A Spork in the Drawer

A Silly People, Small And Afraid

Meet Derby Line, Vermont, a bucolic border town with a difference:

First was the white, painted lettering on the pavement on three little side streets -- "Canada" on one side, "U.S.A." on the other. Then came the white pylons denoting which side of the border was which. After that, signboards were erected on some streets, ordering drivers to turn back and use an officially designated entry point.

And along with the signposts came an influx of American Border Patrol agents, cruising through the town in their green-and-white sport-utility vehicles with sirens, chasing down cars and mopeds that ignored the posted warnings.

You can see where this is going:

For longtime residents accustomed to a simpler life that flowed freely across a largely invisible border, the final shock -- and what made most people really take notice -- was a proposal by the border agents last year to erect fences on the small streets to officially barricade the United States from Canada, and neighbor from neighbor.

"They're stirring up a little hate and discontent with that deal," said Claire Currier, who grew up in this border area and works at Brown's Drug Store, which has operated on the same spot since 1884. "It's like putting up a barrier. We've all intermingled for years."

So what is it that has caused such trouble in Derby Line? All together now:

"9/11 changed everything," said Border Patrol agent Fernando Beltran[.]

And there it is.

"They understand that there's a change, but to them it's a way of life," Beltran said as he cruised through the town streets in an unmarked SUV. "They never considered themselves in danger. There's a sense of security here."

And in all likelihood they, and us, weren't in any real danger. At least, there are hundreds, thousands, of ways to enter the US unnoticed if one is so inclined. Perfect security equals perfect police state. Neither are achievable but the latter seems to be the goal.

The reporter of this article gives the Ministry of Homeland Security a freebie:

But for the border agents, Sept. 11 exposed the vulnerability of America's northern frontier and the ease with which anyone -- a terrorist with a portable nuclear device, for example -- could cross into the United States from Canada using one of the multitude of unguarded back roads or forest paths, or, in a border town such as Derby Line, simply by crossing the street.

Suitcase nukes!

"We can't be wrong once," Beltran added. "If we're wrong once, that could be devastating to the whole country."

All must be subsumed to keep us safe!

Of course:

The new vigilance has led to more arrests of people crossing illegally and interdiction of contraband, mostly drugs. Border agents in this sector said that last year they arrested people from 117 different countries trying to enter the United States illegally. Among the drugs, agents say, they have confiscated large shipments of ecstasy pills being smuggled in, as well as shipments of extra-potent hydroponic marijuana.

No terrorists but the so-called War on (Some) Drugs continues apace. Let's remember that much of the "security" being foisted on us today had nothing to do with terrorism but with the current wave of drugs hysteria that began in the 1980's. Just say no!

But complain not, dear Citizen subject:

"We interact with the public," Lague said, "so they understand we're not doing this stuff because of them; we're doing it to protect them.

It's for your own good.

It always is.

.

Den. Dodd Explains It All

Say "hello" to a Senator today.

.

To Hell With Jason Altmire

I had chance to speak to Rep. Jason Altmire (PA-11 04) last March. Without revealing my position on the matter I asked him if telecom immunity was dead. Altmire responded that it wasn't completely dead but at any rate he was absolutely opposed to immunity.

Well lookee here.

Ironically, just today I received in the mail a letter from Altmire asking for campaign cash. Obviously his campaign thought that I would support him like I did in 2006.

Good luck in the rematch with Missy, jackass.

.

You WILL Obey

Sen. Kit Bond (R-Just Following Orders) this morning:

When the government tells you to do something I think you all recognize that that is something you need to do.

Says it all.

.

Taken Pure

When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.

- Abraham Lincoln, letter to Joshua Speed, 24 August, 1855

.

Tyrant

Pierce:

For the past couple of weeks, they've just gotten blatant about it. The administration of George W. Bush is bound by no law, bound by no precedent, bound not even by the forms of democratic self-government, let alone its actual substance, which is being used as a throw-rug in John Yoo's den these days. They will torture and the Congress can do nothing. Their powers to spy, to search, and to seize are unlimited and Congress is not remotely entitled to know even what those powers are. They can imprison without trial. They can force corporations -- and, indeed, individuals within the government -- to violate the law. They are not subject to treaties. They are not subject to oversight, nor even subpoenas. Read this swill from yesterday. Through his actions, and from the mouths of his minions, George Bush is now claiming fully the powers of a tyrant, by any reasonable definition of the term.

[...]

...Now, a group of very obvious extremists -- Dick Cheney is an authoritarian bully and a personal coward. His approval rating is 19 percent in the country and 100 percent in that hall. Res ipse loquitur. -- gathers in Washington, and not only do the party's most prominent political figures truckle and beg, your liberal media puts the worst of them on the air, as if they were serious people and not simple public vandals. Jesus Christ in Air Jordans, what in hell was David Bossie, a thug and a hoodlum, doing on Jim Lehrer's program last night? Tom DeLay is under indictment, for pity's sake. Why was he on MSNBC, grinning at Chris Matthews and lying about climate change? Mitt Romney's speech was a sprawling landfill of demagogic swill. It was treated as, well, statesmanlike by people who believe that John McCain is not conservative enough. This is plainly nuts, and any respectable conservative would work tirelessly to wring these crackpots out of the movement before the whole mess goes over the cliff again. Somebody should, you know, take out an ad or something.

