Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Privileged Class
So I guess once you're elected to Congress, you're immune from drunk driving laws; you can stash the evidence that you've committed a crime in your office, because investigators aren't allowed to search it; if you kill someone because you've got a lead foot and blew a stop sign, the taxpayers will cover your financial liability; and, we learn today, you can commit whatever Internet-related crimes you please, because the police aren't allowed to search your computer.
Meanwhile, the same Congress that has immunized itself from much of the law is also responsible for the ever-expanding federal criminal code, which we can thank for our shamefully enormous and still-soaring prison population, which is by far and away the largest in the world.
You have lawmakers who feel they're above the law. And who at the same time are criminalizing anything and everything they find tacky, repugnant, or immoral.
Forgive the lofty language, but you know what? This isn't healthy for our republic.
Tim|8.23.07 @ 9:48PM|#
Don't forget those who read your emails and listen to your phone calls and otherwise abuse their authority and keep it all secret through executive privilege or FOIA exemptions.
Tim|8.23.07 @ 9:51PM|#
Or detain people without charges or authorize torture and hide behind state secrets and classified documents and...
M|8.23.07 @ 9:52PM|#
our shamefully enormous and still-soaring prison population
Blame trans-fats and a still insufficiently zealous TSA.
Tsu Dho Nihm|8.23.07 @ 9:53PM|#
Our republic? The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.
|8.23.07 @ 10:05PM|#
What?
Sorry, I was watching a VH1 special on Lindsey Lohan that I Tevo'ed
the other day.
I hope she gets out soon. Her DUI charge was sooooo unfair...
|8.23.07 @ 10:13PM|#
We should make all citizens members of Congress, ushering in an era of unprecedented freedom and perks.
|8.23.07 @ 10:36PM|#
Pro Lib,
In this new congress, I propose that every citizen receive $100
million.
To raise the funds, we can increase the Arbitrary Dispersement
Tax.
All in favor of the measure?
|8.23.07 @ 10:38PM|#
China would probably be beating us in prison population if they weren't executing 8,000 people a year.
|8.23.07 @ 10:49PM|#
Hey joe, why doesn't the great and fair Democratic majority repeal these exemptions?
tros|8.23.07 @ 11:00PM|#
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Florida's top police agency said
Wednesday its investigation into former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley's
lurid Internet communications with teenage boys has been hindered
because neither Foley nor the House will let investigators examine
his congressional computers.
Maybe they could get the evidence they need if it was part of a
reality TV show.
GILMORE|8.23.07 @ 11:06PM|#
Radley
As always, you frame the point perfectly. The angles you tend to
cover are relevant to everyone who care about how we live today.
(unlike the common ferret-owner type of libertarian indignation)
The more of your stuff that gets in this magazine (or any other
media), the better.
Steve in Clearwater|8.23.07 @ 11:17PM|#
CRIMETHINK, we arrest and jail 8000 people every five days on marijuana possession charges alone, so they're going to have to jack up the pace in China if they wanna compete in the Big Leagues.
|8.23.07 @ 11:26PM|#
The joke is that apparently only 100 people domestically are
being wiretapped, per today's report.
That defies all logic, and it is one of the most humiliating lies
I've read today.
Anonymo the Anonymous|8.23.07 @ 11:35PM|#
Our republic? The last remnants of the Old Republic have
been swept away.
QFT. I think I'd actually vote for Jar Jar Binks before most of our
current senators.
Daniel|8.23.07 @ 11:57PM|#
I love how the government (illegal wire tapping) and now government officials are able to (ab)use the law to protect themselves from the law. Makes me feel safe. What's that called again, a Receive-33?
Ray G|8.24.07 @ 12:24AM|#
Janklow had also pardoned his son-in-law for a DUI I believe
when governor.
Our prison population has far too many innocent people in it for
petty drug use, et cetera, but I hate to frame the issue on prison
population alone.
Doing such, the debate tends to veer off into a basic hard or soft
on crime in general which isn't the point. If we were to be
generally soft and inconsistent on crime, that is harmful of
individual liberty writ large.
But when we frame the issue in terms of useless laws and the
zealous prosecution of victimless crimes, it takes that whole soft
on crime aspect out of the equation.
|8.24.07 @ 12:30AM|#
Our republic? The last remnants of the Old Republic have
been swept away.
But that's impossible. How will the Emperor maintain control
without the bureaucracy?
|8.24.07 @ 12:42AM|#
Fear - fear will keep them in line.
China would probably be beating us in prison population if they
weren't executing 8,000 people a year.
The difference is, the majority of Chinese prisoners are political
prisoners, while the majority of our prisoners (at the Fed level,
at least) are there for drug offenses. Arguably,
they are political prisoners as well.
|8.24.07 @ 12:58AM|#
State Representative Bob Allen, Republican from Titusville
Florida was
arrested for offering a police offer $20 to suck his dick (Allen
wanted to suck the cops dick, that is). Allen pulled into a
public park at 2 or 3 am, went to the bathroom, then had the
offending encounter. At first, Allen reasonably explained that
there were a lot of "black men" in the park, and he was afraid he
was going to become "a statistic" so, naturally, he offered to pay
a black dude to get some lip on cock action. When the scandal
broke, he blamed
Cubans (the state speaker is cuban) for their skepticism towards
such reasonable
white-man-afraid-of-black-man-so-he-offers-a-suck-of f strategies
towards crime reduction. Now the court papers come out, and Bob
Allen
blames a lightening storm for scaring him out of his wits, and
into a $20 blow job.
