Archive for glbtq community



This morning I don’t really know where to begin because there’s so much material and since I have devoted so much time in preparing I have to ask you give an old NYC hack driver a break and bear with me. Today, I present to you a case of two women, I stand corrected, two conservative woman that for lack of a better word are what I have to call “the problem” for Conservatism in America. These two women are more of a threat than flash mobs, the New Black Panther party and GLBTQ marriage rights combined. Conservatives should be afraid of these women, Doctor Gina Loudon and Barbara Espinosa because they are very vocal in speaking their minds about the sitting and duly elected 44th President of the United States. Worse than that they are working within the high walls of Conservative talk radio to destroy any chance of the Right “taking back the country!’


Gina Loudon and Barbara Espinosa, however are not the disease they are a symptom of the progression of the disease. The disease is that white American Conservatives are tired of being restricted in their public and private speech out of the fear they might offend people of color, the GLBTQ community and young sexually active women. White Conservatives in the US of A are angry that changes in laws that offend their social worldview are being changed against them in rapid ways. Events like gay marriage and a President of color, that would have drawn at best laughter and at worse a trip to the funny farm had you told their grandparents in their youth now stand in stark contrast to the Conservative wish to just go back to the black and white [ in their proper place, of course] days of <a href=””>1951 Pleasantville</a>.

It appears that color is an issue here that is connected to culture that is connected to actions. Gina Loudon this past week issued forth a rant at on what she calls “Obamaphones.” Loudon, whom I quote from the website, Ethics Alarms:

People often wonder, sometime piously, how it is that tyranny occurs. We like to think the populations victimized were somehow less savvy, more gullible, or asleep at the wheel. We think ourselves better somehow, and that it could never happen here. Every generation that has fallen to tyranny has believed the same comforting fable. They only learn that they, too, were susceptible to tyranny when it is too late.

When Hitler wanted to subjugate the German people, he proclaimed that every household deserved a car. Thus was born the “Volkswagen” or peoples’ car. Though cheap, they were cars, widely available, and from a benevolent leader whom they believed cared for their good. Even the narcissistic, megalomaniacal Hitler didn’t have the audacity to call them “Hitler cars.”

Enter Barack Hussein Obama in 2012. His way of spreading the wealth around is “free” healthcare. But as Obamacare lies in peril, his landmark bill unpopular with most Americans, now he brings free cell phones and free high-speed, broadband internet. No cheap DSL for Obama’s subjects, err, constituents. Why did he stop short of fiber-optics and T-1 lines? He has unemployed and underemployed masses that scream for free things, and direct their hostility for a poor economy to the rich people who have jobs and can afford things like cell phones. Under the guise of access to emergency services, the left repeat the slogan for the masses that communication is a human right and should not be reserved for the rich.

If you are already receiving any public service, you are probably entitled to a Volksphone. There are upwards of 20 million people enjoying what they are told are “free Obama phones”. The rest of us are forced to subsidize the Volksphone through hidden taxes assessed by the Obama Federal Communications Commission (FCC), through the universal service fund.

Thomas Sowell recently explained that Obama is more tyrannical than communist or socialist. A socialist wants to own the businesses, but with ownership comes responsibility. Tyranny is the government’s ability to take credit for things, while denying any real responsibility for what goes wrong. The Obama phones fit that definition well. Obama’s emissaries created the program, mandate the assessments on the telecommunications companies, who then pass the cost to us. Then candidate Obama can enjoy the fruits of the giveaway, while Chief Executive Obama can deny responsibility for levying the taxes. True to fascism that would make Mussolini blush, the telecommunications companies gained 20 million new customers with the FCC guaranteeing the bills will be paid. The program that cost $600 million two years ago has exploded to well over $1.2 billion and climbing. And we thought that forcing millions of Americans to buy private health insurance was a boondoggle for that industry. Remember when Obama said he would reign in the special interests?

So here is the fun part for campaign Obama. The website, is flagrant propaganda. The site denies Obama is taxing anyone, but gives him credit for giving the phones away. This website, owned by an anonymous person or entity, features a flattering image of candidate Obama and serves as a campaign tool by expressly giving Obama credit for “spreading the wealth around.” In truth, the mechanism being used to mandate the entitlement is actually credited to the Reagan Administration by But clearly, there is a significant propaganda campaign to give Obama credit for expanding the home phone subsidy program into giving away free cell phones.

Okay, had Loudon stopped there she might have been okay and people could have waived this off as a person who just can’t deal with the legislative reality of the Universal Service Fund. The money for subsidized cell phones comes from the carriers who do this in their own interest of course. Also, Obama didin’t start this program. But Doctor Gina Loudon can’t accept this or even that the program grew out of the Communications Act of 1934 [47 U.S.C. § 151 et seq] . She’s already on the crazy train so she just decides to see where it will take her:

Truly chilling is the potential for electoral abuse of the program. This is a Presidential campaign notable for two records: 1) The record use of technology and 2) The record abuse of campaign finance violations. Rarely are elections overturned for electoral violations, so the cynical campaign strategist can plan to ask forgiveness rather than permission. The Obama campaign strategy in the last election was to cheat at every turn, going to great extents. They cheated contribution limits (namely from Soros who paid the biggest fine in FEC history), they modified online credit card transaction forms in order to hide donor data, which hid critical identifying data for huge numbers of overseas donations. These donations were ostensibly from American expats, but were ultimately connected to foreign nationals who made illegal contributions. With so much data scrubbed, the tracking was tedious to the point of impossible before election day. By the time the crime was discovered, it was too late. Obama had won, and he knows he can count on the swooning Lame Stream Media to ignore the story. The average American is unaware of his arguable theft of the election, though the evidence abounds.

