Gee, glad I live in Canada. Of course, we are about as messed up. But at least we can console ourselves with large helpings of poutine!

Posted by: Paul Darcy at May 11, 2005 10:39 AM

This is certainly a dirty, disingenuous move on the part of the Congresscritters. Unfortunately, this is a common tactic - add some unrelated, controversial provision as a "rider" to a bill that is popular and close to a vote.

I would certainly encourage everyone to write and call your reps and Senators - keep in mind that a lot can change between the time a bill is first passed by one side of the Congress, and the time it is actually enacted.

Finally, Congress can "try" to do anything they want. They often do, even when it's clearly unconstitutional. As much as some people complain about the current Supreme Court, they have had some real balls in the last 10 years in terms of shooting down laws that go beyond Congress' authority. In this case, Congress can no more "exempt" a law it passed from judicial review than it can wave its hand and "exempt" the law from being presented and signed by the President. In other words, this whole premise is ridiculous.

Posted by: DaveESQ at May 11, 2005 10:54 AM

You know it passed the Senate on a 100-0 vote? I'm a Dem, but I'm mad as hell at everybody. Not a single one was against it. Not even the usual token protest vote. Sad.

Posted by: rdhatt at May 11, 2005 10:54 AM

Wil - I'm glad you called them the "Extreme Religious Right" because I have sort of considered myself a member of the religious right for years. But the bills that are passing Congress are outrageous, even to me. I'm conservative, but these folks are nuts.

Posted by: OddieTaco at May 11, 2005 10:54 AM

Indeed. Soon the jackboots will be kicking in YOUR doors... It is scary and sad to see a nation that used to stand for such noble things as Peace and Liberty and Justice For All becoming what it is today.

Posted by: Glyn Evans at May 11, 2005 10:59 AM

Wil,

Please take a moment and visit: http://www.infowars.com/index.html

I came across this site (created by Alex Jones a radioshow host based in Texas)a few days ago while doing a search for the Nat.ID on google. The broad depth of the information on this site is mind blowing and very disturbing. He seems to be very credible.

Anyway, I'd like to know what you think. Thanks in advance.

Fats

Posted by: fatsvernon at May 11, 2005 11:12 AM

Politicians are getting worse! There once was a time when they actually thought the voting public had an intellect. Do they think no one would notice? Maybe more of the problem with politicians these days is that they don't care or respect what the voting public thinks. Pushing this bill through a case in point...even in Canada we have a Liberal minority government have lost touch with the voting public. They (the minority governent) just lost a non-confidence vote in Parliment which should bring down the government. The Prime Minister said that it really wasn't a confidence vote at all just a trial run on one... Huh!
Do they think we're idiots? At least that's all we have to contend with up here...unless the US government decides that Canada would look better as a US state and attaches the invasion order to another "support the troops" bill. In that case we're screwed!

Posted by: psycho at May 11, 2005 11:14 AM

Keerist!! In case of emergency, keep your passport handy.

Considering how prevalent air travel is in this country, we're in effect saying that you need travel papers to go from state to state. Welcome to the Soviet States of America.

-Chris

Posted by: Animeraider at May 11, 2005 11:15 AM

This gets uglier and uglier.

But, I just realized something interesting and would like to advise everybody not to fall into the trap.

This bill was described by the MSM as "must-pass" bill. Really, besides an "Act of War" resolution while we are under attack (in which case, no President has ever bothered to wait to get one), there really isn't any such thing. The MSM made this SEEM like a "must-pass" so that they could paint anybody who went up against it as being either "an anti-War nutcase" or "anti troops." It's sad that Democratic Senators don't believe their constituents would understand the explanation "I voted against that funding because they tacked on something that had nothing to do with funding the troops." Sure, there would be ads against them in the next election saying "Senator X voted against the troops," but Senator X could reply "My opponent thinks you are as stupid as dirt when he tells you that I voted against the troops. I did no such thing. Are you really THAT stupid?"

Point is, the Democrats WANTED the cover of it supposedly being a "must pass" bill. Had this bill not passed, the war wouldn't have suddenly stopped. Troops wouldn't suddenly have been without bullets or body armor (any more than they ALREADY ARE). The free world wouldn't have come to a complete stop. Had 45 Democrats said "No, that's just NOT going to happen. Take that out, or pass it 55 to 45 and we'll make a POINT of the fact that you were willing to sell out Democracy without debate."

But again, the Democrats decided to "choose their battles" and probably figured they would strike it down in court.

Personally, I am losing faith and becoming VERY afraid.

The Days of Decision are coming. We are frogs begin slow-cooked, and by the time we realize the water is boiling, we won't have the strength to jump out of the pot. Perhaps we already don't.

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon
CLL2001@Gmail.com

Republicans lie and innocent people die.
Republicans steal and give to their rich friends, leaving just an IOU for our kids to pay off.
Republicans cheat and think they are "moral."
We must flush away all Republicans in '06 and '08.

Posted by: CyberChas at May 11, 2005 11:22 AM

Wil,

I consider myself a conservative and a republican and I am very much against the Real ID Act. I have contacted my senator and urged him to vote against HR 418. I was just in Washington DC and I wish I had been able to read your blog and find out about this while I was there and able to speak to my representative and senators in person.

I urge you not to generalize Republicans in your writing. I know it's hard to not do that, but as I'm sure all Democrats aren't for abortion and gay rights please know that all Republicans don't agree with everything that is said and done by the party. I actually hate voting within a party. The best man - or woman - for the job should be elected to the office.

Posted by: crouton at May 11, 2005 11:22 AM

Crouton:

I don't want to get into a "yahoo forms" type discussion on Wil's forum (it's too damn nice a place), and Wil, if you think this post has gone over the line, please remove it.

But, people need to understand this basic principle...

THIS IS GERMANY IN 1932.

The Republican party is following an AGENDA and anybody who supports them is complicit in the success of their agenda.

You can't say: "I'm a Republican, but I don't believe that this bad thing they are doing is right, or that bad thing they are doing is right." If you say you are a Republican and you ever vote for a Republican, YOU ARE SUPPORTING THEIR AGENDA, WHETHER YOU WANT TO OR NOT. YOU ARE A COLLABORATOR!!!

It's time to TAKE SIDES. It is down to "US" and "THEM." I believe that Republicans are "THEM" and everybody else (not specifically Democrats, btw) are "US."

Apologists and collaborators are going to have to remember that old saying from the 1960's -- "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem." No more just driving around in your nice car and filling up with gas and paying your taxes and thinking "it's not my problem."

We are as close to fascism in this country as we have ever been.

The Days of Decision are coming.

We are frogs begin slow-cooked, and by the time we realize the water is boiling, we won't have the strength to jump out of the pot. Perhaps we already don't.

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon
CLL2001@Gmail.com

Republicans lie and innocent people die.
Republicans steal and give to their rich friends, leaving just an IOU for our kids to pay off.
Republicans cheat and think they are "moral."
We must flush away all Republicans in '06 and '08.

Posted by: CyberChas at May 11, 2005 11:32 AM

I have been reading on the blog about the national ID cards & it infuriates me. I honestly cannot believe what this country has become in the last 5 years!
Recently, there was a spot on the news about a bill in Florida allowing people to use guns & this law actually protects them. I can't remember a lot of the details, but you should look it up. I just know I'll be staying away from Florida for awhile. It's frightening. I'm beginning to wonder why we're over in Iraq @ all...perhaps we're taking lessons from their old regime?

