Category Archives: An Enemy of the State

Truthy

Posted on by

I was at a meeting of local county conservatives last night and one of the members started talking about how much personal information people, unthinkingly, release on the ‘net. Personally, especially on Facebook, my profile is sparse. I post my name, that I’m married and the company name I used to work for. I thought long and hard before I added that last bit and did so only at the request of a few former work buddies.

But all too many people post everything—all their personal information, phone numbers, personal details, family photos by the ton, oblivious just how much they release. We hear of the NSA spying on US citizens and no one really believes the NSA’s claims of innocence.

PRISM is one such spy program that examines all email traffic looking for specific pieces of information.

The Prism program collects stored Internet communications based on demands made to Internet companies such as Google Inc. under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to turn over any data that match court-approved search terms.[6] —  Wiki.

http://static.tumblr.com/k6l9ga7/1pRlvb0xk/big-brother-1984-cropped.jpgThe conversation from last night was still fresh in my mind this morning when I found the article below in my morning news basket from Ed Morrissey. He compared “Truthy” to George Orwell‘s Big Brother watching everyone.

Media curiously silent on “Truthy”

posted at 8:41 am on August 27, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

It’s been a couple of days since the Washington Free Beacon’s Elizabeth Harrington first reported on the three-year-old  federal grant from the National Science Foundation for the “Truthy” database, and … not much else has happened. Blogs have picked it up, including our own Mary Katharine, and Reason’s Bobby Soave did a good job of highlighting its inherent contradictions. Twitchy has collated a number of tongue-in-cheek attempts to kick-start Truthy. Other than that, the national media appears to have gone radio silent on this latest project; according to a Bing news search this morning, no national outlet has yet picked up the story from WFB.

That’s interesting, because one might have guessed that they would take notice of a million-dollar effort to encroach on their fact-checking turf. In my column for The Week today, I wonder why the federal government is spending a million dollars to create a mechanism that sounds like it could come straight out of Orwell when we have a perfectly good private-sector market for free speech:

The better question is this: Who makes these subjective judgments? At least at first, the answer would be the researchers who are building Truthy under a federal grant from the NSF. It’s not to hard to imagine a scenario in which the federal government would eventually find a use for Truthy, and would make the subjective judgments on how best to monitor political speech on social media.

Reason’s Bobby Soave points out the basic contradiction in claiming, as the abstract does, to support “the preservation of open debate” while attempting to apply labels to speech such as “suspicious memes,” “hate speech,” and “subversive propaganda,” as well as determining which arguments constitute an “organic meme” versus an “inorganic” one. “Those seem like conflicting goals,” Soave writes, “even if pursued in a totally apolitical way.”

Or an “inorganic” way, for that matter. Truthy is the very definition of a top-down determination of the legitimacy of public speech. In a free society, citizens make those determinations for themselves. That is the organic approach to political speech, stemming from those who wish to engage in — or become spectators to — the contest of ideas, arguments, analyses, and proposals. Instead of allowing people to reach their own conclusions about those ideas and arguments, Truthy and the NSF instead appear to want to delegitimize the people who engage in those debates, which would in any other circumstance become the very kind of political smear that Truthy is supposedly designed to protect against.

The fact-checking industry, for all its faults, at least uses a free-market approach to criticism and debate that “Truthy” would pervert. Citizens of a free nation who value political speech shouldn’t pay a dime for Truthy, let alone a million dollars. Its abstract describes an apparatus for state control of political thought, as though its proposers read George Orwell’s 1984 as a how-to rather than a cautionary tale.

The Inquisitr takes a look at the principals involved in this project, and wonders just how non-partisan this project really is:

The project website also says that while many memes are created in a “perfectly organic manner,” others are allegedly driven by the “shady machinery of high-profile congressional campaigns.” Free speech advocates say, “so what” to the organic vs. organized meme creation. If a political advocacy group makes a Barack Obama golf meme, will they wind up in the government-funded database? According to the description and focus of the Truthy database project, the answer would be a resounding “yes.”

