Thursday, 19 September 2013

Fwd: The Perfect Storm: ObamaCare and DemoDebt - The Left's Formula for Economic Decline






http://patriotpost.us/alexander/20184

 

The Perfect Storm: ObamaCare and DemoDebt

The Left's Formula for Economic Decline

By Mark Alexander · Sep. 19, 2013

 

"If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people … must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify." –Federalist No. 33 (1787)

The DemoDebt showdown on September 30 and the implementation deadline for the next major phase of Obama's UNaffordable Care Act on October 1 are combining to create the "perfect storm," a formula for extended economic stagnation and, consequently, the greatest domestic threat to American Liberty and free enterprise since Franklin Roosevelt's despotic administration.

To summarize, in 2010, under Democrat majorities in the House and Senate, Barack Hussein Obama obtained one of the Left's most coveted political prizes – a plan to nationalize health care. This had long been the "crown jewel" of socialist governments, having also been proposed by Hillary Clinton during her husband's regime.

The stated rationale for the so-called "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," now ubiquitously called "ObamaCare" (but perhaps more aptly called ObamaCareless"), was to "control health care costs" and "provide insurance coverage for the uninsured," approximately 15% of Americans with no medical coverage – which is not to say no medical care.

Of course, the real rationale for ObamaCare is the implementation of a scheme that will ultimately give the central government authoritarian regulatory control over more than 20% of the U.S. economy. Obama and his NeoCom cadres of statists on the Left have effectively hijacked the once-noble Democrat Party and converted it into their own socialist party tool in their ongoing effort to pull the plug on our Constitution.

Ultimately, the objective of ObamaCare is to implement a massive single-payer system, in effect, placing the management and rationing of health care services under the thumb of a bloated and inefficient central government, with the objective of using that "achievement" as a major political stepping stone to implement a much broader socialist agenda in the coming years.

Our nation is about to take a great leap in that direction, with devastating consequences. Ronald Reagan, in a now-famous 1961 radio address, warned, "One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It is very easy to describe a medical program as a humanitarian project… Most people are reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people."

Comment | Share

As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid surmised earlier this summer, "What we've done with ObamaCare is a step in the right direction, but we're far from having something that's going to work forever. … We had a real good run at the public option … don't think we didn't have a tremendous number of people who wanted a single-payer system." When asked if he really meant to say "single payer," Reid responded, "Yes, yes. Absolutely, yes!"

Indeed, Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the grossly misnamed "Health and Human Services" bureaucracy, infamously proclaimed during Obama's first presidential campaign, "I'm all for a single-payer system eventually."

For his part, Obama was clear in his objective to nationalize health care: "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14% of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody."

In other words, Obama's objective is to convert the U.S. into a Euro-style socialist state. Were he to look across The Pond, however, he would notice that the UK is now moving to privatize its National Health Service in order to avoid the fate of other EuroUnion states teetering on the verge of bankruptcy.

Recall, if you will, the inimitable words of Winston Churchill: "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." More recently, former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher aptly noted, "Socialist governments … always run out of other people's money. They then start to nationalize everything."

Sound familiar?

So, with the debt ceiling deadline looming, and implementation of ObamaCare imminent, the war of words is heating up, with Republicans in the House attempting to use the debt debate as leverage to defund or modify ObamaCare. Republicans will not fall on their sword over Obama's unmitigated government spending and growth, but will hopefully obtain some ObamaCare concessions using the debt debate as leverage.

Comment | Share

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has announced that he would advance a bill to make raising the debt ceiling conditional on defunding or delaying implementation of ObamaCare. In doing so, he and his Republican colleagues will argue that they are merely following Obama's lead, as he has already unilaterally delayed certain mandates that could be a political liability for the Left.

For his part, Obama is using his center stage bully pulpit to undermine the Republican maneuver: "We don't have an urgent deficit crisis. The only crisis we have is the one that is manufactured in Washington, and it's ideological. And the basic notion is that we shouldn't be helping people get health care and we shouldn't be helping kids who can't help themselves and whose parents are under resourced, we shouldn't be helping them get a leg up."

Monday, Obama stepped up the Demo-goguery: "Republicans in Congress don't seem to be focused on how to grow the economy and build the middle class. … [A]re some of these folks really so beholden to one extreme wing of their party they're willing to tank the entire economy just because they can't get their way on this issue?"

And the master of "smoke and mirrors" offered this debt-ceiling lesson to his low-info supporters who "haven't been keeping up": "Now, this debt ceiling – I just want to remind people in case you haven't been keeping up – raising the debt ceiling … does not increase our debt; it does not somehow promote profligacy. All it does is it says you got to pay the bills that you've already racked up, Congress. … It's always a tough vote because the average person thinks raising the debt ceiling must mean that we're running up our debt, so people don't like to vote on it."

