Friday, March 27, 2009

H.R. 1444 - They're not even trying now...

(H/T - Michelle Malkin)

Some of you may remember my post on H.R. 1388 a few days ago.

Well, it turns out that it has not only
passed both House and Senate, but has even been re-named to honor Ted "swimmer" Kennedy.
(apparently, Orrin Hatch thought it would make a nice present)


Now, while all of the parts that tie "Volunteer Requirements" to "grants" remained in 1388 -
they did remove something before getting the abomination passed.


Between being first officially "reported" to the House and being voted on by the full House, bill managers stripped one whole section of the measure that created a Congressional Commission on Civil Service, thus removing the section that contained the language cited above concerning "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" and a possible requirement for "all individuals in the United States" to perform such service. The section could be restored during the Senate-House conference committee meeting.

A new, separate bill containing that language has since been introduced in the House.

Did you hear your internal reading-voice deepen on that last sentence?


"A new, separate bill containing that language..."

That's a polite way to put it - but how about this instead:

The whole section was lifted - in its word-for-word entirety - and reintroduced as if it were a brand-spanking-new piece of legislation, rather than the unendurable, cast-off by-blow that it really is.

Behold!

H.R. 1444: Congressional Commission on Civic Service Act

Identical in every single way to the 1388 text - they didn't even rearrange the section numbers:

(5) The effect on the Nation, on those who serve, and on the families of those who serve, if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service.

(6) Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.

And make no mistake - both laws being passed will have exactly the same effect as if it had remained one law, their details, intent and design so neatly dovetailling the way they do.
(what a coincidence!)


There is one significant difference, though.

Apparently out of gratitude for having 1388 named after him,
Ted Kennedy actually put his name on 1444.


1388 is enough to light-torches-and-raise-pitchforks over, but at least it still uses the grant-money-carrot to lure you in.

1444 sets up "Mandatory" for everyone.



H.R. 1444 - Because Freedoms lost to the Collective come more easily in smaller bites.


- MuscleDaddy

26 comments:

  1. Nope, I refuse the mandatory service. And my son refuses. And anyone I have any influence over refuses. Try to arrest and jail us all for refusing mandatory "national service." It's involuntary servitude, which is unconstitutional. Try to enforce this and watch the civil war begin.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kinda neat how these things so often show up just before the weekend, when folks are likely to pay little attention, forget about everything before hittin it again Monday - and they've got a fresh one on the plate so's ya don't notice the steamer from last Friday...

    ReplyDelete
  3. ohio right wing nutMarch 27, 2009 at 11:11 PM

    bring on 1776 2.0 bitches,
    we are ready.

    Is it time to fire bomb D.C. yet?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I refuse to do anything at all that is "required" or "mandatory". What are they going to do? Jail us? Their fucking jails are so over crowded as it is. Are they going to release murderers and rapists so they can jail people for not being willing slaves? Because that is exactly what this is. You know, I've given time and money for years helping out the disadvantaged and I hate that phrase "give back to the community". The community that I've been helping out has always taken and never given, but I did what I thought was best. I'm not giving to anybody anymore because these are the same people who voted for the hope and change bullshit so now they can have it. Bring. It. On. I'm not doing anything I don't want to do and just try to make me. My husband works too much to waste time working for nothing. This asshole leader is living in some kind of fantasy land.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "ohio right wing nut said...
    bring on 1776 2.0 bitches,
    we are ready.

    Is it time to fire bomb D.C. yet?"
    Yes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Congress can pass all the bills it likes; doesn't mean anything meaningful will come of it. Americans will shrug it off for the idiocy that it is. And I can tell you as a high school teacher that our youth won't take to it either. Today's kids can't hold down a paying job for a month; how long do you think they'll last in unpaid service? I can see the Obama Brigades dropped off in neighborhoods for a day of canvassing . . . that turns quickly into a day in the park under the influence of some weed. Community organizer, eh? Bwahahahah! Get off my lawn kid before I sick the dogs on you.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AMENDMENT XIII Section 1.
    Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
    Section 2.
    Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
    Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
    Sorry, Comrade Kennedy and Comrade Jugears, but these two bills are unconstitutional.
    Nuking D.C. and NYC would rid us of our Politburo and the Uselss Nitwits... a twofer in my books, with very little downside.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "ohio right wing nut said...
    bring on 1776 2.0 bitches,
    we are ready.

    Is it time to fire bomb D.C. yet?"

    Fkn a skippy...

    I think we need to add a few more places - lets see, while I am not party specific - its safe to say the blue areas are all fair game too - and we lest not forget NY

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have no intention of participating in any form of forced servitude under any circumstance. They can drag me away and throw me in a camp for re-education, but they can't make me serve. My concern is they'll make it a much more subtle form of coersion, like withholding driver's or professional license or registration renewals for those who don't "volunteer". That way they can still claim that it was your decision to participate.

    ReplyDelete
  10. My concern is they'll make it a much more subtle form of coersion [sic], like withholding driver's or professional license or registration renewals for those who don't "volunteer".

    We have a winner! We have precedent for this in the "deadbeat dad" arena. There will not be anyone sent to jail for refusing to do "mandatory volunteer" work. Instead, they'll be punished civilly. Fines, suspension of licenses, etc. are far more effective.

    This is one of the reasons I oppose government licensure of various occupations. A license is permission from authority, which is the antithesis of a right, which needs no approval from others.

