Tag: Leviathan

Quote of the Day

KevinLeave a comment

Quote of the Day

It was obvious to me at the time DHS and Patriot Act (and TSA!) were bad moves. Aside from the fact that amalgamating many inefficient bureaucracies into one multiplies not divides the inefficiencies – efficient government is not an overriding concern of mine – centralizing power to meet a crisis leaves the centralized power available for abuse long after the crisis is forgotten. The chances that a future Democrat administration would disband DHS and repeal Patriot Act were patently zero even at the time. Expand, politicize, and abuse now are the order of the day, and I am not surprised in the least.

Both major parties seem now irredeemably statist. Many Republicans are starting to say the right things once more, but I doubt 51% will trust the party again soon enough to help. Nor should we, on the record. I attended the public signing of the Contract With America, and I watched as it was abandoned by Republican “realists” who seemed to think that absolute power in *their* hands was kinda neat.

– Jerry Pournelle

Here’s Your 1st Rightwing Extremist Suspect

KevinLeave a comment

Here’s Your 1st Rightwing Extremist Suspect

Tax protester in hot water over tea bags

A Beeville grandmother who sent tea bag tabs to Washington and Austin earlier this month found herself at police headquarters Monday answering questions about her intentions.

“I’m just a normal person. I’m a single grandmother raising two granddaughters,” said Faye Freeman Tuesday morning.

So imagine her reaction when Texas Ranger Andy Lopez and Beeville Police Department Staff Sgt. Richard Cantu came to her door Monday and told her they wanted her to go to the police department for questioning.

The reason? Freeman had mailed the tags from 64 tea bags to different elected representatives in Austin and Washington on April 4 to protest government spending. And one of the recipients had called the authorities to report her, saying he or she had received something suspicious in the mail from a woman in Beeville.

“If you were on the receiving end of something like that, what would you think?” Freeman said Lopez asked her.

“If I’d got something like that, I would have called the person back and said, ‘Can I help you?’” was her response.

But you’re not a clueless politician. No fair!

When investigators asked if she thought she would open a suspicious envelope that had no return address, Freeman said, “The envelope had my return address on it.”

Later she asked this reporter, “How did they find me if there was no return address?”

Wouldn’t “DUH?” have been an easier reply?

Freeman was doing what thousands of working taxpayers are doing this month as part of a protest against increased government spending and coming tax increases.

Instead of sending tea bags, the grandmother decided to send the tabs from the bags and use the tea herself.

This saves .gov money since they don’t have to run a mass-spectrum analysis on the contents of the teabags to determine if they’re Earl Gray or just Lipton like the tag says.

When she was asked why it was that she did not include a note in the letter explaining why she was sending the tabs, she had a simple answer. “That would have been an awful lot of writing.”

And we know our elected officials can’t be bother to even read the legislation they vote on, so what would have been the point?

Freeman sent the envelopes to everyone in Washington and Austin she thought might listen. That included President Barack Obama, her U.S. senators and a number of representatives, state senators and representatives.

“When you do something like this you want to cover the chain of command,” she said.

But she never expected lawmen to show up at her door asking her to go downtown.

“I’m really surprised it happened,” Freeman said. “You should have seen my neighbors. I’m just a normal person and when the Texas Rangers came looking for me, they said, ‘Oh my goodness, what’s going on?’”

“I was stunned to start with,” Freeman said. “I didn’t have any idea. They kept assuring me that I wouldn’t be arrested.”

As long as she cooperated.

But if she stepped out of line . . .

“They were polite. I didn’t have any problems answering their questions,” Freeman commented.

Never answer their questions. Ask if you are under arrest, and get a lawyer. The police are not your friend, and they are not there to help you. And yes, I’m serious. I know there are a lot of good ones, but I also know you can’t count on that. Lawyer up.

She said she planned to attend the tea party scheduled for the Bee County Courthouse lawn this morning. The entire tea bag tab incident was related to that event, a protest against the government for spending big and taxing big at a time when regular people are trying to make ends meet.

Other Bee County residents also mailed off tea bags to state and national representatives, but unlike Freeman most included a note of explanation with theirs.

“It seems to me that they keep wanting to tax people but they aren’t listening to what we want,” Freeman said. To her, that is taxation without representation, the reason the first tea party was held in Boston at the beginning of the American Revolution.

