We the iSheeple

June 2013
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

We the iSheeple

04 June 2013

George Rebane

The RR category ‘We the Sheeple’ has been renamed ‘We the iSheeple’ in order to keep up with the times that require starting certain words with the lower case ‘i’. Except for some outrageous ideas wrangled in these pages, RR has been pretty staid in its approach to format and matters of eye candy. During the life of this commentary there has been a steady rise in the number of media reports that acknowledge, nay, confirm that we live in a land of the ill-informed, insouciant, inane, ignorant, insane, and idiotic – hence the real reason for adorning Sheeple with an i, for it gives meaning and therefore belongs there.

For the few that may care, the i that metaphorically broke this camel’s back was a couple of insane non-sequitors in the 3jun13 Union. It seems that a band of idiots gathered recently to deny elephant rides to children attending this year’s upcoming Nevada County Fair. These same people are the local representatives of known regional and national organizations that concern themselves with such things as ethical treatment of animals and children’s safety, and other matters that in their daily round iSheeple are not capable of handling themselves.

And then we come to a local moving & storage company that now has to get rid of its perfectly good trucks and replace them with new ones prescribed by CARB, the enforcer of our state’s mega-albatross job killer AB32. To the tune of $1.3M they will comply with this certifiably insane legislation and accede to the mandated purchase of fourteen new vehicles that purportedly will sport cleaner engines. The result of the costly exercise will have absolutely no measurable effect on any clean air metric you care to dredge up, let alone any effect on providing a better quality of life to earth’s inhabitants.

Of course I could go on, and perusing my past posts shows that I have done so in abundance. More than ever, and with each passing day it is beyond any lingering reasonable doubt that we have become a nation of iSheeple – the ill-informed, insouciant, inane, ignorant, insane, and idiotic.

Posted in Agenda 21, California, Critical Thinking & Numeracy, Nevada County, We the iSheeple

164 responses to “We the iSheeple”

Steve Frisch

09 June 2013

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 09 June 2013 at 01:25 PM
A for Christ’s sake Todd, blow it out your hole. My objection to Ms. Koire has nothing to do with her being a woman, a liberal, a blond, or anything but the content of her presentations.
You are a total cartoon.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

09 June 2013

SteveF, everyone can read your writings here. You are your own worst enemy. You are a misogynist and it comes across loud and clear. But you are right, I am Captain America.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

09 June 2013

Stephen
You’ve got to forgive Todd. He’s locally grown and is not as sophisticated as most of the contributors to this blog. He’s easily confused and resorts to 1980’s rhetoric for most of his blather. Possibly it’s the result of Mercury poisoning but either way kindness is the best response. We love you Todd. Don’t change, stay as you are.
.

LikeLike
George Rebane

09 June 2013

SteveF 147pm – OK, then it looks like we have a similar understanding of policy and law. I would argue though that there are also (shall we call them) post-legislative policies that are adopted by bodies charged with implementing a law that came into being pursuant an adopted pre-legislative policy. A nearby example of a post-legislative policy was recently voiced by our Sheriff Royal regarding his intent to enforce marijuana laws and ordnances which are already on the books. Does this breakdown make sense to you?

LikeLike
Paul Emery

09 June 2013

George
In regard to the Marijuana Ordinances they were not on the books, they were written with the leadership of the Sheriff. Kinda like letting doctors invent diseases. They voted to allow the Sheriffs Department to do a knock and search on any property in Nevada County based on unverified “complaints” of which there are no records kept. The apathy of the Tea Party and Cabpro on this issue was profound considering the invasion of property rights that are included in the ordinance. This is all; done under the flag of “code enforcement” but there is plenty of evidence to date that while they’re there they check out for other unrelated violations. The requirements for a code search warrent are much less a than a criminal warrent but once in the door they can do what they want.

