Support Our Military!

I originally found the above Youtube movie on a Myspace page. You can also see it on YouTube itself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78oxfVWI-9Y


I thought it was hilarious and had great production value. I think it is a good thing to remember that our military men and women are real people like you and me. Humor is definitely a human trait we all share.


Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think we all can agree our servicemen deserve the best possible chance of returning home safe. They shouldn't have to want for body armor or armor for their vehicles, and they should expect excellent medical care. Sometimes the US fails those courageous men and women that make extreme sacrifices on our behalf.

Maybe you think we never should have gone. Maybe you think we had no choice and had to go into Iraq. Maybe you think we removed Saddam, removed threats of WMDs floating around Iraq, saved the Kurds, saved the Shites, saved the Iraqi Olympic soccer team and it is time to scale back;Iraq might not be capable of constituitonal republic, we haven't perfected it yet either.

Regardless, we owe our troops. Next time you think about complaining to your congressman about the war.....how about instead reminding them that they're not allowed to let our servicemen down like we have in the past.

The Failure of Government Schools
20/20
John Stossel's
"Stupid In America"

There are many reasons that the public school systems in America fail to properly educate and lag behind many school systems around the world. Most of these reasons were brilliantly articulated by John Stossel in his 1/13/06 special "Stupid In America". A sample free video cut can be viewed here:

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=1500594

*Video best viewed on a broad band connection*

"American students fizzle in international comparisons, placing 18th in reading, 22nd in science and 28th in math behind countries like Poland, Australia and Korea. But why? Are American kids less intelligent? John Stossel looks at the ways the U.S. public education system cheats students out of a quality education.

"We're not stupid. But we could do better," one high school student tells Stossel. Another says, "I think it has to be something with the school, 'cause I don't think we're stupider."

That's the question Stossel examines in his special report: What is it that's going wrong in public schools?

There are many factors that contribute to failure in school. A major factor, Stossel finds, is the government's monopoly over the school system. Parents don't get to choose where to send their children. In other countries, choice brings competition, and competition improves performance.

Stossel questions government officials, union leaders, parents and students and learns some surprising things about what's happening in U.S. schools. He also examines how the educational system can be improved upon and reports on innovative programs across the country."

Stossel's main point is that Public Schools in the US are a governmental monopoly. Choice leads to competition and competition leads to superior products. This particular product would be the education of our children.

Our children are assigned to a particular school based on the location of their residence. Of course, the students living in wealthier neighborhoods have the edge in quality and funding. Is your school terrible? Are your taxes paying for a dismal education system where you live? Are your children stuck with BAD teachers that have tenure and can not be fired by their employer due to union contracts? The answer to all this is......Too bad. You have no choice unless you can afford to move or pay your taxes AND pay private tuition. Not only is this a frustration for the parents but, also the outstanding teachers that are forced to helplessly watch the incompetence among other teachers and administrators alike. Sometime the only alternatives are to pay poor teachers to do things other than teach or, to just try to transfer the problem to another school and let them handle it. They call this pratice the "Dance of the Lemons".

If you are interested in viewing the entire show, a VHS or DVD can be bought from ABC for $29.95 here:

http://www.abcnewsstore.com/store/index.cfm?fuseaction=customer.product&product_code=T060113%2001&category_code=HOME

Study Finds That Democrat and Republican Extremes Lack the Ability to Reason

In a scientific study featured by MSN/MSNBC, it shows that "Democrats and Republicans alike are adept at making decisions without letting the facts get in the way". Thus the Spin Doctor was born.

"The tests involved pairs of statements by the candidates, President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry, that clearly contradicted each other. The test subjects were asked to consider and rate the discrepancy. Then they were presented with another statement that might explain away the contradiction. The scenario was repeated several times for each candidate.
A brain-scan technique known as functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, revealed a consistent pattern. Both Republicans and Democrats consistently denied obvious contradictions for their own candidate but detected contradictions in the opposing candidate."

The study went on to say that the beliefs were so strongly held that these people could learn very little from new data/information. This is especially so if it contradicts someone on their "team" or argues against an assumption they have a political belief in.

This sort of thing is what really turns off the free thinking individuals. The embarrassing extremes often chase out those that are more mainstream or don't tolerate hypocrites or automatons. It is definitely this closed mindedness that lead me to the Libertarian party forsaking the Republicans.

Note:
The credit for finding this study goes to Bhfrik of the blog "Club Lefty". This prolific blog definitely leans to the left but, is well thought out and brings up many interesting topics of interest.

