Monday, August 3, 2015

Democrats Hate Your Guts!




As more intelligent folk speak out about the miserable state of our current political system, we are delighted to expand their audience through this blog.  
Today's guest post is by PJ O'Rourke, 
 Contributing Editor to The Weekly Standard,
a publication we follow and highly recommend.

Click here to link to original

They Hate Your Guts
Democrats and their voters.
THE WEEKLY STANDARD AUG 10, 2015, VOL. 20, NO. 45 • 

 I would like to address myself to the poor, the huddled masses, the wretched refugees teeming to America’s shore, the homeless, the economically, socially, and mentally tempest-tossed. 

Also, I’d like to address the young, the hip, the progressive, the compassionate, and the caring. I’d like a word with everyone who votes for Democrats.
Democrats hate your guts.
Democrats need your vote and they’ll do anything—no matter how low and degrading—to get it. They hate you the way a whore hates a john.
All politicians hate people. Politics is a way to gain power over people without justification for having that power. Nothing in the 11,000-year history of politics—going back to the governing elites of Mesopotamia—indicates that politicians are wiser, smarter, kinder, more moral, or better skilled at any craft (aside from politics) than we are.
But political rulers need the acquiescence of the ruled to slake the craving for power. Politicians hate you the way a junkie hates junk.
Politicians gain power by means of empty promises or threats, or both when they’re on their game. Should you vote for people who are good at politics? No. You should vote for Republicans. We’re lousy.
Believe me, I know why you don’t vote for Republicans. You see the Republican candidates and they look so .  .  . Bush-League, Dog Walker, Rubio Rube, Get-Outta-the-Carson, Hucka-Upchuck, Ap-Paul-ling, Cruz Control, Fat-Fried Christie Crispy, Son-of-a-Kasich, Dingleberry Perry, Flee the Fiorina, Sancta-Santorum, Graham Cracker, and Nervous 7/11 Night Shift Manager Jindal.
And never mind the busted flush Trump Card who should be spray-painted with Rust-Oleum primer, have a squirt gun super-glued to his hand, and kicked through the front door of the Ferguson, Mo., police station.
You think, “I don’t want to vote for these people.”
Just between you and me, we Republicans think the same thing. 
Christ whipping RNC and GOP leadership

Republican politicians stink.
This is because real Republicans don’t go into politics. We have a life. We have families, jobs, responsibilities, and it takes all our time and energy to avoid them and go play golf. We leave politics to our halt, our lame, and our feeble-minded. 
Republican candidacies are sinecures for members of the GOP who are otherwise useless and/or retired.

Democrats, on the other hand, are brilliant politicians. And I mean that as a vicious slur. Think how we use the word “politics.” Are “office politics” ever a good thing? When somebody “plays politics” to get a promotion, does he or she deserve it? When we call a coworker “a real politician,” is that a compliment?
“But,” you say, “Republicans don’t love us either.” And we don’t. As voters you are demographic groups. Republicans do not love demographic groups. Actually, Republicans do not love groups at all, with a few exceptions: The guys in the combat unit they commanded. Blood relations old enough to have been dead for years. Intimates of their private clubs. Golf buddies. Fellow guests at the Alfalfa dinner. And everybody in Bohemian Grove. But this love is proclaimed only after copious drink has been taken.
Loving you would mean Republicans are paying attention to you. We aren’t. Republicans pay attention to only a few people:
* Members of their golf foursome
* Business-associate members of their golf foursome
* Investment adviser members of their golf foursome
* Members of other golf foursomes at the 19th hole
* Their spouses (that is, their most recent spouses, married for being rich or hot)
* Their children (except the artisanal pot grower in Mendocino who’s shacked up with a holistic dance therapist—he’s cut out of the will)
And in that order.
Democrats pay a lot of attention to you. They offer you all sorts of trick-or-treat giveaways.
Benefits are the way government is expanded. The more government expansion, the more opportunities for politicians to get power. (Beware of razor blades in the candy apples.)
Democrats offer you regulations to make your life safer from razor blades in candy apples. Regulations expand government with unelected regulatory bodies so that politicians can get power without bothering about your vote.
Democrats hate you now, but wait until they have you fully regulated and aren’t even pretending to lick your Nikes, Birkenstocks, or Manolo Blahniks. (Nikes will be banned for exploitative overseas child labor. Manolo Blaniks will fall victim to a National Campaign to Improve Foot and Toe Health. And Birkenstocks—which never go away—will be found to be in violation of federal biodegradability standards.)
Democrats adore your demographic groups. Democrats are pro-woman, pro-black, pro-Latino, pro-immigrant, pro-LGBT, pro-AFL/CIO, pro-differently abled, pro-unemployed, pro-poor. 
(And by pro I mean whore.)
Besides prostituting themselves to your demographic groups, Democrats are adhering to the first principle of political elites: Divide and conquer.