LikeLike
George Rebane

09 June 2013

PaulE 418pm – Paul, I have no idea how your specific marijuana concerns tie with the policy/laws semantics thread. And I didn’t say that such ordinances “were” on the books, just that once they ‘are’ on the books the sheriff can put in place a policy of enforcement that has wide latitude with regard to the formal legalities that apply.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

09 June 2013

Obviously this thread is way above PaulE’s pay-grade. What a hoot!

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

09 June 2013

Posted by: George Rebane | 09 June 2013 at 03:16 PM
Yeah, I kind of think we are on the same page here. Of course after legislation is passed implementing ordinances have to be crafted. I am not quite sure what you mean by “pre-legislative’ policy. How can a body have policy that is not supported by law? If they did there would be no legislative authority for implementing it, thus like a private policy it might be a nice/bad idea, but could be challenged by citizens exercising their constitutional rights.
Please note, I don’t follow marijuana law very closely, not being a stoner and all, but it seems to me that in the case of marijuana we have some conflicting laws. We have state laws that allow marijuana to be grown, possessed, sold and used for medicinal purposes; and federal law that restricts the growing, possession, sale and use of marijuana. This puts the Sheriff’s office in a tough position while it is all getting sorted out, but it seems to me that the ‘conservatarian’ position on something like this would be that state and local law should prevail.
By the way how does a “Constitutional Sheriff” rationalize threatening to refuse to follow federal or state law on gun possession while simultaneously preferring to enforce federal law over state law on marijuana?
[For the record my druthers at this point would be that due to conflicting state and local laws there is probably need for a national law, under the commerce clause, to address the issue relatively uniformly across the country.]
I do find it amazing that CABPRO would not consider a local law that allows for “knock and search” without a warrant, probable cause or due process based on an anonymous tip with no record kept a violation of property rights. How do they prove probable cause? It is ludicrous [my word of the day] to me that the Sheriff’s office would do this under the cover of code enforcement. Does a properly trained Sheriff accompany every code enforcement officer in these cases? It seems kind of dangerous to put a code enforcement officer in this position.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

09 June 2013

Here is the case that establishes Commerce Claus powers to regulate marijuana.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich
If it were up to me I would legalize it, regulate it, tax it, and earmark the receipts for drug and alcohol addiction programs, probably putting hundreds of Nevada County growers essentially out of business.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

09 June 2013

Stephen
The Board of Supervisors designated the Sheriffs Department as the inspectors for code compliance, a move that’s unprecedented in Nevada County or elsewhere in California to my knowledge. That means they can enter and inspect your property almost without restriction due to the ease that a Code Warrant is granted. The source or nature of the “complaint” is not necessary to obtain a warrent. It seems to me that our local property rights advocates should be more up in arms about this than bike trails in Berkeley>
There is big bucks in Marijuana enforcement from both Federal grants and property seizures as well as keeping our jails, prisons and courts busy. That’s what keeps it illegal.
We saw our “constitutional sheriff” in action last week when he accepted a DEA grant for Marijuana Eradication. It seems like he puts himself in the role of being the Judge as to what Federal law, which is contrary to State law, he wishes to enforce.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

09 June 2013

Posted by: Paul Emery | 09 June 2013 at 05:45 PM
Thanks Paul. At least they are not sending code enforcement officers out to do this unprepared, but the approach of using Sheriffs does seem rather unorthodox.
So what is up with that George? You think we should have Sheriff’s do searches based on Code Warrants but think zoning is a violation of property rights? Or bike lanes are a UN plot?

LikeLike
Paul Emery

09 June 2013

George, this is consistent with any discussion about policy and law and certainly within the boundaries of government intrusion in our private lives as outlined by Ms Rosa.
The Libertarians have been active supporters of those opposing the ordinance but when push came so shove and the ordinance was passed there was not a peep from the CABPRO, Tea Party so called property rights advocates.
The cultivation of medical marijuana for distribution to collectives and dispensaries in California is a legitimate cottage industry under California law. Effective enforcement of the current ordinance will devastate our rural economy and leave hundreds of families with no income. Where are those who are supposed to be standing up against excessive regulation and government intrusion?