It is to a lot of us, Ms. Freeman. (OUTSTANDING name, BTW. That’s probably what set the pol in question off. “Freeman? Can’t have THAT!“)

Lopez said he cannot comment much on the investigation. He said he received a call from someone who was concerned about the letter received from Freeman.

Lopez said he believes if she had included a letter explaining her feelings in the envelope there might not have been a complaint.

“I was asked to look into it, to see if there was anything fishy about it,” Lopez said of the envelope. “I was enlightened by Mrs. Freeman.”

Lopez did suggest that she might have been more clear with her intentions by including a note or letter of some kind. He said that when she said it would have taken a lot of writing to include a letter in each of the 64 envelopes, he simply suggested that she could have written one letter and made copies.

See above. Only a moron or a legislator (but I repeat myself) could have misinterpreted what a tea bag tab meant.

Lopez admitted that he had not kept up with the news regarding the tea party movement but he understands the intent now.

“She’s articulate and she seems sincere and genuine about that,” Lopez said.

As far as the tea bag letters and tea party protests planned for Wednesday across the nation, Lopez said he could understand the intent.

“This is America,” Lopez said. “Whatever makes your boat float.”

Here’s a picture of this dangerous subversive:


Be afraid. Be very afraid!

On that DHS “Rightwing Extremist” Report . . .

KevinLeave a comment

On that DHS “Rightwing Extremist” Report . . .

The best take on it I’ve read anywhere, House of Eratosthenes posts On That Homeland Security Right-Wing Extremist Group Report.

Excerpts:

I skimmed through the left-wing blogs to find out what their reactions would be. Yglesias, ThinkProgress, Raw Story, Pandagon, Anonymous Liberal and Balloon Juice. A consistent and recurrent meme emerged: Troubling issues that arise from a government agency’s suggestion of terrorist motives on the part of free citizens “rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority” (p. 2) were left unexplored…even untouched. The subject matter turned, instead, to tit-for-tat, howzitfeel type of nonsense. Silly conservatives didn’t say a word when Bush was trampling on our civil liberties, why are they piping up now?

Awesome! The new administration was elected in on a glossy, glittery platform of “change.” And now it’s doing things that can only be defended by implying they’re the same as what the old crowd did. Some change.

Meet the new boss, same as . . . .

If only it were true. The argument is defeated — as left-wing arguments usually are — through an exercise known as reading things.

That oughta leave a mark.

As Malkin says:

[T]hose past reports have always been very specific in identifying the exact groups, causes, and targets of domestic terrorism, i.e., the ALF, ELF, and Stop Huntingdon wackos who have engaged in physical harassment, arson, vandalism, and worse against pharmaceutical companies, farms, labs, and university researchers.

Don’t take her word for it, or mine. The report to which the liberal bloggers point with their “the other guy did it too” defense, “Left-Wing Extremism: The Current Threat,” is here. You won’t need to study long. The difference between the 2001 report and the one that just came out, is structural. The older report gives facts…and more facts…and more facts…dates…cities…statistics…the history behind each of the more pertinent groups, who founded them, why, what their methods are, what they’ve been caught doing, some intelligence suggesting who funds them. It even does a decent job of inspecting the possible dangers posed by right-wing extremist groups.

This month’s report from DHS boils down to one thing: “Hey, we’d better be worried about this stuff! You know how those tighty-righties are when they lose their jobs, especially when black people are elected President!” Yes, I’m putting words in their mouths, but not unfairly.

That’s how I read it.

Another Quote to Think Upon

KevinLeave a comment

The quote intended in the title is the last one in this post. Before that, however, I want to post this excerpt from The Right to Keep and Bear Arms: Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the United States, published February 1982. Warning: The excerpt is long, but I urge you to slow down and read every word:

Enforcement of the 1968 (Omnibus Crime and Safe Streets) Act was delegated to the Department of the Treasury, which had been responsible for enforcing the earlier gun legislation. This responsibility was in turn given to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division of the Internal Revenue Service. This division had traditionally devoted itself to the pursuit of illegal producers of alcohol; at the time of enactment of the Gun Control Act, only 8.3 percent of its arrests were for firearms violations. Following enactment of the Gun Control Act the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division was retitled the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division of the IRS. By July, 1972 it had nearly doubled in size and became a complete Treasury bureau under the name of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

The mid-1970’s saw rapid increases in sugar prices, and these in turn drove the bulk of the “moonshiners” out of business. Over 15,000 illegal distilleries had been raided in 1956; but by 1976 this had fallen to a mere 609. The BATF thus began to devote the bulk of its efforts to the area of firearms law enforcement.