But speaking of “the shady machinery of high-profile … campaigns,” we have this:

The Truthy database project is billed as a non-partisan effort, but the “lead investigator” on the project is reportedly involved with a multitude of progressive or liberal groups, Filippo Menczer has reportedly uttered support for Moveon.org, Amnesty International, and President Barack Obama’s Organizing for Action, among other groups. Filippo Menczer is also a computer science and informatics professor at Indiana University. Links to the political and activists groups the Truthy database leader supports are posted on his bio page at the Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research. Menczer’s page also says that he is on sabbatical at Yahoo! Labs for the 2014-15 academic year. The $1 million grant funded by the taxpayers runs during the same year.

But don’t worry … you’ll love Big Brother! They promise not to make that a “suspicious meme,” too.

For most of us, bits and pieces of our history and personal details are already in some database—a piece here, a piece there, including our tax and income data, even our medical history. It’s too late for us but we should be ever vigilant to not allow more of our personal data to come into some one’s hands. Privacy is achieved only through constant vigilence.

Facebook

A new front

Posted on by

A new front in the civil war within the GOP has appeared in the Heartland. Mitch McConnell and his NRSC fired the opening shot at Nebraska conservative candidate Ben Sasse. Sasse, a well known conservative and healthcare policy expert, has drawn McConnell’s attention. The NRSC is now channeling funds to Sasse’s opponent.

Ben Sasse, the conservative candidate in Nebraska on the most recent cover of National Review and who has the backing of the Senate Conservatives Fund, RedState, and others, suddenly finds Mitch McConnell and the NRSC holding fundraisers for his opponent. Sasse, it should be noted, is widely considered a brainiac opponent of Obamacare and healthcare policy expert. — Red State.

Another attack was initiated against Jamestown Associates who are consultants to conservative republican candidates.

…yesterday, the National Republican Congressional Committee blackballed Jamestown Associates from helping elect Republicans. The NRCC is joining the NRSC in attacking Jamestown. Why? Because Jamestown Associates has been working with conservative candidates the House and Senate GOP leadership opposes. — Red State.

How does McConnell and the establishment expect to win new ‘Pub seats in Congress when they are attacking their fellow republicans? Not surprisingly, the answer is: emulate the democrats—instead of repealing Obamacare, McConnell and his henchmen claim their aim is to ‘fix’ not repeal Obamacare.

Republicans Begin Laying Ground Work to Walk Away From Obamacare Opposition

 

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  January 16th, 2014 at 04:30 AM

Conservative and Republican affiliated groups have started the 2014 assault against Democrats who support Obamacare. At the very same time, it is increasingly clear Republicans are laying the groundwork to abandon their opposition to Obamacare.

The Business Roundtable, which has a great relationship with Republican Leaders, is now listing Obamacare as an entitlement worth preserving.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former economic advisor to John McCain and who opposed passage of Obamacare, has started a think tank premised on keeping, but fixing, Obamacare. Holtz-Eakin has the ear of Republican leaders. In 2009, Mitch McConnell appointed him to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.

The Chamber of Commerce is declaring it will work to fix, not repeal, Obamacare. In fact, just last week the head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said, “The administration is obviously committed to keeping the law in place, so the chamber has been working pragmatically to fix those parts of Obamacare that can be fixed.”

Concurrent to this, the Chamber of Commerce has begun funding candidates to beat conservatives in Republican primaries…

The establishment has gone so far to betrayal ‘Pub conservatives that they have aligned the NRSC, with the willing concurrence of the NRCC, with a democrat, and democrat funded, organization.

The Republican Main Street Partnership, headed by former Congressman LaTourette — who is a friend of Speaker John Boehner — is working with the Chamber and party leaders to target conservatives the party leadership finds troublesome. LaTourette has been parroting talking points from the National Republican Senatorial Committee about the Senate Conservatives Fund, Club for Growth, and others.

