Tag Archives: Dictatorship

Obama’s unrestrained FBI: Is this America?

In the last weeks of the Bush-Cheney administration, FBI Director Robert Mueller and then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey rushed into law such unbounded expansions of the FBI’s domestic surveillance powers that I was stunned. Years ago, I had often and critically reported on J. Edgar Hoover’s ravenous invasions of Americans’ personal privacy rights, including mine; but these new FBI guidelines, taking effect last Dec. 1, are unsparingly un-American.

As described by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an ever-watchful guardian of the Constitution, these Attorney General’s Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations authorize the FBI – without going to a court – “to open investigative ‘assessments’ of any American without any factual predicate or suspicion. Such ‘assessments’ allow the use of intrusive techniques to surreptitiously collect information on people suspected of no wrongdoing and no connection with any foreign entity. These inquiries may include the collection of information from online sources and commercial databases.

. . . .

President Obama has expressed no objections to these radical revisions of the Constitution, a founding document he used to educate students about at the University of Chicago. His attorney general, Eric Holder, said calmly during his Senate confirmation hearing: “The guidelines are necessary because the FBI is changing its mission … from a pure investigating agency to one that deals with national security.” (Read more from wnd.com)

Obama supports extending Patriot Act provisions

More Change we can believe in. . .

By DEVLIN BARRETT (AP) – Sep 15, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration supports extending three key provisions of the Patriot Act that are due to expire at the end of the year, the Justice Department told Congress in a letter made public Tuesday.

Lawmakers and civil rights groups had been pressing the Democratic administration to say whether it wants to preserve the post-Sept. 11 law’s authority to access business records, as well as monitor so-called “lone wolf” terrorists and conduct roving wiretaps.

The provision on business records was long criticized by rights groups as giving the government access to citizens’ library records, and a coalition of liberal and conservative groups complained that the Patriot Act gives the government too much authority to snoop into Americans’ private lives. (Read more from www.google.com/hostednews/)

Gorbachev era Economist on History, Socialism & Healthcare

Dr. Yuri Maltsev was a member of then-President Gorbachev’s perestroika reform team. In this great interview with Radio Free Market, he corrects the generous perception historians have of Gorbachev, illustrates the flaws of Socialism, and speaks at length about the healthcare in America.

Much of the early discussion in this interview traces Dr. Maltsev’s essay (here).

Health care reform means more power for the IRS

There’s been a lot of discussion about the new and powerful federal agencies that would be created by the passage of a national health care bill. The Health Choices Administration, the Health Benefits Advisory Committee, the Health Insurance Exchange — there are dozens in all.

But if the plan envisioned by President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats is enacted, the primary federal bureaucracy responsible for implementing and enforcing national health care will be an old and familiar one: the Internal Revenue Service. Under the Democrats’ health care proposals, the already powerful — and already feared — IRS would wield even more power and extend its reach even farther into the lives of ordinary Americans, and the presidentially-appointed head of the new health care bureaucracy would have access to confidential IRS information about millions of individual taxpayers.

In short, health care reform, as currently envisioned by Democratic leaders, would be built on the foundation of an expanded and more intrusive IRS.

Under the various proposals now on the table, the IRS would become the main agency for determining who has an “acceptable” health insurance plan; for finding and punishing those who don’t have such a plan; for subsidizing individual health insurance costs through the issuance of a tax credits; and for enforcing the rules on those who attempt to opt out, abuse, or game the system. A substantial portion of H.R. 3200, the House health care bill, is devoted to amending the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in order to give the IRS the authority to perform these new duties. (Read more from washingtonexaminer.com)

Is Ben Bernanke The “Machiavelian Monster” Equivalent Of Nicholas Biddle?


Mises does a great profile of Nicholas Biddle (1786-1844), president of the Second Bank of the United States – the central bank that preceded the Federal Reserve, and provides some useful analogues to not just the current Chairman of the Fed, but to all Fed-friendly crony insitutions that are doing all in the power to perpetuate the hegemony of Wall Street.

Like Ben Bernanke today, Nicholas Biddle cultivated the veneer of a benign civil servant calculating serenely far above the political fray. In reality he, like Bernanke, was up to his neck in the backroom game of power.