The Democratic party is one big family. This means—as those of us from big families know—all of you detest each other. Or you will by the time Democratic matriarchs and patriarchs get done parceling out too little to one group, too much to another, and none to most. (Are you undocumented alien moms and children enjoying your summer internment camp?)
Democrats are particularly infatuated with the demographic group of voters who are poor. Democrats provide many social programs for the poor. If you happen to be poor, you know what these social programs do. They pay you to stay poor.
Democrats favor a higher minimum wage. And they’ll make sure you get a minimum wage. Forever.
Democrats want to give you health care that’s free—and worth it.
Democrats will provide you with more opportunities to get an education and buy a house. A couple hundred thousand dollars of student loan debt and a huge mortgage that’s underwater will keep you poor for sure.
And then Democrats tax the hell out of your beer and cigarettes—two of the few small pleasures available to the poor.
Democrats are tough on business. After all, you might get into business. And make money. And vote Republican. 

Money is all Republicans care about, say Democrats. That’s not true. We care about other things. We care about stocks, bonds, precious metals, commodities, mergers and acquisitions, arbitrage, and hedge funds.

And we care about you personally. If you happen to have a large amount of money to invest in our hedge fund. Actually, we care about you anyway—if you’re of any use to us. Just the way you care about strangers—if they’re of any use to you. This is a good, Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, side to human nature. Politics is the other side.
And even if we don’t care about you—because of our inability to care or your inability to be cared for—at least we’ll leave you alone!

Democrats will herd you into a group. Democrats like groups because they loathe individuals. Any given group can be made dependent on political power. Any given individual is a different matter.

Democrats are in favor of abortion and against the death penalty. 
How could anyone possibly arrive at that pair of moral judgments? Republicans can, sometimes, understand the majesty of death—abortion as a matter of private conscience and evil paying the ultimate price. Republicans can, sometimes, understand the sacredness of life—each fetus as a being and how we must not take what we cannot give from any person, however bad. But no Republican understands the virtue of killing a baby too innocent to be born while sheltering and feeding a murderer until he gets fed up and tunnels out of Dannemora.

Democrats hate you. And your family. Sixty-nine percent of America’s abortions are performed on women who are poor. More than half of the people in prison report pre-arrest annual incomes of less than $10,000.

A fetus is an individual who might grow up to be anything, even a Republican. Meanwhile convicts are a group that is fully dependent on government. (And in Vermont, felons in prison can vote by absentee ballot, which may explain Bernie Sanders.) “Wait!” you say. “Republicans are just as bad! Look at the Republican candidates trying to attract votes from segregationists, male chauvinists, gun nuts, religious lunatics, transgender-bashers, Nazis, climate-change-deniers, union-busters, flagrant emitters of greenhouse gases, and Wall Street malefactors of great wealth.”

Yep. There our candidates are, trolling through the gutters of the electorate. That’s what politics does to people. It sullies even the most well-bred fellow and gal. Especially if they happen to be halt, lame, feeble-minded, or otherwise useless and/or retired and have therefore taken up politics.

Stay away from politics. And vote Republican. 
As it says in Forrest Gump (the book’s author, Winston Groom, is a Republican), 
Stupid is as stupid does.” 
And you can count on us Republicans to not do much. 



Friday, July 31, 2015

Congress rebels against Boehner

Would Christ take the whip to GOP Leadership?


In our series of guest posts, today, we feature Congressman Tom Massie's [R-KY] co-sponsorship of Representative Mark Meadow's resolution to replace the Speaker of the House, John Boehner [R-OH].

Massie is a Libertarian Republican, with a Master's degree in Mechanical Engineering from MIT, and an accomplished inventor with 24 patents, and is endorsed by FreedomWorks, Club for Growth, Gun Owners of America, and Young Americans for Liberty.


The dissatisfaction we Conservatives have experienced in recent times over Mr Boehner's obeisance to President 0bama has, of late, turned to outrage as we watch Boehner and Senate Majority Leader McConnell [R-KY] ram through legislation antithetical to all things Conservative, and Mr McConnell's latest demonstration of power in which he has threatened, coerced, and blackmailed every Conservative senator into supporting his condemnation of Senator Cruz's criticisms of the GOP leadership.

We're not sure today what the GOP stands for.  Pretty much, we're certain it has nothing to do with Conservative values.

