Midnight Thoughts on the Night of the Election

It’s midnight, and Mittens has just come out to start his ‘throw in the towel’ speech.  At last, the long, horrible campaign season is over, and Barack Obama has been reelected as President of the United States of America.

The moochers and looters have triumphed, and now we get four more years!  So, what can we expect from Obama II—The Sequel?

We can expect our energy policy to continue to be happy thoughts, unicorn farts, and green energy boondoggles.  Obama and his allies will continue to push us down the same path that Spain has been on for the past decade, and just as that green path has destroyed Spain’s economy, we can expect much the same thing here.  It may not be obvious as the Spanish failure, or as quick to come—the sheer size differential gives America a bit more inertia than Spain enjoyed before the disaster becomes apparent—but it will inevitably come.

Adding insult to energy injury, we can expect full-blown cap and trade, and more and more coal-crippling regulations from Obama II’s EPA.  Coupled with their anti-fracking sentiment, our energy prices will skyrocket, with completely predictable consequences on the rest of the economy.  Prices will rise, growth will slow, unemployment will go nowhere but up, and a new recession dip is probably the best we can hope for.

Our fiscal policy will continue to be print-and-spend, and if you were hoping to actually get a real budget passed, you’re going to be disappointed.  Obama II will have no reason to bring Harry Reid to heel; quite the opposite, in fact.  Reid will feel even less inclined to defer to a lame-duck Obama than he has in Term I, and we know from Woodward’s The Price of Politics that Dingy Harry hasn’t exactly been Barry’s biggest fan thus far.  Rather than any kind of fiscal discipline, we can expect another round of ‘stimulus’ bills that will do exactly what the last one did—create a handful of jobs at hideously outrageous costs ($700,000-plus per job), line the pockets of Democratic campaign donors, prop up failing state programs for another year or so, and in general disappoint the rest of us.

Baring a miracle in which the Republican leadership in the House wakes up tomorrow with actual spinal bones and testes, the Benghazi debacle will simmer on for a few more months until the internal investigation finally reports its findings.  Oddly enough, these findings will *cough*whitewash*cough* corroborate the White House’s timeline and ‘prove’ that there was nothing that the President or any of his top advisors could have done to save the Ambassador and the other three Americans, even if they had known about it, which they didn’t until much later.  Like Fast and Furious, Benghazi will quickly be forgotten, and some new ‘crisis’ will be media-blitzed to distract the attention of the populace.

In repayment for his faithful service, Ben Bernanke will be re-appointed to his current place at the Federal Reserve.  The quid pro quo for this will be the continuation of QE3 until sometime after the 2014 elections, at the very least.  The money supply will continue to expand by some 80 billion dollars a month, interest rates will continue to be artificially depressed, and the budgetary cracks will continue to be papered over—until the dollar collapses, hyperinflation begins to bite, and we begin speaking fondly of Jimmy Carter’s days in the White House.  The Carter-era ‘misery index’ will come back with a vengeance, made worse by the dissolving dollar.  The United States’ credit rating will be cut again (and probably several times), until the only place the government can borrow money is directly from the Federal Reserve.  At that point, the country will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the international banks, who will begin cannibalizing what’s left of the Republic to pay off China.  The Fed will have no choice but to raise interest rates, which will in turn accelerate the budgetary destruction of pretty much everything, from Medicare and Social Security to EBT cards and Obama phones.  Our foreign wars will end, not with success, but with despair and infamy as we will no longer be able to afford to maintain them.  The troops will come home, and the Armed Forces will be decimated, which will only add fuel to the fires of unemployment.

When the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) decide that it’s time, the dollar will be completely abandoned as the world’s reserve currency.  Emboldened by the financially-mandated downsizing of America’s military, they will move to fill the vacuum left by a retreating America.  America’s influence will vanish like a snowflake in the sun, as Barack Obama’s anticolonial dreams are realized.  With the continued encouragement of President Obama, the influence and reach of the Muslim Brotherhood will spread to still more countries, providing ever more fertile ground for radical Islam to grow and flourish.