LikeLike
George Rebane

09 June 2013

StevenF 446pm – Pre-legislative policy = ‘We will support gay marriage. Then subsequent laws legalize gay marriage and define its particulars, e.g. in the adoption of children. Post-legislative policy = administratively adoption is made more difficult if one partner has AIDS.
Who said “zoning is a violation of property rights”? Of course it is by definition because zoning does prevent the owner from disposing of his property as he wishes, and the extent of one’s ability to dispose is the only reasonable operational definition/measure that prescribes the extent of ownership (but you knew that).
If you’ve read any of the years of posts on property rights on RR, you know that conservatives are willing to relinquish a certain extent of personal liberties along many dimensions so as to enable an ordered society to exist and function. Not agreeing on the line that defines that ‘extent’ is another factor that separates the Right and Left.
My stance on drug legalization is a matter of record here.

LikeLike
Ben Emery

09 June 2013

George,
You rarely disappoint with your support of violating individuals civil liberties. Can you explain to me at all how you value liberty and freedom for all people not just yourself.
I am going to answer your exit question from your 12:51pm comment with an indirect answer at the same time asking a question. What would Jesus do or advice? In your definition what is the role in society of being a Christian.
I would suggest you read Mathew 25 “The Judgement Of Nations”. Here is a hint
He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’

LikeLike
Paul Emery

09 June 2013

George
Let me try this. Can you explain why you and others of your persuasion (CABPRO and The Local Tea Party) have failed to speak out publicly against the Marijuana Cultivation ordinance and how it affects property and privacy rights and the local economy ? Do you understand how the knock and search with only an anonymous unrecorded complaint (if that) process works?

LikeLike
Ben Emery

09 June 2013

Paul,
I will mix the two dialogues we are having because I see the same pattern arise again and again on RR. The civil liberties of pot growers don’t matter just as those who are homeless. Just as Muslims, or Mexicans, and should I say more broadly but more succinct.
Those who are economically poor, color in their skin, and god help you if you have both civil liberties are privileges not rights.

LikeLike
Michael Anderson

09 June 2013

GG: “Regarding MA, he’s his own Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and to go back in time, I doubt I’ll ever forgive him blah blah blah blah”
Yawn.
TJ: “She does not appear to be a doormat that MA wants here to be”
People who advocate and conspire to obstruct public meetings are fascists. I don’t want her to be a doormat, I want her stop trying to destroy civil society.
TJ: “This MichaelA is a true ass”
And Todd, I invite you to take a long walk on a short pier. BTW, that would require you seeking out a body of water, with a pier. There’s a new fishing pier that’s short up at Scott’s Flat Lake, just east of the Day Use area. Please take your long walk on that one, thanks.

LikeLike
George Rebane

09 June 2013

PaulE 958pm – Actually I (and perhaps we all) could use a tutorial on how the anonymous knock and search works. Is there also a citation to a county code/ordinance that you would point us toward?
BenE 932pm – which individual civil liberties do I not support? Evidence?

LikeLike
Ben Emery

09 June 2013

Profiling, targeting, loitering, spying on Americans, Patriot Act, pre emptive attacks, free trade/ US companies setting up shop with nations that are on the worst nations that violate human rights, and the list can go on and on.
George outside of the American revolution you side with authority and power almost in every situation. I am convinced that you would have been a loyalist during the American revolution and would have called those you now hail as hero’s as upstarts and a threat against the crown.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

10 June 2013

Michael Anderson | 09 June 2013 at 10:12 PM
Too funny MA, are you out of third grade yet? LOL!

LikeLike
Michael Anderson

10 June 2013

Todd, you know where Scott’s Flat Lake is, right?

