An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings
Haven’t You Done Enough???
First we get the stimulus package that did nothing for our economy, and actually put us further in debt. Then Obama tries to pull a fast one on the American people with his new and improved health care that is a joke. Next it was the Cash For Clunkers program that was also supposed to stimulate the economy but failed miserably. Cash For Clunkers succeeded in the following…
- Disposing of perfectly good cars.
-Putting people further in debt with a car payment they couldn’t afford. Kinda hard to make the payments on your brand new car when you don’t have a job.
-Putting the country further in debt.
-Attempted to put cars on the road that Obama wanted on the road, rather than what the American people actually wanted. Since most of the cars that qualified for the program where models that no one really wanted in the first place, car companies got to unload some of there stock that they otherwise would have been stuck with.
-It also gave Brett Favre a new home. Ok sorry back to the rant at hand!
Now there is a bill that is being revised that would give Obama the power to disconnect private sector computers from the Internet. Are you kidding me?
-The president of the United States has always had the constitutional authority, and duty, to protect the American people and direct the national response to any emergency that threatens the security and safety of the United States. The Rockefeller-Snowe Cybersecurity bill makes it clear that the president’s authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack. The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster. This particular legislative language is based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks. To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a “government shutdown or takeover of the Internet” and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false. The purpose of this language is to clarify how the president directs the public-private response to a crisis, secure our economy and safeguard our financial networks, protect the American people, their privacy and civil liberties, and coordinate the government’s response.-
Now the above sounds really good right? Being able to safeguard this, and protect that. Yeah right! I wouldn’t trust Obama with a potato gun but you expect me to trust him to have the ability to shut down my access to the Internet? I can think of a few sites he would like to shut down right now. Hey, this one is on that list! Perhaps it is time to stock up on the guns, ammo, and rations and just wait for the government to come knock on my door. Hope they like lead, cause that’s what I’ll be serving that day!
Post by Ick!
Fascinating post. But some questions:
1. All this concern about encroaching Presidential power is terrific, but were you a civil libertarian when the Patriot Act was enacted?
2. Isn’t the purpose of the proposed bill to protect our networks in the case of cyberattacks by terrorists or foreign powers? Isn’t that a real problem? If no one has the power to shut down the network, how do you propose to protect our information grid?
3. Doesn’t the government already have the power to shut down the entire air traffic system in the case of a national emergency? Have you opposed that as a threat to our liberties? How is this different?
4. Wouldn’t Dick Cheney say that the President already has this authority through his powers as Commander in Chief?
Previous commenter nyp: very good, thought-provoking questions.
Actually, Sarah, his questions are misleading, distracting from the real issue at hand, and based on misinformation, and are just “grasping at straws” mentality.
1. Nothing to do with this subject. I dont care if I were a skin-head nazi when the patriot act was enacted, this isnt the patriot act. The patriot act also didnt give the president absolute power over civilian communication across the entire country, with the ability to shut it down at a whim. Dont compare apples to oranges.
2. You can protect the networks in MANY ways (Oh, like were doing right now!) that dont involve government takeover and shut down of any THEY deem necessary. Mainly you protect any services, operations, etc that youre worried about at the source.
Anyone with any amount of foresight and intelligence can see thats not what this is about. Its about the transferring of information via the internet being stopped by the government. That is basically another encroachment of our right to free speach, which Liberals have been plotting for several years now. I see this as a: “Well, the Fairness doctrine probably wont work, so lets try these other more sneaky methods”. Show me in the constitution where it says the FEDERAL government has the right and authority to silence the people of the United states, for ANY reason or in ANY manner. Thats right, it doesnt.
3. Once again, youre comparing apples to oranges. Air traffic is ENTIRELY different than internet cummunication. Im sorry I have to point that out to you. For a shining exapmle, go look at what happened on 9/11. You cant fly a laptop computer into a large building killing thousands of innocent people. There is no argument to make that the internet as a whole can be used to kill thousands of innocent people. Stop watching Die Hard movies. Real life isnt like Hollywood.