"Pay the bills that you've already racked up, Congress"? Apparently Obama's trillion dollar "economic stimulus program" FAIL is just something Congress "racked up."

South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson had it right back in 2009, when he interrupted Obama's introduction of his nationalizing health care plan to a joint session of Congress: "You Lie! You LIE!"

I second that motion, without apology, and have found that it is applicable to just about anything Obama says.

Of course, Republicans are endeavoring to "grow the economy and build the middle class" as Obama takes the nation down the tubes.

According to the Congressional Budget Office this week, Obama's plan to continue mounting debt on future generations is unsustainable, and that debt load is exacerbated by the rising costs of ObamaCare.

As the number of major corporations opting out of ObamaCare grows, and as states and individuals start calculating the enormous cost of the exchange programs, and as even Obama's most ardent supporters – unions – abandon his socialist scheme to nationalize health care, Obama defiantly claims, "A lot of the, you know, horror stories that were predicted about how this was gonna shoot rates way up and there were gonna be death panels and all that stuff, none of that stuff's happened. And in two weeks, the Affordable Care Act is gonna help millions of more people. And there's no serious evidence that the law, which has helped to keep down the rise in health care costs to their lowest level in 50 years, is holding back economic growth. All of the horror stories that were talked about have not come true."

Not YET! In the words of P.J. O'Rourke, "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free."

In fact, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimate conservatively, that the "Affordable Care Act" will increase national health spending $621 billion over the next 10 years.

Even the liberal editors of Obama's hometown paper, the Chicago Tribune, opined, "Let's delay and rewrite this ill-conceived law. Congress need not start from scratch. Lawmakers can build on what all of us have learned from three years of painful trial and error. Three years of attempting, but failing, to make this clumsy monstrosity work for the American people."

Comment | Share

Obama blames the fracturing of his ObamaCare coalition on propaganda: "The problem we have is that over the last four years billions of dollars have been spent misinforming people about what this law is about. All of the horror stories that were talked about have not come true."

But in fact it's the Left's dezinformatsia propaganda machine that has spent billions "misinforming people." And that was before the bludgeoning from a $700 million taxpayer-funded ObamaCare marketing blitz, funneled primarily to Demo friendly ad agencies and media outlets.

ObamaCare also gives the government strong-arm capabilities associated with communist dictatorships. Most notably, Sarah Hall Ingram, who served as commissioner of the IRS office responsible for targeting Obama's "enemies list" in 2012, is now in charge of the IRS office enforcing ObamaCare mandates. This greatly expands the opportunity to target a much broader "enemies list" with a wide range of tax and regulatory compliance mandates.

Ingram and her cronies have at their disposal an unprecedented amount of personal information centralized under the ObamaCare Data Hub, a compilation database of all manner of information on every American, ostensibly to determine eligibility for subsidized insurance.

With the brewing political battle over the budget deficits and implementation delays as a backdrop, here is the shortlist of ObamaCare bullet points from our previous analysis on this socialist behemoth:

§  Suspension of employer mandate – Obama unilaterally suspended application of the employer mandate portion of the law. This is a clear violation of constitutional authority. Obama has stepped over the Constitution, as he frequently does, to pick and choose which laws or portions of laws he enforces without consultation with Congress. It also throws the law off balance, because it allows employers to skip their obligations but leaves individual consumers and employees beholden to the law.

§  Congressional Exemption – The Office of Personnel Management quietly issued a blanket exception that allowed Congress and congressional staffers to continue to receive their generous health benefits rather than having to enroll in ObamaCare. Louisiana Sen. David Vitter has introduced legislation to reverse the OPM exemption and end the subsidy, as required by the 1995 Congressional Accountability Act, one of Newt Gingrich's Contract With America provisions. Of course, Congress continues to exempt itself from most mandates and regulations it imposes on the rest of the nation.

§  Political Exemptions – HHS has issued exemptions to hundreds of employers, nonprofit groups, and union organizations for delaying their entry into ObamaCare. The reasons for the exemptions are because these groups will lose employees, money, or members by taking part in the law as it is currently designed. However, the exemptions have been either arbitrary or directly linked to organizations that have publicly supported the law or Obama and Democratic elected officials.

§  Subsidies – HHS lifted all restrictions for people applying for subsidies to pay for federally approved health benefits. These millions of people will therefore be on the honor system in reporting their income or whether they are already receiving assistance from an employer or other federal entitlement – a clear invitation to mass-scale fraud.

§  Insurance premium increases – ObamaCare claims that premiums will not go up. Indiana is predicting a 72% hike; Ohio is predicting an 88% hike. Florida and California project even greater devastating increases.

§  Insurance coverage changes – A July Wall Street Journal analysis revealed that few of the low-rate insurance policies that healthy people now purchase will be available once the law is fully implemented. Individuals will be forced to pay more regardless of their need for coverage.

