CISPA stalled in Senate

From Fight For The Future:

Hey!

Like the villain in bad horror movie, CISPA just won’t stay dead.

The privacy-killing zombie-bill is stalled in the Senate, and today the Whitehouse released their response to a petition against CISPA. Thanks in part to the massive public outcry (yes, you) they made some strong statements in support of users’ rights to privacy.

But given that corporate lobbyists have already spent $605 Million on buying support, we can expect that CISPA will be back in some form soon enough. It’s likely that the Senate will split the bill up into several smaller bills that will be harder to keep track of and rally around.

So.... We made an infographic to get everyone up to speed about the threat that CISPA still poses to our online privacy and our most basic rights. Click here to check it out.

To sign petition:click here

National ID scheme

From Campaign For Liberty

Date: April 29, 2013

To: John Tate
President

From: Norm Singleton
Vice President of Policy

Re: National ID Card Fight Looming

Overview

It is often said, "No man's life, liberty, or fortune is safe while our legislature is in session."

Next week, the Senate comes back in session after a brief one-week recess, so buckle up.

The schemes are coming fast and furious, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to finish up ramming a slew of power grabs through the Senate before Congress' extended August recess. The fights over the National Internet Tax and gun control haven't gone anywhere.

But President Obama, Harry Reid, and the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" also want to get their National ID/"Immigration Reform" bill fast-tracked, knowing that time has helped work to defeat these schemes in the past. As soon as the Senate comes back next week, the fight could begin.

I am not exaggerating at all when I say this is the absolute WORST National ID scheme we've seen to date.

So it's absolutely vital C4L members spring into action to stop this madness NOW.

If we're going to win this fight - especially after all the other battles we've taken on in recent weeks - we simply must start raising resources and generating No National ID Petitions IMMEDIATELY.

We're not going to have much time.

The Gang of Eight's Scheme

"Control the borders." "Path to citizenship." "Amnesty."

There's no end to the buzzwords being tossed around. And this fight is about to get white hot!

But all of the sloganeering is just designed to conceal all the madness contained within this 844-page monstrosity.

In fact, the problems are almost too many to list.

Besides dramatically increasing federal spending, this bill mandates every American carry a federally issued National ID card with their photo.

It also creates a new federal database with biometric information on every American.

If passed, the bill would:

*** Require a new National ID card based on Social Security cards and a national database containing biometric identification information, such as fingerprints, retinal scans, or scans of veins on the back of hands, which could easily be used for government tracking.

*** The card would be required for all U.S. workers regardless of place of birth, making it illegal for anyone to hold a job in the United States who doesn't obtain the ID card;

*** All employers would be required to purchase an ID scanner to verify the ID cards by making sure the information on the card matches the information in the federal database.

So every time any citizen applies for a job, the government would know.

You can bet it's only a matter of time until "ID scans" will be required to travel, attend public events, or make even routine purchases.

By far, the most dangerous part is the biometric tracking technology, which would allow federal bureaucrats to track our every move.

In fact, it sends shivers down my spine just reading through all the new mandates and requirements.

This is exactly the type of battle that often decides whether a country remains free or continues down a slide toward tyranny.

Once government bureaucrats know exactly how we live our lives, it won't be long until they try to run them.

It will only be a matter of time until they spend their workdays making sure you and I don't go anywhere, read anything, eat anything, or drink anything they think we shouldn't.

Knowing many citizens have had massive success derailing National ID schemes at the state level, the statists have come up with a solution . . .

Federalize it.

In other words, they're getting rid of mandates on state governments to create conforming ID cards. Under this legislation, the federal government would just take on the responsibility of issuing these IDs!

The Politics

The National ID card is something the establishment of BOTH parties have wanted for years - and they think they finally have the votes to get it done.

Reading through the names of the top four leaders of the Gang of Eight is enough to make you feel queasy.

John McCain. Lindsey Graham. Chuck Schumer. Dick Durbin.

These senators, knowing they have absolutely ZERO street cred with pro-limited government grassroots, have tapped Senator Marco Rubio to deliver their message.

Senator Rubio, of course, has presidential ambitions.

He's no doubt observed that the last two nominees of the Republican Party - Mitt Romney and John McCain - carved a path to the GOP nomination by consistently stabbing its grassroots' supporters in the back.

Their strategy is to flat-out IGNORE the National ID portions of the legislation.