LikeLike
George Rebane

10 June 2013

BenE 1040pm – Once again you demonstrate the depth of your understanding of the contents and comments on RR. My 1022pm question to you was simple and direct. As expected, the ‘evidence’ for your 932pm charge is yet another layer of charges.
My strong recommendation stands – attempt to stick to the ideas presented and discussed here, they are sufficiently complex for anyone who understands them, and doubly so when we seek to offer practical solutions. But when we divert to attack the ‘messenger’, we simply make known that the discussion has passed beyond our ken. A discreet silence would be more appropriate and propitious.
As proof I offer the ongoing exchange between Messrs ToddJ and MichaelA the pursuit of which diminishes both, regardless of how it got started.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2013

Here is a link to the Ordinance that gives the sheriffs Department the task of enforcing civil code.
http://asa-nc.com/nevada-county-calif-emergency-cultivation-ordinance-2349-may-2012.pdf
George, the important to remember is that this is a Civil not Criminal matter that the Sheriffs Department has been authorized to administer by the Board of Supervisors. That means that the requirements for a warrant are much less than a criminal search warrant and only need to have a “reason to believe that a condition of nonconformity exists” to obtain a warrant. That can be nothing more than a rumor or complaint from an unnamed source (the Sheriffs Department says they did not keep copies of the complaints) So if you get a knock on the door they will ask you for permission to “inspect for compliance” your property. If you say no, you need a warrant they will get one in a matter of hours because all they need is a “reason to believe” which requires no proof or evidence. Only the opinion of the inspector. in this case an officer with the Sheriffs Department. Once on the property they can press criminal charges based on what they find. This can serve as an entry warrant then to gain access to property they could not obtain a criminal warrant to enter.
California code of civil procedure Section 1822.51
http://www.lawserver.com/law/state/california/codes/california_code_civil_procedure_1822-50
“Cause shall be deemed to exist if either reasonable
legislative or administrative standards for conducting a routine or
area inspection are satisfied with respect to the particular place,
dwelling, structure, premises, or vehicle, or there is reason to
believe that a condition of nonconformity exists with respect to the
particular place, dwelling, structure, premises, or vehicle”

LikeLike
George Rebane

10 June 2013

PaulE 1054am – Thanks Paul. It seems that such a ‘work around’ of ordinances would then allow any jurisdiction to allow its law enforcement arm to conduct a preliminary search of any premise in a so-called fishing expedition. Is that your understanding?

LikeLike
Ryan Mount

10 June 2013

Perhaps we should have a civil servant rather than law enforcement perform these inspections. My suspicion is that we choose the Sheriff because he and his deputies are:
1) Elected
2) Armed
You’re typical natural-gas-car driving bureaucrat is neither.
Of the couple people I know that have had these visits from the Sheriff, both went off without an incident, however they were very nervous about what Paul was referring to above. Even though they honestly had no wrong-doings going on their properties and their “grows” were properly planted. (well, planted in the correct place, but full of male plants…the dumbasses. Maybe the Sheriff could provide some horticulture advice while visiting?)
[sarcasm=on]Maybe we should just allow neighbor to sue neighbor since it’s already a civil case?[/sarcasm=off]

LikeLike
Ben Emery

10 June 2013

George,
You ask for specific examples of you supporting civil liberties and I gave you some. Our exchanges almost revolve entirely around this issue. Every once in awhile you will let down your guard and come out with the unfiltered truth of your positions. In these moments is where I shape my opinions on your positions.
Lets do a little q and a session one topic at a time.
Do you support Arizona’s SB1070 Immigration Law?
I know you do since we’ve talked about it before but I am not going to try and sift through RR archives to find it.
Now lets say you and your wife were pulled over and they asked you where you were born for no particular reason. You answered them honestly. They followed up with asking you for your birth certificate or proof of citizenship and you couldn’t produce it and were hauled off to the county jail.
Would you say your civil liberties were violated?

LikeLike
George Rebane

10 June 2013

BenE 1139am – Yes I support SB1070. Now how does that make me and half the people of this country not support civil liberties and become pariahs in the eyes of the Left? Your interpretations of enforcement are a red herring in this discussion.
And I do recommend that you learn to “sift through RR archives”, it’s an easy search function that you can do using the TypePad search window or just google it.