This post is copyrighted, so even though it's a hilarious story,
you'd better use even a word of what I wrote, 'cause it's pure
comedy gold, Jerry. Comedy gold.
|8.24.07 @ 1:00AM|#
I'm sure that my man Jeeves will figure out a way to get us all out of this, right after he makes us all a perfect pot of tea.
|8.24.07 @ 4:39AM|#
Our incarceration rate will make us a nation in decline, if we are not already. I admit that without much forethought or self-control I proselytize my friends nearly every day about the slow-moving disaster of the expanding Federal criminal code.
My man Friday|8.24.07 @ 7:10AM|#
At one point the Empire abolished the Senate, which is probably a good thing; but who's our Darth Vader now that Rove is out? (I'm assuming Cheney as emperor.)
Fluffy|8.24.07 @ 8:29AM|#
Petraeus could be Vader, if it weren't for the fact that Vader
actually, you know, had powers.
Petraeus-Vader has been elevated by the neocon blogosphere into
fucking Patton riding Alexander the Great piggyback, and it's on
the basis of virtually no discernible accomplishment.
So Petraeus can be Vader, but we'll all have to just pretend that
he has force powers. Act like we're choking when he force-chokes
us, etc.
OK, I stole that last bit from Robot Chicken.
|8.24.07 @ 8:35AM|#
Fuck, Radley, between this post and
This one from Ed Brayton about how the White House has recently
decided it can ignore FOIA requests, I had two fucking lousy
bookends to a fucking lousy day.
What you do is important, but geez, this shit is just hella
depressing. Thanks.
Oh, and Lamar,
You're right--the new addition of Cubans and lightning to Bob
Allen's reason for being scared is comedy gold. Thank you.
ed|8.24.07 @ 8:44AM|#
Once again Reason blames the lawmakers and not the culture that made them possible and the voters who put them there. Congress did not elect itself. They mirror us.
|8.24.07 @ 8:47AM|#
Taktix®,
My cunning plan only included citizens, so we can tax the heck out
of the illegal immigrants.
|8.24.07 @ 9:05AM|#
Why do you think they employee so many people to "protect," them as body guards. I would want protection to if I was fucking over a few hundred million people every day.
|8.24.07 @ 9:16AM|#
My cunning plan only included citizens, so we can tax the
heck out of the illegal immigrants.
Pro Lib,
I figured we'd just sell them into slavery to recoup the
cash.
All,
I was also trying to point out how horrid a direct democracy would
be.
|8.24.07 @ 9:24AM|#
Here's the part Mr. Balko doesn't mention, from the Byrd story
he links:
The Fairfax County police officer who investigated the accident
had started to write the 81-year-old Senator a traffic ticket when
Bryd pulled a copy of the U.S. Constitution out of his pocket and
pointed to a section that he said the cop prevented the cop for
ticketing him for anything because he, as a member of Congress
"shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the
peace, be privileged from arrest" both while attending a session
and traveling to or from the Capitol.
Byrd spokeswoman Ann Adler says the Senator, an acknowledged
Constitutional scholar, "almost always has one (the Constitution)
in his pocket."
Byrd was taken to the nearby Fair Oaks police station where the
shift commander put in a quick call to Fairfax Commonwealth's
Attorney Robert F. Horan. Horan told the cop that if the Senator
wanted to claim Congressional immunity for the ticket, the cops
would have to honor it. With everything else that had happened in
Washington in recent months, a traffic accident probably couldn't
be classified as "treason, felony or breach of the peace."
Horan said he was familiar with the immunity clause -- Article 1,
Section 6, of the Constitution -- because he had encountered it
once before during his 32 years in office. Another member of
Congress, also from West Virginia, invoked the clause to escape a
speeding ticket 20 years earlier.
So, in this case at least, Byrd did not feel he was above the law -
the Constitution itself says that he's immune from being charged
with minor crimes.
|8.24.07 @ 9:29AM|#
Dan T.,
The purpose of that clause is not to get out of speeding tickets,
which didn't exist (unless there were horse speed limits) at the
writing of the Constitution. The purpose was to prevent the
executive branch from molesting and hindering members of the
legislative branch on the way to vote on something
controversial.
Episiarch|8.24.07 @ 9:38AM|#
So, in this case at least, Byrd did not feel he was above
the law - the Constitution itself says that he's immune from being
charged with minor crimes.
So is that why he later accepted the ticket Dan? I love how you say
"Radley left this out" and then you leave something out.
Theoretically, Byrd could be, at any time, going "to or from the
Capitol." Even if he wasn't, he can just say he was, and that's
that. That isn't the intention of that rule.
Kind of like when I had a pistol permit in NY that allowed me to
carry "to and from fishing, hunting, hiking, camping, shooting
events or practice", so I just carried hiking boots and a fishing
pole in my car at all times.