Obamacare will remain in place, and will be phased in over the next four years.  As more patients are added to an already-overburdened health care system, costs will continue to rise and the level of care delivered, along with outcomes, will decline.  At the same time, more and more employers will abandon their own health care plans, leaving more and more workers dependent on Obamacare.  When doctors and other health care personnel become frustrated and leave their professions, the disintegration of America’s health care system will accelerate.

Taxes will increase, not just on ‘the rich’, but on everyone in the country.  Rather than increasing revenue (as we will all be told, as the reason for the increases), revenues will stagnate, then fall as the sum of Obama’s policies send the country into a full-blown depression.  The ‘D’ word won’t be used by the mainstream media until long after the reality is crushingly obvious to every one of the 51 million plus people who did NOT vote for Barack Obama today.  By the time some brave CBS reporter says ‘depression’, it may be too late for it to matter.  At some point, a combination of debt, hyperinflation, regulation, dependency and failed ideology masquerading as policy will crush the social order.

When the EBT cards aren’t worth having because what food there is can’t be had at a decent price…when your eternal unemployment check isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on…when your Obamaphone stops working because the government can’t pay the bill…and when there aren’t any doctors to be found when you have your emergency…remember this night.

Tonight, the moochers and looters reigned triumphant.  Are you ready to shrug yet?

A few words before the election

Tomorrow, America will go to the polls…or at least, some of us will.  Yes, this is an important election.  The most important one ever?  I doubt it, despite all the rhetoric.  Still, it is very important, because the country is in serious trouble.

We are faced with several choices.  Realistically, either Barack Hussein Obama will be reelected, or Willard Mitt Romney will be elected.  While there are other choices, the system as it now stands greatly favors the two major parties.  Like it or not, that’s just how it is.

There are those who say there are great differences between Obama and Romney.  Certainly the two men have vastly different backgrounds and experiences, and would undoubtedly bring different styles of management to the next four years.

If Obama wins, then we can expect more of the same things that we’ve seen the last four years, only on steroids.  As is typical, a second-term President is unencumbered by the restraints of needing to worry about reelection; he is concerned only about getting his policies in place, and securing his place in history.  If you are a proponent of more government, more spending, and redistributing the wealth from the haves to the have nots, then you should vote for Barack Obama.

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has promised less government, less spending (except for military spending), fewer regulations, and lower basic tax rates for all.  He has promised to repeal the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), and to offer his own version of healthcare reform in its place.  If you believe he can do this, then you should vote for Mitt Romney.

There are those in both major parties who will encourage you to vote the ‘straight party ticket’, because presumably all of the party candidates support the same basic party platform, and have similar views on the issues.  That is, after all, why parties have platforms in the first place.  I strongly urge you to read both major party platforms, even though that tends to be a somewhat painful process.  Then, think about what previous platforms have said, and what little relationship those platforms had to what was actually done by the members of both parties, once they were elected.  It may make reading the platforms for the first time a bit more palatable…or it just may piss you off even more.

The reality is that for most of us, our votes don’t really matter.  Unless you live in one of a handful of swing states—Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, some others—your state is either so solidly red or blue that your one little vote makes about as much difference as a drop of water in the ocean.  In my state, Mitt Romney was up by more than 20% in the most recent poll.  Baring an act of God, he will carry my state by a comfortable margin.  Some would say this is a reason to despair, and not bother voting, but I disagree.  I view it as an opportunity to use my vote to try to change the system for the better.

If you are like me, and live in one of the 40-odd states that are solidly committed to one candidate over another, then you also have this opportunity.  Regardless of whether you consider yourself a Democrat, Republican or Libertarian, I would ask that you consider voting for Gary Johnson.

Before you reject this notion out of hand, please think about this:  Gary Johnson is the independent candidate most well-known in this race (Sorry, Jill—you Greens didn’t have the cash to really push the airwaves.  Maybe if you start raising money now for next time around.) and thus most likely to be able to poll 5% of the popular vote.  Why is this so important?  Because if a third party—ANY third party—gets 5% of the national vote, it will qualify for federal matching funds in the next election cycle…and THAT will break the two party duopoly that we now have.

