Archive for the ‘government fear mongering’ Category

Republican @ 20 .vs. Democrat @ 40

“There’s an old saying that goes something like this:

If you vote Republican at 20 you have no heart. If you vote Democrat at 40, you have no brain.

The problem is that young voters have, for the last eight years, been voting for their own destruction, and now they’re getting it — in spades.

The worse news is that the Republicans are simply asking whether you’d like to go in the wood chipper feet first or head first rather than offering actual policy fixes.

Let’s just focus on two, both of which come from the same problem: Monopolies.”

Via Market Ticker

Government Shutdown Theater: Making Cuts That Will Cause the Maximum Pain for Dramatic Effect

October 1, 2013 2 comments

“In 1969, the Nixon Administration cut the National Park Service budget. In response, George Hartzog, the NPS director at the time, closed all of the national parks for two days a week. The closures included prominent landmarks like the Washington Monument. Democrats and Republicans criticized Hartzog’s decision – but it was the flood of citizen complaints that led Congress to reverse its decision and restore funding (and fire Hartzog).

And thus, the term “Washington Monument Syndrome” was coined. This is an old political game that is also known as the “Mount Rushmore Syndrome” and the “firemen first principle.” The tactic involves making cuts to high-profile programs that will get the public’s attention – and tick them off enough to push them to support tax increases they would otherwise oppose.

Here’s how it works: When the government is threatened with reductions in spending, they’ll make cuts (or threaten to) in programs and services that are important to the people. It is a manipulation tactic that is designed to inflict pain, discomfort, and fear.”

Via Activist Post

McCain doesn’t know how many times someone can forge a passport without being charged under his immigration legislation

McCain: I Don’t Know How Many Passports We Let You Forge

” Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), a member of the “Gang of Eight” that helped write and pass the immigration reform bill in that chamber, said he did not know how many passports a person could forge under the proposed law before being charged with a crime.

On Capitol Hill on Wednesday, asked McCain, “Senator McCain, can I ask you a question about the Senate immigration bill? Under the bill, how many passports can someone forge before it becomes a crime?”

McCain said, “You’re going to have to ask our folks that, I don’t think that we stand for any forgeries.””

Via CNS News

22 Nauseating Quotes From Hypocritical Establishment Politicians About The NSA Spying Scandal

“Establishment politicians from both major political parties are rushing to defend the NSA and condemn whistleblower Edward Snowden. They are attempting to portray Edward Snowden as a “traitor” and the spooks over at the NSA that are snooping on all of us as “heroes”. In fact, many of the exact same politicians that once railed against government spying during the Bush years are now staunchly defending it now that Obama is in the White House. But it isn’t just Democrats that are acting shamefully. Large numbers of Republican politicians that love to give speeches about “freedom” and “liberty” are attempting to eviscerate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The government is not supposed to invade our privacy and investigate us unless there is probable cause to do so. Apparently many of our politicians misunderstood when they read the novel 1984 by George Orwell. It wasn’t supposed to be an instruction manual. We should be thanking Edward Snowden for exposing the deep corruption that is eating away at our own government like cancer.”

Via Activist Post

Tales From Your Police State: Don’t Count On Republicans, Gun Owners

“Just in case you thought it was only the Democrats that wanted to take your guns, America, here’s Exhibit A: Mike Murphy, GOP strategist, is behind most of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns advertisements on television. MAIG is Michael “Call Me Napoleon” Bloomberg’s non-profit dedicated to stripping you of the ability to say “no” to him and other busybodies that know better than you how to live your life.

But that’s only one guy, right? So why was Pat Toomey hip deep in the gun legisation crafting in the Senate? (other than his desire to keep getting invited to all the swanky Democrat-funded parties in DC…) Why was John “Angry Gnome” McCain desperate to see a spate fo anti-gun legislation? Why was John “Crybaby” Boehner looking to do an end run around his own caucus to introduce anything that came out of the Senate?”

Via Scott Rhymer

SHERIFF: ‘We want people to call us if guy down street hates government’…

Palm Beach County sheriff gets $1 million for violence prevention unit amid questions about civil liberties, care for mentally ill

“The goal will be avoiding crime — and making sure law enforcement knows about potential powder kegs before tragedies occur, Bradshaw said. But the earmark, which is a one-time-only funding provision, provoked a debate Monday among mental health advocates and providers about the balance between civil liberties, privacy and protecting the public.

Bradshaw said his proposal is a first-of-its-kind in the nation, and he hopes it will become a model for the rest of the state like his gang prevention and pill-mill units.