Gabe Harris|8.24.07 @ 10:07AM|#
I assume pro-war commentators and seasoned Foreign Policy
"experts" like Michael Young are also excluded from the searches
right?
so come on guys...as long as you are "reasonable" about foreign
policy you don't have anything to worry about.
|8.24.07 @ 10:12AM|#
Look, I'm really tired of all the talk about the government spying on you people. I'm going to track you all down and have a good talk with you. See you soon.
|8.24.07 @ 10:14AM|#
So is that why he later accepted the ticket Dan? I love how
you say "Radley left this out" and then you leave something
out.
I guess you got me - I honestly didn't realize that Byrd later
accepted the ticket, although if he did then Mr. Balko should not
have included it as an example in the first place.
Spaniard|8.24.07 @ 10:22AM|#
Rejecting the parliament is the fastest way into dictatorship. Do you know America what you are doing?
dhex|8.24.07 @ 10:22AM|#
mr. balko always manages to darken my day.
shit man mel brooks had it right:
"it's good to be the king."
|8.24.07 @ 10:41AM|#
So is that why he later accepted the ticket Dan? I love how
you say "Radley left this out" and then you leave something
out.
Speaking of leaving things out, Byrd was charged $30 for court
costs. As the article says, he still enjoyed privilige.
As I read the story, Byrd accepted the ticket after he was sure the
fix was in. Nice option if you can get it.
|8.24.07 @ 11:14AM|#
Didn't you get the memo? Once elected to the House or Senate, you have achieved the status of Prince. The rest of us are just peasants. Well, maybe not yet. But once elected Prince, they work together to raise our property taxes to the point that they can eventually tax us off our land and make the transition complete.
|8.24.07 @ 11:29AM|#
You can't just go about enslaving people, Taktix®, that's
unconstitutional. However, if we were to arrest and "duly convict"
all of the illegal immigrants, well, the 13th
Amendment expressly exempts convicted criminals from its
terms.
I just hope this new found power doesn't go the heads of the
roughly 300 million new members of Congress. Maybe that's more like
200 million--we don't need to include minors.
Michael|8.24.07 @ 11:31AM|#
There's a kernel of truth to the notion that our politicians
reflect the people who elect them, but it isn't the whole truth. In
the end, power corrupts. By maintaining the tradition of two-party
leadership, we've given our politicians too much power and too much
opportunity to build protection into their powers. Incumbents have
to spend exponentially less money to maintain their seats than
challengers to unseat them. Third party politics are practically
non-existent.
Our government, as it stands, is deeply broken. It's all legal and
above-board, because we allowed them to pass the laws that allow
them to protect their privileged status. What we need to do is tear
it down, go back to the drawing board and start over. Politicians
need to become public servants again, not overlords and
masters.
|8.24.07 @ 12:02PM|#
I've got some sympathy on the aren't allowed to search your
computer.
Remember, when the police SAY, search your computer, what they MEAN
is, take your computer away indefinitely. Unless and until found
guilty, he and his staff have to do their jobs somehow.
I'm not sympathetic to them having special privileges, though, or
being able to commit crimes in office without investigation. Police
SHOULD just be imaging drives and not taking property as part of
busts, and they SHOULD be investigating Congressmen as easily as
other people.
|8.24.07 @ 12:26PM|#
The implicit issue in the 2008 elections is the arrogance of the
Privileged Class - besides those matters Balko mentions, they range
from the way from McCain believes that his ideas on "clean
government" trump the Bill of Rights to some cretinous congress
critter yelling "It's my money" while quarreling over a piece of
pork down to our illustrious local police forces who seem to spend
more time protecting their rogue brethren than they do catching
criminals. (But I'm from Chicago, "Second City to None in
Corruption".)
If John Edwards could forget his 1890's class-warfare oriented sort
of populism and start running against governmental arrogance, he
might be able to get somplace. Oh well, into ever life some
sunshine must fall.
|8.24.07 @ 12:39PM|#
"What we need to do is tear it down, go back to the drawing
board and start over."
I agree with your overall point and feel the same way. Without
making any implications as to what methods you intended - I wish to
make my own point that we should not make "tearing it down and
starting over" the banner under which we stand to make that happen.
Tearing down ones house means that you have to have another one
ready to move into - unless you want to spend time in the snow and
rain.
What I would love to see is to see a group of very wise people get
together and do a state by state, for the Senate, and a district by
district vetting of the candidates for the house for the primaries.
Then come up with real contenders for the incumbents who could get
the attention and backing necessary to win.
Let's say that I no longer want my very secure Senator to be my
represtative due to his refusal to represent his constituents on
the immigration issue. The problem will be that he WILL be
reelected in the GOP primary. So then, in the general election, I
will have two choices, my current Senator or a Democrat who, by the
very fact of declaring himself a democrat can not be trusted to
stand firm for me on this issue (or any other issue for that
matter, they all promise and never deliver) - no matter what
promises s/he makes. So, I'll be forced to reelect my Senator who
will continue to please those who have the power to put him in
office - instead of the people of this State.
And that is where the problem lies. We need one more layer to the
primary. A layer where good, involved, informed and organized
people help to select viable candidates in the primary that have a
chance of winning. People selected by the people, not special
interests.
Problem is, I'm not an organizer, and I'm fairly new to my state
and county - so I don't know whom those people would be. But what
we need are real challengers, put forth by the people in the
primaries rather than in the general election.