Are you truly happy with the candidates of the two major parties?  Wouldn’t it be nice to see at least one more voice on stage at the debates, to bring differing views to the table?  More importantly, wouldn’t it be nice to see both major parties have to work harder to attract your vote, be more responsive to your issues, and to generally pay more attention to what they do and how they do it…because there would be new blood ready to take their place?

There are those who say that a vote for Johnson is a vote for the ‘other’ candidate.  Realistically, unless you’re in one of those few very close swing states, that’s just not true.  To say that is to encourage you to be a good little lemming, and do as you’re told.   If you want to be an obedient lemming, then believe that.  However, if you want to be an informed voter, you can disregard that, and consider your vote carefully.

There are those who say that a vote for Johnson is ‘wasted’.  Again, not true, for the same reason as above in most states.  Additionally, it’s rather insulting, I believe.  How can voting your conscience and beliefs ever be ‘wasted’?  Wouldn’t that mean that every vote cast for someone who didn’t win would be ‘wasted’?  Why vote at all, then?  Why not just have a dictator decide what the results of the vote would be, without all the bother and expense of holding an election?  The entire point of the democratic process is to allow everyone to make their own opinions known…and then to try to reach some kind of consensus about who’s in the majority, and who’s in the minority, and how do we manage to carry on without killing each other.  There are no ‘wasted’ votes!  There are only votes for candidates who didn’t win, or for those that did.

In summary, for those of you in the swing states, I encourage you to vote your beliefs and consciences.  For the rest of us, we have an historic opportunity to change the system that has so manifestly failed us these last several decades.  Look around you…is the country doing well?  Then ask yourself this question:  could a third party added into the mix make things any worse?

I hope you come to the conclusion, as have I, that having more voices added to the chorus can only make things better.

Proposed Amendments to the Alabama State Constitution

Since it is incumbent on every citizen to be informed about the issues before voting, here's a list of the amendments which will be on the Alabama ballot tomorrow.  For those of you who don't live in Alabama, your state's Secretary of State should have a list of pertinent amendments/resolutions/whatever available for you to study before you go in to the polls.

For those of you not from Alabama, one of the wonderfully quirky things about our state is our Constitution, and the way it requires us to do things.  It's well worth several inches explaining it, but that's a topic for another time (be glad).

Thanks to Bill Armistead, Chairman of the Alabama Republican Party, who sent this out in a general push email.  The Alabama Republican Party is taking no position on these amendments, but provided this as a courtesy.  Kudos to them for doing that!

Amendment 1 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, relating to the Forever Wild Land Trust, to reauthorize the trust for a 20-year period. (Proposed by Act No. 2011-315)

Explanation - The Forever Wild Land Trust was established in 1992 and since then has aquired over 227,000 acres across the state, available for hunting and recreational use. Forever Wild is funded by 10% of the interest earned by the Alabama Trust Fund. This amendment is seeking to reauthorize using those funds for Forever Wild.

Voting Yes means you are agreeing to use up to $300 million from the Alabama Trust Fun to purchase additional land for the Forever Wild Program.

Voting No means that you do not agree with using Alabama Trust Funds to purchase additional land for the Forever Wild Program, but it does not stop the current use of land already used by the Forever Wild Program.

Hype and Fail ENDORSES this Amendment.  10% seems to be a reasonable amount to devote to recreational use, and the Forever Wild Trust has been remarkably scandal-free for an Alabama program.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 2 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, to allow issuance by the State from time to time of general obligation bonds under the authority of Section 219.04 and Section 219.041 to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, so long as the aggregate principal amount of all such general obligation bonds at any time outstanding is not in excess of $750 million. This amendment would replace the maximum aggregate principal limitations currently contained in said Sections 219.04 and 219.041. The proposed amendment would also allow issuance by the State of general obligation refunding bonds under the authority of Sections 219.04 and 219.041 to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, subject to certain minimum savings thresholds and limitations of maximum average maturity. (Proposed by Act No. 2012-567)

Explanation - Is passed, this amendment will allow Alabama to refinance loans at a lower rate. It also allows Alabama to sell up to $750 million in bonds to provide money to give as incentives for new industries to locate in the state.

