ORWELL 2010

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE BRANDEIS

“Discovery and invention have made it possible for the government, with means far more effective than stretching upon the rack, to obtain disclosure in court of what is whispered in the closet. … The progress of science is furnishing the Government with means of espionage [on American citizens] that is not likely to stop with wiretapping.   ” Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, 1928

WASHINGTON — Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is “going dark” as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone.

Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages.

The bill, which the Obama administration plans to submit to lawmakers next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering innovation.     New York Times, Sep 27, 2010

To wiretap a phone a government law enforcement agency must show cause and obtain a court order from a judge. It is not a difficult hurdle but it does provide a modicum of protection. What the current administration is reportedly proposing is new law authorizing the government to conduct constant surveillance, no specific justification required. We have seen the Presidential offices of both parties create “enemies lists” with the help of governmental agencies. That is bad enough, but our founding fathers had a far greater concern, the vulnerability of the nation’s falling into the hands of a totalitarian leader. Let’s not make it easy. In this regard, the fear is not Obama, but who may follow in years to come.

THEY ALL WENT HOME

Congress is not in session. The Democratic leadership closed up shop until after the election.  That leaves voters in the dark with regard to the coming tax increases. You know increases are coming but you don’t know how much. That’s by design.

Right now the Democrats greatest fear is a stalemate. Advancement of the liberal agenda will come to a halt if Republicans win control of the house. The window will be slammed shut on tax increases for at least two years. The Democrats ace-in-the-hole is the automatic tax increase that will occur if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire. That’s the plan.

To expose that hand before the election would be political suicide. No one votes for higher taxes. After the election all they have to do is … nothing. Or, to keep up appearances, debate the issue to death until the end of the year. They were unable to pass a budget for a whole year. Not passing a tax bill for a few weeks should be easy.

LET’S HAVE AN ARGUMENT

“One Nation Working Together”

Power Line comments on the  “One Nation Working Together” rally in Washington:

1) Four hundred organizations, including all the major labor unions, the NAACP, the Sierra Club, Code Pink, the Green Party, the Communist Party, Planned Parenthood and hundreds more were not able to turn out as many people as Glenn Beck.

2) One of the stated purposes of the gathering was to protest against lack of civility in public discourse. The program was opened by Ed Schultz.

Item 2 is good for a laugh and a cry. No one in public discourse, not even Keith Olberman, is less civil than Ed Schultz. If you don’t know him you must watch one full program of his on MSNBC,  6pm EST. Force yourself. You must know your adversaries. You cannot speak about a man with authority if you have not observed him for yourself.

What is striking about Power Line’s item 1 is the motley crowd of supporters. Have you ever been embarrassed to know Michael Savage is on your side? It beats knowing that your agenda coincides with that of Code Pink and the Communist Party.

LIFE ON THE BORDER

Arizonians live next door to routine violence. Fortunately most of it, but not all, takes place on Mexico’s side of the line. Nonetheless, it is difficult to find a place in Arizona where one can feel comfortable walking after sunset anywhere within 10 miles of Mexico.

Both political parties in Washington have prioritized potential votes over the safety of one of its state’s citizens.

GLOBAL WARMING, WHY PROOF DOESN’T MATTER

Harold Koh put it well when he said global warming is a tool “to level the playing field”. The global warming issue is not only a tool of local government, it is also a tool of international socialism, one world government. The leveling Koh referred to was leveling between nations, a bringing down of the strong and bringing up the weak. Equality of status is the goal.

The failure of the Copenhagen conference to get a treaty signed was a crushing blow to the Left. The treaty as written would have established a transnational government agency with control over all signatory nations in matters deemed to affect the environment. It also would have legitimized the concept of pre-established “climate debt”, the idea that successfully functioning nations owe a debt to the lesser prosperous nations on the grounds that the former have emitted more carbon dioxide. Two major goals would have been reached in one treaty, as both power and wealth would have been “spread around” between nations.

Transnationalism is the term for the advocacy of a one world power. The United Nations is a transnational agency. Transnationalism is by its nature a darling of the Left as it melds the strong with the weak, the accomplished with the dysfunctional and the noble with the rogue. Proponents of socialism think big. They are not constrained by reality. Given a one world government the bliss of socialism could be brought to the whole world in one fell swoop.