§  California insurance companies opting out – In the nation's most populous state, Anthem Blue Cross is opting out of covering small businesses. UnitedHealth and Aetna are opting out of individual consumer insurance pools. This severely threatens the viability of the insurance exchange in the state.

§  Doctors opting out – The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced in August that the number of doctors opting out of seeing Medicaid patients has tripled in the last three years. Doctors are also limiting the number of Medicare patients they treat, and fewer doctors are taking on new Medicaid patients.

§  Implementation Delays – During the last week of August 2013, HHS delayed signing agreements with insurance companies that would sell plans on the federal exchanges beginning October 1. One reason was the technical difficulties in coordinating the display of information on federal websites.

§  ObamaCare Speak – The IRS rules defining minimum essential coverage do not mention the word "tax" in explaining the penalty for not meeting minimum coverage standards. Instead, the new phrase is "shared responsibility payment."

§  Power of the Exchanges – Federal and state bureaucrats will have the power to arbitrarily bar from taking part in the insurance exchanges any physician or health care services that don't meet certain standards. Standards, by the way, are being set by an unnamed and unaccountable panel of experts appointed by the government – in other words, death panels. States and the federal government will also be able to bar the sale of insurance to individuals and small businesses outside the exchanges.

§  Seeking Donations from the Private Sector – this past spring, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius privately reached out to numerous health industry officials, businesses and charitable groups, asking them to provide material or financial donations to aid the implementation of ObamaCare. She wrote letters or made phone calls to private groups, church organizations, and health industry executives. The presumption was that larger organizations were expected to contribute more.

§  "Bending the Cost Curve" – ObamaCare was supposed to bend the cost curve down. But a May report by the House Energy and Commerce Committee compiled from 17 of the country's largest insurance companies stated that insurance premiums will rise 100% on average, and in some cases as high as 400%. Small businesses will see hikes of 50% to 100%.

§  Employers trimming coverage – Insurance brokers are now designing and packaging bare-bones plans that employers can offer to their employees in order to cut costs. The plans are modeled after traditional catastrophic care plans that offer coverage for only certain circumstances. These plans will remain within the realm of the law because the level of employer-sponsored coverage was never specified.

All this being said, there is a silver lining.

Ironically, Obama, the consummate narcissist, having himself embraced the name "ObamaCare," will, along with future generations of Democrats, suffer a severe reversal of political fortunes. Why? Upon the implementation of ObamaCare, every American of every political stripe who has any issue with health care, whether a hangnail or heart transplant, will blame Obama and the Democrats, who were solely responsible for forcing this abomination upon the American people.

In the meantime, until a majority of "we, the people" are ready and willing to throw off this tyrannical burden, we will suffer the consequences. As 18th century philosopher Joseph de Maistre wrote, "Every nation gets the government it deserves."

In 1816, Thomas Jefferson provided the words that should form the rallying cry for every conservative candidate on the 2014 ballot: "We must make our election between economy and Liberty, or profusion and servitude."

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis

 



__._,_.___





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Against Racism







September 19, 2013

Against Racism

By J.R. Dunn

An old ploy of the left is being implemented on the comment threads of this website (and elsewhere) to discredit the honest and open discussion of race relations.

For decades the left has discredited conservatism by its oddballs, benefiting by caricaturing "right-wing extremists." One such personification of conservatism when I was growing up was the "little old lady in tennis shoes," a mythic wraith who was supposed to badger candidates with demented questions from a... right of center perspective, let's say. Until conservatism came into its own in the 1980s, the little old lady did plenty to undermine and discredit the movement. (Claims that she was based on a real character from Orange County, CA may well be apocryphal.)

There's no lack of other "right-wing" stereotypes -- crazed military men ("Have you ever heard of... fluoridation, Mandrake?"), backwoods Neanderthals, the hordes of "bitter clingers." But the perennial favorite among the left, both within media and without, is the racist.

Now, it has been pointed out a thousand times that the Democrats are the actual party of racism. The "Solid South," based on segregation, exploitation, and keeping the nigras down, was a Democratic South. All the notorious American racists -- Orval Faubus, Theo Bilbo, Lester Maddox, and George Wallace -- were Democrats. The last Klansman to serve in the U.S. Congress, Robert Byrd, was a leading Donkey as well as being kleagle for the West Virginia Klan.

In opposition, we have no less than Martin Luther King, a registered Republican, along with many black leaders of the era. As the party of Lincoln, the GOP long had a lock on the black vote. Allowing itself to be stooged out of it (by a clown like Lyndon B. Johnson, no less), is one of the greatest errors the party ever made.