You see, the ‘Republican’ Main Street Partnership is funded by democrats: several unions, an Indian tribe, and a well-heeled democrat contributor. See my post from yesterday.

These act lead to my next segment of today’s post. In my mail, yesterday, was an envelope from the NRC wanting me to renew my ‘membership’ and contribute to the party.  I tore it up and trashed it.

I will not contribute to the NRC. I will contribute to specific candidates whom I think worthy of my money. I may contribute to the local ‘Pub organizations. I may attend their fund raisers, I may contribute directly to their election campaigns. Maybe.

I will impose litmus tests for every candidate. I am personal friends with some at the local and state level. I will help them remain in office because I know they will pass my litmus test.

For the rest of the ‘Pubs, they will have to work to get my support, my money, and my vote. It is very likely, like so many did in 2012, that my ballot in 2014 will have blank spaces next to some offices. By blank space I mean I skipped voting for that office.

Unless there is a winning conservative primary opponent next summer, the 4th Congressional District may be one of those offices that I will skip. Unless Ms Hartzler renounces her allegiance to the Washington establishment and proves, by her voting record, that it is a real renouncement, I will not be voting for her in 2014.

I supported and endorsed her in 2010 and 2012. No more. When there is no difference in the ‘Pub establishment and their willing helpers to the democrats, why bother voting for that office?

I’ve been a republican all my adult life. I’ve voted republican for 45 years. I still am a republican, a conservative…but my party is no longer.

Facebook

Us vs. Them

Posted on by

Us vs. Them. A simple statement that carries so much within it. Us. Who are we? Are we the vast members of middle-America who see our family, friends and neighbors lose more and more under the despotic rule of the central government? Or, are we those of the dependency class, dependent on others for their livelihood and trapped in a situation that crept upon them slowly and unnoticed?

There are variations on both sides. Some of those middle-Americans are doing well. They have jobs, homes, and their debts and taxes are manageable. They cruise through life not noticing the fates and fares of those around them…until suddenly they too are affected. Affected by a sudden increase in debt, a loss of a planned bonus, business profits decrease and the expected pay increase never arrives, their employer raises the employee cost of benefits or ends them, resulting in changes of a comfortable life. Suddenly, there is stress and uncertainly of the future instead of the former complacency.

On the other side, many are forced into dependency. Stress increases. Families lose jobs and become dependent on unemployment insurance. Job seeking becomes more difficult. Openings are few and seemingly fewer. Personal debt increases as families attempt to maintain lifestyles that cannot be sustained.

Along with dependency comes more governmental intrusion. Benefits that had been assured now become ‘means tested’. Are you qualified to receive those benefits? When did you last look for work? How many companies have you visited? Called? Submitted a resume?

Then Murphy arrives to visit and personal finances drop even more.

At some point, sooner or later, a few people here, more over there, people begin to consider: how long can this continue? If you listen to democrats, all will be well if government grows and the rich “pay their fair share.” What the dems don’t mention is that there aren’t all that many rich to soak, and they already pay far more than their fair share.

The dems declare that all will be well if we just spend more. The great social programs of the last century, Roosevelt’s New Deal, Johnson’s Great Society, the actual trillions of dollars spent on these programs that have no record of success, are not failures. We just have not spent enough, yet, democrats say. Spend more, regulate more, control more, restrict alternatives, force the populace to behave as dictated.

Conservatives push for limitations: limitations of federal spending. Limitations on bureaucratic regulations, limits on governmental intrusion, a limit on spending. Conservatives strive for limits because they realize that one day the bills will come due and all the money in the nation won’t be able to cover those debts.

And finally there are the republicans. They declare all will be well if you elect us and throw the democrats out of office. We’ll continue all those spending programs because, in the end, we’re here for the power, not for the benefits of the governed. The argument begins. Solely for power? Not true, many within the establishment claim. True, says the party’s conservatives and point to Karl Rove, Crossroads, and the US Chamber of Commerce who, instead of attacking democrats and liberals, side with them against conservatives.