I think this is one place where bloggers could get involved in
helping to organize a pre-primary to make the primaries more
meaningful.
I do it if I could - but I have no idea how. I wish all of you
super bloggers would take up that charge!
Kev|8.24.07 @ 12:53PM|#
Tearing down ones house means that you have to have another
one ready to move into - unless you want to spend time in the snow
and rain.
I have a plan for the house; I just need a builder.
The way to avoid having a "privileged class" is to not let people
stay in these positions long enough to forget where they came from.
To that end, we need serious term limits--no more than two for
senators and four for representatives. It's ridiculous that Robert
Byrd has been in the Senate for over 48 years; I doubt that the
Framers had something like that in mind (especially since people
didn't live that long back then).
But on top of that, we also need term limits for government
bureaucrats as well, because otherwise, they'd be running the show
in the absence of longterm members of Congress. I'd say ten years,
tops, for any government job save the military and things like NASA
and the postal service. Nobody should otherwise spend an entire
working life suckling at the government teat. If you have a talent
for something, get a job in that field, and if you don't, it's back
to school for you. Entrenched bureaucrats tend to get even more
out-of-touch with the real world than the elected representatives
whom they serve.
So there's the idea; the trick is to get it implemented. Any
suggestions?
|8.24.07 @ 12:57PM|#
From the Memory Hole - there stands Jim Traficant, D-Ohio.
Famous for his floor speeches in the well of the US House of
Representatives. He is in prison for exposing, on a nightly basis,
the hideous fraud and treason of what is popularly referred to as
the United States, and it's priviliged class, members of Congress.
You can debate all you want as to whether Traficant was railroaded
or simply caught ... but the fact remains there is no one like him
standing in the house telling the truth. Not even Ron Paul comes
close to the affairs and deeds Traficant spoke to every evening.
So, if we're ever going to overturn the oligarchy of the Party of
Power that occupies Washington, and return to our Constitution,
remember the lesson of James Traficant.
The people who occupy Washington will brook no revelation,
disclosure nor Light.
|8.24.07 @ 1:21PM|#
Kev - I agree with you that the easy solution is term limits for
our senators and reps. Problem is that the Princes currently in
power refuse to allow it. But it needs to be done. It really is THE
solution. In a way, it is just like the military - fresh blood
keeps moving through.
Interesting concept re: long term bureaucrats in key positions.
I've always thought revamp civil service and replace it with a
military like structure - up or out.
Dick n da ass|8.24.07 @ 1:33PM|#
If the Kings Men need 2 follow the Kings Rules...Perhaps the
rules wouldn't b so silly.
Like the 55 mph speed limit. And the .08 BAC and that pesty zero
tolerance on Marijuana.
joated|8.24.07 @ 2:15PM|#
"who at the same time are criminalizing anything and everything
they find tacky, repugnant, or immoral."
So why are there so many laws? Thesefolks have shown time and again
by their personal behavior that they find precious little "tacky,
repugnant, or immoral."
|8.24.07 @ 2:18PM|#
"...criminalizing anything and everything they find tacky,
repugnant, or immoral."
This is the impulse behind "hate crimes" legislation, where "the
crime" becomes defined as an affront to a specific individual or
group (e.g., "homosexuals", "Muslims").
For example, the recent flushing of the Koran incident at Pace
Univ., the guy was arrested under NYC "hate crimes" statutes.
Indeed, this isn't healthy for our republic.
|8.24.07 @ 4:00PM|#
Wonder why there are so many laws in a nation that that bellows
democracy and freedom on every pulpit? Control, simple and easy.
Laws are in place to protect property, wealth, and positions. My
college professor blew my mind when he demostrated that over 80% of
our laws are based on assests and wealth. That is to say that the
laws serves those with assests and wealth.
The priviledged class throws out a new bogey man every 2 decades or
so to remove the microscope from themselves. Facists, communists,
now terrorists. The problem now is that terrorist is a very losely
defined term. If you disagree with policy you have no say in, are
you a terrorist or will you be displaying characteristics of a
terrorist. Recently the NYPD labeled librarys and coffee shops as
incubaters of terror ideology. In essence knowledge and open forums
is the fertile soil of hostile dissent.
It's a power grab folks, the elite are not stupid as some of us
think. They are organized, share common goals and are beginning to
see that the old "bread and circues" of Rome is all you need to
take what you want.
I would like to think that we have a future. In fact we do not,
private armies such as blackwater and private prisons constructed
by halliburton are the beginning. Failure to improve infrastructure
or aid to collapsed American citys is not a mistake or
oversight...its the open and direct result of politicians and the
corporations they are in bed with emptying the public funds for
thier own ends.
I'm not a doomsayer, only a humble, practical, observant patriot
watching the ship run ashore. I recommend picking up several well
written books concerning urban survivalism, farming and basic
engineering.
Goodluck my friends, more so for your children.
|8.24.07 @ 4:26PM|#
The USA is in the midst of class warfare.
The masses are indoctrinated from an early age that as things are
is correct, proper and as it should be.
Disagree with authority and be labeled as unAmerican, unpatriotic
and against the troops.
Several Founders wrote what the masses should do when a government
no longer represents them.