We are Bush...

Your 4th Amendment will be Assimilated

Resistance is Futile!

We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Your telephone and e-mail communications will become one with ours. Your birth, educational, occupational, marital, medical, financial, political, and service records have been downloaded, recompiled, and disseminated to us. We are Bush.....

Quoting President Bush:

"It's seems logical to me that if we know there's a phone number associated with al-Qaida or an al-Qaida affiliate and they're making phone calls, it makes sense to find out why," Bush said. http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060102-123422-7213r.htm

Clearly this is misdirection on the part of President Bush. The administration here is attempting to take advantage of America's "Attention Deficit Disorder". Of course it would be sound and reasonable to monitor calls from "known" terrorists to US citizens. A.D.D. America is supposed to associate this reasonableness to the NSA's warrantless program as a whole.

Those familiar with FISA realize that Pres. Bush is perhaps unwittingly putting forward an argument against warrantless surveillance. Here he stipulates that a phone number connected to al-Qaida or an affiliate is known. Many times in the recent past he has insisted that these measures are only used when there is a "clear link" to terrorist organizations. This foreknowledge and clear links amount to instant Probable Cause. There is no judge in the US that would deny a surveillance warrant in such cases. Another line of rhetoric revolves around the need for the timely engagement of surveillance. In the past, the Bush administration has made the point that there is not time to get a warrant. This is not true. Under a legal use of FISA, the NSA may engage in surveillance immediately. They then must contact a judge and request a warrant within 72 hours after initializing surveillance. This retroactive feature of FISA is legal, proper, and nullifies any complaints regarding speed.

The question then is why the administration wants to be able to exercise warrantless searches if warrants are easily had in his offered scenarios and can be approved retroactively? It has been reported by the administration that protocol demands that one of the callers be located outside the US. It has been admitted that "accidents" have occurred where improperly trained agents have "accidentally" intercepted communications that originated in the US and ended in the US. Does the Bush administration want these "accidents" to continue? A judge would deny the warrant and report to the NSA that this particular monitoring is not in line with the Constitution and MUST be stopped. Not exactly convenient if you want the Plausible Deniability afforded by incompetent staff. Perhaps they would like to inadvertently monitor Democrat communications and uncover closeted homosexuals, mistresses, drug use, and other compromising evidences.

Another excuse is that allegedly Clinton and Carter violated the Constitution in this manner as well. Even if true, that does not excuse the continuance of such activities by the current administration. The President should come out with a statement announcing a review of FISA use was conducted and; it was determined to be improper without a warrant. The bad precedent set by past administrations could excuse this temporary faulty assessment of proper FISA use. If this is ended for all administrations it would be a positive outcome for the nation. The allegiance of this writer is to Freedom not a particular party. If the President chooses to cease this illegal spying and set a proper precedent, my voting patterns would not likely change. This writer admits to voting for him twice. If the President continues to abuse the rights our Founding Fathers found Self-Evident, then I will join the Democrat cries for impeachment.

*Note: The Bush Borg picture was found at topplebush.com.

20/20
John Stossel's
Myths, Lies and Straight Talk

On the Dec. 30, 2005 edition of 20/20, John Stossel's report
"Myths, Lies and Straight Talk" was surprising, enlightening, and at times made me chuckle. Here Mr. Stossel exposed some commonly held misconceptions. In the process a few "sacred cows" were gored. Among the top ten myths:

10) We Have Less Free Time

9) Money Can Buy Happiness

8) Republicans Shrink The Government

7) The World Is Getting Too Crowded

6) Chemicals Are Killing Us

5) Guns Are Always Bad For Us

4) We're Drowning in Garbage

3) We Are Destroying Our Forests

2) Getting Cold Can Give You A Cold

1) Life Is Getting Worse

As a Libertarian, numbers Eight and Five were my favorites. Gotta love it! John Stossel, you just rock! One might normally think that only the Ultra Liberals would take a hit on this one but, the Democrats and Greens won't be the only casualties here. Republicans often are on the correct side of these busted myths but, oh how they got nailed on Number Eight!

Republicans are always portraying themselves as fiscally conservative. They oppose "big government". Stossel even quotes Reagan and Bush saying such things but, he also quotes the corrections made by Republican Economist Stephen Moore:

"We fought a war against big government and you know what? Big government won." -Stephen Moore

Funny how the enemy of this kind of "war" never goes away!