Oh, and while were at it, a giant meteor isnt going to destroy the earth, and right now there isnt any super virus thats going to wipe out humanity.
4. Again we go to Dick Cheney bashing. Get over yourself. Hes not in office anymore, and the answer to this asinine question is: no he wouldnt. He believes in the Constitution, not bigger government, from what Ive gleaned from listening to him. But it doesnt matter. Should we go ask Dan Qayle and Bush Sr. and Al Gore to see what they think as well? It doesnt matter what any of them think, they are not only not in charge of anything cept doing talk shows, writing self absorbed book tours and creating ficticious global warming scare tactics to make money.
In short, the answr to all your questions lies within the constitution. Go read it.
One last thing: If terrorists or anyone were threaten to use cars and trucks here to blow up buildings across the country, would you shut down all the highways and roads (all ground transportation) to prevent this? No, of course you wouldnt. Think about it.
Shadow:
More like straw men. This is aimed strictly at shutting down dissent, much like The Anointed One’s diversity goon will attempt to shut down dissent on talk radio. You can’t run a fascist totalitarian state with any dissent … you silence it and you round up those who refuse to comply. Remember that famous Bill Ayers tape, in which he said they’d have kill 25 million Americans that couldn’t be converted.
Cripes, we have 40 czars in charge of almost every part of the American economy and society, czars that have no basis in the Constitution, unelected, accountable to no one but the Second Coming of Christ Himself.
And don’t forget His army already in place. You know, ACORN, SEIU, etc., ready to be mobilized at His orders.
1. Peter: the bit about “czars” is the reddest of red herrings. Name them.
2. Shadowblitz: a) you are remarkably sanguine about the consequences of a coordinated cyber attack on our iT infrastructure. Believe me, they don’t feel that way anymore in Republic of Georgia, South Korea, Checynia, etc. b) You have a remarkably flexible view of civil liberties. It varies according to the identity of the party that holds the executive branch. The previous adminstration strongly defended its right to engage in warrantless evesdropping. It similarly defended its right to seize American citizens and deprive them of habeus corpus if it deemed them terrorists of otherwise threatening to national security. That was the precise argument made to the courts in the Padilla case. And if you asked Cheney’s opinon, he would say that the legislation under consideration is unnecessary, because the President already has the inherent authority to do what is being proposed in the legislation. As we effete liberal snobs said back then, be careful what you wish for.
I went back and re-read the article and never once in the article did it mention terrorists. I wanted to make sure I didn’t miss something this morning while drinking my coffee. Since the word attack was used, then I guess the American people are supposed to assume the government was referring to a terrorist attack. Because lets face it the government always tells the truth, and always puts their agenda’s out there in black and white for the American people. Please allow me to pick myself up off the floor from laughing at that last part!
Really? Coordinated cyber attack, from whom? a bunch of teen hackers?lol You really think our infrastructure is comparable to Georgia and Checynia??
Like I said, stop watching Die Hard movies. We dont need to hand over control of our fastest, most widespread form of communication to a socialist / communist led government based on ficticious possibilities that are straight out of Hollywood action movies. Next youll say we need to have Obamas brownshirts camping out in all of our yards and peeking in our windows because we might have aliens bursting out of our chests.
Flexible view of civil liberties? You joking? I go by what the CONSTITUTION says. It isnt flexible. I could care less about whos in the executive branch. But since you mentioned it, Which Presidents throughout history have been the ones that kept us the safest, were the quickest to rise to our defense? Oh yeah…Republicans. This is the first of a couple times I see in your rambling that you really put your foot in your mouth.
Warrantless eavesdropping? Are you stupid, or just pretending? You dont think catching Terrorists before they pull off something like what happened on 9/11 is warranted?? Good gravy! You are actually saying here that you think handing over control of the internet is more important than preventing another 9/11? WOW.
You even refer to islamic radicals terrorists as “American citizens.” Yes, once again, lets protect the people that have seething hatred for us, and killed 3000 innocent American citizens on 9/11. Another foot in mouth moment.
