Ms. Garofalo’s inconsistencies go further than dissent, as you’ll see below:

She was one of the loudest, most vociferous opponents to the Iraq War and to the torture at Abu Ghraib, Bagram and other U.S. bases. In 2003, on her Air America radio show, she called Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales the “torture czar.”

Yet, she works for “24,” a series that glamorizes the most degrading and excruciating forms of torture shown graphically in nearly every episode.

Last year, I wrote an article about “24,” based on the extraordinary dissection of the series’ ethical problems by New Yorker writer Jane Mayer, who will be Larry Johnson’s guest on No Quarter Radio soon.

… Jane Mayer wrote a critical article about 24’s misuse of torture, wrongly portrayed as a reliable method for extracting information and confessions.

So why does Garofalo, such a vocal opponent of torture and “rednecks” like Rush Limbaugh, work for a show that glorifies torture and whose creator and executive producer is VBFs with Rush Limbaugh?

The money. The job! It’s amazing how plenty of moolah and a steady acting gig can affect one’s moral values, especially Janeane Garofalo’s:

From Mayer’s thorough examination of “24″:

Each season of “24,” which has been airing on Fox since 2001, depicts a single, panic-laced day in which Jack Bauer—a heroic C.T.U. agent, played by Kiefer Sutherland—must unravel and undermine a conspiracy that imperils the nation. Terrorists are poised to set off nuclear bombs or bioweapons, or in some other way annihilate entire cities. The twisting story line forces Bauer and his colleagues to make a series of grim choices that pit liberty against security. Frequently, the dilemma is stark: a resistant suspect can either be accorded due process—allowing a terrorist plot to proceed—or be tortured in pursuit of a lead. Bauer invariably chooses coercion. With unnerving efficiency, suspects are beaten, suffocated, electrocuted, drugged, assaulted with knives, or more exotically abused; almost without fail, these suspects divulge critical secrets.

It makes sense that the conservative Jon Voight, who campaigned for Rudy Giuliani, is guest-starring on this series. But Garofalo, who has NO tolerance for the right?

In fact, here’s Garofalo in 2003 on how to treat ANYONE to her right:

Reaching out to find common ground with political opponents? Building bridges? “That’s over,” she declared. “I don’t have any desire to build a bridge with an antigay evangelist who supports war and the death penalty and actually believes the tsunami was God’s retribution. … The bridge has been blown up.”

“That’s OVER,” she says! Well, alrighty then.

Except that Joel Surnow, the guy who personally hired Garofalo and writes her sizeable pay checks, is a dyed-in-the-wool redneck-lovin’ ‘winger. Hell, he’s a a typical “teabaggin’ redneck” who LOVES Rush Limbaugh (!). But, despite her protestations to “building bridges” with such people, Janeane has NO problem consorting with Surnow or taking his money. To see how incongruous this is, check out Jane Mayer’s description of Surnow:

The office desk of Joel Surnow—the co-creator and executive producer of “24,” the popular counterterrorism drama on Fox—faces a wall dominated by an American flag in a glass case. A small label reveals that the flag once flew over Baghdad, after the American invasion of Iraq, in 2003. A few years ago, Surnow received it as a gift from an Army regiment stationed in Iraq; the soldiers had shared a collection of “24” DVDs, he told me, until it was destroyed by an enemy bomb. “The military loves our show,” he said recently. Surnow is fifty-two, and has the gangly, coiled energy of an athlete; his hair is close-cropped, and he has a “soul patch”—a smidgen of beard beneath his lower lip. When he was young, he worked as a carpet salesman with his father. The trick to selling anything, he learned, is to carry yourself with confidence and get the customer to like you within the first five minutes. He’s got it down. “People in the Administration love the series, too,” he said. “It’s a patriotic show. They should love it.”

Surnow’s production company, Real Time Entertainment, is in the San Fernando Valley, and occupies a former pencil factory: a bland, two-story industrial building on an abject strip of parking lots and fast-food restaurants. Surnow, a cigar enthusiast, has converted a room down the hall from his office into a salon with burled-wood humidors and a full bar; his friend Rush Limbaugh, the conservative talk-radio host, sometimes joins him there for a smoke. (Not long ago, Surnow threw Limbaugh a party and presented him with a custom-made “24” smoking jacket.) The ground floor of the factory has a large soundstage on which many of “24” ’s interior scenes are shot, including those set at the perpetually tense Los Angeles bureau of the Counter Terrorist Unit, or C.T.U.—a fictional federal agency that pursues America’s enemies with steely resourcefulness. …

You’d think that Garofalo, who regularly railed against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, et al. for promoting torture and extraordinary rendition — as do we here at this blog — would be repelled by such a man who adores pro-torture advocates like Limbaugh. But no.