Kindest regards,
Mandee

Posted by: Mandee at May 11, 2005 11:33 AM

"Do they think we're idiots?"
Yes, in fact, everyone of wealth and power does think the masses are mere sheep to be led along to the slaughter. I am a very, stress, very conservative person, but noone, Democrat or Republican, has the right to alter our Constitution. Whether it is the basic right to life that was destroyed by RoevWade or by this bill. Those in power, both Democrat and Republican, have all been chipping away at our rights for a hundred and forty years, beginning with the Civil War. The sheep were led to believe that slavery was what started that war, but it was over the right of the state to make it's own laws to govern itself. Abraham Lincoln, who is touted to have freed the slaves, said during the Civil War, that if he could stop the war without freeing a single slave, he would. (side note: slavery is wrong, and I am in no way endorsing or condoning it. It is morally reprehensible to think one human should be able to own another, so save the comments, please) Soon after at the turn of the twentieth century an ammendment was illegally passed allowing for an income tax. (Illegally because our beloved income tax was never properly ratified by the required 3/4 majority necessary to make an ammendment to the constitution; even your books the IRS gives you refer to it as a voluntary tax. Voluntary as long as you pay, if not they arrest and seize, before trial in many cases.) After the stock market crash of 1929, Joseph Kennedy pushed legislation disallowing "the masses" to make certain "risky" investments. Did you know it is illegal for the average man to even be told about, because his net worth is under $1million?(not to mention a required minimum annual income)
Even though Wil and I disagree on a lot of thinks fundamentally, I'm with him on this, I say lets spend some time organizing a nationwide strike, and shut down the government. Peaceful, of course, no inciting to riot here!

Posted by: jayep at May 11, 2005 11:35 AM

"Do they think we're idiots?"
Yes, in fact, everyone of wealth and power does think the masses are mere sheep to be led along to the slaughter. I am a very, stress, very conservative person, but noone, Democrat or Republican, has the right to alter our Constitution. Whether it is the basic right to life that was destroyed by RoevWade or by this bill. Those in power, both Democrat and Republican, have all been chipping away at our rights for a hundred and forty years, beginning with the Civil War. The sheep were led to believe that slavery was what started that war, but it was over the right of the state to make it's own laws to govern itself. Abraham Lincoln, who is touted to have freed the slaves, said during the Civil War, that if he could stop the war without freeing a single slave, he would. (side note: slavery is wrong, and I am in no way endorsing or condoning it. It is morally reprehensible to think one human should be able to own another, so save the comments, please) Soon after at the turn of the twentieth century an ammendment was illegally passed allowing for an income tax. (Illegally because our beloved income tax was never properly ratified by the required 3/4 majority necessary to make an ammendment to the constitution; even your books the IRS gives you refer to it as a voluntary tax. Voluntary as long as you pay, if not they arrest and seize, before trial in many cases.) After the stock market crash of 1929, Joseph Kennedy pushed legislation disallowing "the masses" to make certain "risky" investments. Did you know it is illegal for the average man to even be told about, because his net worth is under $1million?(not to mention a required minimum annual income)
Even though Wil and I disagree on a lot of thinks fundamentally, I'm with him on this, I say lets spend some time organizing a nationwide strike, and shut down the government. Peaceful, of course, no inciting to riot here!

Posted by: jayep at May 11, 2005 11:36 AM

Cyberchas, I agree with Crouton in one sense. Crouton means that he/she has a fundamental belief that certain things within the democratic party are morally wrong, and could not in good concience, support them. Our only option, unfortunately, is to vote our concience, as I am sure you do. America isn't about everyone agreeing, that would be closer to Communism. Had my senator said, "Hey, I think I'll rip up the Constitution and throw it in your face." I would have voted differently. Keep in mind, back in the 1980's, it was Ronald Reagan, a Republican, who kept asking a Democratically held House and Senate for the line item veto to prevent such things as this. They knew he'd cut their pork barrel spending and reign in the deficit, so they would not give it to him. Unfortunately, the republicans responded in kind when Clinton wanted the same thing. As voters, we must demand change, but pointing fingers at people who agree with you on this issue and declaring them to be collaborators in kind with Nazis, sheesh, the first thing the Nazis did was legalize abortion and euthanasia... who should we consider the Nazis?

Posted by: jayep at May 11, 2005 11:45 AM

Just wait until all the religous folks out there decide to label this the 'mark of the beast' and start preparing for the end of the world.

Posted by: MarcoPolo at May 11, 2005 11:46 AM

Hey, now, any good reason to stock up on supplies and bring down fear upon the masses is a good one. In fact, this may all be a plot by Wal-Mart to increase sales. Instill mass hysteria and force us to buy food, flashlights and bottled water... they could make billions...lol

Posted by: jayep at May 11, 2005 12:02 PM

I think people who believe THAT strongly on either side of the fence should just challenge each other to a duel and be done with it. Chas is no better than his Extreme-Right counterparts: You cannot, simply CANNOT, have a civilized debate when you're the only one being civilized.

Hate speech is hate speech to matter what group you're making generalizations about.

As a test, Chas (and everyone), what if you take his tagline:

"Republicans lie and innocent people die.
Republicans steal and give to their rich friends, leaving just an IOU for our kids to pay off.
Republicans cheat and think they are "moral."
We must flush away all Republicans in '06 and '08."

...and replace "Republican" with "Jew"...

...or "Nigger."

I have no doubt he spewed the word "Republican" out with all the bile and vitriol usually accompanying the vile names I also listed.

I'm deeply against the ID card.

I'm more against bigoted bastards that wrap themselves in the flag like it's a magical cloak of protection (+3 against the slings and arrows of criticism.)

Posted by: Thomas at May 11, 2005 12:05 PM

How about instead of debating each other when we all essetially are saying the same thing (Real ID is of the bad) and use that fire and brimstone to let our governmental reps know how we feel?

Although since the average political candidate has more corporate sponsors than a NASCAR driver, not sure how much good it'll do.

Posted by: GeminiLove at May 11, 2005 12:11 PM

Republicans brought this on us. Why not point out the obvious and use the same type or rhetoric on them they use on the rest of us and our rights?

well, America was a nice experiment while it lasted. It took unpatriotic bigots only six years to tear it down under the leadership of George W. Bush.

Posted by: spacewriter at May 11, 2005 12:35 PM

Spacewriter...

How many Republicans are in the Senate? How many Senators voted to pass this?

Republicans brought this on us? They may have come up with the idea, but it looks like the Dems had just as much to do with it getting passed.

Posted by: MarcoPolo at May 11, 2005 12:41 PM

Amen, Thomas.

CyberChas is obviously as much of the problem as those in power now and is representative of the type of left-wing radicals with whom he no doubt keeps company.

Republicans are not the problem. Radicals are the problem, on either side of the dividing line, left or right. And the problem, as I see it, GeminiLove, is that talking to our representatives is talking to radicals. It's useless. Voting them out of office is better. Your intention is not lost on me, though, but I admit to being extremely jaded.

Further, I'd like to say that the people in power now are not republicans. GW is so far right, he's giving republicans a bad name, lol. He's blurred the line between extreme right and extreme left. He's grown government, spent loads of money, and put government more and more in the people's lives. This is not republicanism. Come on.

This country is as divided as it ever has been. I know, though, in my heart of hearts that things happen for a reason and truth always prevails. Maybe it has to get worse before more people can wake up and see things with new, fresh eyes.

I hear the south of France is nice this time of year...

Open sesame!
AB

Posted by: alibaba199 at May 11, 2005 12:44 PM

Marco beat me too it, but I was going to say that a bill passing 100-0 ( I think that's the tally previously mentioned) means it wasn't just the Republicans passing the bill...

Posted by: psycho at May 11, 2005 12:46 PM

Wil,

There's an old saying that goes 'you don't get the government you want - you get the government you deserve.' This is what our collective apathy and willingness to be led by big business has gotten us.

I'm disgusted at how our system works. I'm outraged by the Real ID and all the baggage it brought with it. Am I surprised?

Not one bit.

