we took over the world
 
because of new federal legislation designed to help consumers and small-businesses, big banks are now looking for more ways to make money.

in addition to the interest rates they collect on various accounts (mortgage, credit cards, etc), banks are now looking to initiate a fee for people who use their debt cards to make purchases.

it is important to note that bank of america is not the only bank initiating these fees, but their CEO did hit $10 million right on the nose in 2010, after the company took $45 billion in bailouts (our money) from the federal government, so they're an appropriate organization at which to direct our ire.

that ire should, in fact, manifest itself the same way it did when consumers decided they had had enough of blockbuster video, another company that made their money by punishing their customers.
 
 
since 2008, the american government has injected a lot of money into the economy in an effort to prevent economic collapse.

a lot of that money went to rich people or corporations that had made poor decisions.  somehow, we decided to give them money from average americans, assuming that would fix the problem and the wealth would trickle down (contrary to historical proof that it would not).

now, one member of the house of representatives is asking the government to take a chance on the next generation of working americans in an effort to fix the broken economy.  rep. clarke's premise is simple:  reducing home mortgage balances, forgiving student loans, and bringing down overall personal debt. 

the most appealing economic issue here is the forgiveness of student loans.

but, is this the right way to go for our country's economic health?
 
 
as you read this, people in NYC are standing up for the majority of us, in the face of the 1% of wealthiest americans who recently brought the economy to disaster and then used our money to get out of it.

you should thank them.  and you should become one of them.

educate yourself.  talk to people you know about the things going on in our nation. specifically, the things that are unjust and keeping the majority of us from living fruitful lives.

with that in mind, here's some stuff you should know:
Wall Street Elites Enjoy Police Protection - CBS MarketWatch
Sharp Rise in U.S. Health Insurance Costs, Study Finds - New York Times
Despite Senate Deal, Nation Stuck in Stormy Political Pattern - NPR

you can't demand better from your elected officials if you don't know what to demand.

know these things, and then demand your elected officials remember that they work for us.


 
 
if you're not familiar with Occupy Wall Street, get familiar because if social media is any indication, it could be soon coming to a town near you.

this movement is important to you because it shows actual american people who are fed up with the state of the government, specifically related to how embedded it is with corporate money.

it's doubly important to you because this is what it now looks like when people exercise their first amendment right to peaceably assemble.

young women, put in temporary cages and shot in the face with chemical spray.
this is not the america we were promised by our founding fathers and this is not the america we should tolerate for our children.

more videos after the break.
 
 
in the past year, we've witnessed protests that have lead to revolutions that have led to ousters of governments far more entrenched, malicious and oppressive than the american government, by people far more powerless, vulnerable and oppressed than the american people.

yet, regardless of political discord in the united states, the political discourse has not even whispered about the potential for revolution here.

there are a couple of reasons american politicians might believe this country is immune to revolution, but those reasons are built on rickety logical foundations that are being eroded by the minute.
 
 
the latest political controversy du jour is an idea that President Obama is taking the mantle for the nation's poor and waging "class warfare" on the rich.

one of the interesting points about this use of language is that it has historically often been used in socialist and communist philosophy, a couple of ideas the group currently using the term openly despise.

the most troubling characteristic of this use of language, however, is that some people believe the poor are waging class warfare against the nation's elite, even though such an undertaking would be all but impossible.


 
 
the american government was founded on the idea that U.S. citizens, through their right to vote, would choose their representation via majority decision and maintain control over the government with a combination of term limits and unprecedented voting rights.

it took several years and a couple of major tweaks to what the founders put on paper, but this country made progress toward making that vision a reality.

unfortunately, in recent years we have witnessed several examples of local governments working counter to voter's rights and majority rule.

it is a problem, potentially fatal, when our elected officials would rather maintain office through political smoke and mirrors than good policy and moral behavior.
 
 
a major problem with the modern american democracy (republic) is a citizenship that is ill-informed when it comes time to vote.

it's safe to blame the populace for at least part of the problem.  a logical extrapolation suggests declining literature reading rates would be followed by less newspaper reading.

especially when you combine that logic with the fact that, on average, americans put in nearly a full day of work watching tv.

americans, to be sure, are partially responsible for flocking to media that has a lower standard for integrity to get the bulk of civic information.

however, it is the politicians who are mostly to blame for populating the content of that media with lies.

in essence, this was Orwell's biggest fear in writing the most government-conspiracy inspired book of all time.
 
 
there's much to-do about Ron Paul's statements during last night's GOP debate that led to people cheering a man's pending hypothetical death resulting from his refusal to purchase health insurance from his employer.
in this example, Blitzer talks about a healthy, employed man who just chose not to buy health insurance.  some people in the audience cheer the stance the Paul takes regarding the government not paying to save his life.  others shout out "let him die". 

these things have generated much attention and out cry, but the macabre nature of this behavior and the general lack of consideration for human life aren't the biggest problems here.
 
 
though it's foolish to assume all republicans are pro-life, abortion is an issue the party has used to activate it's voting base (to great extent) in the past.

being pro-life is important to republican voters and important specifically to rick perry.

how is it, then, this pro-life crowd applaudes those put to death in Texas under Perry's watch?  and, maybe more importantly, why is it a serious presidential candidate then says "I've never struggled with" the idea that any of those people were executed while innocent?

there is nothing pro-life, presidential or acceptable about any of this.