But simple denial won't do. Racism has been pinned on conservatives using every method from blatant media propaganda, Democratic campaign libel, and bogus political analysis (e.g. Kevin Phillips, who decades ago made a name for himself by claiming that the GOP's Southern Strategy was based on racism -- that is, that Richard M. Nixon, the man who federalized affirmative action, was at the same time playing Imperial Wizard south of the line. That's a little too convoluted even for Tricky Dick.)

Accusations of racism are not to be taken lightly. They must be actively and constantly fought. And conservatives have fought, largely by assuring that active racism of the white sheet variety has been absent from the movement. Though he himself accepted the premises of segregation for far too long, William F. Buckley made a point of running the true crazies out of the conservative coalition. Buckley insisted that Klansmen and neo-Nazis had no place in the fold. So dominant was his opinion that such types simply gave up and wandered off to northern Idaho.

But Buckley is long gone, and the conservative movement is no longer a phenomenon of the coastal elites. With the advent of the Tea Parties, conservative activism has spread nationwide. Along with opportunities, this also creates hazards, including renewed efforts at infiltration from the more repellent corners of politics.

We've seen this lately at AT, in the comment threads above all. I've written several recent articles on race -- a topic of serious urgency at the moment, I think we will all agree -- and it's truly disturbing how many overt racists have appeared on the threads. A few examples:

JOURNEY appears to be the Grand Wizard of this crew. Apart from borrowing the name of a 70s logo rock band, Journey is a racist of the old school, one who believes the foulest myths about other ethnicities no matter how dubious the source:

Read Negoes [sic] in Negroland = reports of widespread cannibalism in the 1800's even though surrounded by ample food. So very revolting.

As a matter of course, he characterizes blacks only by the worst examples. There are no educated or civil blacks in Journey's world:

Actually, at times animals are more intelligent. At least they have a purpose for their actions...

Now, the creatures, you are referring are worse than animals because they know the difference between right and wrong but intentional [sic] disregard it.

His solution to current problems is straightforward:

Totally useless in an advanced society. Deportation is long over due back to their motherland = less crime, less racial issues, less tax dollars wasted, no more AA, etc = a win win situation. Even for the blacks, no more pressure to perform in a white society!

Journey is well aware of what he is. As he replied to one leftist who found his way to AT:

racists = truth tellers especially of the painful truths...

I am proud to be a racist. A racist is not afraid to speak the truth and refuses to be brainwashed by the left/communist garbage.

Along with racism, he's also an anti-Semite:

Read what the Communism did to Russians et.al. Follow the trail, Communism was installed in Russia by this country, Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb, & Co.

Along with all this, he's a fan of primitive conspiracy theories involving the Masons ("As for Freemasonry, one cannot just join that organization.") and Skull and Bones, and an admirer of David Duke. (And Diana West, though making a point of that would be cruel.)

He's also convinced that I'm a communist. ("The article was actually cleverly done as Communist propaganda to keep the blacks in power so as to keep the confusion and chaos going.")

There's one in every crowd. It might be best simply to turn our backs, except... There's not just one. Playing an eager Plato to Journey's Socrates is somebody named "HAL K." Though he agrees with Journey in most things, Hal's particular obsession is something he calls "white identity politics" i.e., racism:

"...it is whites who need to free themselves by embracing explicit white identity politics."

Some of Hal's thinking is a little difficult to follow:

"Whites have been suppressing the group identity of the cores of their nations for a long time. This is how a smaller country grows into a larger country (usually at least). This happened in the U.S. and the U.K., for example. This only worked until white countries tried to assimilate the unassimilable."

But the basic tendency is clear. Hal K's major stance is, ironically enough, a plea for fair play for racists - full equality, no more prejudice, no more back of the bus:

The whole problem with mainstream conservatism today is that it puts up a wall and says anyone to the right of the wall is "beyond the pale." Mainstream conservatism only weakens itself when it does this.... Don't denounce supposed white "racists"... start being positive rather than negative.

Others who have crossed the line into explicit racism - though perhaps not to the extent of these two - include "BLACKELKSPEAKS," who praises Journey as follows:

You've done a fine job of challenging the left-wing shibboleths... about King, the "civil rights movement," and black racism, incompetence, and criminality that must be recognized to understand the truth about the social pathologies, murder, and mayhem that pervades the black community today.

"DR. MAX HATHAWAY:"

As far as I can tell, Obama'sand MLK's highest achievements were learning to mimic white people in order to defraud them.

"JACOBITE" (whose specialty is anti-Semitism):

Not only are today's elites much more like Jews, but, hey, many of them are Jews (and most Jews are members).

For comic relief, we have "ROBERT GOWAN," who wants us to know:

We also found out where the guy who pulls his [Obama's] strings is hiding. Lord Jacob Rothschild the richest man in the world is hiding in plane [sic] sight aka Prince Charles.