It must be morally confusing to Garofalo’s fans who, for years, have heard her condemnations of the Bush Administration’s torture practices and treatment of detainees.

Here’s more from Jane Mayer’s article in the New Yorker that wrongly leads TV viewers to buy into the “ticking time bomb” theory that surely Janeane Garofalo knows is a bunch of tripe. The “ticking time tomb” scenario the kind of c-r-a-p on “24″ that infuriates real-life counterterrorism experts like Larry Johnson. “24″ is replete with hyped, false portrayals of the Hollywood-created dramatic device:

["24"'s main premise is] its giddily literal rendering of a classic thriller trope: the “ticking time bomb” plot. Each hour-long episode represents an hour in the life of the characters, and every minute that passes onscreen brings the United States a minute closer to doomsday. (Surnow came up with this concept, which he calls the show’s “trick.”) As many as half a dozen interlocking stories unfold simultaneously—frequently on a split screen—and a digital clock appears before and after every commercial break, marking each second with an ominous clang. The result is a riveting sensation of narrative velocity.

Bob Cochran, who created the show with Surnow, admitted, “Most terrorism experts will tell you that the ‘ticking time bomb’ situation never occurs in real life, or very rarely. But on our show it happens every week.” … Read all.

But the dangerous premise of the “ticking time bomb” — which wrongly influences millions of Americans to believe it’s true and that torture is the only reliable tool in counterterrorists’ arsenal — is not an issue for Ms. Garofalo. Because there’s a paycheck involved.

If you’ve got a yen for more Garofalo mockery, check out Hot Air’s “Video: Red Eye, Mark Levin, Fox & Friends dump all over Olby and Garofalo.”

And don’t miss this report, sent to me by American Girl:

Ha! That CNN reporter nut is taking a break! ’bout time, CNN!

Though critics will probably try to write the tea parties off as partisan publicity stunts, they’re really a post-partisan expression of outrage.

In this video, Instapundit’s Glenn Reynolds, a professor and cogent blogger, gives the real history of Wednesday’s tea parties on C-Span. Of Note: Reynold’s op-ed, “Tax Day Becomes Protest Day: How the tea parties could change American politics,” quoted above, was the Wall Street Journal’s most-read story Wednesday. But, beyond rare outlets like the Journal and Fox News, the tea parties weren’t given much regard by the media.

Another thing: My oh my, what a difference a day makes. Wednesday night’s Anderson Cooper 360 was far more muted, and Christiane Amanpour hosted in Mr. Cooper’s stead. If I were a higher-up at CNN, I would have had some words with Mr. Cooper following his sexually graphic language and inappropriate laughter on Tuesday night’s show.

Wednesday’s discussion led by Ms. Amanpour was much more sober, with the tea parties and attendees treated respectfully. I inferred that a MESSAGE had been delivered to the CNN host and panel to dial it down.

I haven’t checked MSNBC’s programming today and doubt that NBC’s morally and ethically rudderless leadership would care what its hosts did. But it’s good to see that CNN cleaned up its act somewhat.

::::::::::::::::::

Here are some snippets from Dr. Reynolds’ wildly popular WSJ op-ed, “Tax Day Becomes Protest Day: How the tea parties could change American politics“:

Today American taxpayers in more than 300 locations in all 50 states will hold rallies — dubbed “tea parties” — to protest higher taxes and out-of-control government spending. There is no political party behind these rallies, no grand right-wing conspiracy, not even a 501(c) group like MoveOn.org.

[...]

We saw a bit of this in the 2004 and 2008 presidential campaigns, with things like Howard Dean’s use of Meetup, and Barack Obama’s use of Facebook. But this was still social-networking in support of an existing organization or campaign. The tea-party protest movement is organizing itself, on its own behalf. Some existing organizations, like Newt Gingrich’s American Solutions and FreedomWorks, have gotten involved. But they’re involved as followers and facilitators, not leaders. The leaders are appearing on their own, and reaching out to others through blogs, Facebook, chat boards and alternative media.

