Monday, March 29, 2010

On We Sweep With Threshing Oar

While everyone was busy getting their underpants in a twist over health care reform these past several months, our Supreme Leader Barry O'Bummer and his Demobots quietly approved the Patriot Act for another year, all without the provisions that would have protected we the people against its more Draconian measures.

Don't get me wrong. There is no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of yippee skippy jihadists who will stop at nothing to serve our collective heads on a platter with an ice cold glass of goat's milk. Of all this planet's fundamental religions, I find Islam to be the most egregious, although I guess you'd have to give its leaders brownie points for at least being honest and upfront about their brutalities.

That being said, I also believe that there is no way we or our government can protect for every possible horror or tragedy that comes down the pike, whether that be tragedy be a hurricane, sudden onset of cancer, or a terrorist act. I'd rather pay my money, keep my liberties, and take my chances that the laws under our Constitution will do their best.

The Patriot Act is, quite simply, not only unnecessary, it is breathtakingly, shamefully, anti-civil libertarian. And I blame its existence squarely on George "Not a Conservative" Bush. For there hasn't been a president in recent decades more gleeful to clothe the demon of Big Government in the filmy garment of the all caring, ever protective Nanny State. Only this nanny also wears jack boots and waves a bible.

Then came Barry O, with his sharp suited sexy swagger antidote to white male corporate oppression and, golly gee, you could almost hear the collective sigh of relief ring from sea to shining sea: Yes, we can all be free at last.

Except there's just one problem. I have long suspected that our democratic leaders never have been, certainly are not now, and most likely never will be, truly concerned with protecting civil liberties. Recently, I read a very astute article confirming that suspicion.

Civil Liberties in Obama's America, outlines why, historically, democrats have been more than happy to sell our civil liberties down the river just as much as the republicans. Because their agendas are the same: advancing a police state of one form or another.

The article is a little long, but if you're truly tired of cringing in the corner with your thumb in your mouth, while all around you Sieg Heil-ed chants of, "Yes we can," chip away at what remains of your sanity, grab a cup of something and dig in.

Here are a couple highlights:

. . . most of the left does not see conscription as slavery, nor taxation as theft, nor aggressive war as murderous. And this cuts to the core of the problem with leftist civil libertarianism. It is almost always based on a tissue of incoherencies. This is what we must explain to those genuinely disappointed with Obama, who authentically believe that the right to a trial or a right to free speech is more important than a right to a free lunch. . . . leftism cannot sustain and defend civil liberties, since true civil liberties are bound up with the ethics and logic of private property.

When a left-liberal friend expresses disappoint with Obama's war on the Bill of Rights, just note that it was inevitable . . . Leftists will have to make a choice -- bail on their civil libertarianism, as most did under FDR, defending Japanese Internment and national command economics, or bailing on their dream of creating social paradise, or even fostering society, through the violent means of central planning.

. . . and although I am pessimistic we will break most of Obama's groupies out of the hypnotic delusions of his professorial and literate American Idol authoritarianism, we will convince some, even many, one by one, to abandon the rot of soft socialism that has plagued the American left since World War I, and instead embrace the only ethic that can morally transcend Bush's and Obama's dungeons, wiretaps and crackdowns on dissent: The ethic of anti-state libertarianism grounded in private property. And as they come in, one by one, let us welcome them with open arms as we do our slow and uphill work to bring the police state down.


chickory said...

of course. Obama is the closer. his job is to bring the bush haters and resisters into the globalist fold. It took a Bush to make an Obama happen. Interesting during TARP how well the one handed off the baton to the other.

funny i dont see any hew and cry from the libs on Obama's drone bombs in Pokystan; and of course there is patriot act. the two most hated aspects of Dubya's presidency. perfectly Orwellian, the name suggests the opposite of what it is. its any thing but patriotic. and did you know, the vote to extend the PA was taken verbally? that way, there is no signature to hold one accountable.

its a reprehensible act, and is sure to be followed by cap'n trade. immigration.

now. would you like to know where the USA ranks on the level of electronic surveiliance? try 6. only China, North Korea, Belarus, Russia and the UK are worse.

Islam sucks, but i worry about it far less than i do about the next step toward debt slavery cloaked in feel good platitudes and phony compassion.

TROLL Y2K said...

It's a weapon. A hammer.

It's about how it's used and who it's primary targets are and whether innocent bystanders are struck.

The Bush Adminisration targeted muslibs in foreign lands with considerable focus-and-precision.
There was a danger of relatively innocent American citizens being hammered because of their communications the FOREIGN targets of the hammer.

But the facts are that just didn't happen very often. One could defend the Bush Administration and say that's because they were careful and prudent. But the larger truth is that Foreign Muslib Terrorists just don't HAVE a lot of contact with large numbers of innocent American citizens. Distance. Language Barriers. Etc...

The sheer Number of Citizens who possibly COULD have been screwed by the Patriot Act was quite small.

The Obamanation Administration is targeting AMERICAN CITIZENS with unusual views but VERY LITTLE connection to anything International-In-Scope. "White Pride World-Wide" is a slogan, not a reflection of a unified international movement. Most of the "Aryans" and "Radical Christians" that Napolitano calls our "greatest threat" couldn't find Russia on a MAP, let alone form an international alliance with Russian Skinheads.

What they are people who live here, speak English, and have hundreds of communications every week with innocent friends, relatives, co-workers, etc...

So, the probability that innocents will be smashed by the hammer increase exponentially under the Obamanation Regime simply because there are A HELLUVA LOT more of them.

Or should I say "more of US".