Complaint regarding the techniques used by the Bureau in an effort to generate firearms cases led to hearings before the Subcommittee on Treasury, Post Office, and General Appropriations of the Senate Appropriations Committee in July 1979 and April 1980, and before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Senate Judiciary Committee in October 1980. At these hearings evidence was received from various citizens who had been charged by BATF, from experts who had studied the BATF, and from officials of the Bureau itself.

Based upon these hearings, it is apparent that enforcement tactics made possible by current federal firearms laws are constitutionally, legally, and practically reprehensible. Although Congress adopted the Gun Control Act with the primary object of limiting access of felons and high-risk groups to firearms, the overbreadth of the law has led to neglect of precisely this area of enforcement. For example the Subcommittee on the Constitution received correspondence from two members of the Illinois Judiciary, dated in 1980, indicating that they had been totally unable to persuade BATF to accept cases against felons who were in possession of firearms including sawed-off shotguns. The Bureau’s own figures demonstrate that in recent years the percentage of its arrests devoted to felons in possession and persons knowingly selling to them have dropped from 14 percent down to 10 percent of their firearms cases. To be sure, genuine criminals are sometimes prosecuted under other sections of the law. Yet, subsequent to these hearings, BATF stated that 55 percent of its gun law prosecutions overall involve persons with no record of a felony conviction, and a third involve citizens with no prior police contact at all.

The Subcommittee received evidence that the BATF has primarily devoted its firearms enforcement efforts to the apprehension, upon technical malum prohibitum charges, of individuals who lack all criminal intent and knowledge. Agents anxious to generate an impressive arrest and gun confiscation quota have repeatedly enticed gun collectors into making a small number of sales — often as few as four — from their personal collections. Although each of the sales was completely legal under state and federal law, the agents then charged the collector with having “engaged in the business” of dealing in guns without the required license. Since existing law permits a felony conviction upon these charges even where the individual has no criminal knowledge or intent numerous collectors have been ruined by a felony record carrying a potential sentence of five years in federal prison. Even in cases where the collectors secured acquittal, or grand juries failed to indict, or prosecutors refused to file criminal charges, agents of the Bureau have generally confiscated the entire collection of the potential defendant upon the ground that he intended to use it in that violation of the law. In several cases, the agents have refused to return the collection even after acquittal by jury.

The defendant, under existing law is not entitled to an award of attorney’s fees, therefore, should he secure return of his collection, an individual who has already spent thousands of dollars establishing his innocence of the criminal charges is required to spend thousands more to civilly prove his innocence of the same acts, without hope of securing any redress. This of course, has given the enforcing agency enormous bargaining power in refusing to return confiscated firearms. Evidence received by the Subcommittee related the confiscation of a shotgun valued at $7,000. Even the Bureau’s own valuations indicate that the value of firearms confiscated by their agents is over twice the value which the Bureau has claimed is typical of “street guns” used in crime. In recent months, the average value has increased rather than decreased, indicating that the reforms announced by the Bureau have not in fact redirected their agents away from collector’s items and toward guns used in crime.

The Subcommittee on the Constitution has also obtained evidence of a variety of other misdirected conduct by agents and supervisors of the Bureau. In several cases, the Bureau has sought conviction for supposed technical violations based upon policies and interpretations of law which the Bureau had not published in the Federal Register, as required by 5 U.S.C. Sec 552. For instance, beginning in 1975, Bureau officials apparently reached a judgment that a dealer who sells to a legitimate purchaser may nonetheless be subject to prosecution or license revocation if he knows that that individual intends to transfer the firearm to a nonresident or other unqualified purchaser. This position was never published in the Federal Register and is indeed contrary to indications which Bureau officials had given Congress, that such sales were not in violation of existing law. Moreover, BATF had informed dealers that an adult purchaser could legally buy for a minor, barred by his age from purchasing a gun on his own. BATF made no effort to suggest that this was applicable only where the barrier was one of age. Rather than informing the dealers of this distinction, Bureau agents set out to produce mass arrests upon these “straw man” sale charges, sending out undercover agents to entice dealers into transfers of this type. The first major use of these charges, in South Carolina in 1975, led to 37 dealers being driven from business, many convicted on felony charges. When one of the judges informed Bureau officials that he felt dealers had not been fairly treated and given information of the policies they were expected to follow, and refused to permit further prosecutions until they were informed, Bureau officials were careful to inform only the dealers in that one state and even then complained in internal memoranda that this was interfering with the creation of the cases. When BATF was later requested to place a warning to dealers on the front of the Form 4473, which each dealer executes when a sale is made, it instead chose to place the warning in fine print upon the back of the form, thus further concealing it from the dealer’s sight.