To make matters worse, the Obama Universal Service Fund Administration is doubling down. In February they announced that the same people getting free phones were also entitled to high-speed broad band internet service for just $10 per month. In celebrating the program, Mark Henry, CEO of predicts that based on the phone giveaway, the nominal $10 internet service charge will soon go away. This shadowy figure also controls, the site to which visitors to are directed when clicking the link for signing up for a free phone. So who is Mark Henry? He appears to be the guy behind the Obamaphone website. If not, why would the site be pointed to his site?

How will these free phones and internet be used at election time? One can only imagine. The technology already exists for texts to be sent to thousands, even millions of phones at one time. The Obama regime is touting ground breaking texting tactics already, feverously collecting cell phone data for use at election time. Who do you suppose the poor will vote for when they are using a free “Obamaphone” that is sending reminders to go vote for Obama? Who do you think will tell them that their phone is really being paid for by you? Outrageous? Maybe. But what can be done after he is elected?

The portion of the Congressional mandate to provide universal communication service to the poor is called Lifeline and it was established by the Reagan Administration in 1985 per the Federal Communications Commission website:

Lifeline is a government benefit program supported by the Universal Service Fund that provides a discount on phone service for qualifying low-income consumers. Lifeline helps ensure that eligible consumers have the opportunities and security that phone service brings, including being able to connect to jobs, family, and emergency services.

The Lifeline program is available to eligible low-income consumers in every state, territory, commonwealth, and on Tribal lands. Consumers with proper proof of eligibility may be qualified to enroll. To participate in the program, consumers must have an income that is at or below 135% of the federal Poverty Guidelines or participate in a qualifying state, federal or Tribal assistance program.

To participate in the program, consumers must either have an income that is at or below 135% of the federal Poverty Guidelines or participate in one of the following assistance programs:
•Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Food Stamps or SNAP);
•Supplemental Security Income (SSI);
•Federal Public House Assistance (Section 8);
•Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP);
•Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF);
•National School Lunch Program’s Free Lunch Program;
•Bureau of Indian Affairs General Assistance;
•Tribally-Administrered Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TTANF);
•Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR);
•Head Start (if income eligibility criteria are met); or
•State assistance programs (if applicable).

Federal rules prohibit eligible low-income consumers from receiving more than one Lifeline discount per household. An eligible consumer may receive a discount on either a wireline or wireless service, but not both. A consumer whose household currently is receiving more than one Lifeline service must select a single Lifeline provider and contact the other provider to de-enroll from their program. Consumers violating this rule may also be subject to criminal and/or civil penalties.

The Lifeline program is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). USAC is responsible for data collection and maintenance, support calculation, and disbursement for the low-income program. USAC’s website provides information regarding administrative aspects of the low-income program, as well as program requirements.

On January 31, 2012, the Commission adopted comprehensive reform and modernization of the Lifeline program. As a universal service program that fulfills Congress’s mandate to ensure the availability of communications to all Americans, Lifeline for the past 25 years has helped tens of millions of low-income Americans afford basic phone service. Access to telephone service is essential for finding a job, connecting with family, or getting help in an emergency, and the percentage of low-income households with phone service has increased from 80% in 1985, when Lifeline began, to nearly 92% last year.

I’m sure at this point the Conservative readers of this blog need more pictures because facts are such stubborn things. The whole thing also serves a purpose of doing what the Congress approved in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. I quote onece again from the FCC, “Carriers offering LifeLine and Link Up are required to publicize the availability of these programs using media of general distribution ‘in a manner reasonably designed ‘to reach those most likely to qualify for support.”[47 C.F.R. §§ 5045(b)]

So there’s the end of the Dr Gina Loudon part of this travesty and I’m sure you all can see why she’s dangerous to Conservatives; simply put it’s because she’s not stupid she’s just willing to lie to promote her agenda. Now that takes me to the other side of the coin this early afternoon. Former KFNX 1100 radio talk show host Barabra Espinosa called President Barack Hussein Obama “a monkey” on her talk show and then defended the comment on her blog which at the time was called “Hair on Fire” [no I’m not kidding] just as her show was and on her Facebook page. Ms Espinosa was asked to leave KFNX but that hasn’t changed her opinion of the President whom she called a “lily livered pussy S.O.B.” in earlier times.

During the show where she called Obama a monkey the Arizona GOP Chairman Tom Morissey the Tom referred to in the clip] was on the line and he said absolutely nothing in response to the comment. Take a listen.

Yeah, I had the same reaction.

In Hindsight

Of course, KFNX was quick to point out that Espinosa did not make her comments at their station and that she had left the station a month prior. I may have held back a little in this post because calling people names really doesn’t do anything to get people to think. That ends conversations; it doesn’t encourage conversation. Like many Conservative seasoned citizens Barbara Espinosa is a “Birther.” This kind of crap will never go away because people like Barabara Espinosa are coming to the end of their lives and they just don’t give a fuck anymore about anything except the first thing that pops into their heads which is usually that they want to get someone to stop doing something that makes their country less like it was when they were young. This is basically about regret. It’s my opinion that Barbara Espinosa didn’t go to Woodstock and didn’t have fun as a young sexually liberated woman 40 years ago. She fell into the Conservative trap and now she’s angry at the black man in the White House because she was too scared to have some fun in the 1960s.

Pax Terra!

Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H [Journ.]
Managing Editor—Research
The Dis Brimstone-Daily Pitchfork
56 Shatter 2 AS

%d bloggers like this: