Archive for the ‘Rants’ Category

I caught wind of this on a forum I’m a member of. I couldn’t believe what I was reading. More accurately I couldn’t believe I was reading it for the first time. H.R. 2647 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 is.

“A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.”

Here’s one of the “other purposes”. Pay close attention to the phrase “as determined by the Attorney General”. You know, the one that thinks we’re a Nation of Cowards.

---

SEC. 524. PROHIBITION ON RECRUITMENT, ENLISTMENT, OR RETENTION OF PERSONS ASSOCIATED OR AFFILIATED WITH GROUPS ASSOCIATED WITH HATE-RELATED VIOLENCE AGAINST GROUPS OR PERSONS OR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.

Section 504 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

‘(c) Persons Associated or Affiliated With Hate Groups-

‘(1) PROHIBITION- A person associated or affiliated with a group associated with hate-related violence against groups or persons or the United States Government, as determined by the Attorney General, may not be recruited, enlisted, or retained in the armed forces.

‘(2) DEFINITION OF HATE GROUP- In this subsection, the terms ‘group associated with hate-related violence’ or ‘hate group’ mean the following:

‘(A) Groups or organizations that espouse or engage in acts of violence against other groups or minorities based on ideals of hate, ethnic supremacies, white supremacies, racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, or other bigotry ideologies.

‘(B) Groups or organizations engaged in criminal gang activity including drug and weapons trafficking and smuggling.

‘(C) Groups or organizations that espouse an intention or expectation of armed revolutionary activity against the United States Government, or the violent overthrow of the United States Government.

‘(D) Groups or organizations that espouse an intention or expectation of armed activity in a ‘race war’.

‘(E) Groups or organizations that encourage members to join the armed forces in order to obtain military training to be used for acts of violence against minorities, other groups, or the United States Government.

‘(F) Groups or organizations that espouse violence based on race, creed, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.

‘(G) Other groups or organizations that are determined by the Attorney General to be of a violent, extremist nature.

‘(3) EVIDENCE OF ASSOCIATION OR AFFILIATION WITH HATE GROUP- The following shall constitute evidence that a person is associated or affiliated with a group associated with hate-related violence:

‘(A) Individuals possessing tattoos or other body markings indicating association or affiliation with a hate group.

‘(B) Individuals known to have attended meetings, rallies, conferences, or other activities sponsored by a hate group.

‘(C) Individuals known to be involved in online activities with a hate group, including being engaged in online discussion groups or blog or other postings that support, encourage, or affirm the group’s extremist or violent views and goals.

‘(D) Individuals who are known to have in their possession photographs, written testimonials (including diaries or journals), propaganda, or other materials indicating involvement or affiliation with a hate group. Such materials can include photographs, written materials relating to or referring to extreme hatred that are clearly not of an academic nature, possession of objects that venerate or glorify hate-inspired violence, and related materials, as determined by the Attorney General.

‘(E) Individuals espousing the intent to acquire military training for the purpose of using such training towards committing acts of violence of a purpose not affiliated with the armed forces.

‘(4) REQUIREMENTS FOR RECRUITERS AND ENLISTMENT PROCESSING STATIONS- A military recruiters may not enlist, or assist in enlisting, a person who is associated or affiliated with a group associated with hate-related violence, as evidenced pursuant to paragraph (3). A person at any military enlistment processing station who, during the screening process, is found to be affiliated or associated with a hate group (including through admitting to any such affiliation or association on any form or document) is automatically prohibited from enlisting.

‘(5) SEPARATION-

‘(A) SEPARATION REQUIRED- A person discovered or determined to be associated or affiliated with a group associated with hate-related violence, as evidenced pursuant to paragraph (3), shall be immediately discharged from the armed forces, in the manner prescribed in regulations regarding discharge from service.

‘(B) EXCEPTION- Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a member of the armed forces who has renounced the member’s previous affiliation or association with a group associated with hate-related violence, as determined by the commanding officer of the member.

‘(6) REPORTING REQUIREMENT- Not later than April 1, 2010, and annually thereafter, the Secretary concerned shall submit to the Committees on Armed Service of the Senate and House of Representatives a report–

‘(A) on the presence in the armed forces of members who are associated or affiliated with a group associated with hate-related violence and describing the actions of the Secretary to discharge such members; and

‘(B) describing the actions of the Secretary to prevent persons who are associated or affiliated with a hate group from enlisting.’.

---

So it will be up to one man to decide who’s on ze hate list. Welcome to 1930′s Germany. Oh maybe they’ll appoint a hate czar.