The Constitution Subcommittee also received evidence that the Bureau has formulated a requirement, of which dealers were not informed that requires a dealer to keep official records of sales even from his private collection. BATF has gone farther than merely failing to publish this requirement. At one point, even as it was prosecuting a dealer on the charge (admitting that he had no criminal intent), the Director of the Bureau wrote Senator S. I. Hayakawa to indicate that there was no such legal requirement and it was completely lawful for a dealer to sell from his collection without recording it. Since that date, the Director of the Bureau has stated that that is not the Bureau’s position and that such sales are completely illegal; after making that statement, however, he was quoted in an interview for a magazine read primarily by licensed firearms dealers as stating that such sales were in fact legal and permitted by the Bureau. In these and similar areas, the Bureau has violated not only the dictates of common sense, but of 5 U.S.C. Sec 552, which was intended to prevent “secret lawmaking” by administrative bodies.

These practices, amply documented in hearings before this Subcommittee, leave little doubt that the Bureau has disregarded rights guaranteed by the constitution and laws of the United States.

It has trampled upon the second amendment by chilling exercise of the right to keep and bear arms by law-abiding citizens.

It has offended the fourth amendment by unreasonably searching and seizing private property.

It has ignored the Fifth Amendment by taking private property without just compensation and by entrapping honest citizens without regard for their right to due process of law.

The rebuttal presented to the Subcommittee by the Bureau was utterly unconvincing. Richard Davis, speaking on behalf of the Treasury Department, asserted vaguely that the Bureau’s priorities were aimed at prosecuting willful violators, particularly felons illegally in possession, and at confiscating only guns actually likely to be used in crime. He also asserted that the Bureau has recently made great strides toward achieving these priorities. No documentation was offered for either of these assertions. In hearings before BATF’s Appropriations Subcommittee, however, expert evidence was submitted establishing that approximately 75 percent of BATF gun prosecutions were aimed at ordinary citizens who had neither criminal intent nor knowledge, but were enticed by agents into unknowing technical violations. (In one case, in fact, the individual was being prosecuted for an act which the Bureau’s acting director had stated was perfectly lawful.) In those hearings, moreover, BATF conceded that in fact (1) only 9.8 percent of their firearm arrests were brought on felons in illicit possession charges; (2) the average value of guns seized was $116, whereas BATF had claimed that “crime guns” were priced at less than half that figure; (3) in the months following the announcement of their new “priorities”, the percentage of gun prosecutions aimed at felons had in fact fallen by a third, and the value of confiscated guns had risen. All this indicates that the Bureau’s vague claims, both of focus upon gun-using criminals and of recent reforms, are empty words.

Remember, that was an official publication of the United States Senate from 1982. I didn’t emphasize anything, but that is quite strong language from a group of sitting Senators. It was the hearings referred to in this report that prompted Representative John Dingell (D-MI) to say in 1991, on camera:

“If I were to select a jackbooted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today, I would pick BATF – They are a shame and a disgrace to our country.”

And in 1995 in Congress:

The consequences of the behavior of the BATF in these kinds of cases is that they are not trusted. They are detested, and I have described them properly as jackbooted American fascists. They have shown no concern over the rights of ordinary citizens or their property. They intrude without the slightest regard or concern.

All of that was a lead-in to this, found at Extranos Alley:

Jackie Brown, one of the final witnesses at the Ruby Ridge hearings, spoke for many of us when she said “As one whose father fought in World War Two, who had relatives killed in every war this country has fought, it’s terrible to wake up one morning and realize I no longer trust this government. No-no notes in files and promotions and paid vacations are not justice.”

