascist government which serves the corporations. What good will it do to kill all the government workers if they are then replaced with more servants of the corporations. You want to say we should, like Nazi brownshirts, slaughter the government, without realizing the state is an instrument of the ruling class, which consists of transnational corporations, and billionaires. You have bought the corporate propaganda which shifts blame to the government the corporations have perverted and corrupted, instead of those who control and corrupt it. Your veiled threat only serves those who have stolen our democratic Republic and replaced it with a fascist corporatocracy. You have been claimed as useful idiot by the ruling class, which hides its control of government by promoting an attack on “the government.” This is clever in an evil way and fools many gullible people like yourself. The enemy is not the government but the corporate take over of the government. We must use the government to restrain and displace the corporate bloodsuckers.

            My example was the Arizona Power System, a private utility with a near monopoly, which wanted the state to institute a $100 a month “fee” for those homeowners who installed solar and were hooked to the grid (to sell surplus back). The cost for solar for a 1600 sq ft house is (zero down) and $70 a month, so this proposal would totally halt clean and cheaper energy in Arizona. The state, in this case, protected homeowners by allowing only a $5 a month hook up fee, easily paid back with sale of surplus solar, which APS is obligated to increase anyway. This shows how government can be used to take way our rights (to cheap, clean energy) or used (attempted in this case) to screw us by giving the greedy and short-sighted corporation its way. So far, the government has protected our rights against the APS. That is how it should be. The idea of attacking the govt agency which is protecting us from APS attempt to destroy solar energy (a no brainer in Arizona) is suicide.

      • The whole new mantra is that solar customers are cheating and not paying their fair share of grid costs.
        Look up and read “Integrated Grid”. Now that they got everyone clamoring for solar – they will ALL clamor for higher and higher monthly fees.
        They own the system – all of it – legislators, regulators, markets. There will never be a true way to get ff the grid – we live in a matrix of control.

        Also see the PTB strategic plan for electric in the future
        Grid 2030
        and the Technology Roadmap – both put out by the dept of Energy. They are working this plan. Eventually electric will be a global commodity for which they will perform their price manipulation at will to suck you dry.
        Read “Global Grid” too and check out the “Tres Amigas’ project.
        Oh brave new world.

        • You wrote: “They own the system – all of it – legislators, regulators, markets. There will never be a true way to get ff the grid – we live in a matrix of control.”

          Did you read my post on what happened recently in Arizona. The APS demand for a $100 monthly fee was turned down by the govt. agency; APS got $5 a month.

          Integrated grids are based on centralized power; the solar installations on homes are decentralized and can make money for the homeowners by feeding back surplus energy.

          “They (the fossil fuel oligarchs)” will TRY to destroy or control green energy sources, but the Arizona example shows how they can also lose.

          In fact, home solar installations in Arizona are helping APS meet their obligation to increase renewable energy. They will win their efforts to protect their dirty energy monopoly ONLY if we let them. Arizonans tend to be redneck right wingers, but even they realize that solar energy on their own rooftops is cheaper and puts them in control.

          ” (Arizona is) realizing former-Governor Janet Napolitano’s vision of Arizona as the Persian Gulf of solar power

          “We have made huge strides in that direction,” said Kris Mayes, a professor at Arizona State University’s Global Institute of Sustainability.

          Mayes served on the Arizona Corporation Commission, which regulates the state’s utilities.

          In the past four years, net generation of solar in Arizona has increased 3,636%……The cost for solar is down 49 percent since 2010.”

          The battle continues, as APS asks to have the $5 fee quadrupled and Tuscon Energy is asking to drop the price they pay for solar energy fed back into their system. So far, the government has stood with the people. With more an more solar in use, the number of stakeholders and voices supporting the public”s right to cheap, clean energy, without exorbitant utiltity fees, is only increasing. I am optimistic that the people will win this fight, and the government will continue to respond to public pressure.

  16. Why is anyone still defending Obama? He is as rotten as his 4 predecessors and arguably worse.

    • someone who gets it! They are all puppets of the banks and corporations – What we have now is fascism with a large side order of communism

      • The new system is Technocracy, it’s more than a hybrid. Check out the reports and research from Patrick Wood and James Corbett, they’ve both done impressive work.

      • I think Sheldon Wolin has it right: Inverted Totalitarianism is the correct definition of our political/economic system.

        • All I know is that in fascism the corporations make the rules. Have a look at the resumes of Obama’s czars and cabinet. It reads like a multi corporate conglomerate. They are getting the political favors and they are heavily involved (if not solely) in making policy

          • I am not disagreeing but Wolin’s arguments go so much deeper. Think of it as corporate totalitarianism. Instead of a charismatic leader type personality you have a fictitious personality, a corporation, who makes the rules and subverts democratic processes. Denton TX is a perfect example of this. The people of Denton passed a legal resolution to ban fracking in the city limits with a 60% majority vote. In response the TX legislature passed a retroactive ban on any such resolutions and their own state representatives, drenched in oil interest money and investments, voted against their constituents. So much for voting and representative democracy.

            The federal level is just as bad if not worse. A bunch of preening narcissists looking out for #1.

          • livefree1200cc | June 5, 2015 at 12:45 pm |

            I agree, all any of them care about is re-election

  17. MISLEADING TITLE ! This article fails to mention that this woman lives within the village limits and was using the village sewer lines for her waste. That sheds a new light on her supposed ‘off grid’ status

  18. well if off the grid living is illegal, then how come all the illegals here who are living off the grid by working under the table are not called illegal illegals?

  19. The says a living facility must have electricity and water – but it does NOT say where it has to come from. If you can prove you have running water and electric then you have fulfilled the code. Even if they are “hooked up” you can still decide not to use them.

  20. FFS. You could claim that not being connected to sewage might not exactly be sanitary in cases where people don’t know what they’re doing, but if done properly there’s no reason why you can’t live like that. Countries have building regulations and sanitary requirements for a reason, but it seems with this that it’s very much “our way or the highway.” Well fine then. If it has to be the highway, I’m going to start shitting on the road.

    Why not introduce off-grid building regulations alongside those for the connected. There is clearly a demand for greener and off-grid living. They say she has to be connected. And if she connects and defaults on payments she will be disconnected again just this time with debt that she can be controlled by.

    I’m not a US citizen, but I can see similar bullshittery happening here in Spain as well. It costs about the same to have solar panels here because they charge YOU for the electric that you… errr… *sell* back to the grid. Is sell the right word there?

  21. the gestapo is already here

  22. They claim she is in violation of the International Property Maintenance Code. “International” … IOW, the UN and all its “green mandates” that are being forced on us in America because Obama is a bloody sympathizer with the New World Order hooligans.

  23. Has she contacted the Institute for Justice? IJ dot org. Seems like she did if this is the same case I read about before. But she should. I hope she fights on until she wins.

  24. This represents the kind of corporate fascism infecting our, once free, nation. Building codes are primarily to make a home an investment property that banks can lend money on. Saying that a home has to be connected to utilities limits a person’s freedom to live an independent life while insuring more profits for the utilities companies. The people need to start resisting this form of tyrrany.

  25. Little Gov is copying BIG Gov.
    At 6 AM every morning, people must stand at attention in front of their house waiting for the roll to be called. Failure to appear means hard labor.

  26. Of course they did!!!!

  27. I believe anyone should be able to live the way they please.If they choose to live off grid leave it be!

Leave a comment