The protests began with bloggers in Seattle, Wash., who organized a demonstration on Feb. 16. As word of this spread, rallies in Denver and Mesa, Ariz., were quickly organized for the next day. Then came CNBC talker Rick Santelli’s Feb. 19 “rant heard round the world” in which he called for a “Chicago tea party” on July Fourth. The tea-party moniker stuck, but angry taxpayers weren’t willing to wait until July. Soon, tea-party protests were appearing in one city after another, drawing at first hundreds, and then thousands, to marches in cities from Orlando to Kansas City to Cincinnati.

As word spread, people got interested in picking a common date for nationwide protests, and decided on today, Tax Day, as the date. As I write this, various Web sites tracking tea parties are predicting anywhere between 300 and 500 protests at cities around the world. A Google Map tracking planned events, maintained at the FreedomWorks.org Web site, shows the United States covered by red circles, with new events being added every day.

The movement grew so fast that some bloggers at the Playboy Web site — apparently unaware that we’ve entered the 21st century — suggested that some secret organization must be behind all of this. But, in fact, today’s technology means you don’t need an organization, secret or otherwise, to get organized. After considerable ridicule, the claim was withdrawn, but that hasn’t stopped other media outlets from echoing it.

There’s good news and bad news in this phenomenon for establishment politicians. The good news for Republicans is that, while the Republican Party flounders in its response to the Obama presidency and its programs, millions of Americans are getting organized on their own. The bad news is that those Americans, despite their opposition to President Obama’s policies, aren’t especially friendly to the GOP. When Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele asked to speak at the Chicago tea party, his request was politely refused by the organizers: “With regards to stage time, we respectfully must inform Chairman Steele that RNC officials are welcome to participate in the rally itself, but we prefer to limit stage time to those who are not elected officials, both in Government as well as political parties. This is an opportunity for Americans to speak, and elected officials to listen, not the other way around.”

Likewise, I spoke to an organizer for the Knoxville tea party who said that no “professional politicians” were going to be allowed to speak, and he made a big point of saying that the protest wasn’t an anti-Obama protest, it was an anti-establishment protest. I’ve heard similar things from tea-party organizers in other cities, too. Though critics will probably try to write the tea parties off as partisan publicity stunts, they’re really a post-partisan expression of outrage. … (Readall.)

The term “post-partisan” is important. I don’t think that the vast majority of media had any clue that a lot of those attending the Wednesday events were disillusioned DEMOCRATS as well as many skeptical Independents.

As one of those disillusioned Democrats, I can tell you that I do not share the sentiments of many who attended the events. For example, I am in favor of a national health care plan.

But we have to be sensible. I am very worried by a highly inexperienced president — who’s never managed anything except a campaign — who’s embarked on a mad-hatter grab for everything under the Christmas tree at a time when our economy is very shaky and we have such high unemployment, which also means lower tax revenues which are needed to pay for all these grand plans.

I want some prudence. I want the underpinnings of our economy restored. I want new rules for Wall Street and banks. Then, and only then, can we take a look around at what else we can do.

That’s one reason why the “anti-establishment” tenor of these demonstrations also rings true to me.

Did you notice how the media were confused yesterday, trying to find some ideological moniker to hang on the groups? They missed the entire point of the protests.

One thing the media miss is that we feel estranged from our representatives to Congress. Have any of you called your senators’ and representatives’ offices lately? I did, to complain about Geithner’s “toxic assets” plan and the $1+ trillion it is sneakily going to cost taxpayers. When I asked the receptionist to read back what I’d said, she replied, “Is opposed to stimulus plan.” Irritated, I told her that that was NOT what I said, that I was specifically concerned about a very specific plan, and that I was a Democrat.

Ani told me that she’s received a similar brush-off when she’s called her representatives’ offices.

I am afraid that both the establishment and the media have not yet GRASPED the origins of our distress, our worry, and our anger. It is NOT all about taxes. It is NOT anti-entitlement programs. It is NOT rightwing.