"You look at what has happened to the government in 10 years since the Republicans took control of Congress, the government is twice as big." -Stephen Moore

It is hard to question Moore on this after viewing Stossel's program. In over 75 years there hasn't been a Republican administration that cut the size of government. Under George W. Bush it actually grew 25 percent. Republicans are likely to try to blame this on the war on terror. Really? Then how about Stossel's point that according to the Office of Management and Budget, EPA spending is up 12%, the Department of Agriculture is up 14%,the Department of Interior is up 30 %, the Department of Labor is up 64%, and the Department of Education is up 70%? Which is the party of big wasteful spenders of our hard earned tax dollars? I'm confused now.

The world has over 6 billion people now. Surely that's too many. Stossel reminds us of how doomsayers such as Paul Ehrlich wrote in "Population Bomb" that 65 million Americans would starve in a great die off in the 80's. Guess not. Starvation in populous places does occur but, it was pointed out that this was due to things like civil war and government corruption that interfere with the distribution of food. Since technology enables us to grow more food in smaller areas of land than ever before, the UN has certified that the world actually overproduces food.

Gun Control....don't get me started. The gun control activists do a lot to exaggerate and distort reality. They advocate the dilution of our 2nd amendment rights and try to pass as many restrictive laws and regulations as possible. I've seen better info than what Stossel gave but, it is still an honest portrayal as things really are at least. He demonstrates that despite the hype to the contrary, the CDC(Center for Disease Control)completed a review of studies and concluded that background checks, waiting periods, bans on certain guns and ammunitions, and the Brady law had no statistical affect on violent crime. You will thwart the occasional fool that goes to a gun shop with checks and then you get the "if just one life is saved" argument from the left. Statistically it doesn't measure up and ignores the fact that criminals don't buy guns from dealers. The prisoners interviewed by Stossel scoffed at the gun laws. They would get guns regardless and didn't buy from dealers. The not knowing if a stranger had a gun put these criminals more at pause than the threat of police force or prison. I'm sure the NRA would gladly show you their stats on how gun ownership saves lives but, let me just close with Stossel's report that 36 states have adopted concealed carry laws but, none have reported an upsurge in gun crime.

I have no intention of summarizing every one of Stossel's points in this post. To be sure though the fact that DDT is finally being financed by USAID to stomp out malaria in the 3rd world, that there is plenty room left to dispose of garbage, and that we actually have more forest in the US than we did in 1920 is quite entertaining to confront misconceptions with. This was on ABC huh? Perhaps the Liberal Media is also a myth after all as well?

Unconstitutional NSA Spying

In a press briefing US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales put forward the legal justification for the current policy of using the NSA to spy on US citizens.

US Att. Gen. Gonzales

"Now, in terms of legal authorities, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act provides -- requires a court order before engaging in this kind of surveillance that I've just discussed and the President announced on Saturday, unless there is somehow -- there is -- unless otherwise authorized by statute or by Congress. That's what the law requires. Our position is, is that the authorization to use force, which was passed by the Congress in the days following September 11th, constitutes that other authorization, that other statute by Congress, to engage in this kind of signals intelligence. "-Gonzales

"I'm not -- I can't get into the specific numbers because that information remains classified. Again, this is not a situation where -- of domestic spying. To the extent that there is a moderate and heavy communication involving an American citizen, it would be a communication where the other end of the call is outside the United States and where we believe that either the American citizen or the person outside the United States is somehow affiliated with al Qaeda. "-Gonzales

Question: It's been done retroactively before, hasn't it?

ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: What do you mean, "retroactively"?

Question: You just go ahead and then you apply for the FISA clearance, because it's damn near automatic.

ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: If we -- but there are standards that have to be met, obviously, and you're right, there is a procedure where we -- an emergency procedure that allows us to make a decision to authorize -- to utilize FISA, and then we go to the court and get confirmation of that authority.

Question: General, when you discussed the emergency powers, you said, agility is critical here. And in the case of the emergency powers, as I understand it, you can go in, do whatever you need to do, and within 72 hours just report it after the fact. And as you say, these may not even last very long at all. What would be the difficulty in setting up a paperwork system in which the logs that you say you have the shift supervisors record are simply sent to a judge after the fact? If the judge says that this is not legitimate, by that time probably your intercept is over, wouldn't that be correct?

We shouldn't let Congress off the hook so easily just because, the consultations with them were classified. Hopefully, the Democrat leadership at least attempted a classified hearing and were shutdown by the Republican majority. Although, they may have seen a block by the Republican majority as eminent and thus refused to try.