Your 3rd foot in mouth moment (all in the same comment no less) is actually having the GALL to say
” As we effete liberal snobs said back then, be careful what you wish for.”
My reply to that is:
“As we blood-thirsty, money hungry, flag waving, gun toting conservatives said; When wanting to vote for HOPE and CHANGE, be careful what YOU wish for.”
lol!
I have a little surprise for you. Lets start by defining “communism.”
com?mu?nism??/?k?my??n?z?m/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kom-yuh-niz-uhm]
–noun 1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.
4. communalism.
Origin:
1835–45; < F communisme. See common, -ism
Dictionary.com Unabridged (copied and pasted directly)
Ok, now lets look at what Obamas been trying to do, in a quick nutshell, shall we?
1. Gain govt control of the banking / finance industry (Fannie and Freddy, anyone? bank bailouts?)
2. Gain govt control over transportation (after auto bailouts, Obama actually FIRED the General Motors president!)
3. Gain control of the Healthcare industry. (in the works)
4. Gain control of our energy / resources (Cap n trade, also in the works)
5. Gain govt control of our media, ability to acces / send information (He already has control of 90% of the mainstream media, theyre trying to silence the other 10% in any way possible, and now theyre going after the internet!)
Hmm. Media, Healthcare, finances, transportation, information, energy. Whats left? They already have education.
I may have forgotten something, but its late. I didnt even get to all the social programs weve had that are ruining the country, like social security, and the perversion / indoctrination thats going on in our schools.
In what way do those actions NOT present the conversion from a republic with some democracy, to a communist government? If Obama succeeds in all of the above listed, the government will have control of EVERYTHING that makes a country work!! We in the real world call this COMMUNISM, and a hostile takeover. You want to see how unwanted this all is? Watch the results in 2010. Heads are going to roll. Also watch what happens in DC on 9/12. You have some serious waking up to do.
shadowblitz:
1. I am sorry that you believe that President GW Bust was a communist. I happen to disagree, notwithstadning his instigation last year of (a) the bailout of the world’s largest insurer; b) the autumn 2008 auto bailout; c) the TARP legislation; d) the Bear Stearns bridge loan to JPMorgan Chase; e) the 2008 Stimulus bill; and f) the massive run-up in the national debt and federal deficit between 2001 and 2008. We will just have to disagree that those measures constituted “communism,” notwithstanding my many disagreements with President Bush’s policies.
2. The Bush Administration took the position in the Padilla case that it cold seize an American citizen, label him a “terrorist” or other threat to the national security, throw him in a navy brig, and deny him a trial or other habeus corpus rights. As Casy Stengel used to say, you could look it up. That power has now transferred to a Democratic administration. Now, no president, republican or democratic, would ever abuse such powers, right? If you disagree, you should make a generous donation to the ACLU.
3. “Warrantless” means without a search warrant. Once again, an assertion of presidential authority by President Bush and Vice-President Cheney in response to 9-11. Has that alleged constitutional authority lapsed?
There are almost 4o such czars. You can find the full listing of them <a href=”http://olbroad.com/2009/08/22/obamas-czars/”>here</a>.
Sarah. Yesterday, 2:07 pm
Previous commenter nyp: very good, thought-provoking questions
Looks like some sockpuppetry. Inventing IDs to support one’s own position.
And here’s that link once again.
Peter:
1. I am deeply offended that you would accuse me of sockpupetry. You have absolutely no evidence to support your slanderous accusation. I have no idea who “sarah” is, and had absolutely nothing to do with her post.
The correct way to characterize me is “troll”.
2. the link that you keep putting up shows that most of the so-called “czars’ are cabinet officers (like Arne Duncan), or have otherwise been nominated to and confirmed by the United States Senate. the majority of the remainder are in positions created by many previous administrations, especially that of GW Bush. There is nothing secret, nothing special about the president appointing special assistants and envoys. Why is the Secretary of Education a “czar”, and not the Secretary of Transportation? Why is President Obama’s Director of Faith-Based Initiatives an evil “czar” and not the person who occupied the exact same post under President Bush? why would it be a violation of the Consitution for President Obama to have a special envoy to the Middle East, but not a violation for President Bush to appoint someone to the same position?