“Every single incident, whether it’s Newtown, that movie theater, or the guy who spouts off at work and then goes home and kills his wife and two kids — in every single case, there were people who said they knew ahead of time that there was a problem,” Bradshaw said. “If the neighbor of the mom in Newtown had called somebody, this might have saved 25 kids’ lives.”

Bradshaw is readying a hotline and is planning public service announcements to encourage local citizens to report their neighbors, friends or family members if they fear they could harm themselves or others.”

“Mental health advocates, however, worry about a potential new source of stigma, and the potential for erosion of the civil rights of people with mental illnesses.

““We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,” Bradshaw said. “What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’ ”

That’s enough for Senate budget chief Joe Negron, R-Stuart, who helped push through the funding last weekend.”

“How are they possibly going to watch everybody who makes a comment like that? It’s subjective,” said Liz Downey, executive director of the Palm Beach County branch of the National Alliance on Mental Illness. “We don’t want to take away people’s civil liberties just because people aren’t behaving the way we think they should be.””

Via The Palm Beach Post

“Pre-crime” comes to FL…..everyone think and act like the government demands or else they will label you as having a “mental illness”

Feds Identify 300,000 Americans as Terrorists

“Do you hate paying taxes? Are you fighting foreclosure? Do you feel like no one should be allowed to commit violence against you and don’t always blindly follow the commands of the authorities? Do you film encounters with police or believe gold makes better currency than Federal Reserve Notes? Well you might be part of a domestic terrorism movement and not even know it.

On Friday, the Los Angeles Times posted an article attempting to define a domestic terrorist movement consisting of as many as 300,000 Americans. Some are even labeled as non-violent “paper terrorists”.

Is there a more Orwellian term than “non-violent terrorist”? If you can think of one please share it in the comments below.

They refer to this so-called terror group as “sovereigns, zealots who refuse to recognize government authority in virtually any form.””

Via Activist Post

Zero Privacy? FBI to spy in real-time on web chats and e-mail

“Web users’ online communications may be about to get a wider and possibly unwanted audience. The FBI is seeking more powers to spy on people’s emails and internet chats in real time. The proposals have already been met with criticism, that they are a complete breach of privacy. “

Via Activist Post

Congress Declared War on Sept. 14, 2001

” On Sept. 14, 2001, the U.S. Congress in effect declared war when it passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) as a joint resolution. The vote was overwhelmingly one-sided. In the House, the vote was 420 Ayes, 1 Nay, and 10 Not Voting. In the Senate, the vote was 98 Ayes, 0 Nays, and 2 Present/Not Voting. Rep. Barbara Lee was the nay vote in the House.

One may argue about the wisdom of this measure and the logic of this measure. One may evaluate the quality of the measure as law. One may argue about the conduct of the military operations under the Executive that has been enabled by this measure. One may evaluate the ramifications for the U.S. government, for the world, and for Americans. Indeed, one may form innumerable opinions from many perspectives about this measure. But one cannot deny that this AUMF set in motion the ongoing war on terror that is being conducted by the U.S. government.

The Obama administration has made an effort to change the terminology describing the war. For example, it doesn’t like the words “war on terror”, and it has used substitutes. This effort is not central to the conduct of the military operations enabled under this resolution. As long as the resolution remains in place, its existence is what is central.

The Obama administration was critical of how the Bush administration was conducting military operations. After it took power, it changed the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also began to use more drone attacks and to use them in countries that Bush had not. These changes in military operations are also not central to their existence. What matters is that the resolution authorizes military operations of broad scope, in ways to be determined by the President. What matters is that this resolution exists at all.”

Via Lew Rockwell

Congress Goes Bipartisan – Against Civil Liberties

“Civil liberties are theoretically a bipartisan concern. Conservative Republicans who don’t like Obamacare’s “death panels” should be outraged by presidential kill lists. Liberal Democrats who defend due process ought to be offended by secret surveillance law. Protectors of the First and Second Amendments should have a high regard for the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth.

Yet restricting civil liberties is what actually commands bipartisan support in Washington. The same Congress that barely averted the fiscal cliff swiftly passed extensions of warrantless wiretapping and indefinite detention, assuring Americans that only the bad guys will be affected but evincing little interest in establishing whether this is really the case.

The same Congress that failed to come up with an agreement to avoid sequestration appears to have bipartisan majorities in favor of profligate drone use at home and abroad. Lawmakers are generally less exercised about the confirmation of likely CIA chief John Brennan than Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.”

Via Alt Market


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 887 other followers