Face it, if we want America back, we need to TAKE it back, but that would mean missing an episode or two of American Idol, and we just can't have that.

Remember this, America - we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: davelog at May 11, 2005 12:48 PM

In defense of the guy up above who says he is a Republican, but does not agree with the current administration's agenda (Crouton):

It's a completely understandable position. I, myself, am an independednt who hangs out a little to the far left (lest anyone aim their guns at me). While being willing to stand, even in name with the current manifestation of the Republican Party *is* tacit approval of their actions, it does not discredit the statement that one can be a Republican and not agree with any of this. Because, fact is, ALL of this nonsense is very much against the core principles on which the Republican ideology is based. They are calling themselves Republicans, but they are not acting as such. Perhaps the definition of Republican is changing, but it had traditionally been Republican=conservative=belief in *small* government, as opposed to Democrat=liberal=belief in somewhat larger government (more social programs).

So, yes, you are perhaps a truer Republican than they, but they control Congress now, don't they?

Crouton, you may hit a point where you may have to make a moral judgement to leave a political party founded on principles that you believe in, because it is no longer governed by those principles. Good luck with that. (sincerely)

Posted by: naiah christine earhart at May 11, 2005 01:21 PM

I don't like conforming to any one political party. Not only do I not agree with any of them, but I think that choosing sides just goes further to divide us as a nation. Now, I'm a Christian and probably the only uber-conservative here considering my age, but this whole crap with the REAL ID is freaking nuts man! It's going to eventually get so bad that we can't take a leak in our own bathroom.

This kinda crap makes me sad for our country and how it's gone downhill so fast from what it was around 100 or even 50 years ago.

Posted by: Mettaur at May 11, 2005 01:34 PM

Wil, I understand your scorn for this Bill; however, why don't you hold the democrats accountable for their votes in the Senate? If I am not mistaken, the bill passed 100-0.

Is it just evil republicans at work, or are our elected officials just doing what they think their constituents want?

Posted by: James at May 11, 2005 01:44 PM

Philibuster!!!!!
The Dems have philibustered ever judicial appointment for six years, and they can't do it for this? I hate the philibuster, because it is so overused, but this is the type of thing it was designed to prevent. The Dems could have threatened a philibuster to have the extra baggage removed, and the media attention from CNN would have brought this out in a national debate and made the dems heroes. As a ultra-conservative, Ted Kennedy being a hero is a bit unnerving, however, I could have lived with it.

Posted by: jayep at May 11, 2005 01:53 PM

Wil said, "As a postscript, the icing on the cake of this whole thing has to be the way that the Republican sponsors of the bill actually voted down a proposed provision in the national ID card part of the law that would prevent the government from using the Real ID database as a national database of gun owners

Of course. Why am I not surprised? The Republicans in Congress don't care at all about upholding the Constitution. They have abandoned their traditional belief in limited, non-intrusive government. They are the collective bitch of the Extreme Religious Right and groups like the NRA. They are tyrants, and Democrats who allowed this to pass without discussion or debate are cowards."

Now first, I want to make clear I don't disagree on this issue. I do think that both the way this went through and what it does are wrong. Having said that, I disagree with your over-the-top characterization of Republicans (I'm not a Republican either.) Specifically here you say they are the "bitch" of the NRA, yet they VOTED DOWN a provision that would have PREVENTED the use of this new ID database as a gun registry - something the NRA would be AGAINST. In other words, the leadership did something their base (including me) is gonna hate. So reign it in there a bit Wil. Not all us right-wingers are unreasonable. Your not-very-veiled attempt in your previous post on the topic to paint Sensenbrenner as a Nazi ("Herr Sensenbrenner") was clumsy and inappropriate also. I work for a German-based corporation and that comes across badly to me, especially given that modern Germany is more aligned with you politically than with these "fascist" Republicans.

Posted by: JAM at May 11, 2005 01:53 PM

We've really gotten off of Wil's final thoughts, me included, which was to stage a general strike. What does everyone think of that, since everyone agrees the National ID card is a bad thing?

Posted by: jayep at May 11, 2005 01:56 PM

The Republican party's approach to issues like this isn't being driven by gun owners or hill billies or, really, by Bible-bangers either. It is a frightening facet of mainstream America that believes that the government can and should have these powers to fight the terrorist boogieman.

It's being driven by people like The Rich Asshole Neighbor (TM) and soccer moms who have been whipped into a near panic about terrorism and "Homeland Security" (as opposed to all the other "lands" where we are concerned about security - I guess the government isn't concerned about Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or the Virgin Islands...but I digress), and are willing to go along with anything that gives the government some ability - real or perceived - to combat this supposed threat. These people don't care about politics, they just want the government to "deal with it" while they worry about their own private lives, complacently assuming that the government is benign and benevolent.

This stuff is bad news, folks. I "used to be" a Republican too, and while I have never been a hardcore anything, I can honestly say now that I am closer to the Democrats overall.

Posted by: DaveESQ at May 11, 2005 02:27 PM

DaveESQ, I'm afraid you have it wrong. It's not the soccer moms and frightened neighbors pushing these initiatives. It is the neo-con Republican machine (in concert with the MSM) pushing these initiatives and USING FEAR to get them through.

Read the documents of the Project for a New American Century (http://www.newamericancentury.org/). They specifically said that it would take "some kind of modern Pearl Harbour" to give them the leeway to implement their agenda. With 9/11 they got that event. Many conspiracy theorists would maintain that the Administration would even have allowed 9/11 to happen (or aided) in order to have their "motivating moment" so that their agenda could be implemented.

As for the German who objects to the references to Nazi's -- too bad. That is history, and it is, unfortunately, being re-lived here in the USA. I was amazed as I read the timeline of Hitler's rise to power how QUICKLY things started to happen when they happened. Who was going to take the risk seriously in 1928 when his party got only 3% of the vote; and yet by January of 1933 when he was made Chancellor it was probably too late to stop him. Three months later Dachau concentration camp was established.

If you put a bunch of frogs into a pot of boiling water they will immediately jump out. If you put them into a pot of mildly warm water they will sit quietly (perhaps, watching AMERICAN IDOL). If you then slowly heat up the water, they will relax languidly (perhaps following the trials and tribulations of Michael Jackson and the Runaway Bride). By the time the water is boiling and they are moments from dying, their strength will be sapped and they will be unable to jump from the pot.

The Days of Decision are coming.

We are frogs begin slow-cooked, and by the time we realize the water is

boiling, we won't have the strength to jump out of the pot. Perhaps we

already don't.

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon
CLL2001@Gmail.com

Republicans lie and innocent people die.
Republicans steal and give to their rich friends, leaving just an IOU for

our kids to pay off.
Republicans cheat and think they are "moral."
We must flush away all Republicans in '06 and '08.

P.S. I completely agree that a GENERAL STRIKE is a good idea, but don't know how you would get people to do it. You would need to get the MSM to promote it, and they won't. And you would probably need a "catalyzing event" to force it, and that won't be publicized either. If Americans aren't able to be informed about the theft of a Presidential election (perhaps the most awesome political criminal enterprise in history) then what event could possibly motivate them to "go to the streets" for their Democracy.

Posted by: CyberChas at May 11, 2005 02:44 PM

Charlie L-

I'm not really interested in a protracted debate on a blog comment thread, but suffice it to say that I've been hearing shocking things about giving government more power coming out of the mouths of Rich Asshole Neighbors (TM) and soccer moms continuously since 9/11/01. Before any political machine got its story straight. People who won't think things through in a balanced way often react in this extreme way to a serious threat, and have for all of humanity.

Also - if this is a neo-conservative agenda without broader support (or at least broader apathy by the parties I've mentioned), then why are the Democrats apparently just rolling over? If this is a lunatic fringe idea, how does it get glossed over 100-0? What, or who, are they afraid of if they oppose this measure? Probably the otherwise liberal soccer mom and New England/SoCAL/NY Rich Asshole Neighbor votes.