Happy Tax Day.

But What if Your Loyalty is to the Constitution?

KevinLeave a comment

DISCLAIMER: Until proven otherwise, I’m going to go with reader juris_imprudent’s assessment that this “report” is a very clever fraud, thus my Quote of the Day for Monday, April 13. I was not the only one suckered (not an excuse), but juris is right – it smells, and I can only plead stuffed sinuses for not recognizing it. Still, I’m not going to pull the post. I admit my mistakes when I make them, I don’t shove them down the memory hole.

UPDATE 4/14: Michelle Malkin confirms THE REPORT IS REAL, though she does concur with juris that it is “one of the most embarrassingly shoddy pieces of propaganda I’d ever read out of DHS.”

I ought to feel better about not being a dupe, but I think I actually feel worse knowing that the Department of Homeland Security actually did conceive, create, publish, and issue the damned thing.

End of update. Please, read on.

I guess it makes you a potential Rightwing Extremist. I don’t listen to Roger Hedgecock. As far as I know he isn’t syndicated on any station here, but apparently he got a copy of a Department of Homeland Security report, dated April 7, 2009, and did his show on Friday about it. Someone at AR15.com – a hotbed of over 10,000 potential Rightwing Extremists – posted a link to the document, entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment (PDF), so I gave it a read. It’s only ten pages long, including the cover. Aside from the predictable warnings about neo-Nazi skinheads recruiting because our new President has a skin-tone darker than alabaster, there’s some actual new stuff our political masters seem to be worried about. Here are some of the highlites lowlites:

The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

Perhaps they read Neil Strauss’ Emergency? We now need to be afraid of pissed-off military veterans!

Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.

Well, we knew they were keeping track of the Three Percenters already. That is, after all, their stated goal of being loud, proud, and in-your-face; to make sure the .gov knows there’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed.

A recent example of the potential violence associated with a rise in rightwing extremism may be found in the shooting deaths of three police officers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on 4 April 2009. The alleged gunman’s reaction reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a Jewish-controlled “one world government.”

Right. This is in keeping with “The Nazis and eugenics were right-wing” meme that Jonah Goldberg so thoroughly debunked in Liberal Fascism. But Goldberg is a JEW, so, um, nevermind. . . (Liberal Fascism will be out in paperback in June, just so you know. Strongly recommended.) Yeah, this nut, probably off his SSRI meds, decides to shoot three cops to death because of his paranoid fear of having his guns taken away, therefore he’s the poster-boy for “rightwing extremism.”

It goes on in this vein for a while, but here’s the really interesting parts:

Many rightwing extremist groups perceive recent gun control legislation as a threat to their right to bear arms and in response have increased weapons and ammunition stockpiling, as well as renewed participation in paramilitary training exercises. Such activity, combined with a heightened level of extremist paranoia, has the potential to facilitate criminal activity and violence.

—

During the 1990s, rightwing extremist hostility toward government was fueled by the implementation of restrictive gun laws—such as the Brady Law that established a 5-day waiting period prior to purchasing a handgun and the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that limited the sale of various types of assault rifles—and federal law enforcement’s handling of the confrontations at Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho.

—

On the current front, legislation has been proposed this year requiring mandatory registration of all firearms in the United States. Similar legislation was introduced in 2008 in several states proposing mandatory tagging and registration of ammunition. It is unclear if either bill will be passed into law; nonetheless, a correlation may exist between the potential passage of gun control legislation and increased hoarding of ammunition, weapons stockpiling, and paramilitary training activities among rightwing extremists.

—

Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred rightwing extremists—as well as law-abiding Americans—to make bulk purchases of ammunition. These shortages have increased the cost of ammunition, further exacerbating rightwing extremist paranoia and leading to further stockpiling activity. Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move at this time.

—

DHS/I&A assesses that the combination of environmental factors that echo the 1990s, including heightened interest in legislation for tighter firearms restrictions and returning military veterans, as well as several new trends, including an uncertain economy and a perceived rising influence of other countries, may be invigorating rightwing extremist activity, specifically the white supremacist and militia movements. To the extent that these factors persist, rightwing extremism is likely to grow in strength.