Us. vs. Them. Everyone has a different view. What will happen? Who will benefit? Who will be affected? Everyone has an opinion from the ghetto mother who believes her livelihood comes from Obama’s endless ‘stash’, to the Tea Party and grassroot organization who fear their nation is on the brink of collapse and civil war.

Where is the truth? Everyone of them—to that person.

This is an election year. In 2014, every member of the US House for representatives and thirty-three seats in the US Senate, is up for election. The ‘Pubs and dems are both aiming their campaigns at the same demographic groups—liberals and ‘moderates’, i.e., democrats. Both parties, now, actively work to displace, and remove conservatives from Congress. The last time, in 2012, the ‘Pubs did this, they lost—badly. Nearly 4% of the ‘Pubs core voters, those voters the ‘Pubs assumed would vote the big ‘R’, stayed home.

It is likely the same will happen in 2014. When there is no discernible differences between the two parties, why bother to vote of either one? The ‘Pubs assume the failure of Obamacare will be sufficient to garner enough votes to seize control of the Senate. An assumption not guaranteed.

From a political perspective, the Us, the conservatives, are now opposed by Them, the liberals, democrats, and the ‘Pub establishment. The result will be a continuation of the downward spiral of the economy and personal freedom.  When that spiral hits bottom, it won’t be pretty.

‘Us vs. Them’ can be viewed as maintenance of the political status quo or a battle to regain control of governmental power. Entropy declares that the status quo cannot be maintained. It will change. The direction depends on…us.

Facebook

The Start of the Political Season

Posted on by

I was reminded this week that the 2014 mid-term elections—and state and local ones, too, are less that a year away. Office holders are preparing for re-election and aspiring ones are building their organizations and campaign coffers. Actual filing dates are still in the future but the candidates have already started their campaigns.

I am not ready. But, then, I’m not running for office either. I have been called, emailed, texted, by a number of potential candidates wanting various things, some enumerated, others not. I’ll help those I think worthy and ignore those whose abilities and motivation I question.

I’ll not support candidates solely by party.

I will support those who have a track record of conservatism, in and out of office or business. For instance, a local businessman has announced that he’s running for office. I’ve known him and his wife for some time. He has not held office before, so he has no public track record. But—we have conversed on political topics and his views and mine align. I’ll support him.

There is another candidate who actions do not match their words. All candidates make promises. Most candidates claim their opponents are the scum of the earth. I ignore most of these tactics, rather, I review what they have actively done. There are some office holders whom I voted for in their last election that I’ll not vote for again. They’ve lost my confidence and trust.

Confidence and Trust. Two things candidates must acquire from voters to achieve office. Political parties, too, must acquire confidence and trust from their supporters. The Republican Party, as a whole, is losing the confidence and trust of voters.

The sellout of Ken Cuccinelli in the Virginia Governor’s race is an example. The state and national GOP refused to contribute to Cuccinelli and in some cases, actively campaigned for democrat McAuliffe against Cuccinelli. Staffer’s from Eric Cantor’s office helped McAuliffe’s campaign. as did some VA GOP officials such as former Republican National Committee finance chairman Dwight Schar and Judy Ford Wason, a GOP strategist who worked for outgoing Republican Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. When you combine these acts with those of McConnell and other establishment GOP pols and their staffers, it’s no question the GOP is split.

Two days after the election, the headlines echo this division. Here are just a few.

The Republican Establishment Lost Virginia

By: Jason Johnson (Diary)  |  November 6th, 2013 at 05:58 PM  |

Tea party peeved with GOP over governor races, says Ken Cuccinelli was robbed

By Seth McLaughlin, The Washington Times, Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Yes, Virginia, the GOP Establishment did stick a shiv in Ken Cuccinelli

By Matthew Vadum, November 7, 2013

There are more similar stories on the ‘web if you care to look. Among the grassroot organizations, there is a building consensus—#defundtheGOP. I ran across that hashtag yesterday, not on Twitter but as an actual name of a website.