Voting Yes means you agree with authorizing Alabama to refinance its current debts, as well as allow Alabama to sell up to $750 million in bonds to provide money to give as incentives for new industries to locate in the state.

Voting No means you do not agree with authorizing Alabama to refinance its current debts, as well as allow Alabama to sell up to $750 million in bonds to provide money to give as incentives for new industries to locate in the state.

Hype and Fail ENDORSES this Amendment, as it gives the State the flexibility to refinance debt, as well as issue bonds to get incentive money to bring new industries into the State.  Despite complaints, similar incentives have been used successfully in the past, to the betterment of the State as a whole.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 3 - Relating to Baldwin County, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to define the Stockton Landmark District within the county and to prohibit the annexation by local law of any property within the district into any municipality. (Proposed by Act No. 2011-316)

Explanation - (The Constitution requires any change in the Constitution to be voted state-wide even if it is a local county issue.) Stockton, an unincorporated community in Baldwin County, would be designated as Alabama's 1st Landmark District if this Amendment is passed. This will allow residents of Stockton to vote on whether or not their community could be annexed into a municipality if that situation ever arises.

Voting Yes will give the citizens of Stockton the right to vote on whether or not a larger municipality can annex Stockton. Right now, residents in communities such as Stockton do not have this right.

Voting No will allow larger municipalities to annex Stockton without allowing the residents of Stockton to have a say.

Hype and Fail ENDORSES this amendment, as it provides for local choice by the residents of that area.  Yeah, it's silly that we have to amend the State Constitution to do this, but it is what it is.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 4 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to repeal portions of Amendment 111, now appearing as Section 256 of the Official Recompilation of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, relating to separation of schools by race and to repeal Section 259, Amendment 90, and Amendment 109, relating to the poll tax.(Proposed by Act No. 2011-353)

Explanation - This amendment removes racist language referring to poll taxes and segregation in schools based on race from our state constitution, specifically in Article XIV, Sec. 256 and Sec. 259.

The exact wording being repealed from Section 256: To avoid confusion and disorder and to promote effective and economical planning for education, the legislature may authorize the parents or guardians of minors, who desire that such minors shall attend schools provided for their own race, to make election to that end, such election to be effective for such period and to such extent as the legislature may provide. (As amended by Amendment 111)

The exact wording being repealed from Section 259: All poll taxes collected in this state shall be applied to the support and furtherance of education in the respective counties where collected. (As amended by Amendment 111.)

Voting Yes is a vote to repeal the racist language.

Voting No is a vote to keep the sections as they currently are.

Hype and Fail ENDORSES this amendment, and years for the day when ALL references to race are deleted from EACH AND EVERY GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT, at ALL LEVELS (including the Census!).  Yep, we're pretty much ready to move into a REAL post-racial age.  The poll tax is another issue altogether, but one thing at a time.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 5 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide for the transfer of the assets and liabilities of the Water Works and Sewer Board of the City of Prichard to the Board of Water and Sewer Commissioners of the City of Mobile, presently known as the Mobile Area Water and Sewer System. (Proposed by Act No. 2011-543)

Explanation - (The Constitution requires any change in the Constitution to be voted state-wide even if it is a local county issue.) This amendment will call for the Mobile Area Water and Sewer System (MAWSS) to acquire the Water and Sewer Board of the City of Prichard, therefore dissolving Prichard's Water and Sewer Board. This bill specifically states that existing customers of MAWSS will not incur any increases at any time from the acquisition or maintenance of the Water and Sewer Board of the City of Prichard.

Voting Yes authorizes MAWSS to acquire the Water and Sewer Board of the City of Prichard.