Man-made global warming, or “climate change” as it is now called, is the tool du jour. Unfortunately, there is no scientific analysis that rises to the level of proof as to the cause of the current warming cycle. Certainly there is no proof the warming that has occurred is man-made. But proof doesn’t matter. What matters is does the tool work. And it does.

AMANPOUR AND SAWYER DO ISLAM

Christine Amanpour and Diane Sawyer whitewashed Islam in Saturday night and Sunday morning programs. Pamela Geller covers it at Atlas Shrugs.

Given the exposure of various frauds and misrepresentations at CBS (Rather) and NBC (exploding trucks) not to mention the string of dishonesties by Mike Wallace (Google for them) it became apparent that network news “documentaries” are worse than useless; they are dangerous. These programs were, and still are, designed to create an air of integrity, the feeling that they are protecting us by enlightening us about who is defrauding and lying to us. They gain our confidence, then they lie to us.

Those with open minds, as all Conservatives have (wink), give the devil his due and say there must be some truth in what the other side has to say. The problem is, when watching these programs, how do you know which is truth and which is not, what to accept and what to not?

The shrewdest lie is not a lie at all; it is the technique of creating an impression that does not reflect the truth. It is the art of creating a lie by telling a carefully selected string of truths.

Immediately following Diane Sawyer’s 20/20 whitewash of Islam there was a program that focused on securities related crimes featuring a case from 2005 where an employee of a printing house informed another individual of the headlines that would appear in the next issue of Business Week magazine. The individual happened to work at Goldman Sachs, however, Goldman Sachs was not otherwise involved. the trades he initiated were strictly for his personal benefit and were executed through another broker. How might you title such a program?

Perhaps “Illegal Options Trader Exposed” or “The SEC Catches a Criminal”? Or here’s an idea, how about “Greedy Goldman Sachs Defines American Capitalism”? Sounds like a winner  just in need of some minor editing. The program was actually called “American Greed” and the promotional teaser invited viewers to stay tuned for an exposure of insider trading and greed at Goldman Sachs. Denunciation of capitalism was left inferred.

HOW I ALMOST GOT INTO POLITICS

One morning my wife asked me what I was going to do today. I said “Nothing”. She said you did nothing yesterday. I said I wasn’t finished. She didn’t like that so I decided I’d better do something. The neighbor was painting his house so I thought what I would do was sit on the porch and watched his paint dry. I began to think. One of the things I thought about was what it is that attracts flies. My mind naturally drifted next to Washington and then to lawyers.

Washington DC is two places. One is where the natives live; the other is where the govment lives. Studies show that 87.9% of the guvment part is lawyers. The number is probably higher if you don’t count the career bureaucrats, but nobody has studied that. There is no reason to.

Being a Congressman must be a pretty good job judging by how many people want to be one and the lengths some of them go to just to get the job. Some of them even lie. I’m retired and not really doing anything so I thought I could do that just as well as a Congressman and get paid for it.

I drove down to Washington but couldn’t find the employment office. Back home, my neighbor explained the guvmint doesn’t hire Congressmen. He said I would have to get thousands of people to like me better than some other Congressman and to say that I should have his job. Then you drive down to Washington and tell the other feller to get out and you start sitting at his desk.

What about his boss, I asked? Congressmen don’t have a boss, he said. I was beginning to like the job. His paint was dry so I was free to do anything I wanted to. How do you get all those people to like you, I asked. It’s very expensive he said. It can cost over a million dollars. Wow! I said.

Then my neighbor showed me how to use the Internet. I found out a Congressman makes $174,000 a year and the job is only good for 6 years. After that you need to spend another million dollars to get all those people to like you again.

My wife helped me with the math and it turns out you need to spend $166,667 per year to hold a job that pays $174,000 per year. I know they get free postage stamps but I still couldn’t figure out what attracts a person to a job like that. My neighbor on the other side is a lawyer. He explained it to me. It turns out I was right about flies and Washington.