LikeLike
Ben Emery

10 June 2013

George,
“Yes I support SB1070. Now how does that make me and half the people of this country not support civil liberties and become pariahs in the eyes of the Left?”
Do you carry around proof of your citizenship? I bet not.
To start it violates the 4th and 14th amendment of the US Constitution. The other issue your boy Sheriff Joe Arpaio was found guilty of discriminating against a specific segment of the population and SB 1070 has been found to be illegal in 75% of the law and the remaining 25% will be found illegal within the next year or so.
“Plaintiffs have established that the MCSO had sufficient intent to discriminate against Latino occupants of motor vehicles. Further, the Court concludes that the MCSO had and continues to have a facially discriminatory policy of considering Hispanic appearance probative of whether a person is legally present in the country in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The MCSO is thus permanently enjoined from using race, or allowing its deputies and other agents to use race as a criteria in making law enforcement decisions with respect to Latino occupants of vehicles in Maricopa County.”

LikeLike
George Rebane

10 June 2013

BenE 1233pm – Not sure you understand the litigation surrounding SB1070. My “boy Sheriff Arpaio” was not found guilty of anything. And given the country’s problems with illegal aliens and domestic terrorism, I would not mind carrying proof of citizenship on my person. With my background, the government already has a very thick dossier on me. And now we find that they are able to put together some hefty ones on anybody they want who resides within these borders. What is your attitude toward a national ID card and its implication on our civil liberties?

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2013

It’s not quite that easy George. This required a special ordinance added to the County Code authorizing the Sheriffs Department to do that task (enforcement of the ordinance). I’m still curious as to why there is such little interest in this invasion of property rights from the usual critics (CABPRO, TEA Party etc) AS I said, the Libertarians have stepped up and were at the Supes meetings with their opposition.

LikeLike
George Rebane

10 June 2013

PaulE 149pm – Can’t vouch for the sentiments of Tea Party and CABPRO leaderships. My hunch is that 1) both orgs back Sheriff Royal, who they believe will prudently employ the new power given to him, and 2) both orgs have memberships who predominantly would like to wish the weed growers away. Do you know of anyone who has written a well-reasoned apology for the new ordinance?

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2013

Yeah, pretty much as I figure as well. The Good Ol Boy network seems to override any political standards and freedom of land use has it’s limits if it’s an inconvenience-the good old NIMBY syndrome both sides use. Believing that a government official will prudently use his new found power sounds like what Obama is asking for. “Just trust me” they all say.
So now the ability of the police to search anybody’s property (within the County) based on an unverified complaint is now law of the land. Better off worrying about bike lanes in distant cities than our own neighborhood.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

10 June 2013

Hey don’t misinterpret what those “AAAgenda 21 implementers” like me want to do! We want to put bike lanes in our Nevada County neighborhoods too!

LikeLike
Gregory

10 June 2013

Frisch, I support your “Sierra Business Council” changing focus towards installing bike lanes and away from carbon rents.
The gold country is criss crossed with old railway rights of way and water ditches; along with roadways wide enough for a bike lane (better not to have it marked as such), bike paths over paths that have been known for a century to be a gentle grade are perfect for bicycle use.
Of course, to avoid the taking of the property, private owners should be paid a fair market value for the right of way.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

10 June 2013

Greg, that is not a changed focus, it has been a core part of our planning principles from day one!
http://www.sbcouncil.org/Publications/Planning-for-Prosperity
http://www.sbcouncil.org/Publications/Investing-for-Prosperity
http://www.sbcouncil.org/Publications/Mixed-Use-Handbook
By the way, another core principle of our is not to support eminent domain.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

10 June 2013

We have always supported bike lanes as part of a balanced approach to mobility in rural communities.
Please look here:
http://www.sbcouncil.org
Go to publications and read Planning for Prosperity, Investing for Prosperity and Mixed Use Handbook for a full explanation of our planning principles.
By the way, we [SBC] have never supported eminent domain in principle, nor have we ever supported any specific eminent domain action.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

10 June 2013

George…same Typepad posting problem….very odd. Used text editor and everything….