Voting No means that the Water and Sewer Board of the City of Prichard remains the same.

Hype and Fail has NO OPINION on this issue.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 6 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to prohibit any person, employer, or health care provider from being compelled to participate in any health care system. (Proposed by Act No. 2011-617)

Explanation - This amendment will give the people of Alabama the ability to opt-out of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), also known as Obamacare. The bill states, “In order to preserve the freedom of all residents of Alabama to provide for their own healthcare, a law or rule shall not compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer or healthcare provider to participate in any healthcare system.”

Voting Yes gives Alabamians the right to opt-out of Obamacare.

Voting No will mean that Alabamians will not have the right to opt-out of Obamacare.

Hype and Fail STRONGLY ENDORSES this Amendment!

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 7 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to amend Amendment 579 to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, now appearing as Section 177 of the Official Recompilation of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, to provide that the right of individuals to vote for public office, public votes on referenda, or votes of employee representation by secret ballot is fundamental. (Proposed by Act No. 2011-656)

Explanation - Throughout the United States it is the accepted practice to allow secret ballots when voting for public office, however the right to vote by secret ballot for employee representation is something many unions do not want to continue. This amendment will ensure that individuals have the right to vote for public office, on referendums and for employee representation by secret ballot.

Voting Yes will ensure the right to vote for employee representation by secret ballot, supporting Alabama's "Right to Work State" status.

Voting No means that the right to vote for employee representation by secret ballot is not ensured.

Hype and Fail STRONGLY ENDORSES this Amendment.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 8 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to repeal the existing provisions for legislative compensation and expenses and establish the basic compensation of the Legislature at the median household income in Alabama; to require legislators to submit signed vouchers for reimbursement for expenses; and to prohibit the Legislature from increasing the compensation or expenses payable to its members. (Proposed by Act No. 2012-269)

Explanation - This amendment will repeal the 62% legislative pay-raise that the Alabama legislature passed in 2007, and will tie the salary of Alabama legislators to the annual median household income of Alabama citizens. Alabama legislators will no longer be able to increase their own salaries if this amendment is adopted.

Voting Yes will approve the repeal of the 62% pay increase and make the legislators' salaries to be equal to the median income of Alabama households.

Voting No will mean that 62% pay increase will not be repealed and that legislators can continue to vote for the increase of their own salaries.

Hype and Fail STRONGLY ENDORSES this amendment.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 9 - Proposing an amendment to the private corporation provisions of Article 12 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to become effective January 1, 2014, to continue the authority of the Legislature to pass general laws pertaining to corporations and other entities; to continue the authority of the Legislature to regulate and impose a business privilege tax on corporations and other entities; and to repeal various provisions concerning private corporations, railroads, and canals. (Proposed by Act No. 2012-275)

Explanation - This amendment will modernize and remove outdated language (such as references to telegraph companies) in our Constitution, specifically in Article XII, dealing with business entities and the different laws under which they must operate. These changes will provide uniformity and clarity in our law for businesses.

Voting Yes is a vote to remove outdated language in Article XII, as well as enact other changes.

Voting No will keep Article XII as it is.

Hype and Fail ENDORSES this Amendment.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 10 - Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, effective January 1, 2014, to amend Section 247 relating to the authority of the Legislature concerning banks and banking, to repeal various other provisions of Article XIII concerning banks and banking; and to repeal

Amendment 154 to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, now appearing as Section 255.01 of the Official Recompilation of the Constitution of

Alabama of 1901, as amended, subject to the contingency that a new Article XII of the state constitution is adopted that repeals existing

Section 232 of the state constitution, and subject to the contingency that Sections 10A-2-15.01 and 10A-2-15.02, Code of Alabama 1975, are repealed. (Proposed by Act No. 2012-276)

Explanation - This amendment will make changes to Article XIII, which has sections that are outdated or irrelevant to our current banking system, conforming to current legal requirements. Two sections will be repealed, while other sections will be combined in a more logical way.

