Saturday, April 18, 2009

Vets As Nutjobs

(Lisa Benson, via

Heh. No one has been in touch with ME... yet. But ya never know, do ya? Them there former military right-wing nutjobs are a BIG problem...

Much has been written over the course of this last week about the language used in the Department of Homeland Security's report titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence and Recruitment." And here it is:

DHS Report on Right Wing Extremism - Free Legal Forms

The American Legion, among others, were upset about the language contained in the report, and Legion president David K. Rehbein sent a rather strongly-worded letter to Janet Napolitano which said, in part:

The best that I can say about your recent report is that it is incomplete. The report states, without any statistical evidence, "The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."
The American Legion is well aware and horrified at the pain inflicted during the Oklahoma City bombing, but Timothy McVeigh was only one of more than 42 million veterans who have worn this nation's uniform during wartime. To continue to use McVeigh as an example of the stereotypical "disgruntled military veteran" is as unfair as using Osama bin Laden as the sole example of Islam.

Your report states that "Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages." Secretary Napolitano, this is more than a perception to those who have lost their job. Would you categorize union members as "Right Wing extremists"?
In spite of this incomplete, and, I fear, politically-biased report, The American Legion and the Department of Homeland Security share many common and crucial interests, such as the Citizen Corps and disaster preparedness. Since you are a graduate of New Mexico Girls State, I trust that you are very familiar with The American Legion. I would be happy to meet with you at a time of mutual convenience to discuss issues such as border security and the war on terrorism. I think it is important for all of us to remember that Americans are not the enemy. The terrorists are.
Napolitano later delivered an apology, of sorts. All this being, of course, old news. But... I figured if I was gonna post the cartoon... I may as well provide the requisite background information.


  1. This is simply a move by this Administration (and a vast majority of the Democratic Party apparatus) to criminalize being a Conservative or a Republican (at the very least it puts anyone with a dissenting voice on their radar for Who Knows what they have planned - some kind of Donkey Party Gitmo?).

    On top of the obvious issues that the American Legion letter points out here are some of my thoughts:

    The footnote at the bottom of Page 2 claims that hate groups with a single issue are a threat and they give examples such as the "Abortion" issue. This makes members of the Catholic Church all Right Wing Radicals? And the status of the Pope? I wonder if the actual study group that came up with this did any "sanity test" as the two most Catholic states (the ones with the most Catholics per-capitia those being Mass and RI) are rich in Liberal association both elected and otherwise. Simple logic dispels this asertion.

    The box on page 4 that justifies "Perceptions on Power and Radicalization" which cites xenophobia and anti-democratic ideals as being triggered on the poor economy. This whole section is based on a German study where xenophobia is a whole different flavor as opposed to what we have here and the whole anti-democratic side of that is all the lingering sentiment from the merger of the two independent Germany's which Oh-By-the-Way, one of them two was a Communist country (which failed). You don't suppose there would be a few folks with anti-democratic feeling still over there?

    They cite the issue of Illegal Immigration as fueling militia recruitment. Which may be true however, if DHS (the very organization that wrote this document) would simply do its job and seal the Borders then this issue would go completely away!!

    They throw in the Gun Control issue and use the Pittsburgh shooting of three Cops as an example of what could happen. Ignoring that the guy that did the shooting did not belong to any militia or right wing group, radical or otherwise. AND even more importantly, with all the asinine regulations in place here in PA for gun ownership, this guy legally owned all the guns and ammo in his possession. The problem with Gun Control is not with people committed to legal ownership, its with people that don't care anyway.

    And finally, they spend several paragraphs (starting on page 6) on the Perceived Threat of globalization and the so called "New World Order". Now, I don't know where they did their research on this subject, but every protest against Globalization that I ever saw, was filled with waked out Lefties. Now how do they equate them to Right-Wing Radicalization? You got me on that one.

    The sad thing is that this was published and made public. It shows just how smug the Left feels about controlling opinion and the voice of the Right. Unless quite a few people get fired over this report (including at the very least Janet herself) then the Notice will be out there for all the political right.

    Just don't go getting on their Radar - don't go joining one of those Tea Party or 9/12 Groups that are popping up (like the SE PA 912ers that I joined) or buying a gun (that Ruger KP-345 I bought is most likely exempt, yeah) or getting a Concealed Carry Permit (which is surprisingly easy and looks good in my wallet) or buying large volumes of ammo (not that I wiped out the local Walmart of their .45ACP ammo, they really didn't get a lot of it anyway) or getting yourself Laid-off from work. Any one of these activities could find you on an Enemies list of some kind. But, I thought only Republican presidents kept those!!!