I wasn’t surprised by the topic. It has been a frequently discussed topic since 2012. What is new, is that more and more conservatives, disillusioned with the GOP, will no longer contribute directly to the party. I haven’t contributed to the party, admission fees to some party events aside, for years. I’ll continue to not do so. I contribute directly to those candidates whom I think worthy of my money and time.

That list gets shorter every election cycle.

What is worse, is that the party Ruling Class, is actively widening the divide between us—those of us here in flyover land, with those in state capitols and in Washington. They assume we will continue to rollover for the GOP to prevent dems from winning. The active participation of the GOP against one of their fellows, aiding democrats, illustrates that fact.

They are mistaken. The party is still maintaining course for a breakup and McConnell, Boehner, Cantor and others are stoking the boiler, a boiler that is approaching its bursting point.

Facebook

The day after…

Posted on by

UPDATE: Tea Party wins big in Colorado.

Yesterday was Election Day in a number of states. A huge tax increase in neighboring Kansas City—$800M for supposed medical research with no oversight, lost in a 5 to 1 verdict or 84% against. The tax supporters spent over $2M dollars unsuccessfully for another case of corporate and union welfare.

(Update) In Colorado, liberals proposed a massive, $950 million tax hike that was earmarked specifically to increase education spending. It lost by a 66% to 34% margin only receiving half the votes in liberal Denver and Boulder.

Teacher unions spent $4 million promoting the measure, outspending opponents by at least ten-to-one. 

But the model crashed on takeoff tonight. Coloradans didn’t just defeat Amendment 66, they repudiated it by a vote of 66 percent to 34. With almost all the results in, the tax hike was only winning half the votes in liberal Denver and Boulder Counties.

The Centennial State may have tilted left in recent years, but tonight’s results suggest there’s a solid counterrevolution against the liberal direction state government has taken. Two Democratic state senators, including the senate president, were recalled in September after voting for gun restrictions. Now the state’s tax-and-spend constituencies have been given a huge black eye by voters who clearly rejected the idea that education could be improved by pouring more money into the existing system. — The National Review.

***

Democrats won the governorships In Virginia and New Jersey,. What? Christie ran as a ‘Pub? So? I stand by my statement. Christie ran up a large margin in the election with the active assistance of the ‘Pub establishment and democrats. Therefore, if it quacks like a democrat, waddles like a democrat, it is a democrat.

In Virginia, McAuliffe won by a squeaker. For him to win, he had help from the GOP establishment in the state—‘Pubs who campaigned for McAuliffe, assistance from Karl Rove and the national ‘Pub establishment, and by democrat collusion with the Libertarian party who ran an Obama supporter and political bundler on the Libertarian ticket to siphon conservative votes away from Cuccinelli. McAuliffe’s double-digit poll margin shrank to less than 3% once the votes were counted.

Cuccinelli had to battle the democrats, democrats running as libertarians and his own party. With all that opposition, he lost by a slim margin. Some pundits declared that if Cuccinelli has a few more days, as the news about Obamacare reached more VA voters, he could have won. McAuliffe ran on his support for Obamacare. Cuccinelli ran against it.

The GOP Declares War On Obamacare Conservatives

By: streiff (Diary)  |  November 5th, 2013 at 10:30 AM

GOP-Tea-PartySince the this summer a low level civil war has been simmering within the GOP between conservatives who have grown tired of the lack of desire on the part of the Establishment to resist the radical statism that has epitomized the regime of Barack Obama and the Establishment that seems more than happy to go along with Obama so long as they are kept in champagne and caviar. Many solid conservatives have insisted that the division is overblown and that a big tent is necessary to win elections.

To anyone remaining that thinks a reasonable accommodation may be made with the GOP Establishment, today’s op-ed by Michael Gerson (The GOP’s new reality) should serve as a wake up call. In fact, it is apparent from Gerson’s op-ed that the Establishment views conservatives, not the Democrats, as the existential threat to their place at the trough.