—

Unlike the earlier period, the advent of the Internet and other information-age technologies since the 1990s has given domestic extremists greater access to information related to bomb-making, weapons training, and tactics, as well as targeting of individuals, organizations, and facilities, potentially making extremist individuals and groups more dangerous and the consequences of their violence more severe. New technologies also permit domestic extremists to send and receive encrypted communications and to network with other extremists throughout the country and abroad, making it much more difficult for law enforcement to deter, prevent, or preempt a violent extremist attack.

Sounds frightening, doesn’t it? Especially those parts about “as well as law-abiding Americans”.

Now, for me, this is the pièce de résistance (pun intended):

DHS/I&A assesses that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States. Information from law enforcement and nongovernmental organizations indicates lone wolves and small terrorist cells have shown intent—and, in some cases, the capability—to commit violent acts.

As opposed to leftwing extremist lone-wolves and small terrorist cells who, apparently, are only capable of torching animal testing labs, McMansions under construction, and SUV dealerships, or blowing up their own membership by being incompetent bombers like Bill Ayers.

Essentially, the leftwing extremists must not be seen as much of a threat, since they can’t (apparently) organize anything as complex as a birthday party for a five year-old.

And, of course, there’s the Muslim extremists, who don’t do “terrorism” anymore, they do “man-caused disasters.”

But here’s where the real error lies, I think: misidentifying the problem:

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

They missed the single biggest group out there: those of us who aren’t anti-government, we just want our elected and appointed officials to do what they swear to do upon taking their offices: uphold and defend The Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic. As one ARFCOMmer put it:

This “homeland” shit that suddenly started up in the last couple years pisses me off. It reeks of the “fatherland” and “motherland” propaganda shit our enemies used throughout the 20th century. The Nazi regime was “father” to the German people. The Soviet regime was “mother” to the Russian people.


This guy is our uncle and that’s as close as I want the fucker.

I don’t need the government to be my big brother, my parent, my nanny, or my caretaker. It needs to maintain public services (roads, etc.), maintain foreign relations and the military, keep the states from squabbling, and stay the fuck out of my life.

This desire, apparently, makes us “antigovernment rightwing extremists.”

So be it.

Because what really frightens them is that we really do know what we’re doing. We are, after all, the people who build and maintain the infrastructure of these United States. People like Joe Huffman, who – when he’s not coding for Microsoft – makes explosives for fun. People like Mostly Cajun (or for that matter, me), who understand what it would take to bring down our electrical grid. These are just two examples off the top of my head. I’m sure my readers can chime in with their own. That ought to frighten the piss out of our political masters. I know the TEA Parties do.

I wrote another post with this same title almost five years ago. It was about the possibility of another American Civil War. I concluded that piece, thus:

What prevents another Civil War here isn’t the Army or the fact that we hold a higher loyalty to our Nation than to our State of residence, it’s ignorance and apathy.

It would appear that both ignorance and apathy are beginning to wane. And it’s not because our new President is black.

No wonder they’re worried.

Quote of the Day: Prophecy

KevinLeave a comment

Quote of the Day: Prophecy

From the Geekwitha.45, the eve of Election Day, 2008:

Entire Societies Can and Have Gone Stark Raving Batshit Fucking Insane.

—

We, The People are the ramparts that guard Locke. Tomorrow, we will take another in a series of what has become increasingly dire exams. The outcome will be a reality check on the grasp of our nation’s psyche and sanity.

The malevolent spirit that infests the Democrats has offered up a candidate whose barely hidden goal is to change the core substance of America, to redirect our basis from the values of self determination to a coercive utopianism that will will bring to full flower the seeds of self destruction planted nearly a century ago.

We know the stakes: it is nothing less than the soul of the Republic itself.

Right now, the Gods of the Copybook Headings are inking up the rubber stamp that says “Epic Fail” and at some point on Wednesday morning, that stamp will come down on either Barack Obama’s head, or on We The People as a whole.

If our inner thirst for the false promises of a Philosopher King has finally weighed heavier than our memory of freedom, we will well and truly get what we deserve.

Good and hard. And our children and grandchildren and . . .

If Ten Percent is Good Enough for Jesus . . .