Here’s a link to the H.R. 2647 0n govtrack.us that will take you directly to this section 524 of the bill. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-2647&version=eh&nid=t0%3Aeh%3A1655 You have to click to get it to load and then wait a minute for it. It’s a big one.

Here’s a link to the US Code 10,504 that will be affected if the HR2647 goes through Congress and is signed by the President. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sec_10_00000504—-000-.html A link to this is also on the govtrack.us site at the 524 section of the HR2647.

Let’s see who voted against HR 2647 in the house. This is weird 389 Ayes and 22 Noes, 20 of which were Democrats including Barney Frank, Henry Waxman, and Jessie Jackson. Well that just makes it all ok doesn’t it. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2009-460

And here’s the Gentleman from my home State who proposed the amendment. June 26, 2009: Hastings’ Amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act Passes House Oddly enough that amendment doesn’t show at Thomas.gov unless you actually download the PDF of it. How’s that for transparency.

Here’s some more info on the upstanding Congressman Hastings

I tried to make a link to thomas.gov of the bill and/or pdf file of it but all their pages are loaded dynamically with cgi scripts so it’s not possible but you can go there and search for the bill number H.R. 2647 and the one appended with EH is the version that passed. Once you have navigated to that you’ll see a link on the left for GPO’s PDF Display. That’s the (Government Print Office) print version. www.thomas.gov

UPDATE: 7/8/09 If you find the [HR 2647 EH] on thomas you can click on section 523 to make 524 show. Must be a bug or glitch. Yeah, I can see Gibbs saying that now. I kind of like the pdf myself for impressing people when I show it to them. It’s got that nice official logo at the top of an eagle representing freedom. “Hey check out this Appropriations Act”  Also, section 524 is on page 152 of the pdf.

I also see that:

7/6/2009:

Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 96.

Strange Days

Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the
Declaration of Independence?

Five signers were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured
before they died.

Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.

Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army; another had two
sons captured.

Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of
the Revolutionary War. They signed and they pledged their lives, their
fortunes, and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they?

Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers
and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated.

But they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the
penalty would be death if they were captured. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a
wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British
Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags.

Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his
family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his
family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty
was his reward.

Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton,
Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton. At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas
Nelson Jr, noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson
home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open
fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt.

Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife,
and she died within a few months.

John Hart was driven from his wife’s bedside as she was dying. Their 13
children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to
waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to
find his wife dead and his children vanished. A few weeks later he died from
exhaustion and a broken heart.

Norris and Livingston suffered similar fates. Such were the stories and
sacrifices of the American Revolution. These were not wild-eyed, rabble-
rousing ruffians. They were soft-spoken men of means and education.

They had security, but they valued liberty more. Standing tall, straight, and
unwavering, they pledged: “For the support of this declaration, with firm
reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each
other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”

They gave you and me a free and independent America. The history books never
told you a lot about what happened in the Revolutionary War. We didn’t fight
just the British. We were British subjects at that time and we fought our own
government! Some of us take these liberties so much for granted, but we
shouldn’t. So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and
silently thank these patriots. It’s not much to ask for the price they paid.

Rules for Radicals

In 1971, Saul Alinsky wrote an entertaining classic on grassroots organizing titled Rules for Radicals. Those who prefer cooperative tactics describe the book as out-of-date. Nevertheless, it provides some of the best advice on confrontational tactics. Alinsky begins this way:

What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.

His “rules” derive from many successful campaigns where he helped poor people fighting power and privilege

For Alinsky, organizing is the process of highlighting what is wrong and convincing people they can actually do something about it. The two are linked. If people feel they don’t have the power to change a bad situation, they stop thinking about it.

According to Alinsky, the organizer — especially a paid organizer from outside — must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy. This is necessary to get people to participate. An organizer has to attack apathy and disturb the prevailing patterns of complacent community life where people have simply come to accept a bad situation. Alinsky would say, “The first step in community organization is community disorganization.”

Through a process combining hope and resentment, the organizer tries to create a “mass army” that brings in as many recruits as possible from local organizations, churches, services groups, labor unions, corner gangs, and individuals.

Alinsky provides a collection of rules to guide the process. But he emphasizes these rules must be translated into real-life tactics that are fluid and responsive to the situation at hand.

Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.

Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people.
The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”

Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.

Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself. When Alinsky leaked word that large numbers of poor people were going to tie up the washrooms of O’Hare Airport, Chicago city authorities quickly agreed to act on a longstanding commitment to a ghetto organization. They imagined the mayhem as thousands of passengers poured off airplanes to discover every washroom occupied. Then they imagined the international embarrassment and the damage to the city’s reputation.

Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, “Okay, what would you do?”

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”

These are the tactics of Obama’s mentor, but remember, these are for community organizers not someone in power. People in power have a lot more tools at their disposal. Like controlling what people see and hear.

Most people in this country have no clue what’s going on. A friend of mine who does not get FoxNews on cable said to me the other day that all he sees on the news is some local stuff and the other half of it is basically a commercial for American Idol. He did hear about the Holocaust shooting but not the recruiter shooting.

I typed the above phrase into a search engine and this popped up.

American by Choice
We must all learn what it means to be an American.
by Peter W. Schramm
06/28/2007 12:00:00 AM

THIS WEEK, I am being honored by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services as an “Outstanding American by Choice.” This strikes me as an interesting name for an award. It is meant, of course, to recognize selected citizens who were not born in America. But the idea of being an American by choice points to an important, and perhaps unintended truth: being American is not simply reducible to the happy accident of birth. Americans, both natural and naturalized, must be trained–they must be made–and much of my time these days is devoted to making Americans out of people who just happened to have been born here.

Over fifty years ago, when I was just shy of my tenth birthday, my family fled Hungary during the failed revolution against the Russian Communists. Our family’s story was like so many of the refugees from communism, complete with relatives arrested, property seized, and a nighttime dash to freedom. The decision to escape was an easy one to make (although not so easy to execute), but the question I had–the one I distinctly recall asking my father–was “where are we going.” We could have stayed in Europe–and indeed, the Germans would have welcomed us as Volk deutsche because of our German surname–but this was not my father’s plan. “We are going to America,” he said. “Why America?” I prodded. “Because, son. We were born Americans, but in the wrong place.”

Born Americans, but in the wrong place? I’ve spent the better part of the last fifty years working to more fully understand these words. Mind you, everyone understood America to be a free and good place where one might prosper unmolested. But in saying that we were “born Americans, but in the wrong place,” Dad, in his way, was saying that he understood America to be both a place and an idea at the same time. Fundamentally, it is a place that would embrace us if we could prove that we shared in the idea. We meant to prove it.

Because America is more than just a place, being an American citizen is different than being the citizen of any other country on earth. We Americans do not look to the ties of common blood and history for connection as people the way the citizens of other countries do. Rather, our common bond is a shared principle. This is what Lincoln meant when he referred to the “electric cord” in the Declaration of Independence that links all of us together, as though we were “blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh, of the men who wrote that Declaration.”

Because ours is a bond of principle and not of blood, true American citizens are made and not born. This is why, odd as it may seem, we must all learn–those who are born here, and those who come here by choice–what it means to be an American. Regrettably, we are doing a poor job of passing this knowledge on to future generations. Looking to just one practical indicator, the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress shows that 73 percent of twelfth-graders scored below the proficient level in civics, as did 78 percent of eighth-graders, and 76 percent of fourth-graders. To put this into perspective, 72 percent of eighth graders could not explain the historical purpose of the Declaration of Independence. This ignorance is tragic not merely because it indicates a deficiency in our educational system, but because with it comes a loss of our national identity. And so, I find it somewhat ironic and yet very fitting that fifty years after coming to this great country, I spend my days at an institution where my job is to teach college students and high school teachers what it means to be an American.

In recent weeks, there has been much talk about immigration, but very little informed discussion about what it means to be an American–about what is necessary to make Americans. Yes, there needs to be a sensible policy for accepting new citizens, and for ensuring that those who come here do so legally. But what happens once they are here? I hear frequent conversations about failures in integration and assimilation, even among recent legal immigrants. This is not new. What is new is that America’s own natural citizens increasingly have forgotten what it means to be American. Some do not know the basics principles of this country, and still others have embraced the ideology of multiculturalism and self-loathing to such a degree that they can no longer recognize, let alone proclaim, that ours is a great nation built on lasting principles. If we no longer understand or believe in that which makes us Americans, then there is nothing substantive to assimilate into. We become many and diverse people who share a common place, rather than E Pluribus Unum.

We cannot forget who we are. We are Americans. This is a great nation. We Americans insist on holding to the connection between freedom and justice, courage and moderation. We think that equality and liberty have ethical and political implications, and, as we have shown time-and-again throughout our history, we are willing to fight and to die to make men free. We need to impart these principles to the current and succeeding generations.

We Americans correctly demand respect for our rights but, in getting that respect, we must continue to demonstrate that we continue to deserve it. We have to exercise our intelligence and develop our civic understanding so that we may preserve our liberty and pass it on, undiminished to the next generation. If government “of the people, by the people and for the people” is to endure, its endurance can only come from the devotion of Americans–born here and away–who have been so made.