But it surely is about making sure that these rescue plans first put taxpayers’ hard-earned cash in the hands of those who need it first and most: The unemployed, for example. (In my county, our unemployment rate is nearly 12%.) These days, there are very few jobs that would support a family, which makes unemployment compensation and, if possible, food stamps absolutely necessary. They also have a hard cold practical value in that unemployment and food stamps put money into the economy immediately.

I digress. But I am very concerned that these stimulus plans are mostly benefiting the big dogs and bypassing both small businesses — which are the engines that keep our economy going — and middle-class Americans. And it’s not about being unfair to small business and regular people. It’s practical. If we aid small businesses and average Americans, we will directly benefit our economy, and do it far faster. I think it’s called “common sense.”

The problem is that I can’t compress all of these feelings and points of view into a snappy saying on a rally sign. And the point I’m trying to make is that all of the people who were out on the streets yesterday also have many complex reasons for their concerns, and are far more than the ‘wingers that the biased media tried to portray them as.

THANKS to Flineo for the photos!

UPDATE: I am invading Susan’s post to add this video of the protestors taking the CNN reporter to task, for her spin, and attacks. See Concerned Mothers earlier post for more video of the *journalist*. ~saraintaly

Once the segment was over, people let her know how they felt about her *reporting*.

One of my good friends went to the Tea Party in Seattle, and I will post pics once I get them.

… Most notable is the report’s focus on the impact of returning war veterans.

“Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists,” it says. “DHS/I&A is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities.”

The report cites the April 4 shooting deaths of three police officers in Pittsburgh as an example of what may be coming, claiming the alleged gunman holds a racist ideology and believes in anti-government conspiracy theories about gun confiscations, citizen detention camps and “a Jewish-controlled ‘one-world government.’”

It also suggests the election of an African-American president and the prospect of his policy changes “are proving to be a driving force for right-wing extremist recruitment and radicalization.”

The report also mentions “‘end times’ prophecies could motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition and weapons. These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist individuals and groups in the past, such as the violent Christian Identity organizations and extremist members of the militia movement.”

“DHS/I&A assesses that right-wing extremist groups’ frustration over a perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite individuals or small groups toward violence,” the report continues.

The report states the DHS will be working with state and local partners over the next several months to determine the levels of right-wing extremist activity in the U.S.

Last month, the chief of the Missouri highway patrol blasted a report issued by the Missouri Information Analysis Center that linked conservative groups to domestic terrorism, assuring that such reports no longer will be issued. The report had been compiled with the assistance of DHS.

The report warned law enforcement agencies to watch for suspicious individuals who may have bumper stickers for third-party political candidates such as Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin.

It further warned law enforcement to watch out for individuals with “radical” ideologies based on Christian views, such as opposing illegal immigration, abortion and federal taxes. (Read all.)

NOW: ADD YOUR FIRST- or SECOND-PERSON REPORTS!

A rally and march in protest of higher taxes in Santa Barbara, Calif., April 4.

Today American taxpayers in more than 300 locations in all 50 states will hold rallies — dubbed “tea parties” — to protest higher taxes and out-of-control government spending. There is no political party behind these rallies, no grand right-wing conspiracy, not even a 501(c) group like MoveOn.org. [KA-ZING! Take that, MoveOn!]

This is part of a general phenomenon dubbed “Smart Mobs” by Howard Rheingold, author of a book by the same title, in which modern communications and social-networking technologies allow quick coordination among large numbers of people who don’t know each other.

In the old days, organizing large groups of people required, well, an organization: a political party, a labor union, a church or some other sort of structure. Now people can coordinate themselves. … [THIS SELF-DETERMINATIVE ACTION HARD FOR THE LEFTIES TO GRASP SINCE THEY COMPLIANTLY WAIT TO TAKE THEIR ORDERS FROM MOVEON ET AL.]

So who’s behind the Tax Day tea parties? Ordinary folks who are using the power of the Internet to organize. …

NRO’s Andy McCarthy also has a new remarkable piece - “The Obama Administration Is Criminalizing Dissent? Intimidating Its Ideological Opponents? You Must Be Joking“ - condemning the DHS report. All of you who’ve been longtime readers and supported Hillary will vividly recall these wholly inappropriate uses of Obot government figures to silence dissent and to intimidate ordinary citizens who are NOT extremists — and note that the litany of anti-Constitutional examples was written by McCarthy in October 2008:

The DHS screed … is entirely predictable. The only conceivable surprise is that it is so blatant and has happened so soon. But all they’ve done is commit to paper the same stuff they say to each other in conversation. [...]