LikeLike
Paul Emery

10 June 2013

Steven
It could be links. That seemed to be the problem that I had.

LikeLike
George Rebane

10 June 2013

StevenF 708pm – Went to the comments spam folder and found your comments and published them. Keep me posted.
Here’s a correlation – it doesn’t like URLs starting with ‘www’ but seems to accept those starting with ‘http’.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

10 June 2013

Ah, thanks George. Sorry to all for the double post.

LikeLike
earlcrabb

10 June 2013

George, have you thought about switching to WordPress and keeping your Typepad system as an archive for older posts? It might make your job easier for all of us. Besides, using an addition password would be much preferable to that garbled word game that us old blind people can’t see.

LikeLike
Ben Emery

10 June 2013

George in response of your 1:45 comment.
Would you of preferred if I said ruled against his policies or practices instead of found guilty? What he did violated their civil liberties and constitutional rights.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/24/us-usa-arizona-sheriff-idUSBRE94N0Y320130524
“U.S. District Court Judge Murray Snow ruled that the sheriff’s policies violated the drivers’ constitutional rights and ordered his office to cease using race or ancestry as a grounds to stop, detain or hold occupants of vehicles – some of them in crime sweeps dubbed “saturation patrols.”
I am very much against a national ID or Real ID card. Do you know the implications of the Real ID Act. If ever truly implemented I will never renew my drivers license again. To cut to the chase I oppose just about everything with Department of Homeland Security and very little with National Security Agency. I think there should be a department of peace (DOP) within the pentagon as watchdogs and the DOP funding would come from finding fraud, waste, and redundancies in the direct and indirect defense budgets. Last I remember the pentagon couldn’t account for around $2 trillion in spending. Where did that money go?

LikeLike
Billy Tozer

10 June 2013

Hey, Brother Ben, its me your cold as a stone and mean as a snake friend!! Yep, nothing gets my jollies off like soaking a blanket in a bucket of ice water and then seeking out an unsuspecting sleeping homeless person and tossing the dripping blanket upon him/her on a cold, cold night. Or taking her/his nice warm blanket adding a few kicks to their temples just for fun. Clockwork Orange (the opening part) was the funniest movie ever made.
Seriously, lets look at some data. Take the Farm Bill. You know that “farm bill” which keeps awful evil Monsanto in business by screwing the little guy with a genetically modified corn cob.
80% of the Farm Bill goes to Food Stamps. Then there are the USDA loans that were used to built the new dope treatment center (NCCA) on the corner of E Main and Sierra College Drive in GV. Of course, the USDA (the food stamp folks) are funding the new big and improved modern Miner’s Clinic so po folk can get medical care when BambooCare kicks in. Then there is the subsides to the corn growers so that you can put low gas mileage ethanol in your hybrid at taypayers’ expense. That is assuming you don’t have an all electric vehicle that does not pay for our roads or fund Caltrans via the gasoline taxes. So, you should love the Farm Bill since the lion’s share goes to the po folk, the slow, the simple, the down trodden and the defenseless. Excuse my ignorance for saying food stamps. I am such a beast! They are called SNAP now, not food stamps. Supplemental Nutrition, blah, blah, blah. Supplemental my arse, lol.
So, with all this good warm fuzzy stuff going on, you get bent out of joint that a border county which is overrun with illegal aliens who disregard our National Sovereignty and break into our country are profiled? Oh, the injustice of it all. So many giants to slay, so little time. Hey, how is that one Turkish woman who got pepper sprayed doing? Will she or you ever recover??