When Biddle’s bureaucratic cradle was rocked, he quickly morphed into a Machiavellian monster. Keep that in mind as Ben Bernanke gets progressively cornered by Ron Paul and the bourgeoning anti-Fed movement. (Already the Fed is less popular than the IRS.)

When you hear about the Federal Reserve Transparency Act getting stalled in committee, think of Daniel Webster, bought and paid for with central bank money. When you read Fed apologia in the New York Times, The Economist, and the Wall Street Journal denouncing the “reckless populism” of the Act, think of the newspaper editors in Biddle’s pocket.

The full must read article can be found here. (From zerohedge.com)

Lawless Surveillance, Warrantless Rationales (a critique of Obama continuation of Bush policies)

Over at The American Constitution Society for Law and Policy website, Electronic Frontier Foundation Legal Director Cindy Cohn writes about the so-called Presidential Surveillance Program, the “still-shadowy set of programs that spy on Americans in America without any probable cause or warrant.” The EFF, as regular BB readers know, has fought this program for several years now — in 2006, it filed suit against AT&T for providing the NSA with direct access to its database of communications records. Snip from Cohn’s essay:

While the details are unknown, credible evidence indicates that billions of everyday communications of ordinary Americans are swept up by government computers and run through a process that includes both data-mining and review of content, to try to figure out whether any of us were involved in illegal or terrorist-related activity. That means that even the most personal and private of our electronic communications – between doctors and patients, between husbands and wives, or between children and parents – are subject to review by computer algorithms programmed by government bureaucrats or by the bureaucrats themselves. (Read more from boingboing.net)

See Also:

1,000 cameras ‘solve one crime’

Only one crime was solved by each 1,000 CCTV cameras in London last year, a report into the city’s surveillance network has claimed.

The internal police report found the million-plus cameras in London rarely help catch criminals.

In one month CCTV helped capture just eight out of 269 suspected robbers.

David Davis MP, the former shadow home secretary, said: “It should provoke a long overdue rethink on where the crime prevention budget is being spent.”

He added: “CCTV leads to massive expense and minimum effectiveness.

“It creates a huge intrusion on privacy, yet provides little or no improvement in security.” (Read more from news.bbc.co.uk)

Government Reaction: Obviously, we need more cameras.

Children’s books about our dear leader, chairman Obama

Here is the description, direct from the Publisher’s Website:

Ever since Barack Obama was young, Hope has lived inside him. From the beaches of Hawaii to the streets of Chicago, from the jungles of Indonesia to the plains of Kenya, he has held on to Hope. Even as a boy, Barack knew he wasn’t quite like anybody else, but through his journeys he found the ability to listen to Hope and become what he was meant to be: a bridge to bring people together.

a few choice paragraphs:

His mama, white as whipped cream; his daddy, black as ink…

He was there in Chicago because he cared about these people. They were his family. People in Kenya were his family. Indonesians were his family. And no matter where he was, the world was his home. And who he was could be summed up in one word: loveable.

and

When Barack wasn’t studying he liked to jog along the Hudson River. He couldn’t help but notice the river of hurt and hate and history that separated blacks and whites. Being both, he could not take sides. Don’t worry, said Hope. I will be your bridge. In time you will be the bridge for others.

but that’s not all, there’s more:

When his classes came to an end, he raced to Chicago to join hands with the church, to learn new lessons: Not how to be black or white, but how to be a healer, how to change things, how to make a difference in the world.

of course, no book about Vladimir Lenin would be complete without talking about his days in the trenches as a community organizer:

The work was grueling, with stretches of failure, and puny patches of success. Door-to-door Barack went, early mornings, late nights, pleading and preaching, coaxing strangers to march together, to make life better for everyone. He worked hard as a farmer, planting the words “Yes, we can!” like seeds in spring.

but that’s not all, there’s still more good stuff:

Before Barack chased his future, he visited his past, traveling to Kenya to find his family, his father’s bones, and his own place in the circle of Africa…Finally, Barack knelt in the soil at his father’s grave, listening to the still, small voice that spoke to his heart: Go now. Fly free. Become the man you were meant to be. Live in hope.