So I gave up politics. I can do nothing just as well at home, and stay honest while I’m doing it. Now that I’m not going to Washington my wife wants me to take up golf. It seems she read some article about “golf widows.”

THIS IS WHERE I WOULD HAVE WORKED

UPDATE:
The lawyer next door just called. He said some of those jobs are only good for 2 years. I said “Wow!”

WHAT BROKEN INFRASTRUCTURE?

When seeking stimulus money, Barack Obama railed about how badly broken the nations infrastructure had become after years of pre-Obama neglect. I live in the Northeast, the oldest and least modernized portion of the country. If there are crumbling schools and pot-holed highways anywhere I should be able to find them here. But the state highways are good, the Interstates are mostly excellent. In the city where I live the high school building is fine although not luxurious. The towns on either side of us have million dollar ball fields and multi-million dollar gymnasiums. Room for improvement? Always. Decaying and crumbling? Not at all.

But Obama got his money and a good bit of it was spent on infrastructure. There is a very nice 40 or 50 mile parkway here. Work started on a stretch of it, perhaps 8 miles long, well before any signs went up. Those of us among the uninformed who drive that stretch of the parkway regularly were puzzled; what were they planning to do on this perfectly good section of the road. We soon found out.

Biden came, stood on the road and made a speech. “America is being revitalized and we are starting here.” Signs were posted, heavy equipment came in, barricades went up narrowing the road, trees came down and dirt was moved. A few millions of dollars later the equipment will be gone, the barricades will be removed, the road will be the same and the nice landscape that was on both sides will be a little nicer.

It’s not just us citizens who are losing our freedoms, cities and states are losing theirs as well. The Federal Highway Commission is requiring the City of New York to spend the city’s own money to replace signs that read like “PERRY AV” with signs that read like “Perry AV”.

Every street sign in the city must be replaced at an estimated cost to the city of $27.5M. Why? The Fed says the old ones are less safe. “Drivers can read Perry quicker than they can read PERRY so their eyes will return quicker to the road”. Hard to believe? Here’s a link to the story.

This sort of thing is much more than utter stupidity and waste, or perhaps a return to a sign maker for his campaign contribution. It’s the tyranny of central planning.

KRUGMAN IS CORRECT, PARTLY

Krugman may be a Progressive political advocate posing as an economist but when Krugman is right, Krugman is right, well partly. In a recent Op Ed piece for the Times he writes “Default Is In Our Stars”. His thesis is that excessive debt played a key role in the creation of the current financial crisis and that reducing debt to reasonable levels by curtailing spending puts a damper on the economy. That much is correct.

He didn’t exactly say debt, he said personal debt. I don’t think he considers government debt to be debt. Having started his piece by saying (personal) debt was a cause of the crisis he then says “A naive view says that what we need is a return to virtue: everyone needs to save more, pay down debt, and restore healthy balance sheets.” That is naïve?

Our Nobel winning economist has been calling all along for the government to go deeper in debt on another stimulus plan. Now he is calling for consumers not to save and not to slack off on their spending. In other words, to remain over-extended. That idea would push the problem further down the road and deepen it. Then what of the future?

It has long been my opinion that those on his side of the political divide are given to short term thinking. Give a hungry man a fish and the problem of hunger is solved. If he is hungry again tomorrow, give him another fish. Meanwhile, condemn the fisherman for trying to gain from his work. If the supply runs out…..no never mind that, the man is hungry. Just give him a fish.

Krugman’s solution – “In the end, I’d argue, what must happen is an effective default on a significant part of debt, one way or another.” What is default? It is a broken commitment. It is passing the cost of ones spending onto someone else. It is the liberal solution. And “one way or another” is an example of not thinking something through to its consequences.

The default could be implicit, via a period of moderate inflation that reduces the real burden of debt; that’s how World War II cured the depression.” Huh? It was inflation that cured the Depression? He could not have meant that it was WWII that got us out of the Depression, not FDR; that’s an observation only made by Conservatives and denied by the Left.

Let me see, do I have this right? What the nation needs now is is continued high levels of personal debt, less personal savings, more government money spent on stimulus programs, which means a higher level of government debt, and a return of inflation. It makes me proud to say I do not have a PhD.

Here is a link if you want to read the article.