We cite, for example, the 2010 election in Nevada in which Harry Reid [D-Nevada], [then Senate Majority Leader] struggled to keep his Senate seat in the face of overwhelming voter disgust with him.

The GOP accused her of being a Christian zealot!
The Conservative candidate was Assemblywoman Sharron Angle, a fiery reformer who had defeated the Republican governor's unconstitutional legislation to raise personal taxes -- using her personal funds to win in a final Supreme Court decision.

Come the election, she garnered popular support through more than 20 Conservative organizations, to include the Tea Party Express, who endorsed her advocacy for the common citizen.  The GOP labeled her a crazy extremist -- perhaps because she successfully challenged the corruption of both political parties in Nevada.

In the Primary, she trounced the other Conservative candidates [one hand-picked by the RNC] with a 40% margin.

In the election, Harry Reid trailed by 11 points -- until the GOP stepped in to defeat her, using the Mayor of Reno, the widow of the GOP Governor, and both the Republican State and US Senators to ENDORSE Harry Reid and CONDEMN the winning Conservative candidate, Sharron Angle.

We'll repeat that in case you think it's a misprint:
In the election, Harry Reid trailed by 11 points -- until the GOP stepped in to defeat herusing the Mayor of Reno, the widow of the GOP Governor, and both the Republican State and US Senators to ENDORSE Harry Reid and CONDEMN the winning Conservative candidate, Sharron Angle.

Bottom Line:  The GOP defeated the Republican Senate candidate in order re-elect Harry Reid, the arch-enemy of the Conservatives, rather than allow an independent-minded Conservative into the Senate.  They REJECTED the potential of a GOP Senate Majority in order to defeat Angle and other Conservative candidates they worried they could not control!

[Interestingly, Nevada voters tossed out state senator Raggio [R] following his endorsement of Reid and condemnation of Angle.  Even they were disgusted!]

Feeling nauseous?
Watching Boehner and McConnell in action in recent weeks, passing legislation in secret, in which the content remains "secret" for five [5] years, removes the concept of the Balance of Power in which Congress supposedly challenges the Executive Branch through open debate and open voting on the House and Senate floor -- so citizens are properly represented.

Our independent thinking Members of Congress and a few senators have the guts to challenge Boehner and McConnell, and the GOP leadership with House Resolution 385, which declares the office of Speaker of the House "vacant"; we've quoted it below:

RESOLUTION:

Declaring the office of Speaker of the House of Representatives vacant.

Whereas the Speaker of the House of Representatives for the 114th Congress has endeavored to consolidate power and centralize decision-making, bypassing the majority of the 435 Members of Congress and the people they represent;

Whereas the Speaker has, through inaction, caused the power of Congress to atrophy, thereby making Congress subservient to the executive and judicial branches, diminishing the voice of the American people;

Whereas the Speaker uses the power of the office to punish Members who vote according to their conscience instead of the will of the Speaker;

Whereas the Speaker has intentionally provided for voice votes on consequential and controversial legislation to be taken without notice and with few Members present;

Whereas the Speaker uses the legislative calendar to create crises for the American people, in order to compel Members to vote for legislation;

Whereas the Speaker does not comply with the spirit of the rules of the House of Representatives, which provide that Members shall have three days to review legislation before voting;

Whereas the Speaker continues to direct the Rules Committee to limit meaningful amendments, to limit debate on the House floor, and to subvert a straightforward legislative process; and

Whereas the House of Representatives, to function effectively in the service of all citizens of this country, requires the service of a Speaker who will endeavor to follow an orderly and inclusive process without imposing his or her will upon any Member thereof: 

Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the office of Speaker of the House of Representatives is hereby declared to be vacant.

Introduced:  Jul 28, 2015

Status:  Referred to Committee on Jul 28, 2015

This resolution was assigned to a congressional committee on July 28, 2015, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Sponsor:          MarkMeadows  [R], NC 11th Congressional District
Co-Sponsors:  Thomas Massie [R], KY 4th Congressional District
                        Walter Jones      [R], NC 3rd Congressional District
                        Ted Yoho            [R], FL 3rd Congressional District 

Prognosis:   24% chance of passing [and gaining traction].

What is a resolution?
This is a House Simple Resolution in the US Congress used for matters that affect only one chamber of Congress, often to change the rules of the chamber to set the manner of debate for a related bill. It must be agreed to in the chamber in which it was introduced. It is not voted on in the other chamber and does not have the force of law.


This Resolution may not be fulfilled, but if enough of our Representatives from both sides of the aisle vote for it, Boehner [and McConnell] will be put on notice that the US government is not for the power of power-hungry politicians, but rather

"OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE!" 