And bringing up the rear, there's "SMOKES," who, though having no discernable opinions of his own, is eager to lend support to those of others:

Spot on, Jacobite. It won't be a happy ending here, either. They've made another mess.

There are also one or two veteran AT readers who have erred to the extent of offering support to these clowns, but we will let that go as examples of human weakness.

These people are here to trade ideas, to make contacts, to recruit the unwary or ignorant, and to muddy the waters as much as possible. They hope to undercut modern conservatism in the post-Reagan mode, to ridicule and contradict AT writers in hopes of posing as the sole "real" conservatives, to suggest that they alone have the answers -- namely a return to the white hood and the blazing cross -- and to bully and harass readers with a superior sense of tolerance and decency. (Journey to a reader arguing for black intellectual equality: "extremely bizarre responses throughout this thread from 'joy rose'.")

There are ways of thinking, connected to methods of action, that are so harmful and so insidious that they need to be restricted. Jihadism and child exploitation are examples. Racism is another. (And let's not overlook the fact that at least some of these people are provocateurs paid from one slush fund or another financed by billionaire bucks.)

The race card works. Not as well as it once did, and it's losing its mana steadily. But we need only ask Paula Deen how potent it remains. Deen was a victim at second hand -- the real target was her brother. Her ordeal was a blatant example of legal pressure. The accuser -- a former employee of her brother -- was not even black. But none of that mattered. Deen was vulnerable, and the race card was used to take her down. This can happen to anybody, under the proper circumstances. Such circumstances include consorting or accepting active racists at any time and to any degree.

A second point is that you don't want racists around. Racism is almost always a symptom of deep personality problems. The individual in question is often emotionally unstable, paranoid, a victim of personal setbacks who has settled on race as an excuse on which to hang his troubles. There's an example in my neighborhood -- a man who has placed a desk on his front lawn facing the street and who sits behind it putting away beer after beer and haranguing passersby on the evils of the Joos. You do not, needless to say, want such people either on your website or in your political organization.

(I hasten to add that I'm not referring to victims such as John Derbyshire, who was sacrificed to the gods of political correctness by the current leadership of the National Review. Derbyshire has his oddities, but his crime was simply discussing the white version of The Talk -- sitting down your adolescent children to point out that a good method of assuring personal safety is to avoid certain people and certain milieus, among them black criminals and their hangouts. This is not racism. The black version of The Talk, in which children are warned against white racism, is referred to constantly in all media forums without anyone losing their job. Otherwise Eric Holder would be reviewing his résumé.)

Lastly, it provides no answer to our current racial difficulties. It has been pointed out, here and elsewhere, that the liberal attitude toward race is simply an involuted and perfumed form of traditional racism. Its unspoken basis is that the poor blacks are simply too dumb to take care of themselves and must be looked after by smart whities with [D]s after their names. How does this stance differ in any serious way from that of the plantation overseer musing about the lives of his darkies? And we're supposed to counter this with a pure blast of the real thing? This is the philosophy of the madhouse.

AT editors can't be all places at all times. We need the help of readers. That comes down to alerting the moderators. Flagging an item in Disqus isn't that tricky. Run your cursor over the offending comment and a small Flag icon or drop-down arrow with the "Flag Comment" option will appear in the upper right hand corner. Click on it and confirm the comment as inappropriate.

Yes, this is censorship. But as conservatives we know some things deserve to be censored on private forums. Racism is prominent among them.

To allow racism any contact with millennial conservatism would be to spit in the faces of such giants as Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas, and Dr. Benjamin Carson, to turn our backs on the abilities and promise of Allen West, Mia Love, and Tim Scott. (Not to mention Colion Noir.) Blacks have contributed much to American conservatism. They will contribute more as their disgust and impatience with liberalism grows.


Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/09/against_racism.html at September 19, 2013 - 06:45:38 PM CDT



__._,_.___





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: So, Linus Torvalds: Did US spooks demand a backdoor in Linux? 'Yes'






 

So, Linus Torvalds: Did US spooks demand a backdoor in Linux? 'Yes'

Free ESG report : Seamless data management with Avere FXT

Linux supremo Linus Torvalds has jokingly admitted US spooks approached him to put a backdoor in his open-source operating system.

During a question-and-answer session at the LinuxCon gathering in New Orleans this week, Torvalds and his fellow kernel programmers were asked by moderator Ric Wheeler whether America's g-men leaned on the Finn to compromise Linux's security, allowing spies to infiltrate computers.

Torvalds replied with a firm "no" while nodding his head to say yes, a response greeted with laughter from the audience. He quickly followed up by repeating "no" while shaking his head in the negative.

South Korean Red Hat developer Tejun Heo, sitting alongside the kernel boss, quipped: "Not that I can talk about." A video of the Q&A session is below - the short exchange about US spooks starts at the 24-minute mark.