The elite class has federal laws in place that would imprison the
Founders for 20 years with a levied fine of one-quarter-million
dollars.
The federal government, America's elite class and the corporate
structure is a greater threat to our freedoms than all foreign
terrorists combined.
We, the people, are in peril and the threat is from within.
|8.24.07 @ 4:33PM|#
""China would probably be beating us in prison population if
they weren't executing 8,000 people a year""
Don't give them any ideas
"""Once again Reason blames the lawmakers and not the culture that
made them possible and the voters who put them there. Congress did
not elect itself. They mirror us."""
They are human, but that does not justify their actions, nor does
it push the concept of self-responsibility onto others. Sure we
have some responsibility about whom we vote. In 2004 America wanted
more Bush and we've got it (pun intended). But no one is more
responsible for one's actions than one's self.
""""What we need to do is tear it down, go back to the drawing
board and start over.""""
I disagree. The problem is not our system of government but the
people elected, and the inability of citizens to pick good
candidates. This is America after its citizens have given their
minds to the 24 hours news channels. We are failing the
Constitution. The Constitution is not failing us.
"""It's a power grab folks, the elite are not stupid as some of us
think. They are organized, share common goals and are beginning to
see that the old "bread and circues" of Rome is all you need to
take what you want."""
Bingo!
It's all about power getting more power. Information is power, and
they want the ability to record and analyze every little thing you
do and they want to prevent you from doing the same. More open
society, more closed government.
|8.24.07 @ 4:58PM|#
Give me a break. You are worried about the Fed? Do you not think
that Barnes and Noble and Amazon haven't kept track of every
purchase you ever made. Every time you swipe your card at the
grocery store, your credit score, your loans, all for sale to
anyone willing to pay a price. Every key stroke you ever entered is
tracked by people wanting to sell you something or get your vote.
About the only one who can't easily access it is the Feds.
And as for 80% of the laws being to protect wealth and assets - I
think we can assume since you are still green enough behind the
ears to still believe what your professors say, that you have not
yet acquired any wealth or assets that you would like protected.
Isn't that GOOD that 80% is to protect your assets? The other 20%
are to protect your person, rape, slander, gun control, driver's
licenses, and other laws which limit what YOU can say, think and
do. Do you really want that percentage reversed?
If you want to worry about Princes turning you into peasants -
worry about taxes. That is how they take what you work for and give
it to people who sit on their asses and exchange their votes for
bread and circuses. What happens when property taxes get so high
that you have no land, no prospects of owning land and the price of
living goes up? You become a peasant, dependant on the state for a
place to stand.
It's always amusing how the young think that the government will be
their nanny - yet they think everyone who runs the government is
not to be trusted with even knowing what library books they have
rented. Like any of us have any privacy any more anyway.
Personally, I could care less if the government knows what I read.
Anyone with a terminal and a check book ANYONE can find out
anything and everything they want to know about me in a matter of
minutes.
Grow up. If you are lucky, someday you will have wealth and assets
of your own that you want protected. If not, the best you can hope
for is to be a ward of the state, whoring your vote to which ever
politician promises to throw you the best trinkets from the taxes
that they took from those who actually worked hard for it.
Guy_Montag|8.24.07 @ 5:40PM|#
Becky,
Unlike you I know that true happiness in life is not about wealth
and assests. Its about qaulity of life and the right to make those
choices as you see fit regardless of how much you have in the
bank.
You only discredit your own argument by saying that my mindset will
change once I recieve wealth and assests. Thats the entire point of
this thread...absolute power corrupts absolutely. Your curcular
logic just denounced your entire post. I recommend you go speak to
an educated individual or get educated yourself. I would rather
trust an individual who has a doctorate in history and political
science rather than what Bill O'Reilly spews into your ever willing
mind.
Wire tapping, domestic survalance and the ilk are passed off as
"protection" to the populace, however it always ends up enslaving
the populace. This can be seen most recently with the FBI misusing
the patriot act to collect information on passive anti-war
protestors. The governments job has never been to know what books I
read...ever. If your willing to give up your freedoms for
protection than I would have you read a quote from Ben
Franklin...you know the guy that helped form this nation; "Any
society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little
security will deserve neither and lose both." It begins with books,
then phones, then spy satalites, then DNA, etc etc.
Please come to the forum with more understanding of the topic next
time. This was not a debate regarding welfare, and your childish
attempt to use my comments out of context is nothing more than an
authoritarian tool to cloud and obfuscate the true debate. Your
motives are transparent.
|8.24.07 @ 5:55PM|#
**I would rather trust an individual who has a doctorate in
history and political science**
That's because you are young and stupid. Talk to me when you are
older and have a little bit of life outside the nursery. And as for
my not having a quality of life - what makes you think that I do
not. You know nothing about me. You have no idea what degrees I
hold. I happen to think Bill O'Reilly is an idiot, did you make
that assumption because I simply disagreed with you?
You seem to have missed the point about what power of the
politicians is about. It is not just getting out of traffic
tickets, but it is the power of the politicians to take what you
own, what you work for and redistribute it any way they wish - with
you having little or no control over it.
Come back to the argument once you have something more than an
sheltered life paid for by mommy and me to draw from.
