Thursday, May 18, 2006

So Much News, So Little Time And More Ire Than I Care To Discuss

That's the situation at the Mi Casa today and with the State of the Union being what it is the levels of my ire shall see no abatement in the near future. Thankfully, I was delayed enough today by the hail storms that battered my SUV that I managed to regain some semblance of cool.

It is news days like today that serve to reinforce my considered opinion that there is absolutely no chance in Hades that government can ever be reformed, made small, returned to Constitutional limits or just remade into something resembling a sane institution. Not gonna happen. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

Once again the spectre of an anti-Gay Marriage Amendment has managed to rear its squamous, slimy and authoritarian head from the sewers that are the Halls of Congress. This time, tho it looks to be slithering its way to the floor for a debate and a vote. The fact that this subject even came out of committee points up the deranged and dangerous nature of politics. That a proposed Constitutional Amendment which would serve to strip rights from people in this country could even be thought worthy of debate on the floor points up the mental derangement of the Republicans and their partners in crime the Democrats.

One good thing the committee considering this did manage to bring to light was the admission by Arlen Specter (Republicrat-PA) that neither he, nor Russ Feingold (Socialisticrat-Wis.) were keeping to their oaths of office and had no intentions of protecting rights or the Constitution.
"I don't need to be lectured by you. You are no more a protector of the Constitution than am I," Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., shouted after Sen. Russ Feingold declared his opposition to the amendment, his affinity for the Constitution and his intention to leave the meeting.
At last! Some form of honesty from these cretins! It's been painfully obvious to some of us, that Arlen, Russ and all their buddies have done nothing except crap on the Constitution for decades. At least now we have an admission. Too bad it holds no power with their constituencies who seem to care naught for anything but sending these people back to mis-serve them. That Red and Blue Kool Aid is some strong shiznit.

So, they've let this monstrosity out of committee, in order to pander to their moronic core core constituency of so-called Values Voters. They've even admitted that it stands no chance of passage once it's on the floor for debate and still they allow it out of committee. Too flippin' bad these idiots don't remember that the same damned thing was said about the 16th Amendment and look where we are now with that, now. If this is allowed to pass and gets out to the ballot box where anyone lacking two brain cells to rub together can vote on it, then we will have removed the civil rights from an entire segment of our populace.

The issue, which I have covered before manages to federalize marriage once and for all. By allowing politicians to set a definition in this manner the Moral Majority Values Voters are setting themselves up for a massive incursion by the State. But, it's quite possible that this is exactly what these theocrat wannabees are looking for. Blur the church state line enough and the door to a new American Theocracy flies open. When you have people like Pat Robertson and his cultists followers in favour of something like this you had better think long and hard, (or not...long and hard thinking might be a sin).

Marriage is a civil right, regardless of what the anti-gay segment of the populace thinks. Civil rights flow from the state and work on the premise of "equal before the law". This amendment is designed to create a group of people who are not equal before the law. A class of people who are being told by the federal government, (and those who are supposedly their fellow Americans) that the laws of their civic mean nothing in the eyes of the masses who are not part of their state. This is precisely why the Federal government and those who run it need to be reined in and it is precisely why the Founders crafted a document that established the rights of the states as supreme over those of the central government. Of course that was then and this is now and the Hamiltonian and Lincolnian nightmare rules supreme.

Marriage is also a universal right. Everyone is entitled marry, if they manage to find someone willing to marry. They may stand in front of their community and announce their marriage, look each other in the eyes and take one another for their spouse (as many of my non-European ancestors no doubt did) or they may find a priest or priestess of the religion of their choosing to bless their union. Said religious person may choose to marry the couple (trio, group, etc) or not, depending on their personal wishes. That's freedom of choice. Those who attempt to base their arguments on the "Sanctity" card are truly delusional. Look at how many of your "holy men" and politicians have divorced. And don't even get me started on those of us who married in front of a judge.