As far as conspiracy theories and activist journalist websites like New American Century - I pretty much don't listen to them at all. I also don't take as gospel any media source's "report" or "analysis" of a bill or law, since the people writing and editing the articles simply aren't qualified to evaluate the REAL effects and implications of these things. I cannot tell you how many times I have laughed out loud at some liberal rag's chicken little analysis, or thrown something at my TV because Bill O'Reilly has gotten the law so wrong, yet stated it so pompously. The media consistently presents the law or a proposed law in a manner that suits their tag lines, rather than for what it actually is.

In other words - no, I don't have it wrong.

Posted by: DaveESQ at May 11, 2005 03:05 PM

I can't believe news sources are reporting on the RealID part of it and not the constitutional issues. Another thing that has me concerned is that the same rider tactic will be used to extend pieces of the Patriot Act.

A correction to the ArsTechnica artilce, the bill is acutally HR 1268 not HR 418. HR 418 was the original RealID bill and HR 1268 is the appropriations bill. After reading it it seems all of HR 418 was included in the apporpriations bill but the wording on the "NO JUDICAL REVIEW" section has been altered a bit. I wish they had covered the bill that passed and not it's failed predecesor.

Posted by: phuulishness@gmail.com at May 11, 2005 03:40 PM

The suggestion that the Republican Legislators leading the way amidst the current trends towards less personal freedom, less open government, more governmental intrusion into people's lives - and by extension the entire Republican leadership - think we're all idiots is surely true at some level. There are people out there who consider "us" - meaning not them - as idiots collectively, and those who simply don't think of us as one thing or another because we're outside of their collective consciousness.


More alarmingly, there is an entire generation of political thinkers both in strategy and policy, elected and appointed, who are not thinking of the long term health of our country, but who only know how to craft either plan or policy in a short-sighted situational way.


I think of them as the "MBA Politicos", not because I think of people with those degrees as evil, but because we've had a certain bit of practical demonstration thanks to Worldcom and Enron and Haliburton, to name a few, of how short-sighted and selfish many thinkers in the current business degree crop can be, and the political effects of that kind of thinking is certainly going to be as devestating politically as the corporate ones were economically, and what we're seeing in the political sphere is srprisingly similar to the blind one-sided optimism we saw cause those corporate scandals.


Fortunately, we've still got opportunities to slow down or stop this MBA armageddon. Not all the people who currently support the Republican extremists in office are all that convinced of the rightness of their position, and when push comes to shove, many are just not going to be able to do what amounts to betrayal of the centuries of leadership and integrity that have come before them. All they need is a little courage, and that is something we can give them I think.

Posted by: Sitka Larry at May 11, 2005 03:41 PM

If I may interject for a moment. Will, you indicated "Okay, prohibiting judicial review of anything is absolutely insane. Without judicial review of laws, how to we have a balanced government? How do we protect our constitutional rights when unconstitutional laws are passed? How do we prevent the tyranny of the majority? Does this mean that the United States ceases to be a nation of laws, and becomes a nation of men?"

Indeed, it may seem that the prohibition of judicial review is insane; however, Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution provides, "the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

Indeed, Congress does have the authority, granted to them by our founding fathers, to withhold Law from the review of the Supreme Court.

Posted by: John D Schutlz at May 11, 2005 04:04 PM

You know, it's funny. I have to say that after reading the comments here, I'm glad we have the people in government we have now. I'd much rather have them than you crazy bastards! :)

AB

Posted by: alibaba199 at May 11, 2005 04:29 PM

I find the REAL ID bill pretty frightening (we might be getting something similar in the UK shortly). I've been trying to follow this from the UK but it really does mystify me how this is going to become law. I read that it was "must pass" because, as well as the funds for the military in Iraq, it also included increases in payments to the families of military personnel who had been killed. Who was it who lumped all this stuff together into one bill?

One other point: have the Republicans denounced "small government" or something? They seem to be spending a hell of a lot of money.
BTW, I'd probably be described as a liberal in the US.

Posted by: Garry at May 11, 2005 05:26 PM

If I may point out one thing: The concept of "judicial review" (i.e. declaring laws unconstitutional) appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution. It was established by the Supreme Court in the famous Marbury v. Madison case. On the other hand, as John D. Schultz points out, the Congress explicitly has the power to set the jurisdiction of Federal courts, up to and including the Supreme Court.

That said...I looked at the bill text (on Thomas) and the section of the U.S. Code it amends, and it appears that this concerns only a series of improvements to be made along the border near San Diego. The original of that section provided for a waiver of the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act to the extent required to construct this. (And that part was passed in 1996.) I'm guessing somebody found another way to throw a monkey wrench into the construction process, which the provision in the current bill was designed to circumvent. Obviously, this issue has gotten a lot more critical in recent years, and we badly need that border shored up; we shouldn't have to subordinate the defense of the United States to a bunch of radical environmentalists and NIMBYs. But to interpret this strictly limited grant of waiver as an imminent collapse of rule of law in the United States is wildly alarmist at best.

I'm still not fond of the REAL ID act as a whole, nor of the way it was slotted into the military appropriations bill. There are better things that could be done to curb illegal immigration, but I wonder if the Republicans, including the Administration, have the balls to actually deal with this issue in an appropriate manner.

Posted by: Erbo at May 11, 2005 05:35 PM

I just went through the Public Print of the legislation (it's final version), and it appears that the entire Real ID section has been struck out. Forgive my ignorance, but would that mean that it was eliminated?

(link to text of legislation)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:5:./temp/~c109IKMhiR::

Posted by: naiah christine earhart at May 11, 2005 05:52 PM

"They are tyrants, and Democrats who allowed this to pass without discussion or debate are cowards." This is only the beginning, my friend. All it takes is the right (or is that wrong?) president to tip the scales, and our government will cease to be a "democracy," in both name and practice. I forsee this occuring not within my lifetime (if I'm lucky), but most certainly sometime in the next century. It has happened before, after all - just look at Rome...

Posted by: Isorion at May 11, 2005 06:53 PM

Naiah:

It's there, just not exactly where you were looking. It is H.R.1268, 109th Session of Congress, and down towards the bottom of the text is Title VII, Additional General Provisions, Division B: Real ID Act of 2005. It has three separate Titles of its own, and 19 Sections. The URL I get is http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/
D?c109:11:./temp/~c109AzPZlV::, but that is a temporary link and I think people looking will just have to go to Thomas and search for themselves.

Of note is the following under "Major Congressional Actions":

5/10/2005 Conference report agreed to in Senate: Senate agreed to conference report by Yea-Nay Vote. 100 - 0. Record Vote Number: 117.
5/10/2005 Cleared for White House.

The more I learn about this, and the faster the juggernaut behind this picks up speed, the more frightened I become.

Posted by: sunpony at May 11, 2005 07:00 PM

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the American flag." — Huey Long

Nuff said.

Posted by: eric at May 11, 2005 07:28 PM

Indeed! Why should we think that the form fascism will take here will be a clone of what took hold in 1930s Italy? It will be a different iteration of the same phenomenon. But that makes it more frightening, because it is harder to attack and executed with more cunning.

Posted by: sunpony at May 11, 2005 07:37 PM

Congress can limit the jurisdiction of federal courts but probably not of state courts, so if the realID bill is unconstitutional (I'm not sure that it is), file suit in your local courthouse.

A general strike would be cool though.

Posted by: vark at May 11, 2005 07:57 PM

What the hell does the NRA have to do with the RealID bill? NOTHING. Wil, are really you so into insulting anyone who does not share your exact political beliefs that you ignore the facts of the topic at hand?