Rumours of backdoors and other forms of hidden access routes in Microsoft Windows, Linux and security protection products have circulated in infosec circles for years. Fresh revelations from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden that US and UK intelligence have subverted key technologies have reopened the debate.

These blockbuster claims from Snowden suggest that the NSA can crack TLS/SSL-encrypted connections, the widespread crypto securing HTTPS websites and virtual private networks (VPNs). Spooks can compromise these supposedly secure communications by gaining access to the root certificates and encryption keys, exploiting backdoors in equipment and algorithms, or otherwise allowing the signals boys and girls to run man-in-the-middle attacks on encrypted traffic flowing through the world's fibre optic cables.

The NSA's highly classified Bullrun programme relies, at least in part, on collaboration with unnamed technology companies.

Firsthand evidence from a former engineer at Microsoft sheds light on how the feds theoretically go about asking for special favours: Peter Biddle, an ex-Microsoft programmer who worked extensively on BitLocker - the company's full-disk encryption tool - claimed he was informally approached by g-men to add a backdoor to the product.

But he said he rebuffed the government agencies. The pressure on Biddle came primarily from FBI agents who said they needed a skeleton key, of sorts, to easily break the crypto on suspects' computers in child-abuse investigations, allowing the locked-up data to be examined.

Meanwhile, Nico Sell, founder of the pro-privacy self-destructing-messages app Wickr, said she had been informally approached by an FBI agent about placing a law-enforcement backdoor in her software.

It seems that developers are informally sounded out about the possibility of placing secret access to spooks in their technology before the discussion goes any further on the technical details and requirements. Once a programmer snubs the feds, the g-men back off, it's believed.

In light of these revelations, worried netizens have become far more paranoid about the possibility of backdoors in the technology they use and this paranoia extends to both closed-source and open-source software.

Earlier this month Torvalds rejected a petition calling for his kernel to turf out an Intel processor instruction called RdRand, which is used in the generation of cryptographically secure random numbers. It was feared Chipzilla had deliberately weakened that operation under the influence of US spooks to produce cryptographically weak values, ones that can be predicted by intelligence agents to smash encryption.

The fiery Finn dismissed the petition as technically clueless.

El Reg reckons his response to a question about backdoors at LinuxCon was intended as a joke - but just because you're not paranoid that doesn't mean they aren't out to get you, after all. ®

Free ESG report : Seamless data management with Avere FXT

 



__._,_.___
 




   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Boss Trumka Reaches Out in Desperation





Boss Trumka Reaches Out

By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 9.19.13 @ 6:09AM

New evidence of Big Labor's — and Liberalism's — desperate condition.

WASHINGTON — Avert your gaze! Show some respect for the deeply troubled. Richard Trumka, the portly president of the AFL-CIO, has come forward with a pathetic acknowledgment of organized labor's weakened condition, and I suggest compassion. In fact, his proposal suggests the moribund condition of the American left, and I urge a dignified silence.

From the mainstream media we only hear of the squabbling among organizations on the right. Supposedly the Tea Party is running rampant. The other conservatives groups are unruly. The Republican Party is victimized by just about everyone. Yet, of course, these elements of the Republican Party are growing elements. They have come from relative obscurity to sudden political prominence. Trumka, on the other hand, is holding together a dying organization, and he is suggesting agglutinating it with other organizations of the left that are not doing so very well themselves. His great idea is to include such collections of oddballs as the members of the Sierra Club, the National Organization for Women, and the Bird Watchers of America into the AFL-CIO. It is an idea born of desperation.

There was a day when the AFL-CIO was enormously powerful. Back when George Meany and Lane Kirkland headed the AFL-CIO, the unions accounted for over 30 percent of the labor force and they would not think of allying with the likes of the Sierra Club or the National Organization for Women. After all, Meany and Kirkland's unions actually manufactured goods and offered services. Yet times have been tough. In 2012 the unions accounted for only 6.6 percent of the private-sector workforce. With public-sector unions making up 36 percent of government workers at the local, state, and federal level the other unions get a boost, but that boost only puts union membership at 11 percent of the workforce. So here is Trumka's bright idea.

He will extend the AFL-CIO to include all members of the"progressive" movement whether they work or not, whether they are bird watchers or angry women, whatever. On September 9 the AFL-CIO settled for a resolution only to accept working "hand in hand with community partners and allies," but Trumka envisions a wider membership in the future. "We must begin, here, and now, today, the great work of reawakening a movement of working people not just all the people in this hall," he told the AFL-CIO's quadrennial convention. Whatever they do. He tried to bring the NAACP, the Sierra Club, and the National Council of La Raza into some sort of alliance with him at the meeting, but some leaders of lesser unions objected.