Following the recent tea party Tet Offensive — tactically disastrous but symbolically important — the Republican establishment has commenced counterinsurgency operations. Sens. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee — both facing primary challenges from the right — are responding more forcefully to their populist opponents. The National Republican Senatorial Committee has cut ties with a Republican advertising firm employed by tea party challengers. “We’re not going to do business,” says a spokesman, “with people who profit off of attacking Republicans. Purity for profit is a disease that threatens the Republican Party.”

This vivid turn of phrase — “purity for profit” — captures the main reason Republican leaders are edging away from a strategy of accommodation. The Obama era has unleashed a great deal of genuine populist and libertarian energy. But a good portion of it is being channeled into business and fundraising models that depend on stoking resentment against the GOP itself (at least as currently constituted).

The result is a paradox. Over the past few decades, Republican members of Congress have become more reliably conservative (as their Democratic colleagues, to a lesser extent, have become more liberal). Liberal Republicanism has essentially ceased to exist. This means that tea party conservatives are revolting against a more uniformly conservative party. The RINOs they hunt are actually an endangered species. So they have transformed tactical disagreements — over, say, a hopeless attempt to defund Obamacare — into defining ideological struggles.

I’m going to pause here to address some of the strawmen Gerson has immolated.

First, the disagreement over the government shutdown was only a disagreement over tactics in the shallowest sense. I wrote about that in The Budget Showdown Was About Ideology Not About Tactics.

The disagreement was between those of us who see really clearly that the objective of Obamacare is the implementation of a single payer healthcare system after trashing one-sixth of the US economy and those who agree with what Obama is trying to do but prefer to do it more efficiently and maintain the artifice of a market based economy. Remember, it was the Establishment making the rounds of Sunday shows deriding those who were fighting as “whacko birds” and doubting whether they were Republicans. They were too busy to fight Obama but they had plenty of time to fight conservatives. They had plenty of time to send out fundraising letters based on the three dozen or so staged Potemkin votes they’d made to repeal Obamacare, but when push came to shove, when it became, as we Southerners call it, nut cutting time, they were nowhere to be seen.

The column continues and you can read it here. The column ends with these last two paragraphs.

There is exactly zero evidence today that the GOP exists to win elections.

To the contrary all the evidence indicates that it exists to perpetuate the perks and power of the party leadership and to provide sinecures for a coterie of pathetic losers like former NRSC director Rob Jesmer. They aren’t trying to win elections, they are selecting their buddies to become members of their country club and if their buddy loses the primary they are more than willing to help the Democrats win the general election. As Erick posted in The Hungry and the Well Fed,  they play us for chumps asking for money and assuring us that they will fight like the very devil himself… after the next election… and provided the right guy wins.

That last paragraph says it all.

Facebook

Aftermath

Posted on by

If nothing else, the government ‘shutdown’ and debt struggle has allowed us to definitively weed the the useless pols in Washington from the productive Congressmen. Of the Missouri congressional delegation, four voted to support Reid and Obama—that’s what the vote really was all about. Those MO Congressmen were Lacy Clay, representative from St. Louis, Emmanuel Clever, representative from Kansas City, Claire McCaskill, democrat senator, and Roy Blunt, GOP establishment senator. Roy Blunt’s votes validate the ‘Replace Roy Blunt‘ movement that is growing in the state.

The Senate passed the ‘Run up more debt’ bill by a vote of 81-18. It’s easier to document who, among the GOP senators voted against the bill—and against Reid, Obama and McConnell, than it is to document those who supported Reid and Obama.

Sens. Ted Cruz (Tex.)
Marco Rubio (Fla.)
Rand Paul (Ky.)

These first three are expected to be front runners for a conservative presidential candidate in 2016 according to WaPo. I have my strong doubts about Rubio. He’s burned all his bridges with the Tea Party and grassroots conservatives.

Sens. Charles Grassley (Iowa)
Dean Heller (Nev.)
Ron Johnson (Wis.)
Pat Toomey (Pa.)
Sens. Mike Enzi (Wyo.)
Pat Roberts (Kan.)