Having gotten the blessings of his father’s spirit, Barack set forth…

Hope may be slim and beautiful, but she is no weak thing…[Barack] proved it again when all of Washington, D.C., wondered what this skinny kid with the funny name could offer a nation in need. But the hope that lived in Barack burned bright, and on the night he became a senator, everybody felt the flame.

but that’s not all! He had a date with destiny, and:

One sun-drenched day, as his wife Michelle stood by, Barack smiled on a sea of faces from Wichita to Waikiki. He saw whites and blacks, rich and poor, Christians and Muslims and Jews; he saw the ghosts of his parents, of Gramps and Toot, of Martin Luther King, Jr. and JFK. And on that special day Barack was the bridge that held them all together. “I want to be your president,” he said. “Can we make America better? Can we work together, as one?” With a single voice the crowd called out, “Yes! We can!”

And that’s just one book. I personally think we need to change the calender to BB (Before Barack) and AB (After Barack). I mean it is undeniable that the man is the second coming. But, that’s not all, let’s look at the other tome on Barack Obama for children:

(Read more from aipnews.com)

Obama and the Post Office

Fantastic Lew Rockwell essay on campaignforliberty.com:

“Writing in The State and Revolution in 1917, Vladimir Lenin summed up the economic aim of socialism as follows: ‘To organize the whole economy on the lines of the postal service….’

Incredible, isn’t it? After centuries of treatises and miles of paper and tubs of ink, this is the great historical turning point: government employees carrying sacks of paper mail from house to house, and operating at an economic loss.

It’s fascinating how it all comes down to the post office, again and again in the history of public policy. And so it is in our time, with Obama’s admission/gaffe/slip concerning the post office and its analogy to what he wants to do with health care.

Here is a transcript of his spontaneous talk at a high school. A student raised a question about the government’s provision of health services and its impact on private services.

‘How can a private company compete against the government? My answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining, meaning that taxpayers aren’t subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services, and a good network of doctors, just like private insurers do, then I think private insurers should be able to compete.

‘They do it all the time. If you think about it, UPS and Fed-Ex are doing just fine. It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems…. there is nothing inevitable about this somehow destroying the private marketplace. As long as it is not set up where the government is being subsidized by the taxpayers so that even if they are providing a good deal, we keep having to pony up more and more money.’

Now, these comments are nothing short of incredible. The Post Office has been on the loser list for many decades. Most recently, it has been included on the GAO’s high-risk list, increasing its debt to $10.2 billion and incurring a cash shortfall of $1 billion.

Note that the post office is not being shut down for this mess. On the contrary, it is being subsidized not only with tax dollars but, most importantly, with laws. Title 18 (I.83.1696) says that ‘Whoever establishes any private express for the conveyance of letters or packets’ can be fined and jailed. Moreover, the law (39.I.6.606) says that any letter delivered by unlawful means can be seized and stolen by the government. It is immune from antitrust action and criminal liability. [emphasis added]

. . . .

Therefore Obama is right in a strange way: private enterprise has triumphed and government service is terrible. Everyone knows this. It is utterly preposterous that a government mail service exists at all. There is no theory of economics that supports it. There is not now nor has there ever been any economic reason for government postal service. It should be immediately abolished and private enterprise should take over. Even on the basis of Obama’s thin and strange statements, you might argue this conclusion.

But perhaps Obama meant to suggest that the reason the Post Office is so bad is because it has to compete with private enterprise. If he meant that, he lives in a socialist fantasy land, and we have a very dangerous man on our hands. In the real world, no living person could possibly believe that mail service would be improved by getting rid of the efficient producers and granting a totalitarian monopoly to a single government-backed provider.

. . . .

The right path to health-care reform is the market path (no subsidies, no monopolies such as drug patents, no licensure, no anything) that tends toward universal distribution at very low prices and relentless improvement in service. The wrong path is to make health care run the same way as the post office. Obama seems to favor the latter path, even though he admits that it is the least well-performing one. This is surely the definition of fanaticism. If the mobs aren’t angry, they should be.” (Read more on campaignforliberty.com)