Instead, the focus will be on how the GOP was shellacked in the last election and simply "must" join with President Obama to pass this legislation.

Just like in the fight over the Second Amendment, the statists don't see the U.S. House as putting up much of a fight against anything the Senate passes.

So the Senate may be our best and only chance to take a stand.

But this fight will move fast.

C4L members MUST start turning the heat up on the U.S. Senate NOW.

Proposed Plan of Attack

Initially, flooding Senate offices with No National ID Petitions should be our goal.

This is to ensure every senator understands that American citizens won't be fooled by their attempts to hide the National ID portion of the so-called "Immigration Reform" bill.

The more Petitions we can generate, the better.

We should urge every Campaign for Liberty member and supporter to sign a Petition and then immediately begin generating them from other folks, as well.

As you know, back in 1998, then-Congressman Ron Paul was able to spearhead an effort inside Congress to repeal a National ID scheme.

I recall how this issue was ignored when Dr. Paul first began talking about it. But then, as grassroots Americans made their voices heard, a flood of representatives joined with Congressman Paul to kill this scheme.

Public pressure was key then, and it will be again for this fight.

But knowing all of this, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid isn't likely to wait around.

So we have to move fast.

As the fight nears, we're going to have to turn up the heat on key Republicans and Democrats who are most likely to go soft.

I'm talking to Hill contacts and working on an exhaustive list of Senators now.

I will have it to you shortly.

But the most important thing now is raising money and generating Petitions for the initial portion of this program.

I know C4L members and supporters understand the stakes.

The fight over National ID is absolutely critical. It's not one we can ignore.

Without signed No National ID Petitions - and C4L members' generosity - we'll be dead in the water.

But this is a fight we CAN win.

Sign the petition

Congress wants to make themselves exempt from Obama Care

One of my Democratic colleagues in the Senate referred to ObamaCare implementation as a coming "train wreck."

Then jaws dropped around Washington as news broke late last week that some Members of Congress might be working behind the scenes to get around a handful of ObamaCare's worst provisions. I believe Congress should NEVER give themselves an exemption from the bad laws they pass.

You and I must tell Congress if they want to be free from ObamaCare's stranglehold, then they must free ALL AMERICANS from this looming disaster. If you agree, I'm counting on you to sign your Repeal ObamaCare Petition TODAY!

You see, the American public's overwhelming opposition to this radical scheme hasn't changed in the three years since President Obama twisted arms and Senate rules to RAM his healthcare takeover into law. But knowing he had a reelection campaign to run, President Obama delayed much of ObamaCare's implementation...

Only now are all the horrific details contained in the 2,700 pages of this law seeing the light.

Just consider these alarming facts:

*** ObamaCare hikes taxes by an estimated $8.6 BILLION while spending a whopping $2.6 TRILLION over the next ten years!

*** The Florida Medical Association recently voiced concern over ObamaCare causing a shortage of doctors;

*** News outlets are beginning to warn of "Rate Shock" as ObamaCare regulations drives insurance premiums through the roof - by over 60% in some states!

*** Fines resulting from ObamaCare's regulations would be at least $2,085 per year, which is expected to cost hardworking American families as much as $10 billion per year.

Now, the Washington Post reports that even two-thirds of Democrats believe ObamaCare is all cost and no benefit. 85% of independents agree.

In fact, over the past few weeks - just as I've predicted - more and more mainstream news outlets are saying "ObamaCare is a prescription for a Democratic headache in 2014."

ObamaCare is ripe for repeal - if my colleagues have the GUTS to force the issue. So in the face of numbers like these, will ObamaCare's apologists in the Senate continue to carry water for this failed policy? Will President Obama?

If they want to continue ignoring the American people, I believe we could see a massive political earthquake in 2014.

I'm committed to fighting until the day ObamaCare is taken off the books.

I'm confident - with your help - that's a day we can soon realize.

But you and I must prove that we're DEAD serious about winning this fight.

So won't you please stand with me by signing your petition TODAY?

I hope you will.

But I'm counting on you to take action IMMEDIATELY.

So please sign your Repeal ObamaCare Petition.

In Liberty,

Senator Rand Paul

P.S. ObamaCare is ripe for repeal - if my colleagues have the GUTS to force the issue.

But you and I must prove that we're DEAD serious about winning this fight.