The exact wording being repealed from Section 249: All bills or notes issued as money shall be at times redeemable in gold or silver, and no law shall be passed sanctioning directly or indirectly the suspension by any bank or banking company of specie of payment. (This section reflects a time when bank notes functioned as the principal medium of exchange, i.e., as money.)

The exact wording being repealed form Section 252: No bank shall receive directly or indirectly, a greater rate of interest than shall be allowed by law to individuals for lending money. (Banking is now heavily regulated by state and federal general laws and regulation, so that this section is no longer needed. See Ala. Code Title 5 and Title 8.)

Voting Yes means you authorize the repeal of section 249 and section 252, and the consolidation of Article XIII.

Voting No means you want Article XIII to stay as it is.

Hype and Fail OPPOSES this amendment.  Section 249 needs to stay in!  Screw the Federal Reserve, we like sound money, not this fiat crap.

------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment 11 - Relating to Lawrence County, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to prohibit any municipality located

entirely outside of Lawrence County from imposing any municipal ordinance or regulation, including, but not limited to, any tax, zoning,

planning, or sanitation regulations, and any inspection service in its police jurisdiction located in Lawrence County and to provide that a municipality prohibited from imposing any tax or regulation under this amendment shall not provide any regulatory function or police or fire protection services in its police jurisdiction located in Lawrence County, other than public safety mutual aid. (Proposed by Act No. 2012-308)

Explanation - (The Constitution requires any change in the Constitution to be voted state-wide, even if it is a local county issue.) This amendment prohibits officials and municipalities outside Lawrence County from making decisions for zoning, regulation, planning, and sanitation that affect the people living inside Lawrence County.

Voting Yes means that you want municipalities that are not located in Lawrence County to be prohibited from imposing ordinances or regulations on the people of Lawrence County.

Voting No means that you want municipalities that are not located in Lawrence County to be able to impose ordinances or regulations on the people of Lawrence County.

Hype and Fail SUPPORTS this amendment.

"We Dare Defend Our Rights"

E tu, Facebook?

Alas, poor Facebook!

The giant social media company, whose stated mission is “to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected” is the reigning king of social media.  Hailed as one of the “best of the decade” by Entertainment Weekly in their December 11, 2009 issue, it passed MySpace as the most used social network in April 2008.  Now with over one billion users, the Facebook IPO was hailed as “the most hotly anticipated stock debut at least since Google, and maybe ever”…and then, it flopped.

Facebook (known as ‘FB’ by the cognoscenti) has become such a regular part of life that its lingo has entered the vernacular.  Since it’s founding in 2004, to “unlike” someone (the name given to removing someone you’ve “friended” on Facebook) has become the modern equivalent of the cut direct. With more than 40% of Americans now having FB accounts, the extensive reach of the site cannot be denied.  Lauded for its ability to bring people together, FB has allowed millions to find old friends, keep in contact with their loved ones, and establish groups of people with similar interests.  At the same time, it has facilitated stalkers, enabled infidelity and destroyed relationships on such a grand scale that one in five American divorces now (allegedly) involve FB.

As a political tool, FB first ‘hit the big time’ with the 2008 Republican and Democratic Presidential debates. The influence of FB is so pervasive that to NOT have a FB page for your campaign is not only practically unheard of, but also widely regarded as prima facie evidence of gross ineptitude approaching the level of frank incompetence. FB’s ability to coordinate a campaign’s communications with supporters, especially young voters, is undisputed. This is true not only in America, but anywhere the Internet reaches:  FB has been used to organize against unpopular groups such as FARC (the Columbian rebel group), and was the driving force behind “One Million Voices Against FARC”. FB has been banned by Syria, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Iran and China.  Obviously, repressive regimes don’t like FB’s ability to allow people to freely communicate, fearing that such freedom to communicate bodes ill for those repressive regimes.  Of course, this freedom to communicate can be used in other ways.  There have been reports that FB and other social media platforms, like Twitter have been and are being used as terrorist recruitment and coordination tools.