I say that FISA is in some regards Unconstitutional. However, I wanted to reiterate Att. Gen. Gonzales rationale for claiming FISA protections:

Under FISA a court order must be obtained prior to engaging in surveillance. It can also be done retroactively as mentioned by the reporter in the briefing. Retroactively meaning that you can engage in surveillance and then within 72 hrs. consult with a judge for approval. This is to address issues of "agility" and emergency. This still would provide judicial oversight. The questioner asked Gonzales why this wasn't simply done retroactively if speed was of the essence. His reply was simply that they didn't have to.

FISA stipulates that a court order is necessary unless "otherwise authorized by statute or by Congress." The Bush administration legal team will assert that the Authorization to Use Force given to the President after September 11th by Congress satisfies this.

Under the Congressional Authorization of Force it will be argued that the Bush Administration did indeed have legal grounds for Intelligence activities based on the Hamdi ruling. Hamdi was a US citizen detained as a war criminal. The Supreme Court ruled that the detention of Hamdi was consistent with the Authorization of Force and in line with the War Powers afforded to the President. From this Gonzales draws the grounds for Intelligence gathering involving a US citizen.

This is still not in line with the Constitution. Although, the administration will try to lay this at the feet of Congress to escape scrutiny. Congress wrote FISA, not them. According to FISA, a court order is necessary unless *otherwise authorized by statute or by Congress*. This is key. In an unconstitutional manner judicial oversight is removed and power is shifted from the Judicial Branch to the Legislative Branch. It should also be mentioned that Congress authorized the use of force and did not issue an actual Declaration of War.

Senate Fails to Extend Patriot Act

With a 52-47 vote, the US Senate did not gain the 60 needed votes to shut down a Filibuster on the renewal of the Patriot Act. Thank goodness. This is one attack on our liberties that needs to wither and die. It was an interesting mix of Democrats and Republicans that foiled its passage.

It is one thing to get a warrant to investigate someone that is suspected of being a terrorist but, under the Patriot Act, warrants are no longer needed. When a National Security Letter is issued, the FBI can demand electronic records from a business or organization. Not only do they get the database containing the individual requested but, also those of other innocent non-suspects in those files. From there you can have many a "fishing" expedition.

Even if an organization thought searches were unreasonable, Republican Sen. John Sununu-R of New Hampshire contends that the business or person would be required to show that the government acted in bad faith and he doubted that would be possible. No kidding, with all the secrecy, how do you make a case for that? Who wants to be in a position of being in opposition to the Federal Government?

The government will have access to all your records. Even which books you check out from the library. Roving wire taps and surveillance of "lone wolf" operatives with no ties to organizations will be allowed. Everyone is a potential "lone wolf" the language is so broad. Let's face it, for political reasons alone both parties have the IRS audit members of the opposition. We see the constant abuse of power from both major parties. Tom Delay-R and friends, Frist and his alleged blind trust, the Clinton Filegate, Mike Espy's shenanigans, the pardoning of Mark Rich etc. etc. Sen. Arlen Specter-R PA already has put President Bush on notice that his panel would hold hearings regarding a report that the NSA was already broadly eavesdropping without proper warrants. Do we really want to trust the government to be able to fish for dirt on everybody and not need to at least have probable cause and a warrant? I don't think so.

Senate leader Bill Frist compared critics of the renewal to those who "have called for a retreat and defeat strategy in Iraq. That's the wrong strategy in Iraq. It is the wrong strategy here at home."

Really Bill? Attacking the argument by calling your critics retreat and defeaters? If we just hand over our rights to you then the terrorists ultimately win a big battle in the War on Terror. How he compares a pre-emptive war and occupation in Iraq to actual damage to our freedom is beyond me. I'll trust you with my liberty right after I have faith that your "Blind Trust" is really blind. Go sell some more stock and leave the Constitution alone, ok?

The scary thing is that Democrats I once regarded as way far to the left are making sense now. Take Sen. Russell Feingold-D Wis and US Rep. Bobby Scott -D VA for example:

"We can come together to give the government the tools it needs to fight terrorism
and protect the rights and freedoms of innocent citizens"
-Sen. Russell Feingold

US Rep. Bobby Scott -D VA, is worried because, provisions in the Patriot Act are not being limited to terror but, also now appear in routine crime investigations and activities not necessarily criminal. Click in this area to read the article in Virginia that explains that agents have used the act improperly but, were not aware that they were acting on unlawful orders. It will sound similar to what is being said about the US policy on torture. You'll also see that files on innocent citizens are still kept after they have been determined to be ordinary folks. The question is why?