Two Senators face strong opposition in the next election. Liz Cheney is said to be running against Enzi and Milton Wolfe against Pat Roberts.

Sens. Tom Coburn (Okla.)
John Cornyn (Tex.)
Mike Crapo (Idaho)
Mike Lee (Utah)
Jim Risch (Idaho)
Tim Scott (S.C.)
Jeff Sessions (Ala.)
Richard Shelby (Ala.)
David Vitter (La.)

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who would probably have voted, “No,” did not vote. He was recovering from heart surgery. (From The Washington Post.)

There is a graphic, if you follow the link above, that depicts the actual breakdown by political party.

The House—John Boehner approved the Senate bill. Boehner had to enlist Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats to get that approval. In the end the Senate bill passed in the House on a vote of 285 to 144.

Locally, I was gratified to see all of Missouri’s GOP Representatives voting against the Senate bill and Boehner. The only two MO representatives who voted yes were democrats Clay and Cleaver. I have had some harsh words for GOP Representative Vicky Hartzler over her votes on the massive Ag bill earlier this year. I have to applaud her for her votes on this bill. She stayed with her constituents.

The votes from the Kansas congressional delegation was more mixed.

Kansas:
• Sen. Jerry Moran — Yes
• Sen. Pat Roberts — No
• Rep. Kevin Yoder — No
• Rep. Tim Huelskamp — No
• Rep. Lynn Jenkins — Yes
• Rep. Mike Pompeo — No
— Kansas City Business Journal

To say I’m disappointed in Senator Jerry Moran and Representative Lynn Jenkins is an understatement.

So where do we go from here? As usual, Erick Erickson from Red State has thoughts on that.

Much cynicism has been expressed over the past month about the effort, led by Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, to fight Obamacare. It was about money or defeating Republicans or something other than what it was about — undermining Obamacare with a united front.

It was always about undermining Obamacare, despite the claims of others. But, those of us who were in this fight against Obamacare have been quite open that we knew there were side benefits. This fight would expose conservative activists to the frauds they have funded.

Men like Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, and others have preached a great sermon against Obamacare, but now conservatives who supported them see that these men have refused to actually practice what they’ve been preaching. They’ve refused to stand and fight with the rest of us.

The fight was always about Obamacare. Today we know we must keep fighting and fight harder against even our own supposed side. But we always knew the fight would force the charlatans of the GOP out of the shadows into disinfecting sunlight. It has happened as I wrote it would almost a month ago.

Now conservatives can keep advancing. They should not be disheartened.

In reality, the GOP of a decade ago would never have fought like it has fought now. The party that gave us No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, and TARP would never have stood for two weeks embarrassing Democrats with short term spending bills.

Ted Cruz and Mike Lee may not have been able to strike a death blow to Obamacare today, but they were able to fight a fight that would have been impossible before them. They have now made it less and less possible for Republicans to collaborate with Democrats to fix or stabilize Obamacare.

So we must advance. Two Republicans in the Senate caused this fight that their colleagues would have surrendered on more quickly but for them. Imagine a Senate filled with more. We have an opportunity to replace Mitch McConnell in Kentucky with a better conservative. We should do that. We have the opportunity to send a strong conservative from North Carolina and we should do that. Same in Colorado. Kansas looks to be in play. Chris McDaniel will declare his candidacy for the Senate in Mississippi. Conservatives will rally to him quickly. Tennessee could be in play too.

The establishment has given conservatives a brilliant opportunity to advance against them and then against the Democrats. As Obamacare now goes into full swing, conservatives can show that they tried to stop it while Mitch McConnell and so many others sat and watched from a cozy booth the Capitol Hill Club leaving the fighting to others while they did everything possible to undermine the fight.

As more Americans watch Obamacare fail them through the Republican primary season, conservatives will be able to put the focus on Republicans who funded Obamacare instead of fighting it. Whether they like it or not, Republicans in Congress will find their names on ballots in 2014. They cannot hide or escape fate.