GW Bush a communist? What planet are you on? Last I checked, he isnt office anymore? I give you VERY plain examples of how Obama is trying to turn our country into a failed communist clone of someplace like Cuba, and you give me back examples of things OBAMA did, not Bush and blame everything on a person who has been out of office for almost a year. I even spelled it out in a manner a 5 year old would understand!
*insert Twilight Zone theme here*
Who HAS been in office since last November, hit the ground running with bill after bill that have done NOTHING (I repeat NOTHING) to help our economy? Who could that be? George Bush? Nooo….. guess again! Our unemployment rate is higher now than it EVER was during Bush admin. Im sure youll say “thats Bushs fault”, but once again, who has had control of congress AND the white house for the past year?? NOT BUSH! Bush also did not approve or pass the stimulus (porkulus) package. You seriously have some issues.
Denial is not a river in Egypt. I used to be a liberal Democrat myself, but I actually stopped listening to the horrid media and dug into the truth for myself. Stop being a tool, and go learn the truth for yourself, and I dont mean from the Huffington Post or other left wing psychotic websites. Think for yourself.
I have another challenge for you, that Im sure youll fail. Try to get your point across in a manner that doesnt include blaming past presidents. The “Its Bushs fault for everything” doesnt fly anymore. The current admin has had PLENTY of time to fix anything they perceived as being broken by Bush. So try again.
I see this as one of those challenges you give a 5 year old like “lets see who can be quiet the longest”, and like them youll fail in your very next posting.
Buh-buh-buh-buh-Bush! Like a damn broken record.
Also: Bush had aides, Obama has czars. The difference, since you cant figure it out:
Obama’s czars make decisions, they are in charge of certain things that they were not appointed to by We the People.
Bushs aides were assistants, not decision makers.
What does it also say about Obama when one of his czars is a self proclaimed communist, and that Obama feels he cant do the job hes appointed without surrounding himself with dozens of people that are there to do it FOR him? Why are we not allowed to vote on these people for these positions? Things that make ya go HMMMMM….
shadowblitz:
1. “you write: “Who HAS been in office since last November, hit the ground running with bill after bill that have done NOTHING ….”
Uh, I have news for you: President Obama did not take office last November.
2. I am afraid by the your standards President Bush was indeed a communist. Every one of these terrible things I mentioned was enacted by President Bush, not President Obama. To repeat:
(a) the AIG bailout ; b) the autumn 2008 auto bailout; c) the Autumn 2008 TARP legislation; d) the February 2008 Bear Stearns bridge loan to JPMorgan Chase; e) the 2008 Stimulus bill; and f) the massive run-up in the national debt and federal deficit between 2001 and 2008.
What a Red that Bush was! Down with the Czars!
Shadow, old pal:
“Also: Bush had aides, Obama has czars”
Oh, I see. President Bush’s director of Faith-Based Initiatives was an aide. The person President Obama appointed to the same post is a “czar.” Bush’s Director of Drug Control Policy was an aide. Obama’s Director of Drug Control Policy is a “czar.” Bush’s Secretary of Education was an aide (?) Obama’s Secretary of Education is a “czar”.
Much clearer now. thanks.
Obama was elected in November. He started making plans right away, and none of them were for the betterment of the country. Even so, who was in control of Congress when any of the things you mentioned were done? OHHHH thats right. Dim-o-crats. The President cant take a piss without Congressional approval.
Once again, youre totally confusing a government takeover of everypart of a country (health, education, transportation, banking / finance, information, energy, etc) with a president doing bailouts, and creating debt. Im not a Bush supporter, but I call things as they are. To even imply that Bush was a communist, with what we have staring us in the face right now…….. I dont even think Dr Phil can help you if youre that out of touch with reality. Yeah, Bush believeing in National Security, cutting peoples taxes, trying to boost the economy (however mistaken he was) qualifies him as a communist. Riiiight.
