Thursday, December 06, 2007

Democrats, Republicans Merge in One Fascist Party

(Political Post alert! I've tried to avoid it, but I've got a stick in my craw. Feel free to ignore it if you wish. At least the target isn't Bush, only Republicans, or our foreign policy this time.)

I've got a fair number of progressive, liberal opinions and a few conservative ideas as well. When I hear about the bills going through Congress right now, I don't want any part of either party.

I've spent years deriding the Bush Administration and Republicans in general for their post 9-11 feeding frenzy on the Constitution. Now the Democrats are in power and they are joining in on the orgy of Constitutional degradation and this steady accelerated march towards a police state.


Part I - Patriot Act Lite (or Darke as I see it)
H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Passed by the House 404-6)


Sponsored by DEMOCRAT Jane Harman

First of all, I would appreciate it if our government didn't lift words directly off of Nazi Germany's steno pads. Homegrown and Homeland were the types of words coined by Nazis who wanted to define who was "us" (Aryans) and "them" (Jews, Catholics [except the current Pope], Gays, trade unionists, gypsies, etc.).

Let's looks at how a homegrown terrorist is defined...

`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.


Have you ever thought, "If one more of them Bible thumpers knocks on my door, I am going to kill the whole lot of them."?

You didn't really mean it, but it slipped out and your kid repeats what you said at school. You are a domestic terrorist. Oops. I mean "homegrown" like that skunky marijuana the kid down the street grew in the puckerbrush. Or maybe Homegrown like the nice, blonde folks Riefenstahl filmed in the 30s for the Nazi party. You just don't know how they are going to decide based on such an open-ended definition.

Why is it that a loan agreement is so iron-clad but a damn terrorism definition is so loosy-goosy. It makes me want to just...oh, better not to say anything.

Luckily they are forming a money pit called a Center for Excellence, so we are assured nothing of the kind will come of it. Their dinner parties should be quite the thing, dahling.

Part II - The SAFE Act [Stupid Asinine Fascist Excretia]
Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act, or SAFE Act
Sponsored by DEMOCRAT Rep. Nicholas Lampson
(Passed by the House 409-2)


Read more about this bill here.

The gist of this bill is that all those who provide public Wi-Fi service must record and keep a log of all Internet traffic indefinitely. The stated reason is fighting those bad, bad child pornographers, but we already know that the bad guys are always a step ahead. Meanwhile, all that data is available for any reason and you can be sure that Wi-Fi providers will sell it to whomever wants to pay cash to recoup their equipment costs. Just like with EZ-Pass toll records on the East Coast, these records can and will be used against regular people in a court of law.

Theoretically, it is only for certain kinds of pictures, but how is Starbucks going to know where all the child porn on the Internet is? Answer: they are not so they must record all of it to avoid the $300,000 fine for non-compliance. Not a single Democrat voted against this.

Seems like a good time for that old Merle Haggard quote:

"Look at the past 25 years we went downhill, and if people don't realize it, they don't have their f**king eyes on ... In 1960, when I came out of prison as an ex-convict, I had more freedom under parolee supervision than there's available to an average citizen in America right now... God almighty, what have we done to each other?"


The Presidential candidate to vote against both pieces of crap was REPUBLICAN Ron Paul. Good for him.

For those who think I am overreacting, why not check out this video at Floating Down Denial. We've seen these tunes played before.

9 comments:

Swinebread said...

Very worrisome, this simply a means of scaring and controlling the public and has nothing to do with fighting terrorists or protecting kids. The corporations want our information and the thought police want to control our actions.

To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes. Yeah it’s the other purposes I’m worried about..

Swinebread said...

check this out
http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2008/index.htm

ladybug said...

The most ridiculous thing is that the amount of data internet-surfing tracking would provide is unimaginable....which means "someone" would have to come up with some logarithmic system analysis to "find" the so-called "bad" surfers...

And then they'll sell the rest of the info to marketers....

Seems like somebody'll be makin' money in the end - shades of "Mother Courage"?

Dean Wormer said...

Yeah, the dems have completly run off the rails on civil liberties. This shit shouldn't even be left/ right but that's apparently what it's become in this weird world we live in.

Oddly enough I think it will take a Democratic President to turn it around. Not that I think that person will give a flying fart about Civil liberties but the conservatives that've been mocking those of us who've complained about privacy these last few years will suddenly do a 180 once President Obama is sworn in and start screaming about these same issues.

Then the media which collectively treats the progressive part of the populous as fringe and continues to pander to the right will suddenly wake up and realize that *gasp* the constitution IS important after all.

Only when conservatives care about this stuff will you see this stuff repealed.

Dave said...

As Don pointed out some of this stuff is coming from liberals so don't look to them for salvation.

The big nut of it is the Bildebergers, Council on Foreign Relations, UN, Global one world government, controlling the populace, etc. It should not be a conservative vs liberal issue.

It should be a personal and national soverignty issue. Therefore, I am not going to beat up on liberalism, but I ain't defending conservatives either.

Most of this is driven by terrorism and the desire to aprehend the sneaky bastards. However, it is clear that what is good for the goose cooks the ganders sweetly also.

A recent poll showed that the war had a 40% approval rating, while congress had only a twenty percent aproval rating. Harry ried and Nancy Pelosi were supposed to be the saviors. However, they have wasted so much time trying to defeat Bush that they haven't gotten any work done. THerefore, many budget items will not be passed in time, and it is likley at some point government employees will be sent home without pay.

This isn't GWB's fault. He can't sign appropraitions measures before they reach his desk.

Don Snabulus said...

SB,

That web site was VERY interesting. Thanks. Since Blogger boogered the URL,click here for the link.

LB,

You're right. Anybody with any IT or security background would call this crazy stupid. I think something besides security is driving this personally.

DW,

but the conservatives that've been mocking those of us who've complained about privacy these last few years will suddenly do a 180 once President Obama is sworn in

We can only hope so. I will take my freedom any way I can get it.

Dave,

Indeed. Liberalism is predicated on having a voter-driven trustworthy government in place. I don't think anyone wants to have their data mined and be imprisoned on sketchy data, but that is now possible. You can read more about Ron Paul's opposition to one of these acts here. (I realize I said he voted against both, but I was incorrect.) Senators and Representatives who market themselves as liberals would do well to read this because it could save liberalism.

On the other hand, conservatives who want small government but vote for every foolish defense pork plan and cop gadget, well...

Overdroid said...

You do realize this post makes you a homegrown terrorist.

Don Snabulus said...

Yup

Pandabonium said...

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancey, 1816.