To illustrate how pervasive FB has become in politics:  as of October 31, 2012, Mitt Romney’s page had over 11,500,000 members (one becomes a member by ‘Liking’ a site), while Barack Obama’s page had more than 31,600,000.  Of course, FB ‘Likes’ are not votes…but collectively these two pages reflect over 40 million Americans (presumably, very few people ‘Like’ both candidates), which is roughly 1/3 of the number of people that voted in 2008. For completeness sake, Gary Johnson (Libertarian) had 331,000 ‘Likes’, while Jill Stein (Green) had 75,900.  Virgil Goode (Constitution) had 3800 ‘Likes’.  Rocky Anderson (Justice) does not have a formal page, but the Justice Party page has 2886 likes.

To put these numbers in perspective, the Tim Tebow Fan Club page has 255,000 Likes, and is only one of several pages devoted to the quarterback.  The Canada Free Press page has 7600 Likes.

The strength of FB, like all social media sites, lies in the site’s ability to facilitate communication between users.  When repressive regimes have censored FB, they have suffered the approbation of the FB and international communities.  Now, it appears that FB has taken a step that threatens itself on a fundamental level, by censoring an anti-Obama post by Navy SEALs. This post—a ‘meme’ in Internet parlance—was fairly typical:  a collage of pictures of Osama bin Laden and President Obama, with the caption “Obama called the SEALs and THEY got bin Laden.  When the SEALs called Obama, THEY GOT DENIED.”  This “message by the Special Operations Speaks PAC (SOS PAC)…highlighted the fact that Obama denied backup to the forces being overrun in Benghazi.”  Initially the poster (Larry Ward, President of Political Media, Inc., which is responsible for posting on the SOS PAC page) received a warning about the meme violating Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.   At that time he reposted the meme, with the warning as a caption.  He also posted a link to the FB 'feedback comment' page so that people could express their opinion of FB’s behavior.  The result?  The meme was pulled, and the poster was suspended for 24 hours from FB.

Obviously, this meme struck a nerve:  within 24 hours of being posted, it had been shared (posted on other pages) more than 30,000 times, ‘Liked’ about 24,000 times and read by hundreds of thousands of people. (Typically, many more people read posts than respond to them with an action such as Likes or shares.)

As someone with a modicum of experience with FB (disclaimer:  my own page, Hype and Fail, has been up since early September of this year), this meme doesn’t strike me as anything particularly beyond the pale of the usual, run-of-the-mill posts I see and share every day.  I suspect Mr. Ward felt the same about his post, which is why he ignored the warning.  Certainly the meme can’t be nearly as inflammatory as the cartoons of Muhammad posted on FB that caused the Pakistani banning of FB and the creation of an Islamic counter to the site. Given recent revelations about Benghazi-gate, it’s not nearly as far-fetched in its assertions as others have been.  So, the question becomes just why did FB censor this particular post, by this particular group?

Now that the storm has broken, FB has been quick to backpedal, with the following being posted as an update on the original Breitbart.com report:

“UPDATE: Facebook Manager Andrew Noyes emailed the following to Breitbart News this morning: We wanted to follow up on the Special Operations Speaks PAC (SOS) article published on Breitbart.com last night. I assure you that removing the image was not an act of censorship on our part. This was an error and we apologize for any inconvenience it may have caused.”

Too late, FB, the damage has already been done!  I, and others, have already shared this story on our own FB pages, and encouraged our friends to do the same. Between the story on BreitBart.com and the rapid spread of this story on FB itself, the fox is now well and truly into the Internet hen house.  Whether by error or not, FBs actions have the appearance of censorship of an anti-Obama message put up by a group of SEALs.  What makes this truly awful is not just the two SEALs (and others) who died in Benghazi, but how it affects the ‘free and open’ image FB has worked so hard to promulgate.