Got any other examples of Bush being communist? cuz I got plenty more for Obama!
Flying a CUBAN NATIONAL FLAG in campaign offices, appointing 2 or 3 people who unabashedly proclaim themselves as COMMUNISTS, attending a chruch for 20 years that pushed anti- American sentiment, going on “Lets apologize for America to her enemies” tours, Saying we need to tax wealthy people more and “spread the wealth around”, etc. These are just for starters.
Filling positions every other President filled is one thing, but most of these “czars” are NEWLY CREATED positions by Obama, without anyones approval, as in We the People… you know, his bosses?
Also: thanks for proving my point that you cant even pass a little challenge any better than a 5 year old, and stop saying Bushbushbushbushbushbush. No different than any other braindead lib Ive argued with on the internet: youve got little “Bush”s floating around in your head and thats bout it. Sad.
Oh, and nice to see how you not only got off subject completely, but tried to turn the situation into a Bash Bush session. standard liberal tactic.
“When cornered with the facts, change the subject! Blame Bush!”
ROFL
yup, by your standards, President Bush was a communist. Bailed out the auto makers. Took over the largest insurance company. Enacted the TARP; interfered with Bear Stearns; bailed ot the banking system. My goodness, sounds like Moscow.
The point, of course, is that your standards are absurd.
By the way, if you really think that a severe recession that began in the fourth quarter of 2007 can be reversed in two fiscal quarters, you really do not understand macroeconomics.
Good to see, however, that you have conceded on the “czar” lunacy.
Wow, youre a damn broken record.
Helping one insurance company makes you communist? hmm. Then Obamas MUCH worse, b/c he has tried to do ALOT more than the stuff you posted, half of which wasnt Bushs idea or doing.
Could all of those things you keep beating like a dead horse have been done without any help from the Democrat led congress? uh, nope.
My standards were: healthcare, education, transportation, banking / finance, information, energy.
Out of those you covered one, maybe two.
You obviously need to go back to school, and learn to count. Also in my standards were:
Flying a CUBAN NATIONAL FLAG in campaign offices, appointing 2 or 3 people who unabashedly proclaim themselves as COMMUNISTS, attending a chruch for 20 years that pushed anti- American sentiment, going on “Lets apologize for America to her enemies” tours, Saying we need to tax wealthy people more and “spread the wealth around”, etc.
We can all note how you seem to keep trying to dodge these things.
Did Bush HIRE people who proclaim themselves to be communists and have criminal records?? Or are tax cheats?
Hmm. Im gonna go with….no.
Also: You keep bleeting like a sheep over TARP:
[edit] Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP)
The systematic foreclosure prevention and mortgage modification program under this section shall be a program established by the Secretary, in consultation with the Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that—
- Provides lenders and loan servicers with certain compensation to cover administrative costs for each loan modified according to the required standards; and
- Provides loss sharing or guarantees for certain losses incurred if a modified loan should subsequently re-default.
Yeah, thats a takeover of our country by the president. LOL Please point out where it says “President enacted to convert United states to communism”?
Ah, it doesnt. But Who does it mention? Oh yeah, Obama cronies.
Nice to see you keep proving my point as well.
Bushbushbushbushbushbush!! “Im cornered so Ill keep screaming about Bush and blaming everything on him from skin cancer to What Obama did!” Im sure you also run around blaming Hurricane Katrina and 9/11 on Bush too.
Me saying “Filling positions every other President filled is one thing, but most of these “czars” are NEWLY CREATED positions by Obama, without anyones approval, as in We the People… you know, his bosses?” -
is conceding?????
What….? What planet are you on?
Ive punched more holes in everything youve said than baby swiss cheese. If you cant come up with anything intelligent to say, dont bother wasting our time.
Youre a joke, and everyone can see it. Lay off the sauce.