Categories

Dec 27

Net Neutrality Legislation Could Conjure Up New “Civil Rights” Claims By the Left

We briefly covered the FCC’s “Net Neutrality” legislation, an unwarranted and ill advised and probably illegal maneuver that won’t stand up to Congressional scrutiny (or legal challenges).
Michelle Malkin, in her editorial below, discusses what would be a predictable and anticipated sequela if this legislation is allowed to remain in force.

A claim by the Left that internet access is an entitlement; that it is another civil right.

Wrong!

Internet Access Is Not a 'Civil Right'
Michelle Malkin  12/22/2010

When bureaucrats talk about increasing our "access" to x, y or z, what they're really talking about is increasing exponentially their control over our lives. As it is with the government health care takeover, so it is with the newly approved government plan to "increase" Internet "access." Call it Webcare.

By a vote of 3-2, the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday adopted a controversial scheme to ensure "net neutrality" by turning unaccountable Democratic appointees into meddling online traffic cops. The panel will devise convoluted rules governing Internet service providers, bandwidth use, content, prices and even disclosure details on Internet speeds. The "neutrality" is brazenly undermined by preferential treatment toward wireless broadband networks. Moreover, the FCC's scheme is widely opposed by Congress -- and has already been rejected once in the courts. Demonized industry critics have warned that the regulations will stifle innovation and result in less access, not more.

Sound familiar? The parallels with health care are striking. The architects of Obamacare promised to provide Americans more access to health insurance -- and cast their agenda as a fundamental universal entitlement.

In fact, it was a pretext for creating a gargantuan federal bureaucracy with the power to tax, redistribute and regulate the private health insurance market to death -- and replace it with a centrally planned government system overseen by politically driven code enforcers dictating everything from annual coverage limits to administrative expenditures to the makeup of the medical workforce. The costly, onerous and selectively applied law has resulted in less access, not more.

Undaunted promoters of Obama FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's "open Internet" plan to expand regulatory authority over the Internet have couched their online power grab in the rhetoric of civil rights. On Monday, FCC Commissioner Michael Copps proclaimed: "Universal access to broadband needs to be seen as a civil right ... (though) not many people have talked about it that way." Opposing the government Internet takeover blueprint, in other words, is tantamount to supporting segregation. Cunning propaganda, that.

"Broadband is becoming a basic necessity," civil rights activist Benjamin Hooks added. And earlier this month, fellow FCC panelist Mignon Clyburn, daughter of Congressional Black Caucus leader and Number Three House Democrat James Clyburn of South Carolina, declared that free (read: taxpayer-subsidized) access to the Internet is not only a civil right for every "nappy-headed child" in America, but is essential to their self-esteem. Every minority child, she said, "deserves to be not only connected, but to be proud of who he or she is."

Calling them "nappy-headed" is a rather questionable way of boosting their pride, but never mind that.

Face it: A high-speed connection is no more an essential civil right than 3G cell phone service or a Netflix account. Increasing competition and restoring academic excellence in abysmal public schools is far more of an imperative to minority children than handing them iPads. Once again, Democrats are using children as human shields to provide useful cover for not so noble political goals.

The "net neutrality" mob -- funded by billionaire George Soros and other left-wing think tanks and nonprofits -- has openly advertised its radical, speech-squelching agenda in its crusade for "media justice." Social justice is the redistribution of wealth and economic "rights." Media justice is the redistribution of free speech and other First Amendment rights.

The meetings of the universal broadband set are littered with Marxist-tinged rants about "disenfranchisement" and "empowerment."

They've targeted conservative opponents on talk radio, cable TV and the Internet as purveyors of "hate" who need to be managed or censored. Democratic FCC panelists have dutifully echoed their concerns about concentration of corporate media power.

As the Ford Foundation-funded Media Justice Fund, which lobbied for universal broadband, put it: This is a movement "grounded in the belief that social and economic justice will not be realized without the equitable redistribution and control of media and communication technologies."

For progressives who cloak their ambitions in the mantle of "fairness," it's all about control. It's always about control.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2010/12/22/internet_access_is_not_a_civil_right/page/full/

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
May 3

Arizona’s New Immigration Law Can’t Hold a Candle to the Brutal and Restrictive Way That Mexico Treats Illegals

Mexico has been a very outspoken critic on Arizona’s new legislation dealing with illegal aliens. In the following editorial, Michelle Malkin notes ironically that when it comes to harsh treatment of non-citizens, restriction of their rights and legal oppression, Mexico has written the definitive book on the subject.

How Mexico Treats Illegal Aliens
Michelle Malkin        April 28, 2010

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door "to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement." But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in "Nazi-zona" last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south.

The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?

-- The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset "the equilibrium of the national demographics." How's that for racial and ethnic profiling?

-- If outsiders do not enhance the country's "economic or national interests" or are "not found to be physically or mentally healthy," they are not welcome. Neither are those who show "contempt against national sovereignty or security."
They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.

-- Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years' imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years' imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example,
President Obama's illegal alien aunt -- a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).

-- Law enforcement officials at all levels -- by national mandate -- must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens' arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.