Were this an isolated incident, it could be much more easily attributed to an error by a FB staffer.  Sadly, it is not.  This is not the first meme critical of the American government (or some unit thereof) to be warned, then deleted. There are complaints on pages about FB’s ‘pay to share’ policy, as well as their censorship practices when a page's Likes exceed a certain limit.  There is a Change.org petition on the web, where you can sign to support the “Facebook Declaration of Independence”.  This Declaration calls for (among other things) FB to eliminate the pay-to-share policy between connected people, a fair and public appeal process prior to removal of posts, and a removal of the friendship cap limit.  These are not the only warning signs of discontent with FB: Facebook Detox is a site dedicated to helping people kick the FB habit.  FB has started shedding users, and other competing sites are now available. Problems with FB have become a common theme on the Internet, especially the dismal customer service and less than optimal business utility of the site.  Even before FB’s IPO, General Motors stopped buying FB ads, which are a primary source of FB revenue.

Most telling of all, since October 29^th—the first day they legally could do so—FB employees have been selling stock in such quantities that the stock price dropped 3.8% in three days. CEO Mark Zuckerberg has publically stated that he won’t be selling any stock until at least next September, but another large block of stock shares and options unlocks on November 14^th.  Since this November 14^th block of 777 million shares and options is quite a bit more than the 234 million shares and options just unlocked…the math is left as an exercise for the student.

However, the stock price drop doesn’t address the real issue:  namely, that censoring a post by Navy SEALs makes FB appear to be taking a political stance in favor of President Obama against his challengers.  Since it’s commonly accepted in some quarters that the mainstream media has been covering up Benghazi-gate as part of their efforts to support Obama’s reelection efforts, this action makes FB appear just as corrupt and biased as the MSM.  If FB becomes known as a ‘liberal mouthpiece’ like the three major networks, how long will it be before moderates, conservatives, libertarians and others abandon it for more welcoming social networks?

Certainly the behavior of FB with regard to this particular anti-Obama post smacks of political bias and favoritism.  In censoring the SEALs, FB has made many people, myself included; seriously reevaluate their presence on the site.  Without a doubt, FB is THE social network site...for now.  I, and others, have FB pages so we can directly tap that billion-plus pool of users FB has accumulated.  This pool of users is FB’s main selling point, the very thing that made its stock so hyped (and initially overvalued).  Without that huge pool of users, FB is just another social network site…but less customizable than MySpace, less business friendly than LinkedIn, and not tied to another megalithic company (besides itself) like Google Plus.  Throw in Twitter, Pinterest, Tumbler, Diaspora, and all the rest…there’s no shortage of alternatives today, and MySpace’s experience (previously #1; now, not so much) shows us that what is biggest today isn’t necessarily biggest forever.

All that being said, I’m not closing down my FB page just yet.  FB is not ideal, but I’ve invested a fair bit of energy, time and effort into cultivating my page these last few weeks.  In doing so, I’ve learned a great deal about the whole social networking ‘thing’, and picked up quite a bit of useful information about how NOT to start an Internet site/business (mainly by doing things the wrong way the first time).  FB is still too big not to use, and functional enough for most purposes.  I expect it to remain so, at least for the near future.  However, I’m rapidly approaching the pay-to-share point and have had difficulty sharing items on some pages.  Thus far, I’m not aware that I’ve had any posts pulled, and I haven’t seen any warnings, despite flogging anti-Obama gear and memes shamelessly.  But, if my page is destroyed tomorrow…well, I’ve still got my other web site, and a blog, and have no plans to abandon the web at this time.

Still, I’m more aware of FB’s proclivities now, and irritated on behalf of the SEALs.  I don’t expect that awareness and irritation to change any time in the near future, and I suspect I’m not alone in feeling that way.  Be warned, FB!  Your users are watching you very carefully.  Now would be a good time to not screw up again.

NOTE:  if you don’t have a Facebook account but want to see Pages, go to facebook.com and look down the page.  There will be a line for you to select the appropriate language, and under that will be a line that includes links for ‘Badges’, ‘People’ and ‘Pages’.  Click on ‘Pages’ and search for the page you want to see.  The same procedure works for People, as well.

Originally posted HERE:  http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50757