Guy_montag|8.24.07 @ 6:21PM|#
Becky,
As I know nothing about you, you also know nothing about me. Your
orginal post was an immediant attack on me because I wrote some
things you did'nt like..so in essence you made the first
assumptions about me because you disagreed with me. I see this alot
in op eds in various publications and through pundits on television
who cannot handle a dissenting view point. Once again your own
arguments come back to bit you in the behind, its becoming
predictable.
It appears we can both agree our public funds are misappropriated
by our elected officials, yet you only want to speak of the welfare
nation. I agree with you on this..welfare is a safety net, not a
life style. Yet I go further in stating that not only are we
wasting funds on lazy, non-productive peoples. We are also losing
funds to mismanaged and illegal wars, corporate kickbacks, non-bid
contracts, religious tax breaks and private hedge funds. If your
gonna knock down straw men make sure you include them all.
I may be younger than you, but I refuse to become another cog in
the machine that has proven to be malfunctioning. I will continue
to question authority..thats not youth, thats patrotism. Do not
conflate your govenrment with your nation, A patriot adores,
protects and keeps vigil over thier nation...not thier government.
A patriot displayes tough love and tosses up the mirror in the face
of corruption.
I love capatalism, because I am a fan of technology, only in
America can we continue to innovate and produce more and more
wonders for the benefit of mankind...capatalism breads innovation.
Yet unfettered deregulation of corporations and lobbyists pervert
that delicate union between democracy and capatalism.
Its not a crime to be rich, not at all. But once long ago those who
became rich were those who worked hard and had new ideas. The
ruling elite got rich in the modern age by lying, cheating,
stealing, and in some cases outright murder. They take those same
philosophys to the offices they win and continue to use those as a
means of stabalizing thier careers and accumulate more wealth. Of
course that means they open the doors to others who think like
them....soon enough, bang you have corruption so rampent that
anyone young or with a brain in thier head should have a healthy
amount of distrust for anyone in the status of authority.
|8.24.07 @ 6:57PM|#
We can both agree on unfettered deregulation of corporations and
lobbyists pervert that delicate union between democracy and
capitalism.
I always find it amusing when people who support commmunism or
capitalism say utopia would result if only it capitalism/communism
were able to be pure. No, history has already proven that pure
capitalism results in child labor, etc. and pure communism requires
a tyrant to enforce it and results in slave labor. In the end,
there is no utopia on this earth - we can only try to achieve a
balance by passing laws that help to protect the weak while
allowing the engine of self-interest to generate wealth.
But I have to disagree when you say, "But once long ago those who
became rich were those who worked hard and had new ideas. The
ruling elite got rich in the modern age by lying, cheating,
stealing, and in some cases outright murder". It has always been
that way and unless genetic engineering modifies the human race to
something we are not now, it will always be that way.
Rather, long ago there were Kings and subjects. Kings didn't get to
be kings by hard work, they got there by power, treachery and
murder and politics, just like the tyrants of today.
I understand your desire to be suspicious of authority, and well
you should be. I know that I am. But it is more complex than just
ranting against the government as being out to get you.
What keeps you safe in this country is the BALANCE of power. Our
forefathers set up a system where the most ruthless and the most
powerful are balanced by others equally ruthless and powerful who
have achieved heights in the other branches of government. It was a
brilliant plan and the only thing that keeps us, the people, in the
loop is the bill of rights - freedom of speech, freedom to bear
arms, etc. and of course, your vote. A vote is just a notice to
those vying for power what you would be willing to pick up arms and
fight for should they attempt to suject you to their whims.
It is popular to say that dissent is the highest form of patriotism
- but that is jingoistic and simplistic. It is much more complex
than that. It is a willingness to work collectively towards
maintaining a civilized society.
And that gets me to my point. What we are faced with now are forces
who wish to destroy the delicate balance of civilzation that your
forefathers - Greek, Roman, onto today have gifted to you in form
of a represtative government. The terrorists seek to destroy this
by blowing up bombs in discos to achieve political and power grabs
through the use of terror. You allow them continue to do so at the
peril of your freedom. As such, you will need to work with your
countrymen, through the form of your government to stop them -if
you wish to continue to live in a civilized society. No one of us
can do it alone. And as such, you will have to give up some
freedoms to prevent them from coming to your town and taking it
over through force. Because that's the way it was, long ago. And
these terrorists want to return it to that way. It is up to you to
decide how best to balance the need between freedom and
civilization. There is no right or wrong - only balance.
Guy_montag|8.24.07 @ 7:23PM|#
Becky,
It appears we are coming to a consensus regarding the topic at
hand. I am glad to see that thoughtful and reasoned conversation
can dissolve emotional outbursts. We are closer to an overall
agreement yet your last line does frighten me some...
"you will have to give up some freedoms to prevent them from coming
to your town and taking it over through force. Because that's the
way it was, long ago. And these terrorists want to return it to
that way"
I cannot, at the very fiber of my being, agree with that. Only
because it is fear mongering to believe that terrorists are going
to march into our citys and claim control, that would never happen.
At the same time after watching movies like Brazil and Children of
Men and V for Vendetta the narrative that these writers express it
that terrorism can be state sponsored by the very individuals that
claim to represent us. Yes its a stretch, yet at the same time its
not impossible, or far fetched. False flag operations got us into 2
wars before; Vietnam and the Spanish/American war. Both were lies
and orcastrated events to motivate the population into warfare.