[From a McCarthy column in 2008]I’ll be blunt: Sen. Obama and his supporters despise free expression, the bedrock of American self-determinism and hence American democracy. What’s more, like garden-variety despots, they see law not as a means of ensuring liberty but as a tool to intimidate and quell dissent….

[I]n St. Louis, local law-enforcement authorities, dominated by Democrat-party activists, [are] threatening libel prosecutions against Obama’s political opposition. County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, abetted by a local sheriff and encouraged by the Obama campaign, warned that members of the public who dared speak out against Obama during the campaign’s crucial final weeks would face criminal libel charges — if, in the judgment of these conflicted officials, such criticism of their champion was “false.” [YES! THIS REALLY OCCURRED!]

The chill wind was bracing. The Taliban could not better rig matters. The Prophet of Change is only to be admired, not questioned. In the stretch run of an American election, there is to be no examination of a candidate for the world’s most powerful office — whether about his radical record, the fringe Leftism that lies beneath his thin, centrist veneer, his enabling of infanticide, his history of race-conscious politics, his proposals for unprecedented confiscation and distribution of private property (including a massive transfer of American wealth to third-world dictators through international bureaucrats), his ruinous economic policies that have helped leave Illinois a financial wreck, his place at the vortex of the credit market implosion that has put the U.S. economy on the brink of meltdown, his aggressive push for American withdrawal and defeat in Iraq, his easy gravitation to America-hating activists, be they preachers like Jeremiah Wright, terrorists like Bill Ayers, or Communists like Frank Marshall Davis. Comment on any of this and risk indictment or, at the very least, government harassment and exorbitant legal fees.

Nor was this an isolated incident.

Item: When the American Issues Project ran political ads calling attention to Obama’s extensive ties to Ayers, the Weatherman terrorist who brags about having bombed the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol, the Obama campaign pressured the Justice Department to launch an absurd criminal prosecution.

Item: When commentator Stanley Kurtz of the Ethics and Public Policy Center was invited on a Chicago radio program to discuss his investigation of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an “education reform” project in which Obama and Ayers (just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood”) collaborated to dole out over $100 million, the Obama campaign issued an Internet action alert. Supporters, armed with the campaign’s non-responsive talking points, dutifully flooded the program with calls and emails, protesting Kurtz’s appearance and attempting to shout him down.

Item: Both Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, have indicated that an Obama administration would use its control of the Justice Department to prosecute its political opponents, including Bush administration officials responsible for the national security policies put in effect after nearly 3000 Americans were killed in the 9/11 attacks.

Item: There is a troubling report that the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Section, top officials of which are Obama contributors, has suggested criminal prosecutions against those they anticipate will engage in voter “intimidation” or “oppression” in an election involving a black candidate. (Memo to my former DOJ colleagues: In a system that presumes innocence even after crimes have undeniably been committed, responsible prosecutors don’t assume non-suspects will commit future law violations — especially when doing so necessarily undermines the First Amendment freedoms those prosecutors solemnly swear to uphold.) [Emphasis added.]

Just consider the DHS gambit the first of many Domestic Contingency Operations. … Read all.

McCarthy’s title for his 2008 article? “Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment.”

Now Obama and his administration are going further than Bush to seize and concentrate all power in the executive branch.

But Americans are proving that we have not forgotten our forefather’s courage in standing up and fighting tyranny!

And any decent American should be proud of those organizing and attending today’s events! It does NOT matter that we agree with the sentiments of all who are participating. What counts is that they are the kinds of people who ordinarily don’t do protests, but they feel compelled to speak out! BRAVO!

Hey, all you Tax Day people. You’re not part of some ‘winger cabal, are you? You’re not into some dangerous, extremist rightwing group that the Department of Homeland Security has targeted in its new PDF document, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment?” This report has been sent to police (!) around the nation. (See footnote at end.)