Doubtless Trumka will try again. He sees the future of the AFL-CIO as including every worker, along with every feminist, all environmentalists, and the zanies at MoveOn.org who already outnumber his workers in the private-sector unions by one million. There may be some bumps on the road ahead, for instance, when the United Mine Workers of America's 75,000 workers have to join with the Sierra Club whose 1.4 million members believe that coal power is "an outdated, backward and dirty 19th-century technology." Yet Trumka will persist.

Of course, in persisting Trumka is only proving a point I made years ago. These groups, the Sierra Club, the NAACP, the National Organization for Women, and other organizations allegedly serving a noble cause (the environment! civil rights! women's rights! workers' rights!), are in reality just clandestine agents of the Democratic Party. They are left-wing clandestine agents of the Democratic Party, but what other forms of clandestine agents does the Party have? The whole Democratic Party has moved steadily leftward ever since the McGovernites took it over in 1972.

Now Trumka's clandestine agents in the AFL-CIO are maneuvering to stave off irrelevance and doom by throwing in with the other groups. It will do them no good. They are goners. Can the feminists and the other

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/09/19/boss-trumka-reaches-out



__._,_.___





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: Obama's other son....



-----

Friend Describes D.C. Shooter As Obama Supporter

September 18, 2013 by Breaking News 3 Comments

Aaron Alexis SC Friend describes D.C. shooter as Obama supporter
As much as those on the left try to make suspected D.C. Navy Yard shooter Aaron Alexis fit into the template of a right-wing gun nut, the evidence continues to confound them at every turn. According to one of his friends, the now-deceased gunman was more aligned with the progressive cause.
In an interview on CNN, Michael Ritrovato described Alexis as "more of a liberal type," adding he was on board with Obama's agenda. Ritrovato, a self-described conservative, said the two were close despite ideological differences.
Alexis "was more happy with this administration" than during George W. Bush's two terms, he noted.
Though this revelation might come as a surprise to those who feel only right-wingers are capable of mass murder, the real shocker is that CNN allowed Ritrovato's comments to air unedited.
Describing the man he knew as "good-natured" and "like a brother," Ritrovato said he never imagined Alexis was capable of something so heinous. While talking heads scramble to rationalize his behavior or place blame on some nebulous bogeyman, Ritrovato said the only possible warning sign he could recall was Alexis' affinity for violent video games.
His insight illustrates the fact that there are not always clear cut indicators of an individual's propensity to commit random acts of violence. While leftists such as Piers Morgan hope to eradicate shootings through the prohibition of all firearms, conservatives understand that evil exists with or without legalized weaponry.
The only way to continue perpetuating a radical gun control agenda involves denying reality. None of the regulations supported by modern-day gun-grabbers would have prevented this tragedy. Even the full restriction of civilian gun ownership would have scarcely slowed his murderous plan, considering at least two of the weapons used were reportedly taken from authorized personnel on a military base.
What the left considers a panacea would result instead in a criminal element unencumbered by the possibility of retaliation. A potential murderer's fear for his or her own life can serve as a powerful deterrent.
 
 
 
Gang-related crime data has not been released for all of Los Angeles County until 2012.
Then, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department began identifying those crimes that
were gang-related within its jurisdiction in its annual crime data release.
Reported Crimes, 2012
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Jurisdiction
Crime
Crimes
Reported
Number
Gang-Related
Percent
Gang-Related
Homicide
175
105
60.0%
Aggravated Assault
6,974
1,250
17.9%
Forcible Rape
502
8
1.6%
Robbery
4,740
728
15.4%
The largest number of gang-related homicides reported above occurred in Compton (21).
Gang-related violence accounted for approximately 43% of all homicides in Los Angeles County, per Review of Homicide Crime Statistics, Criminal Justice Center, 2005.
 
 


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE; GUN CONTROL LAWS KILL PEOPLE







http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin771.htm

 

GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE; GUN CONTROL LAWS KILL PEOPLE


By Chuck Baldwin
September 19, 2013
NewsWithViews.com

Here we go again. We have another mass shooting at yet another "gun-free" zone. Not only was the location a "gun-free" zone, it was located inside the nation's capital, which has some of the strictest gun-control laws in the entire country.

I thought gun-control laws and "gun-free" zones were supposed to protect people from gun violence. If one listens to the vast majority of talking heads on network and cable news shows, including Piers Morgan and Joe Scarborough, that is exactly what we are led to believe. But in reality, just the opposite is true. "Gun-Free" zones are actually "Free Killing" zones. And in truth, guns don't kill people; gun-control laws kill people.

This is the second time in recent memory when some wacko shoots up a military installation. The first killer was a Muslim; this one was a Buddhist. He also happened to be a black man and an Obama supporter. This combination must drive the politically-correct mainstream media and the left-wing extremist hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), batty. According to these folks, the only people who commit gun violence are angry Christian white guys. But as most of us know, no race or religion or political affiliation has a monopoly on criminal conduct. Unless it's those miscreants in Washington, D.C., of course.