I am a member of the NRA. Every member I know is against this bill. In case you had not noticed, we are the "pro-personal freedoms" people. We are the people who want the very least amount of government possible. We are the tin foil hat brigade, armed. Be against our cause for any number of other reasons you may have, but don't tie us to this shit!

Wil, I did not think you were that stupid. I mean, is it stupidity or do you have to lash out at any general group you dislike over any unrelated issue? Seriously, why not just claim that the Mormons or the Jews or the ACLU is for RealID? I am so against RealID you cannot even believe it. Your highlighting of the issue had me right up until the last paragraph. Are you this thoughtless in real life?

Posted by: Joe Jans at May 11, 2005 08:33 PM

For a similar thread check here on a post about torture. It argues that we must absolutely uphold the Law against torture, even while acknowledging that at some points someone may have to risk life in prison to extract information from a prisoner (in the limit case of a dirty bomb).

When Gonzales calls the Geneva Conventions "quaint", then the Exception (torture) to the Law becomes part of the Law itself, contaminating it. Law ceases to be Law, and we do once again become men, barbarian.

Posted by: CPROBES at May 11, 2005 08:37 PM

Regardless of who's to blame, or who SHOULD be blamed...
...the prospect is frightening to the very core.

I hope that those of us with brain matter will stand up for the whole 'lot' of us and speak out against this madness...before it goes way too far (like it hasn't already) :p

Posted by: GirlNerfHerder at May 11, 2005 09:36 PM

I have been sitting here giving a great deal of thought to what your wrote, and i think what we need is a person WHO HAS BALLS AND NO FEAR to tell everyone in washington what they think someone who has a independent mind and someone who is not a sell out.
I have seen more misery then good and the assclowns in washington forget it is US THEY WORK FOR AND NOT THERE OWN INTREST.
This mean demorcrats and republicans alike it is time for new blood and fresh ideas, THE "W" has turned this once great country of ours the a shadow of it's former glory.
gore or kerry wasnt the answer but they would have been a better choice.
What we need is someone who is NOT LINK TO ANY RELIGOUS GROUPS AND WAS NOT HANDED THE SILVER SPOON.
we need someone who has seen the worse this country has to offer and knows what to do to make it right and then we can worry about the worlds problems after.
sorry i didnt mean to vent but it had to said
thank you

Posted by: Nick Notarangelo at May 11, 2005 09:41 PM

If you put a bunch of frogs into a pot of boiling water they will immediately jump out. If you put them into a pot of mildly warm water they will sit quietly...If you then slowly heat up the water, they will relax languidly...By the time the water is boiling and they are moments from dying, their strength will be sapped and they will be unable to jump from the pot.

Um...wrong.

Just for the record.

Posted by: Alun Clewe at May 11, 2005 10:03 PM

America isn't about freedom anymore, it's about making money. If you don't have money, you don't matter.

Nobody is going to care about your angry faxes. They didn't stop an unjust war, they certainly aren't going to stop this.

It's too late. The bad guys have already won. Make the best life for yourself that you can, but get over the idea that you have any meaningful input into how you are governed.

Posted by: FNRThomas at May 12, 2005 04:21 AM

OK, everyone now, especially you leftist liberals who populate this place - breath deeply, talk a walk and have a cold glass of water.

It's time for a reality check.

This is not a republican problem - none of you were bitching about the democrat problem when they controlled congress for 40 odd years, nor did you whine and cry when Billy Boy was attemtping to ruin the country.

The answer to this is to get involved, contact your rep's no matter which party they belong to and tell them what you want.

Breath deeply again, sit back and relax.

This is the scary part for all of you.

The Republican party won. They have the white house and both houses and with any luck, the supreme court pretty soon as well.

The dem's have had the opportunity to screw the country for may decades (especially you liberals) now it is the republicans turn to roll the screw ups back and destroy the welfare state the liberals have created.

The problems congress has now with the ID bill, etc., were created by ALL the politicians, not just the republicans. If the republicans got it passed by attaching it to another piece of legislation, so be it. Did you piss and moan when the Dem's did the same with countless pieces of their own legislatoin when they were in control?

probably not.

You people made this mess, you people didn't stop YOUR party from the same abuses you are crying about the republicans doing.

Cheney in '08!

Posted by: buildersent at May 12, 2005 04:38 AM

Since yesterday, everyone is still ranting and raving, arguing who is at fault. Guys (and gals), WE are at fault. Not just Republicans, but Democrats and Independants, alike. We get caught up in the political whirlwinds created by politicians that divide us, thus distracting us from the truth. Truth: politicians, whether elected or appointed are only concerned with maintaining and increasing their own personal base of power. And here we are doing it again. We are so caught up in finger pointing and blame gaming that we have lost sight of what, so far, each and every one of us is in AGREEMENT over, which is none of us likes the ID Card. Let's do something about it. Quit bitching at each other about who did what to who, and create a mastermind focus group. Figure out a solution.

Posted by: jayep at May 12, 2005 06:14 AM

Indeed, it may seem that the prohibition of judicial review is insane; however, Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution provides, "the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

Indeed, Congress does have the authority, granted to them by our founding fathers, to withhold Law from the review of the Supreme Court.

It's not like any of the left or right extremists here give a FUCKING RAT'S ASS about parts of the contitution they don't like. Each side would rewrite the country in the only way they see it, WITH BLINDERS ON.

I would also like to ask that anyone who didn't vote in the presidential/congressional elections to shut their pie hole and take whatever comes their way: You didn't get off your Dairy Queen laden asses to have your voice heard in the polling booth, so why should anyone give a whit what you have to say now?

As a musician, I was told that before I could say a particular piece of music was too hard or "sucked", I had to prove I could play it. Now I issue a similar challenge to you "armchair Bolsheviks":

Before you call to tear down the system, at least make an attempt at being a part of it. Run for office, even a local one. If you have such fantastic fucking arguments, then get out there and drum up support. If you feel as though you have the ideals of the people behind you, then push for a change from within.

If you just have a powerful voice, anger, and a desire to raise hell, you're just another thug in a mob.

Posted by: Thomas at May 12, 2005 06:19 AM

"This is our life on Holiday"
B. J. Armstrong

Posted by: Jado at May 12, 2005 06:35 AM

Hey folks,
I've noticed a general preponderance of fingerpointing here. This is getting us nowhere. I think what Wil was trying to point out is this is no longer the fault of the Republicans or Democrats. This has become the fault of the government as a whole. Forget party lines. Forget all the lines. This is a matter of the government no longer being accountable to the people. I'm not a patriotic person, but this isn't the country that people have fought, bled, and died for anymore. And it's up to those of us whose eyes are open enough to see that to do something about. We need co-operation, not bickering. We all agree something is seriously wrong. So forget about responsibility and do something about it. Write to your congressman and senator and tell her/him you are seriously upset. Forget blaming anyone and just stand up and say no. If you keep looking for the scape goat, this will all be over before we can stop it.

Posted by: Keith Divver at May 12, 2005 06:44 AM

WWdN is much better when it's not political.

Posted by: Tom Bissell at May 12, 2005 06:53 AM

Wil,
Please step out of your bubble every once in awhile. I guess I could be considered a member of the NRA and the "religious right" and this whole idea of a national ID card scares the hell out of me and angers me to a point beyond words. I don't know of any friends or neighbors who agree with it. Stop blaming groups of Americans with different ideologies than yourself and look at the real culprits...men with power that want more. Red or blue, it makes no difference.

Posted by: Mike at May 12, 2005 08:13 AM

Wil,

Two quick observations:

1. No one seems to have posted the entire wording of the section of the bill pertaining to "roads and barriers" so those postulating that it's merely the tip of the iceberg and easily susceptible to "bracket creep" into other abuses of power are without much foundation.