The left seems, oh yes, to be more orchestrated in its mocking opposition than are the grassroots Tax Day efforts that, sadly, Paul Krugman called “Astroturf” (as in fake grass roots) and to which he devoted a precious column. (I’m wondering if someone got to Paul; he used to take Obama’s ruinous economic stimulus plans to task, but his last two columns have fired straight at the heart of the GOP. Now, here’s some of what the left is saying:

• “Fox News is bankrolling and promoting the events.”
• MSNBC’s new dimwit anchor Ed Schultz says that Tax Day participants are “psychos.”
• Firedoglake writes “Corporate Lobbyists Raising Money For Tea Parties (rebutted by Houston TPS).
• MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews goes after the Tax Day people, calling them “poopers,” and is concerned that many are “full-mooners”:

  Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Rachel Maddow mocks the anti-tax Tax Day protests, and oh is she so, so funny:

………………

Footnote about the DHS report (PDF): Yes, there are some truly frightening crazies out there. But I wouldn’t call them rightwing. I’d call them crazy, violent, and racist.

And, yes, the election of an African-American president has doubtless infuriated the tiny groups of Stormfront types.

However, it is very important for the DHS, FBI, and Secret Service to distinguish between right-wing political types and those few extremists who’d wish to harm the president. Otherwise, they’re going to be wasting a lot of time on ordinary Americans who are simply opposed to Obama’s policies.

There is NO logical correlation between having “rightwing” views and plotting violence. I’d guesstimate that 99% of “rightwing” people would never imagine taking violent action and in fact are probably more inclined to be law-abiding than most citizens.

There’s only a correlation between the Stormfront-type racists and violence.

I think about the couple people I know who are involved in the Tax Day demonstrations — GOPMom and LatinaFreedomFighter. I’ve never received any communication from either that would remotely suggest a bent towards violence; they’re just wishing to be vocal about their deep concerns about Obama’s mammoth debt-inducing budget that will likely lead to hyperinflation and leave future generations with nearly impossible debts to repay, debts that also make us far too reliant on our main lender, China, who they don’t trust.

Neither one has ever exhibited anything remotely like “pscyhotic” or dangerous behavior. Michelle Malkin, who is far to my right in her thinking, has written an excellent takedown of this DHS report and its wild claims, in “Confirmed: The Obama DHS hit job on conservatives is real“:

[T]he piece of crap report issued on April 7 is a sweeping indictment of conservatives. And the intent is clear. As the two spokespeople I talked with on the phone today made clear: They both pinpointed the recent “economic downturn” and the “general state of the economy” for stoking “rightwing extremism.” One of the spokespeople said he was told that the report has been in the works for a year. My b.s. detector went off the chart, and yours will, too, if you read through the entire report — which asserts with no evidence that an unquantified “resurgence in rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalizations activity” is due to home foreclosures, job losses, and…the historical presidential election.

In Obama land, there are no coincidences. It is no coincidence that this report echoes Tea Party-bashing left-wing blogs (check this one out comparing the Tea Party movement to the Weather Underground!) and demonizes the very Americans who will be protesting in the thousands on Wednesday for the nationwide Tax Day Tea Party.

From the report, p.2:

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

From the report. p. 3:

(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential sympathizers.

(U) Exploiting Economic Downturn

(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures. Anti-Semitic extremists attribute these losses to a deliberate conspiracy conducted by a cabal of Jewish “financial elites.” These “accusatory” tactics are employed to draw new recruits into rightwing extremist groups and further radicalize those already subscribing to extremist beliefs. DHS/I&A assesses this trend is likely to accelerate if the economy is perceived to worsen.

From the report, p. 5:

(U//FOUO) Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point,
and recruiting tool. Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment, but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent.

And echoing the anti-military bigotry last seen in that disgusting Penn State University training video, there’s this on p. 7:

(U) Disgruntled Military Veterans

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.

There’s no hackneyed left-wing stereotype of conservatives left behind in this DHS intelligence and analysis assessment. I asked both DHS spokespeople to tell me who, specifically, the report was accusing of “rightwing extremist chatter” and which “antigovernment” groups are being monitored as “extremists.” They say they’ll get back to me.

In the meantime, be aware of this from the report, p. 8:

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.

Better make a few last-minute signs for the Tea Party. Obama’s DHS is watching:

Honk if you’re a radicalized rightwing extremist!

Guilty of rightwing extremist chatter

Anti-government, pro-freedom: Sue me

***

Previous: Missouri retracts report linking militias, 3rd party candidates.