-- Ready to show your papers? Mexico's National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals.
A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens' identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico's Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. There's been no public clamor for "comprehensive immigration reform" in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.

Consider: Open-borders protesters marched freely at the Capitol building in Arizona, comparing GOP Gov. Jan Brewer to Hitler, waving Mexican flags, advocating that demonstrators "Smash the State," and holding signs that proclaimed "No human is illegal" and "We have rights."

But under the Mexican constitution, such political speech by foreigners is banned. Noncitizens cannot "in any way participate in the political affairs of the country." In fact, a plethora of Mexican statutes enacted by its congress limit the participation of foreign nationals and companies in everything from investment, education, mining and civil aviation to electric energy and firearms. Foreigners have severely limited private property and employment rights (if any).

As for abuse, the Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of Central American illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico's southern border. The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn't respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtain illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun.

Meanwhile, Mexican consular offices in the United States have coordinated with left-wing social justice groups and the Catholic Church leadership to demand a moratorium on all deportations and a freeze on all employment raids across America.

Mexico is doing the job Arizona is now doing -- a job the U.S. government has failed miserably to do: putting its people first. Here's the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands:

Hipócritas.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2010/04/28/how_mexico_treats_illegal_aliens?page=full&comments=true

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Dec 30

Michelle Malkin on Democrats’ Falling To A New Low in Their Culture Of Corruption In Trying To Pass Healthcare Reform Legislation

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Nov 10

A Terrorist Act Was Perpetrated By A Devout Muslim at Fort Hood Despite Obama and The News Media Avoiding the Term

According to most of the liberal news media, it was a “gunman” who shot and killed 13 people and injured 31 at Fort Hood last week. Not a terrorist. He was also reported to have yelled out “Allah Akbar” prior to the attack. Must have been stressed out about his soon being deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. Or was it post traumatic stress disorder?

Yeah. Nidal Malik Hasan. Couldn’t be any association with Islam or terrorism. Impossible!

In a posting on www.michellemalkin.com, the following was written about Nidal Hasan:

According to Terry Lee, a retired Army colonel who knew Hasan, told Fox News about a story he heard secondhand. He said a fellow colleague had told him that Hasan had made “outlandish comments” about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and US involvement in them and that “Muslims had a right to rise up and attack Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

“[He] made comments about how we shouldn’t be over there – you need to lock it up, Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor,” Lee added.

Still there was not enough evidence to convince the media or Obama that Nidal Malik Hasan was a terrorist and committed an act of terrorism. Look at the newspaper headlines. Hear the newscasts. They all called him a gunman, not a terrorist.

Maybe if his name were John C. Smith III and he was a devout Christian – then they would all be calling him a terrorist – of course without any substantiating evidence.

According to ABC News, U.S. intelligence agencies knew months ago that Nidal Hasan had been attempting to contact people associated with al Qaeda. Maybe he was just trying to find a great recipe for making kick ass hummus.

Obama’s response was so despicable and pathetic … you would think that he was sympathizing with the terrorist. Yet, when it came to his buddy Henry Louis Gates Jr., Harvard Professor of African-American Studies, who was arrested by a white police officer in Cambridge, Massachusetts, he immediately spewed out racially divisive comments and allegations.

There is no doubt in the vast majority of American’s minds:

This was a terrorist attack committed by a homegrown Muslim.
Period.

Read and see contained videos: The massacre at Fort Hood and Muslim soldiers with attitude

Video: US Officials Knew Fort Hood Shooter Tried to Contact al Qaeda Terrorists

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 22

Delineating the Mutually Beneficial Relationship of ACORN and Obama Before the Presidential Election

There has been a tremendous amount of information revealed recently by a few enterprising and brave private citizens conducting undercover sting operations that detailed the pervasive and extreme culture of corruption within ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). It was no secret that corrupt and illegal activities were being conducted by this large organization. However, because of their radical and left wing ideology, Congress and most of the media actively chose to ignore the group and even suppressed information especially as related to Obama’s association with them. Aside from Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and a few others at Fox News, their illicit activities have remained egregiously uninvestigated.

In her June 25th, 2008 Blog, Michelle Malkin presaged the publicity and notoriety that ACORN would be associated with particularly with regard to Barack Obama and his ascendancy on the national political scene. She wrote that: “This left-wing group takes in 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers — you and me — and has leveraged nearly four decades of government subsidies to fund affiliates that promote the welfare state and undermine capitalism and self-reliance, some of which have been implicated in perpetuating illegal immigration and encouraging voter fraud.”

With regard to the relationship with Obama, she noted that: “He cut his ideological teeth working with ACORN as a “community organizer” and legal representative. Naturally, ACORN’s political action committee has warmly endorsed his presidential candidacy. According to ACORN, Obama trained its Chicago members in leadership seminars; in turn, ACORN volunteers worked on his campaigns. Obama also sat on the boards of the Woods Fund and Joyce Foundation, both of which poured money into ACORN’s coffers. ACORN head Maude Hurd gushes that Obama is the candidate who “best understands and can affect change on the issues ACORN cares about” — like ensuring their massive pipeline to your hard-earned money.”

Read: The ACORN Obama knows

More:

Print This Post Print This Post