Sunday, July 12, 2015

Penetrating #CIA

If you worked for the federal government, all your personal data has been compromised!                  [fedscoop.com]


Click here for related story [arstechnica: Sean Gallagher]

The federal government has been opaque about the level of damage inflicted by the data  breach at OPM [Office of Personnel Management] -- which holds the personnel files on the majority of employees employed by the federal government.  Initially, they estimated only about 10 or 12 million files were accessed; but then, that was revised to about 25 million, but, they weren't sure.

We reckon closer to 50 million, to include all those actively employed as well as all the retired folks who have held security clearances or "positions of trust and responsibility."  The two systems breached were the Electronic Official Personnel Folder (eOPF) system, an entity hosted for OPM at the Department of the Interior's shared service data center, and the central database behind "EPIC," the suite of software used by OPM's Federal Investigative Service in order to collect data for government employee and contractor background investigations.

Significantly, the employees at greatest risk in this breach are intelligence officers, whose background investigations and lifestyle polygraph results were within those files that were breached.

Of course, the personnel files of all the senior career bureaucrats in every federal agency were breached, to include the FBI's background investigations which supported their security clearances.  And, let's not forget that, also included were the classified and unclassified files of every elected politician [and their staffers] on Capitol Hill [such were the files that fell into Hillary's clutches for several years, and which magically appeared in her White House bedroom while Bill was President].

Now, each of these folks filled out a Statement of Personal History [SPH], to include names and locations of family members and friends, membership in all organizations, credit card and other bank debt, bankruptcies, and legal history, to include minor and major crimes.

That's a lot of information for bad guys to have in their clutches just for background, but also to hack into at will to target case officers and their families.

But, let's look at what else the bad guys got.

OPM compromised us!                      [Bridge of Spies]
Most of our Intelligence personnel, whether government or contractor, are required to submit to polygraphs to determine whether or not they are spying for foreign governments, or are vulnerable to blackmail or extortion.  There are two types of these polygraphs:
    a) CounterIntelligence, which poses a series of questions the subject must answer relating to foreign contacts and relationships.  This questioning is limited in scope but is, and has been sufficient to root out spies and double agents in the past in the Spook World.
    b) Life-Style, which covers not only foreign contacts and relationships, but also any and all elements of lifestyle, to include unusual sexual proclivities [e.g., homosexuality, cross-dressing, illegal gun ownership, membership in fringe political groups, past or current drug usage, psychiatric care, psychological issues (to include aberrant thoughts, depression, anger, voyeurism, etc.), and past "crimes" [e.g., violations of the Geneva Convention], and basically, anything the polygrapher might dream up.

For the most part, polygraphers in the Intelligence Community are relatively balanced and mature people, and forego many of their more personal prurient interests in their questioning process.  But, that doesn't hold true as a rule, since the younger, more eager folk go for the throat and hope they can intimidate their subjects into disclosing issues which can be used for prosecutions -- and thus make a name for themselves as "spy-catchers", or at least vicious intimidators.

Way back when we directed operations for the Defense Clandestine Service [DCS], we encountered one of these nasty creatures and removed him, and subsequently restructured our polygraphs.

As such, we constrained our polygraph question lists to only Counter-Intelligence issues since one criteria for selecting good case officers was that they would have been involved in some form of nefarious activity -- to include criminal acts -- prior [of course] to their entry into Federal/Military Service; the concept being that most clandestine operational activities involve breakage the laws of foreign countries [and occasionally US].  We also didn't want their very first criminal act to occur on the government dime since that risked their 'fessing up if they felt a sudden moral compunction.

Thunder Road to spy     [Moonshiners]
After all, a good case officer is not one who quibbles about the morality of persuading foreign nationals to commit treason by spying against their countries, or convincing them to lie, cheat and steal for the greater good of their country [and of course, for the US].  So, the legal history of our case officers occasionally included histories of grand-theft auto, gun-running, moonshine operations, illegal liquor/tobacco movements, money laundering, etc.

In some cases, there may even have been violations of the Geneva Convention due to exigent combat circumstances.  And, our operations were highly successful; so much so that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence cited our operational production as exceptional and superior to that of any operations in the Intelligence Community.

[That, of course, was prior to the Clinton Administration, during which the DCS was gutted due to the intercession of the new DCI [Director of Central Intelligence, George Tenet.]

But, we could not convince the CIA to eliminate their Lifestyle Polygraphs; so we made it a policy that our case officers would NEVER agree to a CIA Lifestyle Polygraph [there was one exception by a case officer (a Marine) who unilaterally volunteered; he was later brought up on unrelated court martial charges and it took the intercession of the Commandant of the Marine Corps to arrange for his retirement rather than a court martial].