Care to put freedom on the table as a wager this time?...I do not.
So you see the basis for my distrust. Why hand over freedoms when
they have already proven several times that they can make the
information as they see fit to create the situations that best
serve them.
To simply hand over freedoms based on unrational fear is not what
our founders intended. We are Americans. we display strength when
we need to, compassion when required. We endured the dust bowl,
both world wars, and countless other tragedys in our brief, young
200+ republic without relinquishing our core freedoms, and we can
do it again.
Have a great weekend! :)
|8.24.07 @ 7:34PM|#
It's amazing how some of you categorize Congresspeople as "the
ruling élite" while I see much of contemporary Congress as a self-
absorbed, infighting, rather pathetic bunch.
And I see the self-anointed élite as (the fourth estate)
newspapers, blue state self-proclaimed intelleck-tuals (try John
F'n Kerry here) whose shtick is to purport to care about
"you".
My version of an élite class is every bit as threatening to the
survival of your "liberties" as Radical Islamists who are, indeed,
bent on eradicating "your" way of life.
And way more threating to your "liberties" than the Patriot Act and
the FISA laws.
|8.24.07 @ 7:36PM|#
Thank you for the discussion. We will have to agree to disagree.
While it is true that " terrorism can be state sponsored by the
very individuals that claim to represent us" you have to really
close your eyes and click your heels to ignore the Islamist threat.
It is clear that you have chosen to do so and as such there is
little more we can debate.
I will give you one last parting word of advice. Read a little
history. We reliquished some of our freedoms in every war that we
fought. Your freedom was bought with the blood of those who refused
to be subjected to tyrants. There has never, not for a moment in
history, been a time when there was not someone willing to take
your freedom from you were good men and women not strong enough to
resist.
Have a good weekend.
Guy_montag|8.24.07 @ 7:45PM|#
Tanstaafl,
The reason they are terrorists is because they have no power, thats
what makes them use terror as a tool.
I recently went to London over the winter, there is literally 1
camera for every 10 people in London. Try walking down the street
knowing that your every move is being watched, that every call I
made back home was being intercepted. I was even involved in a
random pat down inspection before going into the subways. That is
not American, and if we allow one or two liberties to die when does
it stop? There will always be a bigger bogey man around the corner
to get scared about.
What makes my brain split open in shear disbelief is when people
say..."they wanna destroy your way of life" When in reality,
releasing our freedoms because of terror IS DESTROYING OUR WAY OF
LIFE
Can you spot the irony in your comments now?
guy_montag|8.24.07 @ 7:51PM|#
Becky,
I do not disregard terrorism as a substantial threat, and I don't
proclaim to know how to fight it the right way. All I know is that
right now its not being done the right way.
Also, concerning your point about history and freedoms during
wartime. Let us not forget that we, America, were the ones who
trained these men and left them to die after the russian invasion
of afghanistan, is there any confussion as to who made who?
"Blowback" is the word used by historians and many experts
regarding our foriegn policies. It is a hard fact to swallow, only
now if we can retrace our steps that got us here, can we begin to
change them. More of the same will only lead future generations in
a sick unrelenting cycle of war and fear....it must stop.
|8.24.07 @ 7:57PM|#
No guy, I can't spot the "irony".
Not a single individual I've discussed the Patriot Act with has
been able to cite one single change to their own lives.
Not one.
As for proliferation of cameras in large cities of the world, get
used to this wave of "the future".
Maybe you'd want to look into acquiring a relatively isolated plot
of land somewhere in the wild wild west of the US that might (just
might) still be protected from usurpation by imminent domain.
|8.24.07 @ 8:10PM|#
"What makes my brain split open in shear (sic)disbelief is when
people say..."they wanna destroy your way of life" "
I've read all the fatwas.
Combine those words with "terrorist" acts and selected targets over
more than 2 decades and it seems like a reasonable
assumption.
And for the record, ("the CIA") didn't JUST train bin laden's
mujahideen and leave them on their own in Afghanistan. Bin laden
thought it propitious to join in the American effort to repel the
Soviets, but always ordered his men not to mix and mingle with
those horrible infidels.
Guy_montag|8.24.07 @ 8:18PM|#
Richard Nixon used his wiretapping for political means to spy on
democratic officials. J Edgar Hoover used his powers to spy on
people he thought were his enemies. Carl rove and Alberto Gonzalas
used thier powers to politicize our justice system to ensure a
republican majority in a democratic nation. The FBI used the
patriot act to gather information on quaker anti-war
protestors....quakers! For what end, they were Americans displaying
thier right to dissent, and they sent spys and tapped thier
phones.
If you wanna talk about "the future" then you better get ready to
live with terrorism, its here to stay and nothing you do short of a
police state will stop it. People had no concept of vehicular man
slaughter at the turn of the century, and nothing we've done since
has stopped it.....but we go on, like we always do, and without
giving up your freedoms.