Allowing any "marriage amendment" to be added to the Constitution is dangerous in the extreme. Today people define a "man and a woman" based solely on their biological sex and their sexual this case a preference for heterosexuality. That could change in a heartbeat given the many and varied changes wreaked by politicians in the past. Remember the "assault weapons" ban? Like the 16th Amendment (which was crafted to tax only the "wealthy") the potential for abuse is huge. The power to regulate is the power to destroy and this abomination has more power than any WMD. You think you know what a "man or a woman" is today. That definition can be changed by legislative fiat by the stroke of a pen. Supporters rely on the "kindness of strangers" and the myth of inherent goodness of politicians which is a dangerous belief system, given the facts.

20 years from now a "man" may be defined as someone of a select race or religion, perhaps as someone meeting certain federal criteria. Perhaps a "woman" is defined by how many times she has had to please a politician or her religious leader or maybe her "purity". What supporters of any Amendment which removes freedom from one group of people fail to realise is that this not only opens a can of worms it offers no protections to anyone, which is what the first 10 Amendments do. This strips rights away from people. If you allow this to happen to homosexuals then rest assured that you have set the precedent that will allow an Amendment to be applied to you, perhaps this very one. If ever there were a time to stand up and just say no, this is it.

Technorati Tags:
, , ,
, , ,

(special thanks to the idiots at Insight for being down all evening. Way to go morons!)

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

They Sure Do Love Their REAL ID, Don't They?

After seeing President Bush go on the air last night and pimp his plan lay out his strategery for "Illegal Immigration" the one thing that struck a chord with me was his mention of an internal passport "high tech, tamper proof identification card". Those of us who have consistently stood against the REAL ID can see what is being proposed here. If the "guest workers" have an internal passport then it stands to reason that Americans will also have to have the same secure ID or the "guest workers" will just obtain "insecure" ID from some source and there will be no solution at all. The call will go out for a National ID (already here, thanks to REAL ID) and all the politicians will nod their heads, seeing the "logic" behind the scheme plan and they will draft new legislation making it a done deal.

I've already seen these "guest worker" passports/ID's in action in foreign countries. Most notably in Apartheid South Africa and in Israel where their "guest workers" were required to carry their internal passports and surrender them for inspection upon demand. These documents served, and in the case of Israel still serve to create an underclass of workers who possess a social status that is only slightly above that of slave or prison trustee. This is a true abomination and should be opposed by anyone who holds this country in any esteem whatsoever.

Combine this with the inevitable call for a National ID for citizens, a must have in order to maintain the validity and "security" of the "guest worker" program and we have one more great leap in the direction of the police state. It's a bad deal all around and restricts just not liberty and our freedom of movement, but legitimate trade and travel between countries sharing a border. Trade equals jobs, just like tourism and making things difficult costs jobs and makes for losses across the board.

And let us not forget the militarisation of the border. Regardless of what Mr. Bush contends when you send troops to the border as a security measure you are militarising your border. Again, I have seen the same thing in Israel, South Africa and in the Sinai. Calling it something else and denying reality never changes the facts of the matter. For all intents and purposes the US government will be creating a Southern border DMZ, akin to that between the Koreas or between Egypt and Israel. As we have already seen before when the government used military on the border, the propensity for tragedy is magnified many fold.

The timing and content of this speech couldn't have come at a better time for Mr. Bush. With his ratings in the toilet and going down the pipes faster than a Bloomin' Onion on a Friday night and incumbent Republicrats up for re-election in the fall he had to do and say something. This subject will also serve to draw attention away from his NSA domestic spying and the appointment of his head spy at NSA as CIA director. The American public are easily distracted and the propagandists speechwriters and Rove are well aware of this. Does anyone still remember the outspoken Generals? They're not on the front page any more, are they? The outrage over the NSA spying is, even as I write this disappearing from the front page, in favour of the latest cat toy distraction...immigration.

Don't be fooled, folks. There is no easy answer for this issue and the strategery from the White House and it's supporters is more smoke and mirrors. Step back, take a breath and look at the big picture. Do you want to live in a country that has internal passports for an underclass of workers and everyone else (just to keep control of the underclass)? Do you want to live in a country with militarised borders? Do remember that a closed off border cuts both ways, it may keep people out but it also serves to keep them in. Let's revive a Reagan era concept where government is concerned, OK? Just say NO! Or better yet, give us a big..."Hell NO!"