I know a lot of American Citizens with unusual views. I've written a personal check to a member of the KKK in an innocent business transaction.

I've never e-mailed or phoned a member of Al-Queda living in Algeria.

See the difference?

My personal belief is that MANY key Obamanation Officials (rahm emmanuel, for one) would LIKE innocent Christians to be struck by the Hammer.

Others can disagree with that.

But they can't make any rational argument stating that it isn't FAR more likely for innocent Christians to be hammered by mistake.

Sheer numbers. Do the math.

Boxer said...

"who authentically believe that the right to a trial or a right to free speech is more important than a right to a free lunch."


But it's easy to convince the masses that a free lunch is a right and those other things? Like free speech? Nothing we need to worry our heads over, because if we just drink the kool-aid and fall in line.... everything will be ok.

and it won't.

We need a third party. And I'll be at the door greeting every person who realizes that what Chickory says is true;

"It took a Bush to make an Obama happen."

Karl said...

Good afternoon Moi,

I was surprised when it was reauthorized, that there wasn't more of an outcry. Although the point may be correct to these folks free lunch outweighs free speech.

I'd be willing to bet the arrests involving Christian militia's is based on information gathered using the patriot act. Secretary Napolitano brought up her concerns regarding right wing extremist activities as part of the reasoning for the reauthorization. A way to legitimize it to the drones.

We may be number 6 in the level of surveillance. We're number 1, in the capability of collecting the data.

chickory said...

very clearly when the MIAC report came out the named enemies of the State were militias, ron paul and third party supporters, returning veterans, 2nd amendment activists and anyone who expressed distrust in the government.

agree with Troll on the tool metaphor, but we talked about this all the time on the blogs years ago. Be careful, conservatives, what you think is a power you want to extend to the feds / executive branch, because that same power will pass to the next. and so we have it. do i see the difference? yes! however, the libs seem to think its just FINE when they are rounding up anyone who wandered off the PC thought reservation. i was not at all surprised to hear about this raid that just happened. i cant wait to read what the actual charges are.

predictably, they found a by stander (to the raid) who gave them just the sound bite they wanted "its kinda scarwy that there are some people living in my community with so many guns" uh huh.

it kind of looks like this is a "pre-crime" round up of suspects. this would be the domestic version of the bush doctrine, only the O doctrine. i doubt christian anti gov gun owners will receive top shelf legal council as KSM does.

i continue to be astounded that there isnt full tilt revolt - and how i wish that would manifest is refusal to participate in this structure.

chickory said...

forgot to say: you know, it blows my mind that they go out and arrest these militia types...meanwhile not one indictment of real criminals in the mortgage and banking fraud, the corruption in washington and everyday crimes perpetrated against the american people. still lovin that hope n change.

Pam said...

Uhoh. Maybe I shouldn't have sent you those e-mails. Put me down for the side that doesn't require wearing a veil, will you?

Karl said...

@ Chickory: What and arrest Dodd, Frank and Clinton. That's where they would need to start.

moi said...

Chickory: "It took a Bush to make an Obama." Following that, I shiver to think who's next.

Troll: I personally know one totally innocent fellow caught in the Web during the Bush years.

Boxer: I like how the article articulates the difference between rights and liberties.

Karl: No doubt Napolitano wields this for her own nefarious purposes. Another fine line, we tread, between patriotic dissent and a traitorous act.

Chickory: I would have ROTFL at the idea of Ron Paul as a target if it weren't so, well, scary at how they'd arrived at the assessment. As for justice; she's no longer blind. She has a hand out, just like everyone else.

Pam: How about the side required to drive a VW? Man, I am STILL laughing! Seriously, I don't want to wear a veil or be stoned for batting my eyes at my butcher, either. But the Patriot Act has nothing to do with keeping terrorists at bay.

Karl: Not enough jail space for all of them. Isn't there some kind of charitable initiative we can stick them on? Like, I dunno, painting houses in Watts or the South Bronx?

Karl said...

How about barnacle removable on US flaged vessels, via keel hauling.

Karl said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Karl said...


I owe you an apology, in my haste to make a reply I didn't bother to check what I had written. And compounded the problem by making another hasty comment. Without proofing either one. For that I'm sorry. It should have read: How about barnacle removal on US flagged vessels, via keel hauling.

Sorry, I was trying to be a smart ass.

TROLL Y2K said...


Thanks and, for the record, This Christian Conservative DID advocate dismantling the Patriot Act in 2008. Mostly for the reasons you cited.


Was he executed? Given a life-sentence? Was his compound burned down ala The Branch Davidians?

Or course a percentage of innocents will suffer in some way, mostly small ways, no matter who administers the Patriot Act. My point is that the potential pool of innocents harmed is MUCH MUCH MUCH larger under the Obamanation.

Again, every single member of the Huratee Militia has had HUNDREDS of communications with innocent AMERICANS.

Al-Quyada members who've never BEEN to America just don't communicate with that large of a pool of innocent Americans.

moi said...

Karl: No worries. I think barnacle removal via keel hauling sounds fabulous. Even if I have no idea what that means.

Troll: Well, no, but I don't believe degrees of tyranny are measurable. Being detained for 48 hours with no idea why, no access to a phone, no rights being read, etc. is wrong. So what if he wasn't water boarded or a fire lit under his toes? To be treated in that manner, as an American citizen, yet with no regard for the rights that come therefrom, in one's own country, by a bunch of flat footed thugs whose paycheck your taxes fund, is tyranny no matter how you slice it and cover it with mayo.

The Poet Laura-eate said...

I think it's high time you followed suit and also started your own political party Moi!