2. I agree with your blogger friend at the Middle Ground or whatever the "intellectually honest" site is, that the intentions of this are likely not evil. So I am disappointed to read your repeated accusations of Fascism....

Posted by: David in Atlanta at May 12, 2005 08:28 AM

Oh! Weary do I grow of men
Who cast an ire on others' sins.
That stamp a foot for noise to make,
But turn with the wind when grounds do quake.
And when rights are diminished between these shores
Stand beside their political whores.
Whether red or blue, may it be understood
The harlots watch out for their own good.
So when your rights are trampled down
You must stand up and make a sound.
But you should never stand by yourself
But try to find someone else
Whose belief in THIS cause is true to yours
And then you can abolish political whores.
JayEP

Posted by: jayep at May 12, 2005 09:22 AM

Dear Wil,

Your post motivated me, as a fellow Californian, to contact Senator Boxer and voice my dismay at yet another blatent attempt to subvert our Constitution by the Republican political elite.

Thanks so much for bringing this issue to your readers' attention. Hopefully, more folks will stand up and say, I'm MAD AS HELL AND I WON'T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!

Dierdra

Posted by: Dierdra at May 12, 2005 09:31 AM

buildersent: Agree with everything you say, except for the last sentence. I'm holding out for Condi Rice. (Yes, I know she said she wouldn't run, but she has plenty of time to change her mind.) Wouldn't that just bake the Dems' noodles...

Keith: I'm all for strictly limited government, which is in fact a "conservative" virtue...one that many Republicans seem to have forgotten about.

Posted by: Erbo at May 12, 2005 09:32 AM

I'm not posting an opinion on the RealID bit itself, but I DO have a couple of things to point out.

- NY state is already violating this bill that isn't a law yet, since they are ordering their Licensing Offices to refuse to ask for ID on renewals/applications... there's talk that the gov would pull NY's federal funding for ALL roads should they do this, so this will boil to a head sooner than later, I think.

- What's all this banter about the Republicans with this bill? How it's their bill and their push, and their Evil... All this research and you missed something: why did this bill pass *unanimously* in the Senate if it was all about the Republicans? (And yes I mean their Evil not they're evil - it's on purpose) I know they have a majority but there's at least 40 Democrats in there that voted for this bill: it takes a full 100 to be unanimous - no votes don't qualify.

JM2C.

Posted by: Randy at May 12, 2005 10:08 AM

Two quick comments:

1) To Randy and Mike: while Wil did castigate the Republicans (who, in all fairness, were the source of the initital bill), he also called the Democrats a bunch of cowards. I would extend that to see-no-evil, bewildered, uncomprehending cowards. Mike's point, that is all about "men with power who want more" is really the core problem here. . . .

2) To David in Atlanta: I don't recall anyone being singled out as a "fascist" (and definitely not a "Fascist"); rather, the general comments are about this bill as a step in the direction of fascism as a political ideology that underlies more and more of what the folks in power are doing. I don't think that ANY of this is innocent, and even if by some chance it is, its ramifications are so potentially devastating to our personal and civil liberties that those who voted for this bill either know that all too well, or are not too sharp on the uptake. Either way, it does not endear them to me as political leaders. . . .

Posted by: sunpony at May 12, 2005 10:46 AM

It's the Corporate State, Stupid
Full Text here:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7260.htm

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

The early twentieth century Italians, who invented the word fascism, also had a more descriptive term for the concept -- estato corporativo: the corporatist state. Unfortunately for Americans, we have come to equate fascism with its symptoms, not with its structure. The structure of fascism is corporatism, or the corporate state. The structure of fascism is the union, marriage, merger or fusion of corporate economic power with governmental power. Failing to understand fascism, as the consolidation of corporate economic and governmental power in the hands of a few, is to completely misunderstand what fascism is. It is the consolidation of this power that produces the demagogues and regimes we understand as fascist ones.

While we Americans have been trained to keenly identify the opposite of fascism, i.e., government intrusion into and usurpation of private enterprise, we have not been trained to identify the usurpation of government by private enterprise. Our European cousins, on the other hand, having lived with Fascism in several European countries during the last century, know it when they see it, and looking over here, they are ringing the alarm bells. We need to learn how to recognize Fascism now.

Dr. Lawrence Britt has written an excellent article entitled “The 14 Defining Characteristics of Fascism.” An Internet search of the number 14 coupled with the word fascism will produce the original article as well as many annotations on each of the 14 characteristics of fascism that he describes. His article is a must read to help get a handle on the symptoms that corporatism produces.

But even Britt’s excellent article misses the importance of Mussolini’s point. The concept of corporatism is number nine on Britt’s list and unfortunately titled: “Corporate Power is Protected.” In the view of Mussolini, the concept of corporatism should have been number one on the list and should have been more aptly titled the “Merger of Corporate Power and State Power.” Even Britt failed to see the merger of corporate and state power as the primary cause of most of these other characteristics. It is only when one begins to view fascism as the merger of corporate power and state power that it is easy to see how most of the other thirteen characteristics Britt describes are produced. Seen this way, these other characteristics no longer become disjointed abstractions. Cause and effect is evident.

For example, number two on Britt’s list is titled: “Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights.” Individual rights and corporate rights, at the very least conflict, and often are in downright opposition to one another. In the court system, often individuals must sue corporations. In America, in order to protect corporations, we have seen a steady stream of rules, decisions and laws to protect corporations and to limit the rights of the individual by lawsuit and other redress. These rules, decisions, and laws have always been justified on the basis of the need for corporations to have profit in order to exist.

Number three on Britt’s list is the identification of scapegoats or enemies as a unifying cause. Often the government itself becomes the scapegoat when the government is the regulator of the corporations. Often it is lawyers or administrators who take on the corporations. Often it is liberals who champion the rights of individuals, or terrorists who might threaten state stability or corporate profit. Any or all may become scapegoats for the state’s problems because they pose problems for corporations.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7260.htm

Posted by: geekboymatt at May 12, 2005 11:29 AM

Congress makes the Baby Jesus want to drink gin out of the cat bowl.

*picking up my pitchfork*

STRIKE!!!

Posted by: eyduck at May 12, 2005 11:54 AM

The judicial review point in the post is just wrong. Totally, outrageously wrong.

The statute bars lower federal courts from reviewing the matter. It does _not_ withdraw judicial review. Judicial review continues to exist, but at the Supreme Court level.

This is fine and dandy, constitutionally - the lower courts exist only because Congress chose to make them. They could be eliminated entirely without offending the constitution, and indeed are structured completely differently today than they were for the first century after ratification.

I'm also rather sure that the statute doesn't bar judicial orders of _compensation_ for construction of the barrier. If it did, then it would violate the Takings clause of the 5th Amendment, which forbids the government from taking private property for public use without compensation.

Rather, what the statute is about is procedure, and in particular about takings and environmental procedure.

Today, as a matter of course, suits are brought to prevent significant construction and development projects. Sometimes these suits are brought for legitimate environmental reasons, or for erroneous (but good faith) environmental reasons.

The second type of suit, I assure you, is very real, and indeed much more common than the first.

More often, though, these suits have to do with local landowners trying to get as much money as possible out of the developer or the government.

For example, its one thing to bring suit and argue that the barrier means paving over the only habitat of a rare bird. Its another thing to bring suit and claim that construction must be stopped immediately and for three years because the Environmental Impact Statement failed to take into account that the barrier will mean less traffic and therefore less smog and a better environment.

When the issue is the taking of private property for public use, its common for landowners to bring suits arguing that the government improperly calculated the boundaries of the development, that it failed to give enough time for public comment of its decision to declare an area blighted, that failing to take one parcel of land won't damage the development as a whole, and so forth.

All that is at stake in these suits is whether the landowner gets compensated after the construction by a court or whether they can demand a premium by holding the entire development hostage in court.