KevinLeave a comment


(It Oughta Be Enough For Uncle Sam)

Ray Stevens, 1993:

Now, I’d just like to say a few words right here about taxes

I pay another man to do my taxes
On account of it’s just one more deduction I can take
But the postman brought my W2 this mornin’
And this year they’re claimin’ a third of all I make

Now I’m just as patriotic as the next man
And you know I love that Red, White, and Blue
So, I’ll help to pay this risin’ “cost of freedom”
But I’ll be danged if I’m gonna change my point of view

Because every time the bureaucrats run out of money
Well Congress socks it to the workin’ man
And I don’t think it’s one bit funny
When they take so much of my money
And do things with it I don’t understand

I don’t know why they feel they gotta squeeze us
But I’ll tell you just exactly where I stand
I believe if ten percent is good enough for Jesus
Well, it ought to be enough for Uncle Sam

Now, some of them folks that we’ve been sendin’ off to Congress
Think that all they’ve got to do is spend and spend
But, you know, you can’t run a family, much less a country,
with more money goin’ out than comin’ in

And that ole debt just keeps on gettin’ bigger
And we’re all gonna have to pay, so don’t you laugh
‘Cause one day soon you might just look down at your paycheck
And figure out that they done started takin’ half

Because every time the bureaucrats run out of money
Well Congress socks it to the workin’ man
And I don’t think it’s one bit funny
When they take so much of my money
And do things with it I don’t understand

I don’t know why they feel they gotta squeeze us
But I’ll tell you just exactly where I stand
I believe if ten percent is good enough for Jesus
Well, it ought to be enough for Uncle Sam

I said if ten percent is good enough for Jesus
Well, it ought to be enough for Uncle Sam
Seemed appropriate.

First Amendment? You Don’t Need No Stinkin’ First Amendment!

KevinLeave a comment

First Amendment? You Don’t Need No Stinkin’ First Amendment!

THIS should give every blogger the warm fuzzies:

Blogger claims police search of home was threat

Police officers accused of drunken driving. A female officer’s alleged promiscuity and infidelity. A commander whose critics labeled his son a child molester.

Jeff Pataky said he uses negative complaints and anonymous tips to fuel his blogging crusade against Phoenix police. A headline on his Web site suggests rewards would be provided for “dirt” on police indiscretions.

Pataky, a former software sales and marketing executive who now focuses his energy shoveling content on www.badphoenixcops.com, said he believes his online criticism of the department – along with past criticisms of police investigations – led officers to serve a search warrant at his home last week.

Police officials said Wednesday that a Phoenix detective prompted the investigation after complaining about harassment, though they declined further comment.

Pataky said he felt the investigation was a response to a lawsuit he filed on Monday in U.S. District Court saying he was maliciously prosecuted by police in 2007 after his ex-wife accused him of harassment, a case later dropped. In his lawsuit he’s asking for an unspecified amount for damages. City officials declined to comment on pending litigation.

Pataky’s blog is known in law-enforcement circles for its off-color language that, according to the blogger, is aimed at Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris, Maricopa County Andrew Thomas and other public officials.

“Too bad. They need to get over it,” Pataky said. “They are held to a higher accountability.”

Pataky said he edits the blog and works with four or five people who receive tips from a variety of sources, including sworn and retired officers.

Investigators confiscated computer material and other items from Pataky’s north Phoenix home, which he considered a threat to quit writing.

“We have heard internally from our police sources that they purposefully did this to stop me,” Pataky said. “They took my cable modem and wireless router. Anyone worth their salt knows nothing is stored in the cable modem.”

Phoenix Assistant Chief Andy Anderson said the harassment case is unique because of the connection to an unaccredited grassroots Web site. He said the blog is one part of the case, though he did not provide specifics of the ongoing investigation.

“This isn’t about the blog,” Anderson said. “That’s just where the investigation led.”

Police also served a separate search warrant at the home of former homicide Detective David Barnes, one of the investigators on the “Baseline Rapist” case.

Barnes was demoted from the homicide unit to patrol after he went public one year ago with claims of mismanaged evidence at the city’s crime lab.

Mark Spencer, president of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, said he was concerned about questionable probable cause to enter Barnes’ house. The union, which claims no affiliation with Pataky’s blog, will represent Barnes through the internal investigation.

More here.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

UPDATE: Say Uncle has links to more details on this incident.