    As to the "firebombing" comments... Chill out, folks. That's the sort of talk that can get you locked up.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Your kids first assignment will be construction of Obamas pyramid. Arbeit macht frei.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I want to know where in the constitution it gives the politicians the right to this? They were elected and they work for us. What we need is to send a clear message that we're mad as hell and we're not taking this anymore. The politicians have lost their minds. The last time I checked, the constitution started with "We the People".

    ReplyDelete
  13. www.infowars.com

    ReplyDelete
  14. The antiwar, flower, power left wingers are the ones who removed National Service from our lives because they did not want to go to Vietnam. We truly have a precedent for every young male participating in such a thing. I find it ironic that the same people would now want to bring it back and make it more universal - all women should be very grateful to Women's Lib and the Equal Rights Amendment which will allow them to participate!
    However I predict failure. Years back Massachusetts tried to institute such a requirement for all able-bodied people receiving welware. The screams of 'This amounts to slavery!!!!' caused them to abandon it. Though how getting paid 'welfare' in return for your service is slavery is beyond my comprehension. Do we think these same people would suddenly be willing work in such a mandatory program?
    Of course the 'Government' really could behave like fascist/communist states, like Hitler/Stalin and put every protester in jail, having packed the Supreme Court to enable this to happen. After all Hitler and his programs were legally voted in all the way. The people didn't know what they had enabled until it was too late. Sorry, I digress.
    It does seem to me that if homeless people aren't (or can't be) made to clean out the shelters and the hungry people who go to soup kitchens aren't (or can't be) made to prepare, serve, and clean up after their free meals then nobody else should be forced to do it for them.
    Though we might all consider this - Mandatory National Service - the draft -was one of the things that made everyone aware of the fact that they owed something to their country and made most people more patriotic, not less and was a uniting and conservative thing.

    ReplyDelete
  15. THIS BILL DOES NOT COMPEL ANY SERVICE AT ALL!
    HR 1444 creates a bi-partisan commission to study and report on volunteerism - including the ideas of mandatory service. The commission has NO power in the bill as written to compel service of any kind. It also has a clear reporting mandate and an END DATE.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Please don't be ruled by anger. Temper sentiments with solid, logical argument that even the simple will understand...volunteerism that is mandatory is not volunteerism or freedom. Yes, we must stand up for our rights. The states are sovereign and the federal government only exists to serve the states. Let's enforce this idea broadly, without anger or sedition but Truth! And let's learn the truth about our american heritage...our forefather sacrificed EVERYTHING for our freedom that we have been willing to give away. Oh, and it would not hurt to pray! Love you all

    ReplyDelete
  17. So much for freedom. I never thought we would end up coming full circle. Slavery, what are they thinking?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I was talking to a friend that made a comment that the jails are overcrowed. Maybe by the standards now. Remember that jails/prisions are run by the government. It dosn't take much to get a "temporary" liscense to take in more people and give them less space. This would not be a problem for a government that is taking away rights faster than they can print them.
    These camps also look like a way to weed out the troublemakers. I believe that they already have a good idea of the worst of the worst, this may just find the quiet ones. And to get to the children before the parents have time to teach them much about the constitution and the framers intentions.

    ReplyDelete
  19. How does a person organize to get rid of the democratic party? They are so few in office and are so evil to the people that pay them. How did they ever get into office. As evil as they are it had to be crooked. There cannot be that many idiots in this country.They had to know way ahead that they were going to win to get all these bills ready to throw at the people to devery there atentiopn, so we will not know what there real big plan is for us. Remember God will not be mocked

    ReplyDelete
  20. Sure this is a "study" being discussed here, but c'mon, you think they are doing this "study" with no intent to use the data and start a program. But, how do we speak out? This study does not challenge the constitution, but the substance of what it is studying does.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Anonymous said...

    AMENDMENT XIII Section 1.
    Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
    Section 2.
    Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
    Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
    Sorry, Comrade Kennedy and Comrade Jugears, but these two bills are unconstitutional."

    I believe the committee that this bill creates to "study the effects of involuntary service" will also be working on an amendment that will repeal and replace the 13th.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I hope you all realize that the attempts to take away our liberty and freedom are not party specific. There are just as many Republicans as Democrats involved. It just so happens that there is now a Democratic majority in congress and they're trying to please their Fuhrer.
    Also, there are approximately 600 camps (concentration) that were built in the US during the 1980s and are supposed fully staffed waiting for those who resist what is happening. Google this stuff. Look for "The Obama Deception" vid.

    ReplyDelete
  23. No one is going to accept this. We all know it. Working for free? HA! what a laugh.

    ReplyDelete

We reserve the right to delete comments, but the failure to delete any particular comment should not be interpreted as an endorsement thereof.

In general, we expect comments to be relevant to the story, or to a prior comment that is relevant; and we expect some minimal level of civility. Defining that line is inherently subjective, so try to stay clear of insulting remarks. If you respond to a comment that is later deleted, we may take your response with it. Deleting your comment isn't a personal knock on you, so don't take it as such.

We allow a variety of ways for commenters to identify themselves; those who choose not to do so should take extra care. Absent any prior context in which they may be understood, ironic comments may be misinterpreted. Once you've earned a reputation for contributing to a conversation, we are likely to be more tolerant in those gray areas, as we'll understand where you're coming from.