"You have an incentive to snoop on people for whom there is no probable cause that they've committed a crime"
"The Patriot Act has provisions in it that are extremely invasive into people's private affairs without making any significant difference in public safety,"
"If they limited it to terrorists, there wouldn't be any debate. This is not only for run of the mill crimes, but for activities that aren't even criminal." - US Rep. Scott-VA

It should be noted that US Rep. Bobby Scott(D)-VA, is the only legislator from the Hampton Roads area that voted against the Patriot Act and its renewal. I urge you to contact your senators and let them know you insist on better civil liberties protections being installed in the Patriot Act

Dec. 15th - Bill of Rights Day

On Dec. 15, 1791, the first ten amendments in the Bill of Rights were born. This served to help protect the rights and liberties of the individual that our founding fathers found to be clearly "Self-Evident". Our founders sought to provide safeguards against government tyranny. They understood that all men are created as equals. In the recent past however, our very freedom has come under attack from multiple sides.

The Supreme Court Ruling on Kelo vs. New London dealt a devastating blow to personal property rights. The Fifth Amendment states:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Note where it says that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. Eminent Domain was abused as it was. In Kelo vs. New London it was ruled that the extra tax revenue generated by redeveloping seized land constituted a 'Public Use' Then there is the problem of "Just Compensation" that is also mandated by the Constitution. As soon as a governmental authority hints that condemnation is a possibility, the value of your property tanks as the market realizes the probable outcome. A typical tactic is to wait a few years and compensate the owner at a current "Fair Market" value that reflects that fact. Authorities often work with the same land appraiser for all their property appraisals and they do not always match up with a propertie's true value. There is also the possibility that the government might claim to want to build a school or court building on your land only to change their mind later and hand it over to a private developer when they "realize" it was not such a great idea after all. A convenient 'Ooops!' if you will.

Then there is the Patriot Act which has mostly served to take away our freedom rather than protect it. What did Ben Franklin say? Something like, "Those that would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither"? Here is an instance of legislation that gives the federal government far reaching ability to spy on your activities without going through the usual 'Probable Cause' protocols. Warrants are no longer needed nor is substantiated evidence that one associates with terrorists. If the gag provision stands in the legislation then you can not even tell anyone that you were made to hand over documents and information. That makes it a little difficult to point out abuse if you can not publicly address it. You have to rely on the government's court system.

The Bush administration often addresses the critics of the Patriot Act by saying that they have failed to uncover any abuses of the new provisions. Let us grant them that and make the assumption that the Bush team will NEVER abuse it. However, what about the next President and his/her administration? What if it is Hillary Clinton in office? Will the Republicans call you unpatriotic if you oppose a Clinton using the act's provisions? How concerned were those Republicans when the Clintons ended up with 900 FBI files on prominent Republicans? Will the Bush team promise that they never use the IRS to audit Democrats they have a dislike for. Bill O'Rilley certainly took exception to his audits while Clinton was in office. This is a double edged sword here. The Republicans need to understand that they will not always control the Presidency and both houses.

You the individual, need to also realize that it is your responsibility to do something when our freedoms are threatened. At least the Tidewater Libertarian Party of Virginia Beach is willing to take a stand. It was our Vice Chairman and legal counsel Stephen Merrill that filed an Amicus Brief or "Friend of the Court" brief with the Supreme Court on Kelo vs. New London. Unfortunately, the ruling went the other way but, Merrill was proactive on this issue on behalf of the TLP and your rights to private property. The Tidewater Libertarian Party also actively engages in educational forums such as our Bill of Rights celebration that was held on December 15th of this year in the Town Center of VA. Beach, Virginia. It had to be moved into the Hilton Garden Inn due to inclement weather but, keynote speaker Professor Douglas Walker and the students from Princess Anne High that read each of the first ten amendments made it a success none the less. Below are some pictures from this particular event.

From the left, Britt Howard-TLP member, Ken Taylor Suffolk Party Chair, unknown *sorry*, 3 students from PHS, Wally Erb, and Chad-TLP

Students, guests, and to the far right is Leslie

our Chair for the Bill of Rights Day Committee

University Professor Douglas Walker and

participating students from Princess Anne High

Students from Princess Anne High in the office

of Sen. George Allen-R (VA) after the presentation