LikeLike
Gregory

11 June 2013

Steve, by changing focus, I really mean changing. Becoming the “Sierra Bikeway Council” would mean you wouldn’t even have to change your web address.
Your carbon business will be going away; it’s just a matter of time.

LikeLike
Ben Emery

11 June 2013

Bill,
Clockwork Orange was an awesome movie when I was about 18 years old. I pretty much like anything by Stanley Kubrick and Jim Jarmusch. I think you are referring to the drunkard in the tunnel but I think the what probably resembles your life a bit closer are all the women dolls around in the opening scene with a bunch of men with eye make up on.
As for the homeless remarks you are one accident, major health issue, or banksters playing roulette with the nations pension funds from being one of the people you like to terrorize with cold blankets and kicks to the temple.
I am pretty much against the farm bill because its focus is on industrial ag not small farmers. I talked with my uncle this weekend at my daughters graduation party about it. He is a peach farmer that would definitely fit into the small farm category. He would probably like George’s and your opinions on most things. I don’t know how much you know about agriculture so I will save the long rant on it. Crop insurance was created for very good reasons but as like everything else has been corrupted by those who have accumulated wealth and political power through lobbying.
It has a Monsanto Protection Act inside of it as well. This exempts Monsanto from lawsuits or litigation, basically a free pass to do whatever they want.
SNAP or Food Stamps are kind of the same thing as our aid to Israel there are strings attached to that money, they must spend a huge portion of it on US defense weaponry. So it ends up being a back door subside to the Lockhead Martin and Boeing’s. Same goes for the SNAP increase is government contracts for Genetically Modified “food” products. Weapons industry isn’t alone in this backdoor funding. I forget the number but we are talking in the billions that is funneled to the pentagon through indirect channels annually.
Why is it you guys can’t connect these dots?

LikeLike
Ben Emery

11 June 2013

Bill,
Do you remember you made a remark about the peaceful Turkey protests and I said it will only last a couple days until a state rep saboteur would start the violence. Well it happened and now the gloves are off. The same thing happened in the OWS.
Any protest that opposed the powerful that gains any traction has the exact same game plan used against it and the plan works perfectly every time. This is why the MLK civil rights movement succeeded to the extent it did and why Malcolm X and the Black Panthers didn’t. Show the immorality, suppression, and oppression of those who sit in power and the general population will side with you. Fight back and it justifies a violent response from the state. This is why the myth that the founders put in the 2nd amendment was to fight the US government if it became tyrannical is asinine.
Violence only breeds more violence.
From this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/10108014/Lady-in-the-Red-Dress-and-her-dream-of-a-Turkish-rebirth.html
To this
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/11/world/europe/turkey-protests/index.html

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

11 June 2013

Ben I do connect the dots. Every penny we waste on SNAP is one less penny we could have buying bullets.
As far as the homeless are concerned, we do a lot for them. We have armies of volunteers across the waves of amber grain picking up their trash. Right here in Nevada County volunteers are hauling off truck after truck of piles of trash and we don’t even charge them dump fees. Gee, I wish somebody would pick up all my trash and neighbor’s trash for fun and for free. Guess they never heard of the rule “You haul garage in, you haul garage out” On the bright side, I am so thankful they are not leaving piles of trash in our beautiful National Forest or priceless State Parks or in our protected wetlands…oppps, the illegals leave piles of trash in our protected wetland and wildlife refuges (a Federal offense), but we pay people to clean up after them. Its all good.
From last month: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/world/middleeast/grisly-killings-in-syrian-towns-dim-hopes-for-peace-talks.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
From a few days ago: http://www.salem-news.com/articles/june052013/syria-christians.php
I always believe in putting a face on it. But because of your apparent sensibilities, I won’t post the pic I really wanted to show of little Christian children laying in the streets drenched in blood. So much blood you can only tell they are children by their size. All lined up all nice and pretty. So, ya, I ain’t too worried about a Turkish woman that got a puff of tear gas in the grand scheme of things.
I am concerned that we would give either side in the Syrian conflict a penny. One side is the Prez of Syrian, backed by Hezbollah and Iran. The other side is the Sharia Law folks. If the enemy of my enemy is my friend, we are in a no win situation. Best to stand back and let them kill each other.
In some areas of fighting, your beloved UN reports that 90% of the fighters on either side aren’t even Syrian. And you are up in arms about sending money to Israel? I suppose you believe that the Israelis eat Palestinian babies on a daily basis, just like most of the countries we fund believe over there. We the Sheeple is right. Islam good, Christianity bad. Dark skinned people=good, screwed over folks. White skinned people=bad, white devils and exploiters of the planet. Poor countries= victims. USA=bad. Europe=good. USA=bad. Money for military=bad. Money to feed the entire plantet and sent to corrupt governments=good. Yep, connect the dots.