True to form, the idiotic Washington press corps initially reported that the killer used an AR-15 rifle. To their chagrin, it turned out he used a shotgun. This hasn't stopped gun-hater Senator Dianne Feinstein from immediately calling for more gun control. And the White House is saying Barack Obama is going to issue some kind of anti-gun executive orders. Leave it to a lame duck Marxist President to try to bypass Congress and ignore the overwhelming majority of the American people (including Democrats) who have made it clear they are in no mood to accept any additional gun control.

It was only a few days ago when two liberal anti-gun legislators who spearheaded the drive for egregious gun-control laws in the State of Colorado were recalled from office. And they won't be the only ones. Come next year, there will be a host of anti-gun legislators all over the country who are going to be given their walking papers by their respective electorates. The only states where it is safe for politicians to promote gun control are socialist states such as New York, Massachusetts, and California. By and large, the American people have had all of the gun control laws they can stomach. They have drawn their line in the sand. They are not only voting at the ballot box, they are voting with their pocketbooks. Gun manufacturers and retail stores cannot keep up with the demand for guns and ammo. Even .22 rimfire ammunition is as scarce as hen's teeth.

Mind you, this DC killer had passed at least two background checks by the US military; he had what is called a "secret" clearance; he was given an honorable discharge from the United States Navy; he had been awarded the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and the National Defense Service Medal. Born and raised in one of the most anti-gun cities in America, New York City, the man was given a rifle permit by the New York Police Department. So, pray tell, please explain how any existing gun-control laws--or any future gun-control laws--would have been able to prevent this guy from doing what he did?

In fact, the gun-control laws that Obama, Feinstein, et al, are clamoring for are the very laws that contributed to the deaths of those 12 innocent victims. Had these victims been allowed and encouraged to carry their own arms for self-defense, the death toll would doubtless have been much less. But this is the same story in every single one of these mass shootings. The perpetrator knows he is entering a "gun-free" zone and none of his targets will be able to shoot back. I repeat: guns don't kill people; gun-control laws kill people.

Our Constitution recognizes the organic right of free people to serve as self-defenders. The Militia of the several states is comprised of every able-bodied man and woman (excepting conscientious objectors) within the State. And each man and woman is recognized as having the responsibility to: 1) be personally and adequately armed, 2) be adequately trained and skilled in the use of arms, and 3) be expected to defend themselves and others from attack when necessary.

It has never been the government's responsibility to protect us; it has always been the people's responsibility to protect themselves. It is the government's responsibility to protect the right of the people to protect themselves. As seen in every single mass shooting, the government is completely incapable of protecting the citizenry from these kinds of attacks. If the people do not protect themselves, there is no protection. All these gun-control laws do is prohibit the people from protecting themselves. This is why we desperately need State leaders to declare any and all federal gun-control laws to be null and void and boldly declare to the people of their states that they will honor and protect the people's right and duty to defend themselves.

Furthermore, if Mr. Obama attempts to circumvent Congress and enact gun-control measures via executive order, it is the duty of the US House of Representative to immediately issue articles of impeachment against him. It is past time for these so-called conservatives in the GOP to grow some man stuff and start taking their oaths to the Constitution seriously. It is when the legislators in Washington, D.C., and in the respective states refuse to protect the liberties of the American people that the people themselves must protect their liberties.

I think I speak for millions of Americans when I say I have had it with Obama, Feinstein, Scarborough, Morgan, and the rest of these would-be tyrants who want to strip us of our Natural right of self-defense--and that includes the right to defend ourselves from our own government.

At this juncture, let me inform readers that a brand new documentary film is about to be released to the public. The film is called "MOLON LABE: How The Second Amendment Guarantees America's Freedom" produced by James Jaeger. This is the same man who produced the outstanding film released a few years ago called "The Spoiler." MOLON LABE features such outstanding freedomists as Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, Larry Pratt, Alex Jones, Stewart Rhodes, G. Edward Griffin, and Edwin Vieira, Jr. And, yes, I am in the film also. The film is scheduled to be rolled out next month. Whatever you do, be sure to watch this film and encourage everyone you know to watch it. Never has a film been more timely or more necessary.

By the way, MOLON LABE means "Come and take them." This is what Spartan King Leonidas said to Persian King Xerxes at the Battle of Thermopylae when he was told to lay down his weapons.

To learn more about the film, go to MOLON LABE

Plus, it is not too late to become a sponsor of the film. Your donation could help awaken hundreds of thousands of Americans to the importance of the Second Amendment and its relevance to us today. Watch the trailer then consider becoming a sponsor.

Once again, the government's denial of the people's right of self-defense has led to the untimely deaths of a dozen innocent Americans. So, I say again: guns don't kill people; gun-control laws kill people.

 



__._,_.___





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.