The idea of the bill is simply to bar injunctions, orders preventing the construction from going forward. Those injunctions give the landowners tremendous leverage - "pay me X or I'll hold up this construction for years in court."

The idea of the bill is this: The barrier will be built immediately, and if someone's land was taken they can sue and get paid compensation, but they cannot bring lawsuits trying to prevent the construction from occurring or claiming that the construction should take place somewhere else.

In that respect (if only that one), the statute makes perfect sense.

Posted by: Cheburashka at May 12, 2005 02:44 PM

The simplest way not to worry about this is to remember that just because Congress attempts to withhold access to the courts in this fashion does not mean that they actually have the power to do so.

People can claim the Supreme Court has no power of judicial review, but factually speaking, they do: they are the final arbiters of the meaning of the Constitution. This neo-conservative trend of railing against judicial review is just plain silly: to say that the Court lacks such power would effectively overturn every major Court decision from Marbury v. Madison onwards.

If this law turns out to be unconstitutional, it will still be overturned, despite any hollow pretense on the part of Congress.

Posted by: J.Cormier at May 12, 2005 03:37 PM

How is it that people never learn from history? We have become so apathetic over the last 20 or 30 years and then we end up with a bad president, possibly the worst one ever, who no less got re-elected and a bad congress to boot. I heard the senate vote was unanimous for this act. As someone who had campaigned actively for Democrats last year, I feel disgusted at that notion.

Posted by: Kyle at May 12, 2005 04:31 PM

Ok. Stupid me. I didn't realize that it was attatched to an appropriations bill when I wrote my earlier post.

Posted by: Kyle at May 12, 2005 05:05 PM

OK. Time to respond to some of the wonderful attacks.

First, to Alun...

If you had bothered to read the whole scopes link that you were so kind to provide, you would have found THIS little tidbit:

"Like a fable, the "boiled frog" anecdote serves its purpose whether or not it's based upon something that is literally true."

IT IS A METAPHOR, you stu... Oh never mind.

And to Alibaba who accuses me of being "representative of the type of left-wing radicals with whom he no doubt keeps company." How the hell would YOU know who I keep company with. Those types of slurs don't prove anything.

And mostly, to those who keep pointing to the 100-0 vote.

DO YOU HAVE A FU&%ING CLUE WHAT A "MUST PASS" BILL IS? It is a bill that it would be "political suicide" for anybody (even a radical like Barbara Boxer) to vote against, because it would immediately get every member of the MSM (that's right, the RIGHT-WING DOMINATED MAIN STREAM MEDIA) to call you "unpatriotic" or "a conspiracy nut" or "anti-American" or "a highly partisan obstructionist (even though the entire PROCESS of politics in the US is set up to be partisan). And that would be followed by tv advertisements run by national right wing organizations not tied to your opponent during the next election cycle saying the same thing, but in even more vitriolic words and pictures. Don't doubt they would have pictures of soldiers with legs missing coffins and "Senator X voted against these brave men and women." THAT is American political history, whether it was Dems or Reps doing the nasty work. So, once it was tagged onto a "must pass" piece of legislation, it was either going to pass 55-45 or 100-0, but either way it was 100% the Republicans who made it happen.

Now, on to the final item. Why am I so pissed at the Republicans? Maybe because they stole an election in 2000? Maybe because they LIED a thousand times, beginning on September 11, 2001 and up to today. Maybe because they stole ANOTHER lection in 2004 (EXIT POLLS DO NOT LIE! EVER! THEY NEVER HAVE! THEY ARE INCREDIBLY ACCURATE SCIENCE.)? Maybe because they called us "unpatriotic," "unAmerican" and "vile" when we questioned the war in Iraq, and then they sent our boys and girls off without the tools they needed? Maybe because they have co-opted the media to their own ends and made it into a propaganda machine to serve their purposes? YES, damn it, I am very angry, and I am angry at REPUBLICANS because they are the ones doing it. Are Democrats the long-term answer? DEFINITELY NOT! They are corporate owned and just as vile. Kerry sold us out when he conceded the day after the election was stolen from him out of fear of being labeled "a sore loser." (Hmmm. I notice that Rossi in Washington doesn't seem to care about that.)

The answer will not be with Democrats, but with progressives who are not bought and paid for before they arrive in Washington. And mostly, it will begin with FAIR ELECTIONS where everybody is given a chance to vote (no ten hour lines in the rain, no massive voter roll purges, votes for felons who have done their time [including probation], and no throwing out votes where the person checks one box and also writes in THE SAME NAME) and every vote is counted fairly, and not by three companies all tied to the Republican party and with significant motive to cheat.

Anybody who says they support the Republican party and what it is doing to this country I love so much is my enemy. I love the Constitution of the United states and its amendments! That is my bible. That is my faith. One of the purest and most incredible documents ever written, designed to create a noble and powerful CENTRAL government to hold together an ugly consortium of states with a variety of vile habits and histories.

Republicans are the enemy. When the battle lines are finally drawn, I will stop being a pacifist. I will leave my "NO WAR IN IRAQ" bumper sticker on my car -- will you leave your "W04" sticker? I hope so, as I wouldn't want to accidentally help the wrong person to move to their next body.

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon

Posted by: CyberChas at May 12, 2005 05:31 PM

I think it's interesting Chas left off his hate speech tagline, yet leaves us this final thought:

Republicans are the enemy. When the battle lines are finally drawn, I will stop being a pacifist. I will leave my "NO WAR IN IRAQ" bumper sticker on my car -- will you leave your "W04" sticker? I hope so, as I wouldn't want to accidentally help the wrong person to move to their next body.

You have stepped beyond the boundaries of hyperbole: You are advocating murder based on a political belief. I suppose you could kill them all much better of you rounded them up into camps, set-up kill stations and had the ones that weren't too weak to pile their kinsmens' corpses into mass graves.

You are the problem, Chas. Not people LIKE you. YOU. You're the thug looking for an excuse to kill people. A sociopath, or to be more precise, a politicopath. Stalin would be swelling with pride.

I won't resort to aimless meanderings about how I'll slay someone for the candidate he or she chose, I'll simply as that you get mental help quickly before your powderkeg in that noggin of yours takes you into the nearest belltower with a rifle, serving to only discredit the beliefs you enumerate in the manifesto they find next to your bullet-riddled body.

Posted by: Thomas at May 12, 2005 09:33 PM

A Republican-Democratic civil war could only be hilarious. After all, only one side has the guns.

Posted by: Cheburashka at May 13, 2005 10:25 AM

If you had bothered to read the whole scopes link that you were so kind to provide, you would have found THIS little tidbit:

"Like a fable, the "boiled frog" anecdote serves its purpose whether or not it's based upon something that is literally true."

IT IS A METAPHOR, you stu... Oh never mind.

(Sigh.)

Yes, obviously it's generally presented with allegorical intent (though, incidentally, there's a difference between an "allegory" and a "metaphor"). However, it was also presented as fact, which it isn't. You didn't say "They say if you put a bunch of frogs..."; you didn't say "The story goes that if you put a bunch of frogs..."; you said "If you put a bunch of frogs..."; you stated it as if this were factual.

I was not attacking the allegorical intent behind your inclusion of the frog story in your message. I was, in fact, explicitly trying to stay out of that part of the debate. Hence my stating "Just for the record" at the end--i.e. that I was presenting this only as a statement about the frog story itself, and in no way as an attempt to attack the point you were trying to make with it. Yes, I did read the entire Snopes article, of course. Did you read my entire reply? (Sheesh.)

Posted by: Alun Clewe at May 13, 2005 11:04 AM

Whoops...the entire first three paragraphs in that last post were, of course, quoted and should have been italicized. I need to be more careful with my previewing...