To sign petition

A thank you from Demand Progress

From Demand Progress:

Some updates, and a request: The House passed CISPA, but that's as far as the bill will go, at least in its present, privacy-obliterating form:

HUFFINGTON POST: Senate Won't Vote On CISPA, Deals Blow To Controversial Cyber Bill.

We played a huge part in this, with Demand Progress members sending more that 200,000 emails to Congress in opposition to CISPA.

But the fight isn't over yet. There's a good chance the Senate will take up some sort of cyber security legislation later this year -- but we've cultivated strong relationships with several senators who really do care about privacy rights, so we'll have real standing there when the time comes. And, of course, we won't hesitate to ask you to weigh in.

And as a reminder for those of you who missed the successful conclusion of our week of action earlier this month: We told you about that frightening new proposal that actually would have expanded and harshened the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act -- the law that makes it a potential federal crime to violate a website's fine-print terms of service agreement.

We asked you to help us stop it in its tracks.

Well, here's the big headline:

HUFFINGTON POST: Internet Activists Win First-Round Victory In Fight Over Anti-Hacking Law

It required a mad (exhausting) fury of activism and lobbying, but it looks like we've won this battle.

This rally capped off a couple of weeks of activism in opposition to that expansion proposal and in support of CFAA reform -- which included 150,000 or so emails to Congress, thousands of tweets and phone calls, and a dozen meetings on Capitol Hill with key Congressional offices.

As the Huffington Post reported:

Internet activists won a major victory this week when House Republicans put the brakes on an effort to vote on reforms to federal anti-hacking laws. The reforms had become a legislative flashpoint in the wake of the death of Aaron Swartz, an Internet activist who was facing a bevy of charges under the controversial Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) before committing suicide in January.

So as you can see, our work together is having a concrete impact. The ground has shifted in our favor, on the CFAA, CISPA, and on Internet freedom in general.

We shocked the political establishment by responding to the new CFAA proposal so quickly, and we have ever-growing credibility and clout with policymakers and the media as we make our case about these issues that we all hold so dear.

But we'll of course need to keep pressing forward. We still want to achieve positive reform of the CFAA. We still need to watchdog the Senate as they consider taking up cyber security legislation of their own. We're expecting movement in the Net Neutrality fight in coming months.

And we'll keep working to defend our civil liberties more broadly, as reactionaries try to exploit fear to constrain our freedom and undermine constitutional protections.

Thanks.

Demand Progress

If you wish to make a donation to Demand Progress:click here

It looks like our activism is paying off. We let the statists know we mean business,that will rise up and protect our rights and that they better take their crap somewhere else like outside our borders.

Axis of Evil

We've got to get out of this place if it's the last thing we ever do we got to get out of this place


We're not going to let a bunch of North Koreans outpsycho us


Everytime you buy Chinese goods you are giving these workers the tools they need.


With Obama in office we thought we'ed give world domination another shot

Let's keep an eye on these countries. I get a bad feeling about them from what is posted here and elsewhere.

Congressional Code of Ethics

Prohibition Against Use of One’s Position With the House for Personal Gain

It is fundamental that a Member, officer, or employee of the House may not use his or her official position for personal gain, including any gain that would accrue to the individual in the form of compensation for outside employment activities. A key provision of the House Code of Official Conduct (House Rule 23, cl. 3) provides that a House Member, officer, or employee may not receive compensation and may not permit compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted from his position in Congress.

As noted in the debate preceding adoption of this rule, an individual violates this provision if he uses “his political influence, the influence of his position . . . to make pecuniary gains.”1 Members and staff, when considering the applicability of this provision to any activity they are considering undertaking, must also bear in mind that under a separate provision of the Code of Official Conduct (House Rule 23, cl. 2), they are required to adhere to the spirit as well as the letter of the Rules of the House. In any event, the Standards Committee routinely advises Members and staff to avoid situations in which even an inference might be drawn suggesting improper conduct.

In addition, the Code of Ethics for Government Service, which applies to House Members, officers, and employees, provides (at ¶ 5) that a federal official should never accept “benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance” of official duties. The Committee found that this standard was violated, for example, when a Member persuaded the organizers of a privately held bank to sell him stock while he was using his congressional position to promote authorization for the establishment of the bank.2 The Member also sponsored legislation to remove restrictions on the development of property in which he had a personal financial interest. Thus, the Member was found to have wrongly used his official position for personal benefit.