Technorati Tags:
, , ,
, , ,

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Why Freedom?

Why indeed? Why choose to talk, write about and work towards something that so few in this country, this world...value so little? Why do something which will inevitably add more pages to the government files started on me when I was a teenager, (probably novella sized, by now)? Why continue to try and get people to abandon their steady march towards totalitarianism and a life dominated by the State?

For myself, I can only assume that this affliction is biological. I must have a genetic predisposition to freedom. A DNA level compulsion that leads to a desire to be left alone by "authority' and to run my own life. All I need to do is look at my families history to see that there is a pattern which can only lead me to believe that my malady is inherited and comes from a long line of people who sought nothing more from life than to be left alone.

All of my paternal European ancestors came to this continent before there even was a United States, seeking freedom and a place they could call their own. Some later fought to free this country from the grip of the monarchists and their King. Others just traveled farther West and minded their own business, keeping to the hills and deep valleys of Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia. Eventually, tho the world and the powers that be caught up with us. It didn't stop some family members from acting up, tho.

After hundreds of years of trying to stay ahead of things time ran out and "civilization" caught up with and surrounded us. That hasn't stopped us from acting up, mind you but it sure has made it harder for us to be left the hell alone, and it's getting harder each and every day, thanks to all those "people" out there who don't possess the freedom gene. Shoot, just the other day I was informed that 63% of my fellow Americans thought it was just fine for the government to know who I was talking with, when and for how long. Of course, another poll showed that 53% thought the same program went too far (except for Republicans who seem to love big government), so I don't know what to think based on polls. I'll just go the "Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" route, to be safe. Personally, I think it's an unconscionable breach of privacy and supporters of this type of thing are not my kind of folks. These are the worst sort of people, they're enablers. These are our own modern day Tories, supporting the tyrannies of the state against the rights of the individual.

After weeks like this last one, I have to wonder why I, and others like me (you know who you are) even bother. It has become painfully obvious that history is now trending towards totalitarianism. Just as the steam engine came about at "steam engine time" we are entering a period where it is essentially "police state time". All the pieces are in place and the players are seemingly ready and willing to bring about a totalitarian police state.

Many of my fellow "libertarians" and freedom lovers came to where they currently are after reading Rand, Rothbard, Thoreau or a host of others. Not me, tho. I grew up like this and had serious issues with authority in most forms, (just check my "permanent record"). My reading as a kid and teen was Heinlein, Burroughs, Dent, Ernst as well as a host of history authors. I eventually made my way to Rand and the others, but I was already a dedicated individualist long before I ever read their works. Once you combine this upbringing with the "freedom gene"'s all over. You can never be a good little follower. Never the employee of the month, even tho you make a darned good boss for a company of one. And situations like the ones currently occurring in this country...well....I'm not inclined to feel nice towards the people involved.

A well known libertarian with whom I have served asked me once why I got involved in political activism. I told him I did it for the simple reason that I didn't want to have to look my kids in the eye after the shooting started and tell them that I did nothing to try and stop it beforehand. I have thought for years that we stood a chance of avoiding the horrors of totalitarianism or armed rebellion, through the political process. I can't say that I have faith in that anymore. I have lived in Communist China (not the new one, the old one in the 70's) and experienced the police states of Apartheid South Africa and Mubarak's country is coming to strongly resemble those places and I don't like it. Not one little bit.

I'm not too sure there's a helluva lot I and my compatriots can do anymore, tho. As Claire Wolfe has pointed out innumerable times it isn't time to shoot the bastards, yet. And that time may not even come, especially given the numbers of people in support of the State and its master manipulators. I guess we'll just have to keep beating our heads against the walls and trying to get some freedom back. It's either that or give in and roll over....and those of us with the gene can't go that last route. I can't say what my compadres plan on doing, but as for myself I plan on following in the footsteps of John Chapman "Babe" Jarrell and Captain Malcom Reynolds. I aim to misbehave.

Technorati Tags:
, , ,
, ,