Posted by: Alun Clewe at May 13, 2005 11:05 AM

Thomas and Alun:

Don't think it doesn't bother me greatly that the disgusting and anti-American actions of the current Republican Regime in Washington has driven me to such an INTENSE HATRED of Republicans (and all those who support them) that I would believe myself eventually capable of putting aside my life-time of pacifism and taking up arms to destroy those whom I consider the enemies of my nation's liberty.

Were the members of the German underground evil for wanting to kill Nazi's and members of the SS? That is the analogy (or is it a metaphor? or a simile? DO YOU THINK I FU#&ing care?).

Have I mentioned lately how much I TOTALLY HATE you vile and disgusting Republicans? Your lies? Your cheating? Your evil intentions against my great country and constitution that so many have died, lost limbs and bled to protect?

WHEN (IF?) it comes to battle in the streets, I consider that those who keep their "emblems of pride" (such as the W'04 sticker) on their SUV's are the ones with so much confidence in their fascist regime's power to protect them that they really ARE the enemy. WHEN (IF?) it comes to that, and I have truly given up my pacifism, then YES, I will do what has to be done.

Should we have all just rolled over and let Hitler have the world, because to kill those who supported him would have been wrong? Is that the answer? OH, I guess if you are a Christian Dominionist, then YES, because that will bring about the rapture sooner.

OH, and for those who missed it, here is my "hate speech tagline." OF COURSE, I don't really see how it is "hate speech." I just point out the TRUTH (Republicans lie, steal and cheat. All quite easily provable.) and suggest a recourse.

Here's to DEMOCRACY! Here's to every voter getting to vote and every vote being counted! Here's to getting the hell RID of the Republican thugs who control my country.

The Days of Decision are coming.

We are frogs begin slow-cooked, and by the time we realize the water is boiling, we won't have the strength to jump out of the pot. Perhaps we already don't.

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon
CLL2001@Gmail.com

Republicans lie and innocent people die.
Republicans steal and give to their rich friends, leaving just an IOU for our kids to pay off.
Republicans cheat and think they are "moral."
We must flush away all Republicans in '06 and '08.

Posted by: CyberChas at May 13, 2005 11:36 AM

Thomas and Alun:
...
Have I mentioned lately how much I TOTALLY HATE you vile and disgusting Republicans?

Fer cryin' out loud, what exactly makes you think I'm a Republican? Again, I was only stating that the story of the frog happened to be factually incorrect; I was not attacking the point you were trying to make with it. The fact that frogs don't really sit and wait to be boiled alive doesn't invalidate your point, and I wasn't saying it did.

For the record, although I've been trying not to take sides and to stay out of the political debate completely, I actually agree with the point you were trying to make with the analogy. I don't like what the Republicans are doing; I'm not a Republican; I didn't vote for Bush or for any other Republican candidates in the last election, and I don't intend to in the next election either. I actually agree that the country is going in a bad direction. Okay? So can you stop yelling at me now?

Yeesh, man, calm down. Indiscriminately attacking people who aren't attacking you (just pointing out a minor factual error is not an attack) isn't helping your case...

Posted by: Alun Clewe at May 13, 2005 11:56 AM

My apologies to Alun. I don't hate you. People can critique without gaining my scorn and wrath of emotion. And if I mis-represented the frog allegory (which I didn't know had been debunked) as fact-based, then I deserve to be called on it.

There is a lot of conflict right now between those who don't like the current "reality" and those who have admitted to living in (and creating) their own reality. The biggest problem is that the non-reality people have turned out to be RIGHT about being able to MAKE their own reality, and that has confused all of us for whom reality was always assumed to be more stable.

It makes those of us who are normally quiet, calm, and loving people quite agitated. Of course, I would rather be agitated than apathetic and accepting of this process, but I don't like the "me" that dealing with this makes me into.

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon

Posted by: CyberChas at May 13, 2005 01:55 PM

Cheburashka:

Thank you for the legal analysis. That certainly renders the intent of that part of the bill much more understandable. I still wonder about the precedent it sets, but I appreciate you laying out some of the repercussions for us.

Posted by: sunpony at May 15, 2005 04:45 AM

When in Doubt, Quote Heinlein:

"When a place get crowded enough to require ID's, social collapse is not far away. It is time to go elsewhere. The best thing about space travel is that it makes it possible to go elsewhere."
-Lazarus Long

this one makes perfect sense. Wil, do you have any spare starships you can loan me??? :)

"A generation which ignores its history has no past and no future"
-Lazarus Long

It's a sad day when our front-page news is about a "scandal" on American Idol or about Britney Spears saying something to someone. Too many people just don't care about the things that are really important.

We are already starting down the path that leads to tyranny and oppression by an oligarchy.

Conservatism and Liberalism make no sense in this day and age. A polarized nation will have an extremist government.

You americans need a "centralist" party. one that just does what the situation calls for, regardless if it is a conservative or liberal solution.

Posted by: Colonel Flagg at May 15, 2005 11:52 PM

but I don't like the "me" that dealing with this makes me into.

That makes two of us, but something tells me you don't like the "you" that you see in the mirror regardless of the issue you're dealing with... and I don't want to even begin to fathom how many issues you deal with ever waking moment of your piteous excuse of an existence.

The bottom line is that YOU are acting as the vile Stalin, Chas. You are the one calling for the cold-blooded, pre-meditated murder or people based on an political ideal that they have: The ideal that the federal government should be very small and that more power be in the hands of local officials. THAT is the definition of being a Republican. You have, on your own, lumped extremists into the group as a whole.

You, you murderous liberal toadie bastard, should know better, being the first to cry foul when some redneck Bubba says all Muslims are terrorists.

This discussion has been an exchange of ideas, and remains a fine place to vent frustrations, but practicing your hate speech (again, swap out "Jew" or "Nigger" with the word "Republican" so you can see how PAINFULLY hateful your calls for killings are) is the thread's single point of failure, rendering the previously stated valid points you may have awkwardly and accidentally stumbled into completely and utterly moot.

Posted by: Thomas at May 17, 2005 11:20 AM

Thomas you ignorant slut:

I have never called for the killing of Republicans, and I never would.

I merely said that "when the battle lines are finally drawn..." that __I__ would do what __I__ had to do. What anybody else wants to do is between them and their belief system.

Neo-conservative Republicans and Christian Dominionists are driving this country towards an ugly form of fascism. In fascism, the extremes become more clear -- there are those in power and there is "everybody else." And "everybody else" falls into three categories: those who go along, those who fight, and those who die.

In 1939, if a member of the underground had the opportunity to kill a Nazi SS officer, they would be proud to do it. As a pacifist, I have to be ready to do the same things WHEN we get to that point.

I don't know what kind of therapy you are getting, Thomas, but I would suggest a request for better meds. You are more than a little passive-aggressive, and it detracts from your totally inane comments.

If you don't like the fact that Republicans lie, stop being one.

If you don't like the fact that Republicans steal, stop being one.

If you don't like the fact that Republicans cheat, stop being one.

But don't blame ME for pointing it out. It is REALITY, and you can't un-do it with all the propaganda machines in the world and even a 99% control of all the mass media. You can try, but I won't let you succeed.

Read the Iraq Memo. Read Sy Hersh. Read the TRUTH!

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon
CLL2001@Gmail.com

Republicans lie and innocent people die.
Republicans steal and give to their rich friends, leaving just an IOU for our kids to pay off.
Republicans cheat and think they are "moral."
We must flush away all Republicans in '06 and '08.

Posted by: CyberChas at May 17, 2005 04:40 PM

Okay, that's enough. I will not tolerate the advocating of violence against any person or group of people on my blog.

If you guys want to take this flamewar to e-mail, go right ahead. Any further comments will be deleted. Any further threats will be forwarded to the proper authorities for investigation.

Posted by: Wil at May 17, 2005 05:18 PM