Conservatives must advance — ever advancing against the Republicans who have folded in the fight against Obamacare. We will not win all the fights. But Ted Cruz and Mike Lee show we do not have to win them all. We just need reinforcements.

The last time the major leaders of an American political party tried to compromise their way to power, the party broke apart giving us the Republicans. This fight too will break apart the GOP. There will not necessarily be a new party from it, but there will be a fundamentally altered party of new faces fueled by a grassroots movement now able to connect with each other and independent from Wall Street and K Street funders.

Never before have the people been less dependent on a party apparatus to play in primaries. Conservatives now have groups like Heritage Action, Senate Conservatives Fund, Madison Project, Club for Growth, FreedomWorks, For America, and others to fund and rely on.

Grassroots upset about this fight should be encouraged. We’d have never gotten this far with the GOP before 2010. Imagine now the possibilities in 2014 if we make examples of a GOP that refused to fight Obamacare.

2014 must now be about advancing, ever advancing, even through the ranks of the GOP to have the fights that must be had.

Republican leaders in Washington want you to get off the field.  Instead, get involved and get even. — Red State.

Our enemies have chosen us. Now it is time for us to choose their replacements.

 

 

 

Facebook

Friday Follies for June 7th, 2013

Posted on by

There are so many items to post about today that it’s almost overwhelming.  Where shall we start?

How about some bullet items.

As you can see, there are numerous subjects for a post. However, everyone is focused on the revelation that the NSA has been seizing call data for ALL (I’m still not sure that is accurate,) Verizon subscribers—and Verizon isn’t the only carrier involved!

What people are overlooking, is that this isn’t new. What is new is the volume of the data and the scope of the data seized.

The movies have misrepresented call tracing since the advent of the digital switch. Way back in the ’30s and ’40s, telephone switches were analog. In order to trace a call, you can to follow, trace a call, through the internal connections of the switch. It was a slow and laborious process.

With the advent and deployment of digital switches and modern call routing techniques, it’s much, much easier. A call detail record is created when the call is dialed. More data is added when the connection is made and additional data, timestamps, is added until the call is terminated. If either the originating or destination number is known, a carrier can retrieve the call data in seconds—a minute or two at most.

What is NOT available is the conversation.

You see, when digital switches were deployed in the ’60s and ’70s, the audio of the calls were digitalized, compressed, to better utilize and manage the telephone circuits between switches. If you tapped in on a circuit, you’d hear nothing. It’s digital data, not analog audio. The only place to tap is what is known as “the last mile,” the circuit between your home and the local switch. When wiretaps were granted, the taps had to be placed at or near the subject’s premises.

Digital central office and long distance switches weren’t designed to enable tapping and many, most perhaps, still aren’t. It’s extremely difficult. The FedGov, using FISA, asked the major telco carriers, in the early years of the 21st Century, to develop switches to enable tapping and to retrofit existing switches. It would be extremely expensive to retrofit the deployed switches and the carriers told to FedGov to pound sand.

The carriers did, as new switches were added and older switches replaced for added capacity, comply with the FedGov’s directives. Eventually, their networks will be replaced with switches that will have the capability of listening in on live conversations—but that time is still in the future. The transition will continue for several years, maybe a decade or more. Businesses just won’t replace a large, significant portion of their infrastructure at a whim of bureaucrats.  The expense would put them out of business.

However, the FedGov has carriers over a barrel…and a club called the FCC. The FCC licenses telecommunications carriers and using the threat to withdraw that license, can coerce the carriers into doing whatever the Feds want—within some fiscal reason. That’s why the transition has and will take significant time.

So, we have a reprieve for awhile. I don’t know how long. Years, maybe? A decade, possibly? We must put that time into good use. First, by electing a CONSERVATIVE congress. Next, repeal the Patriot ACT and disband DHS, or, failing that, severely curtail their power and scope.

It’s not too late…yet, if we are to preserve out liberty.

Facebook