Our problem with the CIA was that most of their case officers were drawn from two primary sources:
a)  Young recruits from the MidWest farmlands before they'd had a chance to commit any significant illegal acts
b)  Police officers at local, state, federal or military levels [e.g., ATF, DEA, etc.], or military police, or even analysts.
[A Chief of Station in Central America in the early 1980s was formerly an enlisted Air Policeman whose expertise was limited to writing speeding tickets and whose weaponry expertise consisted of a Colt .38; he was an advisor to the Nicaraguan Contras and sported a Fidel Castro style beard.]

The difficulty in dealing with CIA's Clandestine Service [NCS] was that they thought [and still think] like cops, looking for an arrest rather than a penetration.  Worse, once they actually committed a grievous crime, they seemed to become addicted and pushed the envelope to see how much they could  get away with before conscience actually kicks in.  Today, they bring in SpecOps grunts to conduct interrogations, presuming their effectiveness equates to the volume of shrieking they can induce from torturing prisoners.  We doubt they have any trained interrogators, although there was a time when they had the best.

In dealing with the CIA, we often found ourselves countering their law enforcement backgrounds to the detriment of the operations.  At times, it was even preferable to work with the FBI agents since they seemed to have a more balanced approach to operational activities -- although only a few had a clue on how to run a counter-intelligence op.

But, we can't condemn the CIA too much since they've had to restructure so many times after Congress either destroyed them directly, or our Presidents appointed idiots such as George Tenet or Leon Panetta as "Directors" but who were actually tools of the cops who had risen to the executive level at the CIA.

But, we digress.

The point of all the blather above is that these data breaches have put at risk our best [and worst] intelligence personnel; and not only the operatives, but the analysts and support personnel who are privy to our most sensitive secrets.

So, all the hoopla about Fast Eddie Snowden spilling state secrets [well, actually, all the illegal activities of the NSA] is actually secondary.  In reality, if you can compromise the operatives and analysts, you've made the ultimate penetration.

But, here's the kicker.
Who are the hackers?

Were they the Chinese, or the Russkies, or ISIS?

Probably not.
As one NSA exec explained to us 40+ years ago, encryption is a pretty solid process.  In order to break the encryption, you have to have at least one end in the clear.  And, that requires a human operative who has a key.

How does that operative get the key?

Well, generally, it's a trusted bureaucrat who has the skill sets to understand the encryption and how to access the system.  And, those folks are few and far between.  So, who are these critters.

Basically, you have to delve back into history [i.e., the 1990s] when the US government demanded that every IT company telecom turn over its encryption keys to the NSA, since otherwise, they couldn't access these files.  The companies screamed bloody murder, but, in the end, the US companies acquiesced and gave up their keys.
[The European companies all told the NSA to pound sand, so only the US companies' data was vulnerable, as were the US public.]

Interestingly, the workaround on this process was the companies which provided the "anti-virus security" programs to protect against the hacker "evil-doers".  Back in the early 1990s, we were consultants at the Pentagon and advised against having a foreign [e.g., Israel] company supply the anti-virus security programs to "protect" the DOD systems -- most particularly, the DODIIS [DOD Intelligence Information System].  At that time, the Army's Intelligence CIO held a PhD in Physical Education, and had no idea how to work his computer, much less how to secure the Intelligence system.  Worse, there was a move afoot to digitize the DCS and its registered sources and case officers -- to save paper and conserve storage space.  [We took the liberty of discussing this issue with the Assistant Secretary of the Army [a personal friend], and ended that nonsense.

But, since then, all those safeguards we tried to put into place were eradicated, and our sensitive intelligence data were wide open to exploitation to the 10th grader who wanted to hack into his school server -- or the DOD classified intelligence systems.

So, whodunit!
We're guessing the Chinese, whom we don't trust as far as we would Hillary Clinton, are not the perps here.  Rather, we suspect this is an Administration op, in which the goal is to identify every individual in the US with a security clearance and to build a complete dossier on these folks since they might pose a threat to the upcoming totalitarian government they plan to install.  [Yes, yes, we know; and for those who doubt us, we'll don our tin-foil hats].

But, we've monitored so many totalitarian governments, and watched their formation, the template is clear:  identify your opposition, neutralize them, collect all the weapons, and then institute a system wherein neighbors spy on each other, and kids report on their parents, police operate without rules, suspend the Constitution, and .... well, you get the picture.

Look at East Germany and talk to the refugees from that Communist state.  They'll be happy to explain to you how the process works -- and how we're headed directly down that path, back to the Berlin Wall.