In the same vein, the Code of Ethics for Government Service affirms (in ¶¶ 8 and 10) that “public office is a public trust,” and provides that a federal official should “[n]ever use any information coming to him confidentially in the performance of governmental duties for making private profit.”

One of the purposes of these rules and standards is to preclude conflicts of interest. Although the term “conflict of interest” may be subject to various interpretations in general usage, under federal law and regulation, this term “is limited in meaning; it denotes a situation in which an official’s conduct of his office conflicts with his private economic affairs.”3 The ultimate concern “is risk of impairment of impartial judgment, a risk which arises whenever there is a temptation to serve personal interests.”4

These rules and standards are applicable in a wide range of circumstances relating to outside employment. When there is a potential for a conflict of interest to arise in connection with one’s outside employment or other activities, it would be advisable to consult with the Standards Committee before accepting the position. For example, a conflict of interest may arise when the prospective outside employer is an entity with interests before Congress. In no event may a Member, officer, or employee participate in lobbying or advising on lobbying of either Congress or the Executive Branch on behalf of any private organization or individual, even on an uncompensated basis, as that would conflict with a Member’s general obligation to the public.5 Other circumstances that implicate these rules and standards of conduct are discussed below, regarding receipt of excessive compensation, Member official activities on matters affecting their personal interests, outside employment of one’s spouse, conflict-of-interest concerns for staff members, and seeking future employment.

With regard to the outside employment of a staff person, it may be possible for conflict-of-interest concerns to be alleviated through a requirement that the staff person have no involvement in any matter coming before the congressional office that would be of interest to his or her outside employer. However, in some circumstances, such a requirement either is not feasible or would not be sufficient to satisfy the applicable rules and standards. In those circumstances, there may be no alternative to the staff person declining or terminating the outside employment.

Example 1. A newly-hired legislative assistant in a Member’s office who had worked for a consulting and lobbying firm in Washington wishes to continue to work for that firm on a part-time basis. His congressional pay is below the senior staff rate. The federal issues on which he would work for the firm are different from those for which he has responsibility in the congressional office, and he would not engage in any lobbying for the firm. Notwithstanding the proposed limitations on his work for the firm, he may not accept any part-time employment with that firm, as it would violate the general principle that Members and staff are not permitted to lobby Congress.

Example 2. A Member is considering hiring an individual who is a professional grant writer to research and handle constituent grant requests in his district office. The individual would like to continue to operate her grant-writing business on a part-time basis. Because there would likely be, at a minimum, an appearance of use of her official position for personal gain in such circumstances, she must discontinue her outside business upon accepting employment in the congressional office.

Example 3. An outside organization that operates a congressional internship program offers a congressional staff member part-time employment as director of that program. Because such a position would likely require use of contacts and information gained through the individual’s employment with the House, the offer must be declined.

At times a Member or staff person wishes to engage in outside employment that involves the selling of goods or services. On the basis of the rules and standards of conduct set out above, a Member should not undertake any outside employment that would involve the Member personally in the selling or endorsement of any goods or services. On the same basis, at a minimum, any staff person who engages in sales may not solicit purchases from either (1) any non-congressional person with whom the employee came into contact through the congressional office or who has interests before the congressional office, or (2) any subordinate staff in his or her congressional office. In addition, in soliciting sales, House employees may not, directly or indirectly, identify themselves as congressional staff, refer to their congressional duties, or otherwise make use of their status as a congressional employee.

The Standards Committee is available to advise Members, officers, and employees on the applicability of the rules and standards of conduct in other specific circumstances.

Source:click here

I knew this was conflict of interest on Congressman Rogers' part. This is big.

FBI interviews attempted assissin

From Public Advocate:

I have breaking news.

I'm sure you remember the shooter that burst into the headquarters of a fellow pro-Family organization back in August and shot one of their security guards.

What you may not know is this shooter targeted Public Advocate that same day.

A few hours ago, this shocking video was released with the shooter's stunning confession.

The shooter admits "after a little bit of research" he found the location of anti-gay groups from the Southern Poverty Law Center's website where they list and name organization's they believe should be punished.

Watch the video and read about my ongoing battle with the SPLC.

Worse yet, after the attack, the SPLC attempted to update their list of targets by publishing my home address.

More info on Public Advocate: click here

This is proof the Southern Poverty Law Center encourages violence.