And Fuck You too, Obama (or: why America is a Single-Party system)
Feel free to stalk our every post with the f*cking c*nts RSS feed, subscribe to f-ckingc-nts.com by email, follow our new posts and random comments on Twitter, or become a fan on facebook. Go on. You know you want to! All the cool kids are doing it ...
So, Senator Barack Obama supports Senate bill 1959, the "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" … fuck you very much, Mr. Obama. Not-so-oddly, this bill has received relatively little coverage in the mainstream press, so allow me to quote a few choice sections for you:
`SEC. 899A. DEFINITIONS.
`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.
`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.
`SEC. 899B. FINDINGS.
`(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be used to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism.
`(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens.
Getting the idea? Yeah, so there we go. I'd very much like someone to tell me exactly who gets to define what constitutes "violence" and "force"? Who decides what qualifies as "extremist"? And what exactly is "terrorist-related propaganda" anyway? Sounds like another pile of Big Brother horseshit straight from the BushCo. playbook … so what in the fuck is a Democratic presidential candidate doing supporting this sleazy control-freak crap?!
Apparently, Obama (along with almost all the rest of the Democrat fuckwits in Congress) missed the subtext of the last midterm election … one might reasonably surmise that the Dems gained control of the legislature because voters were fucking sick of watching their civil liberties getting gutted, while their pocketbooks got raped paying for a war based on a pile of bareassed lies. One might reasonably surmise that, but Obama, like the rest of the sheep in jackasses' clothing that pass for Democrats these days, is on the Big Brother bandwagon. Patriot Act? Everyone hates it? Great, let's renew it, and see if we can't pass a few more draconian insults to the Constitution while we're at it.
My favorite bit in this one? "The term `ideologically based violence' means the … planned use, or threatened use of force or violence … to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs." If I write a post announcing my plans to organize a sit-in on the local federal building steps, protesting in favor of legalizing marijuana, wouldn't that technically be planned use of force to promote my social beliefs? Hell, threatening to punch a drunk redneck for gay bashing would fit the bill too, wouldn't it? So that would make me a "homegrown terrorist" or something?
Think that's taking it too far? Do a little research on COINTELPRO, or the McCarthy hearings. Hell, the US Government once locked up American citizens of Japanese ancestry for possibly being Japan-sympathizers in WWII … but I guess we don't have to worry about seeing any Muslim internment camps springing up, because the bill does say, "… individuals should not be targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion." That ought to be a relief to all the brown people in the US who happen to speak with slightly foreign accents, eh?
So really, I guess this isn't just about Obama drinking the anti-terrorism Kool-aid from BushCo. Really, it's more about ALL the lameass fucktards calling themselves Democrats right now. When the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 hit the House of Representatives, it passed with only SIX opposing votes. I see little reason to expect a stronger showing in the Senate. America is looking more and more like a single party system every day. Oh sure, the Democrats talk more about social services, and the Republicans talk more about law and order and morality and taxes … but when it comes to our constitutional civil liberties? We've ended up in a sad place where the only non-Libertarian presidential candidate who still gives a fuck about protecting them is running at the back of the Democratic pack.
I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again, sadly enough … get a fucking clue, Democrats. We voted you in because we wanted something DIFFERENT, and yet here you all are, in control of Congress, and the runaway train that is the Executive Branch has hardly slowed down at all. Basically, the next presidential election is most likely going to be a race between Beelzebub and Satan … Satan is offering a straight up barbed-wire dildo when the American public bends over after the polls close, and Beelzebub promises he'll only anally rape us with his bare arm. Great fucking choice.
If you'd like to read the full text of the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, GovTrack has it posted here.
Wow, that is fucking bullshit. My question is how do you know he supports this bill? Maybe I just read over it.
13th December 2007 at 7:59 am | permalink |This pretty much summarizes my feelings on the democratic candidates, too. None of them seem to have a spine at all. I do gravitate towards Edwards but can't say I'm totally enthusiastic about him but it doesn't seem like he has much of a chance with the media's obsession with Obama vs. Hilary.
13th December 2007 at 1:32 pm | permalink |@aaron: Here's a link to his full auto-email reply to constituents who write asking about the bill, which includes the line, "I will work to ensure that this legislation helps to achieve our domestic security objectives while protecting civil liberties and constitutional rights."
Now, if he were actually planning on trying to kill the bill, he wouldn't be working to "ensure that this legislation" does anything, would he? I would assume, if he were actually against it, he'd come right out and say so …
@akshelby: I'm just wishing that Kucinich had a chance in hell, but it does totally look like a media lockdown on Clinton/Obama … which is exactly what I was thinking of with the Beelzebub reference. heh
13th December 2007 at 3:54 pm | permalink |See, I was into Kucinich until he said he'd be on a ticket with Ron Paul. When he said that, I became totally disillusioned by him. Has he explained that at all?
13th December 2007 at 5:40 pm | permalink |@akshelby: Not that I know of, but it could just be left-fielders-gotta-stick-together … I'd love to see them trying to agree on a coherent platform. hehe
13th December 2007 at 5:45 pm | permalink |Edwards Kucinich seems plausible.
13th December 2007 at 9:41 pm | permalink |Well, I'm switching my party affiliation just so I can vote for him in the Democratic primary here …
14th December 2007 at 4:10 pm | permalink |Switching? What was your party before? You really don't seem like the republican type, alphabitch.
17th December 2007 at 9:16 am | permalink |I'm currently registered with the Green party … they're the only liberal anti-corporate party in the US.
17th December 2007 at 3:19 pm | permalink |Ahh ok. I was thinking "not democrat… republican? Naah.."
18th December 2007 at 4:08 am | permalink |After reading the website for the green party, it seems they stand for everything the democrats are supposed to. It's a shame the democrats mostly suck, and the greens have no real chance of getting elected.
Bah.
18th December 2007 at 4:26 am | permalink |@davidgx: Yeah, pretty fucking pathetic situation, really.
20th December 2007 at 7:51 pm | permalink |I might just register with the greens myself after voting in the primaries.. I'm a lefty in the south so.. if my vote is going to be worthless, it might as well be for the right people o_O
21st December 2007 at 12:30 pm | permalink |The thing I think that makes it even worse is that if the greens ever gained enough popularity to become electable, it would more or less split the democratic vote.
Everyone who currently votes republican and doesn't go for a dem, would never go for a green. So you get roughly 50% of the people voting republican and the other %50 give or take is split between the dems and the greens… the republicans always win.
-_-
21st December 2007 at 1:24 pm | permalink |@davidgx: Yeah, I figure the same about my vote here. :-) National races go Repub so hard, I don't even feel like I'm costing the Dems a vote.
And the way the Dems have been going in Congress lately, I'm not sure I'd feel bad about it anymore.
But if the Greens ever got big enough to have a chance, it'd probably be the same lifetime in which the Libertarians had a good chance at splitting the Republican vote too … it might actually look like a real multiparty system! heh
21st December 2007 at 4:12 pm | permalink |That's a good point.
And yeah, I've been really disappointed with what they've done with congress. The minimum wage increase was good, but that's about it. I still have a hard time believing that they've surrendered to Bush so many times, especially on the war.
21st December 2007 at 6:21 pm | permalink |Ron paul 2008!!! Ronpaul2008dotcom learn about him. 99% of Everyone else supports the nwo!
26th December 2007 at 3:21 am | permalink |