Peter W. Schramm is an American who happened to have been born in the wrong place. He is also the executive director of the John M. Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs, and the chair of the Masters in American History and Government program at Ashland University.

Here’s what the typical Politician thinks about “Fiscal Responsibility”. Basically, California Budget Conference Committee Chairman Noreen Evans (D, Santa Rosa) is saying, we give away your money to our friends and ourselves when times are good, therefore we should be able to increase your taxes when things go bad because we’re the Superior ones, the Politicians and your Stupid. Live within your means applies only to you because we have the control and you don’t.

There have been many complaints and much protest from people simply wanting our representatives to simply Read The Bill before they sign it. The stimulus Bill was rushed through without it being read and that was one of the big reasons for the Tea Party. Then on a Friday before a Holiday recess the House voted on the Cap & Trade Bill. It was about 1000 pages and had a last minute amendment added of 300 pages. Well look how seriously our Government takes us.

A Complete Mockery.

I’m a member of a forum that has a guy in my State of FL here who knows a thing or two about “the market”. He posts charts and articles and is just all wound up about things. His name is John Galt. Today he was very excited and posted a video from cnbc. Now like I said I don’t know much (about the world of big money and wall street) but I do know this.
“This market continues to be propped up by government intervention and manipulation…..”
This cannot be a good thing, especially with this gangstadministration. What’s that saying that Reagan had? Scariest words you’ll ever hear. We’re from the Government and we’re here to help. Here’s the video and at about 2:00 is when you really need to listen. There’s a commercial first of course.

The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a mobile phone’s microphone and using it to eavesdrop on nearby conversations.

The technique is called a “roving bug,” and was approved by top U.S. Department of Justice officials for use against members of a New York organized crime family who were wary of conventional surveillance techniques such as tailing a suspect or wiretapping him.

Nextel cell phones owned by two alleged mobsters, John Ardito and his attorney Peter Peluso, were used by the FBI to listen in on nearby conversations. The FBI views Ardito as one of the most powerful men in the Genovese family, a major part of the national Mafia.

The surveillance technique came to light in an opinion published this week by U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan. He ruled that the “roving bug” was legal because federal wiretapping law is broad enough to permit eavesdropping even of conversations that take place near a suspect’s cell phone.

Kaplan’s opinion said that the eavesdropping technique “functioned whether the phone was powered on or off.” Some handsets can’t be fully powered down without removing the battery; for instance, some Nokia models will wake up when turned off if an alarm is set.

While the Genovese crime family prosecution appears to be the first time a remote-eavesdropping mechanism has been used in a criminal case, the technique has been discussed in security circles for years.

The U.S. Commerce Department’s security office warns that “a cellular telephone can be turned into a microphone and transmitter for the purpose of listening to conversations in the vicinity of the phone.” An article in the Financial Times last year said mobile providers can “remotely install a piece of software on to any handset, without the owner’s knowledge, which will activate the microphone even when its owner is not making a call.”

Nextel and Samsung handsets and the Motorola Razr are especially vulnerable to software downloads that activate their microphones, said James Atkinson, a counter-surveillance consultant who has worked closely with government agencies. “They can be remotely accessed and made to transmit room audio all the time,” he said. “You can do that without having physical access to the phone.”

Because modern handsets are miniature computers, downloaded software could modify the usual interface that always displays when a call is in progress. The spyware could then place a call to the FBI and activate the microphone–all without the owner knowing it happened. (The FBI declined to comment on Friday.)

“If a phone has in fact been modified to act as a bug, the only way to counteract that is to either have a bugsweeper follow you around 24-7, which is not practical, or to peel the battery off the phone,” Atkinson said. Security-conscious corporate executives routinely remove the batteries from their cell phones, he added.

Money Rules the World

By: Timothy P. Carney
Examiner Columnist
March 4, 2009

As the CEO of this organization, I have resigned myself to the fact that Barrack Obama is our President and that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way. To compensate for these increases, our prices would have to increase by about 10%. But Since we cannot increase our prices right now due to the dismal state of the economy, we will have to lay off sixty of our employees instead..

This has really been bothering me, since I believe we are family here and I didn’t know how to choose who would have to go. So, this is what I did. I walked through our parking lots and found sixty ‘Obama’ bumper stickers on our employees’ cars and have decided these folks will be the ones to let go. I can’t think of a more fair way to approach this problem. They voted for change, I gave it to them. I will see the rest of you at the annual company picnic.