    BT: Jimmy T sends.

  2. It is despicable for this report to single out our warriors for special recognition of this kind.

    Just despicable.

    Which speaks to this administration.

  3. Jimmy T said it well, leaving me nothing to add.

    Even I'm surprised that this administration would sink so low, so soon.

  4. The Obama Administration has to learn this fact:

    It is not a good idea to piss off veterans. HUGE voting bloc.

    Plus the millions of people in this country who will turn against an administration which disrespects our veterans.

    Bad move on Napolitano's part and for The Big O for being so stupid as to let her release a report like that.

    These people are all anti-American unpatriotic unconstitutional amateurs who really have NO IDEA how to run this country and how to treat American citizens.

    Gee. Maybe we can turn them out of ofice after four years?

  5. Jimmy: Excellent. The thing I find funny was all the talk about Dubya creating a gulag, shredding the constitution, declaring martial law, suspending elections, yadda, yadda... but there was never any document released by HIS administration that corresponds to this one. Yes, there was an analysis of left-wing threats in the past, but THAT document had references and was backed up with facts. Napolitano's bird cage liner had only supposition and innuendo.

    Kris: Agreed. On all counts.

    Buckskins: Jimmy WAS on a roll, wasn't he? Good stuff.

    Sharon: I find the release of this document an interesting contrast to The One's stated aims of "courting the military" not two weeks ago. Which goes to show the problems the Democrats have in actually governing. They're just so damned INEPT.

  6. Seems to me, this is aimed directly at gun control. Tracking people who have concealed carry permits, tracking those who spend lots of money for ammo used at target ranges, waving the American flag (you remember, the one we swore to protect?), those who chose to join a group active in the caring for and aid giving to returning vets.
    We're on the block. A friend has a car she dedicated to vets (Mustang, all decked out, she wins prizes and awards with it) and she hasmade the list. Oh, yeah, she's former military and has carry permit, too. The One is going too far with this. He will create a homeland problem he will not be able to handle. I do not understand the lack of ability of politicians to fail to grasp the extensions of the actions they might wish to enact. It is a sad commentary on the state of our government and leaders.

  7. One other thing: a friend has written to me pointing out what he claims to be am odd fact: There are more civilian shootings going on in the month of April than at any other time of year. Any response to this?

  8. Can't add much to the above, other than my two cents: the whole thing is nothing more than reprehensible.

  9. If memory serves, I believe the Supreme Court of New Jersey placed Frank Lautenberg on the ballot in 2002, in defiance of state law, based on a fundamental right the citizens had to vote on a democrat and on a Republican. What that has in common with this report is an egregious violation of power-sharing between our representative government and The People who own it:

    The voter gets to decide what is "left wing," "right wing" and "centrist." Not the DHS and not a state supreme court. Not Charlie Gibson or Katie Couric. The People.

    This is the Frankenstein Monster grabbing his own remote-control out of the Doctor's hands, and history indicates it is exactly how democracies become tyrannical. Consider what happens if our veering-off-course is hard-right, or hard-left. Suppose we wake up one morning and..."left wing" means capital punishment is available in all fifty states. "Right wing," on the other hand, says it is not only available but regularly handed down as punishment for stupid stuff like jaywalking. The debates that take place are not about whether it's a legit form of punishment, but how much discretion should the judges have in handing down something else.

    Or we go off in the other direction: "Right wing" means you can smoke marijuana anywhere you want, day or night. "Left wing" says not only that, but we should have vending machines in the schools dispensing crystal meth. The debates are about which drugs to put in the vending machines next.

    Now if The People vote on that...I say, all fine & good. Some of it is stupid...but it's only as stupid as the people. No despotic form of government here.

    But if government grabs the controls and starts steering itself...bad, bad news. With The People doing it, these hard left-and-right turns become highly unlikely; comical, even. With the government deciding what's centrist and what isn't, the "center," in fact, actually disappears...the necessity of compromising with others has been obliterated.

    I see Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has opined on this, and it seems he thinks the people making "a big deal" about this are just whacked out in the head. It seems, furthermore, that he's in the minority on this particular point. And for that, I am very glad.


Just be polite... that's all I ask.