Read the whole thing.

.

Is It Dictatorship Yet?

Sooo...George signed the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act today. Did he also issue a "signing statement" at the same time? Need you ask?

Even though he forced Congress to change its original bill, Bush’s signature yesterday came with a little-noticed signing statement, claiming that provisions in the law “could inhibit the President’s ability to carry out his constitutional obligations.” CQ reports on the provisions Bush plans to disregard:

One such provision sets up a commission to probe contracting fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan. Another expands protections for whistleblowers who work for government contractors. A third requires that U.S. intelligence agencies promptly respond to congressional requests for documents. And a fourth bars funding for permanent bases in Iraq and for any action that exercises U.S. control over Iraq’s oil money.

What will Congress do in response?

I think we all know the answer to that.

.

SCRAP THE "PATRIOT" ACT

Given Alberto Gonzales' record on state executions in Texas can anybody explain how this is a good idea?

The Justice Department is putting the final touches on regulations that could give Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales important new sway over death penalty cases in California and other states, including the power to shorten the time that death row inmates have to appeal convictions to federal courts.

The rules implement a little-noticed provision in last year's reauthorization of the Patriot Act that gives the attorney general the power to decide whether individual states are providing adequate counsel for defendants in death penalty cases. The authority has been held by federal judges.

Under the rules now being prepared, if a state requested it and Gonzales agreed, prosecutors could use "fast track" procedures that could shave years off the time that a death row inmate has to appeal to the federal courts after conviction in a state court.

Again, check this first link for John Dean's overview of Abu's conduct when it comes to state killings. Does anybody outside of the White House think this is a good idea? And I should say that it is a bad idea regardless of president and Attorney General.

Now to the larger point: Every time we turn around we discover that there's another provision tucked into the "Patriot" Act that gives the Executive Branch authoritarian power. Let's remember that the scandal about the firing of US Attorneys came about because the act allowed the appointment of USA's without Senate approval. The act was even used to bust some corrupt local government officials. Hardly a case of terrorism.

The "Patriot" Act was intended to combat terrorism. It's clear, and has been for years, that the true intent of the law was to give the president as much power as possible over as much as possible.

Scrap the "Patriot" Act. Then maybe - maybe - we can start again to craft a bill to address the issue of terrorism. But for now, the act is merely enabling the president to engage in his own terrorism.

.

Direction For Dictatorship

I've been meaning to get to this for the last week. It would seem that George, with little notice, recently gave himself explicitly dictatorial powers:

In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.”Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

He laid this all out in a document entitled “National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”

The White House released it on May 9.

Well, isn't this just dandy? You'd think that the Liberal Media would be all over this. Oh, that's right, the media isn't liberal.

Anyway, let's have a look-see:

[§2](d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;

Notice the non-specific wording here; also notice "localized acts of nature." the is means earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, and what have you. In other words, anything the president deems a sufficient emergency.

This leads us to:

[§2](e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

The key phrase here is "coordinated by the president." This puts the legislative and judicial branches under presidential control. How long would the last?

[§11](a) The continuation of the performance of ["Primary Mission Essential Functions"] during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after ["Continuity of Operations"] activation;

"Or until normal operations can be resumed." Again, as determined by the president.

So if this were to come to pass what would your legal recourse be? Need you ask?

[§21](c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Under just about any other president this wouldn't be so alarming but given that George already claims the power to strip citizens of their Constitutional rights whenever he feels like it I can't help but think that this directive is a Very Bad Thing. Even Jerry "Swift Boat Slime" Corsi sees this for what it is.

And given that there are 601 days left for this increasingly isolated and desperate administration to do what they want this should be, but won't be, big news.

[Via Pam at Pandagon.]

.

On The Kremlin And BushCo™

Jon Chait:

Many people think of democracy as free elections, some other basic rights (like free speech) and not much more. But really, that's only the beginning. There are plenty of countries that have free and fair elections and yet are clearly not democratic because their ruling parties have a permanent, immovable hammerlock on power.

One key thing that separates strong democracies (such as the United States) from weak democracies (such as Russia) is that the latter use the police power of the state as a tool of the ruling party. Russian President Vladimir V. Putin doesn't mind throwing his enemies in jail or sending out the police to break up protests.

I realize that the United States is not becoming Russia. But isn't this behavior, in a sense, what the Bush administration stands accused of? If true, it's an incredibly serious violation.

[...]

It would be very easy to overreact to all these things and conclude that our democracy is imperiled or that Republicans are wannabe Putins. But almost nobody seems to be overreacting.

Most people are under-reacting. Allowing the security apparatus of the state to help tilt elections is an extremely grave precedent. When the line of acceptable behavior can be moved without much protest, it often can be moved further the next time.

No, we're not becoming Russia. But becoming just a little bit like Russia still ought to be considered a major scandal.

Well said.

.