Terrorism is what the 21st century is going to have to deal with,
and soon terrorists will come in all religions and skin
tones....the unibomber, timmothy McVey, the IRA, abortion clinic
bombers....one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter
You cant afford to be this niave Tansaafl
You need to look closer.
|8.24.07 @ 8:28PM|#
"....the unibomber, timmothy McVey, the IRA, abortion clinic
bombers....one mans terrorist is another mans freedom
fighter"
One last stab, gotta go.
I can draw a clear line between the UnAbomber (whose Manifesto I
read closely and whose life I read about in detail), Tim McVEIGH
(whose life I studied a little), wacko individualists bombing
abortion clinics...
...and the agenda of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (the confessed
slaughterer of Daniel Pearl) and Islamist wackos.
Clear.
Buenas noches.
|8.24.07 @ 8:43PM|#
Guy - I enjoyed my discussion with you, and engaged in it with
you, because you seem like a bright lad - despite having your head
filled with the nonsense that passes for knowledge these
days.
Look - you really shot your wad when you wrote, "But once long ago
those who became rich were those who worked hard and had new ideas.
The ruling elite got rich in the modern age by lying, cheating,
stealing, and in some cases outright murder". That you could even
write those words .... well let's just say it's clear you aren't a
history major.
But don't feel bad, you probably know more than I did when I was
your age. There is hope for you yet.
tanstafaal - I agree with what you wrote at 7:34. If we had decent
reps - the Islamist threat would never have gotten this far. We
need term limits!
|8.25.07 @ 1:28AM|#
Thank you for the discussion. We will have to agree to
disagree. While it is true that " terrorism can be state sponsored
by the very individuals that claim to represent us" you have to
really close your eyes and click your heels to ignore the Islamist
threat. It is clear that you have chosen to do so and as such there
is little more we can debate.
I prefer to focus on the threat at hand (the steady erosion of
rights and the consolidation of power in the hands of large
corporations and the political elite) rather than the vague threat
that's at a distance (international terrorism). 9/11 was a tragedy,
but it did not fundamentally change the American way of life
at-large. Handing over our rights so that we can pretend we're
safer will.
The constant focus on terrorism in America is ignoring the
rampaging bear in your face so that you can stop the threat posed
by the dog down the block. The real threat to America is letting
our government get even more out of control.
|8.25.07 @ 1:52AM|#
It's called multi-tasking. Just because the roof is leaking
doesn't mean that you don't need to address the overflowing
toilet.
We have to fight the terror threat as a civilized society. That
means we have to give some rights to our government to do their
job. That's the bummer of living in a civilized world - you have to
give up some of your rights and grasp the concept of a common
good.
Our government isn't mommy who gives a sh*& about you and it
isn't a boogy man. It's people working together towards mutually
beneficial goals. Should you limit its power - yes. But granting
reasonable rights to those tasked to protect you - such as spying
on terrorists as well as those who cooperate with them is necessary
for your own survival. If you can't accept that - get a compound in
Montana and let the rest of us work it out.
|8.25.07 @ 2:26AM|#
"Read a little history. We reliquished some of our freedoms
in every war that we fought. Your freedom was bought with the blood
of those who refused to be subjected to tyrants."
Becky, in the future, please don't confuse wars that preserved our
freedom with wars that attain a questionable political goal. It's
insulting, and it forces me to agree with Guy Montag (by the way,
ace posts, there, Montag).
|8.25.07 @ 9:09AM|#
Guy--
Please don't assume those who disagree with you aren't
educated--this is an insult equal to "you should have an open
mind," addressed to a stranger.
Give people the benefit of the doubt. It's polite, and you won't
come across as a conceited twit.
By the way, haven't you noticed that academic consensus for the
last forty years has always been in aid of big government, by which
the academy lives? Big government, by the way, is antithetical to
the liberty intended by our nation's founding; any academic who
doesn't know that ain't very educated. So the consensus is
self-interested, and their political philosophy corrupt.
Contemporary academic opinion is not a good argument for you to
rely on.
|8.25.07 @ 11:57AM|#
Mr Balko --
Your post on Congress putting itself above the law has considerable
merit. But then you weaken it by trotting out this irrelevant
aside:
"Meanwhile, the same Congress that has immunized itself from much
of the law is also responsible for the ever-expanding federal
criminal code, which we can thank for our shamefully enormous and
still-soaring prison population, which is by far and away the
largest in the world."
In fact, 90+% of US adult prisoners are in state/local custody. The
federal criminal code, however much expanded, is not responsible
for their incarceration. And most adult prisoners (~75%) are being
held on charges of violence or crimes against property ... hardly
newfangled concepts.
Ginger McNulty|8.25.07 @ 4:30PM|#
Heh, yeah, no kiddin! They're also immune to laws and social
condemnation for torturing and even killing children.
http://reason.com/news/show/121088.html
http://www.theagitator.com/straightfox.php
|8.27.07 @ 9:56AM|#
Just to correct a myth that appeared above, the US did not train
or fund Osama bin Laden while he fought the Soviets. The US funded
native Afghans and not Arab fighters in Afghanistan. The Arabs
(like Osama) didn't need US funding; they had plenty from the Arab
world.
Here's the State Department page on it: < a
href="http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/24-318760.html">The
US Did Not Create Osama Bin Laden
|8.27.07 @ 9:58AM|#
Ah, I see no HTML allowed. For ease of copy & pasting:
http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/24-318760.html
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245