LikeLike
George Rebane

11 June 2013

“Violence only breeds more violence.” What violence bred these 20th century mortacracies?
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2013/05/breaking-bread-2nd-amendment-and-gun-control.html

LikeLike
Ryan Mount

11 June 2013

The issues with SNAP, and there are many of them, is a result of the unintended consequences of a bloated and largely unaccountable government bureaucracy and legislative arm.
The fact that most people receiving SNAP are working/have income of some sort, seems to escape most people’s assumptions about the program. Note: if one is unemployed, a recipient is only eligible for 3 (three) months of SNAP benefits. Hardly a suck on the system, eh?* Most households have jobs.**
Anyhow, I’ve been a vocal critic of the program along Ben’s line. Mostly because the program has been HEAVILY (like no other one) Agribusiness. Specifically the arm of the business that produces mounds of crap, like garbage processed foods and soft drinks.
So given what I’ve outlined above, and how it relates to iSheeple, when I’ve raised the specter of eliminating mega-crap foods like Coca-Cola from the eligible items, and replacing them with whole foods, guess who complains the largest? I’ll take my answer off the air. Actually, no I won’t: SNAP recipients! Suddenly they don their Patriot wares and become instant and highly ironic faux-libertarians. “You can have my Coke when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. How dare you tell me what I can give my child!” Idiocracy isn’t a movie, it’s a realty.
The USDA is absolutely no help in this manner, as they have become puppets of the Corn Syrup and processed foods industry. They’re excuses, and it’s generous to call the USDA reasoning excuses, mainly follow this line of thinking: we don’t want our recipients to be embarrassed at the checkout stand.
If we want to fix SNAP we need to:
– Remove all crap from the eligible items. Minimal processed foods or put limits on how many Kraft mac-n-Cheese boxes one can EBT.
– Have mandatory requirements for a percentage of whole foods per month
– Leave the existing “you must work if able” requirements in place. Maybe increase the pressure.
– Have stricter nutritional requirements for eligible items.
*http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2226
**http://www.fns.usda.gov/ORA/menu/Published/SNAP/FILES/Participation/2011Characteristics.pdf

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

11 June 2013

My remark about the Turkish woman who got tear gassed IN FRONT of a boat load of cameras and reporters was just a PR move. Heck, Ben, you can see the sound mike inches from her head.
But, we agree on at least one thing. I never said that Turkey would not be next nor the protests would not end up as just another sunny day in the eternal Arab Spring. I knew this was coming, a no brainier to anyone, yourself included.
What is sad about the Lady In Red and all those young idealistic freedom loving folks from Egypt to Tunisia is that their revolution for democracy will be hijacked by the most ruthless tyrannical “peace lubbing Muslims” of them all. In the name of the Great Prophet, they turn from pretending to be pro democracy and freedom lovers to be just another dictatorship along the lines of Idi Amin. The Lady in Red is much better off with the government she has now because where this train is going, she will long for the days of dressings as she pleases and being educated and putting up with only a puff of tear gas at a demonstration. Just look at Egypt and Libya and all the other “democracy” movements in that Allah forsaken region.

LikeLike