***

Oh, I’m sure DHS will be issuing its report on self-proclaimed bank terrorists like Bruce Marks of NACA and criminal rackeeters harassing private citizens in their homes to “exploit the economic downturn” any day now.

Human beings have an inherent, necessary need to hone in on those who present a real threat to them. However, rational human beings have the logical capacity to DISCERN who is really an enemy who might do one harm, and those who simply disagree with one.

After 9/11, when more law enforcement resources (imho) should have been focused on monitoring the very few who exhibit true terrorist leanings, Attorneys General John Ashcroft and then Alberto Gonzales decided that “ecoterrorists” were the major threat to the nation, and ordered the FBI to go all out to find any reason possible to charge anyone they suspected to be an “ecoterrorist” and toss them in federal prison.

Now, the Obama administration is making the same mistake: Instead of logically worrying about the porous Mexican/U.S. and Canadian/U.S. borders that allow terrorists to cross into the U.S. easily, and to monitor recruitment of young men into terrorist cells in the Middle East and Southeast/Southwest Asia, they (and their willing blogger abetters) are going after ordinary Americans who simply wish to express their disgust with irresponsible spending. Townhall sums it up so well:

This is almost unbelievable.  The message is simple:  If you are a conservative, you might be dangerous…

The WaTimes reports,

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines “rightwing extremism in the United States” as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.

“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the warning says.

… That’s right, when they say ‘extremism’ they are not talking about what we think of when we think of ‘extremists’ — they are actually talking about mainstream conservatives who actually oppose things like (gulp) abortion.

(Of course, this comes just in time for the Tea Parties …)

Think about the federal law enforcement manpower that will be expended tomorrow to photograph and watch participants at the Tax Day protests. And you just KNOW that the leftwing bloggers will write nasty, mocking reports on their findings after they’ve combed through every news report tomorrow for any crazy remark, even though it’s always possible to find at least one crazy person at any public event.

Remember too that, of late, Obama hasn’t been scoring well with the left, given his executive power grabs and destruction of freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. But Obama’s people know how to divert the lefties’ attention, and they’ve found a perfect foil in the Tax Day participants. And the lefties are all falling for it.

What say you?

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Read more at Memeorandum.com about the DHS report and tomorrow’s protests.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

UPDATE — Here’s one of the crazed extremists behind Tax Day:

– LatinaFreedomFighter’s latest video. She’s attending the Phoenix, Arizona Tax Day event tomorrow. I hope the FBI keeps an eye on her! She’s clearly a ticking timebomb! Snort.

Here’s part of her insane and dangerous speech:

WTF! The American Revolution was in essence to do away from bowing down before Kings and the monarchy.

How ’bout hearing about Obama bowing to the Saudi King? Its true. Obama bowed from the waist in a greeting which is unseemly coming from the President of the United States. So, not only do we have a rookie as Pres, he acts like one too! …. Read all.

Obama’s rash disinterest in creating a positive cash flow, despite a few sneaky tax increases (see below), makes me want to assume the identity of the character Blake in Glengarry Glen Ross, shake my fist at Obama, and say to his smug visage, “You can’t close the leads you’re given, you can’t close shit, *you are* shit, hit the bricks pal, and beat it, ’cause you are going *out*. “

What will happen? Inflation. Or, as Larry Johnson and Larry Doyle have warned, hyperinflation.

Inflation will also affect entitlement programs like Social Security. The annual “cost of living” increases will bump up accordingly. This all comes out of the U.S. treasury or, er, those loans from the Chinese.

You’ll also be paying more taxes.

What about the taxes and the unbelievable $3.6 TRILLION budget? As Lynn Westmoreland wrote in “Fiscal sanity dies in Obama budget,” published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

[...]

The Democrats’ budget spends too much, taxes too much and borrows too much.

President Obama promised his legions of young supporters on the campaign trail that he would restore fiscal sanity to Washington and kick all those money-grubbing special interests to the curb. Blue Dog Democrats swore they’d stand up to ultraliberal Speaker Nancy Pelosi and impose “paygo” —- which means that every dollar of new spending is balanced out with cuts elsewhere or new revenue.

Ha! Joke’s on us, I guess. They pulled a fast one.

Instead of balancing budgets and reforming entitlement spending and “making tough choices” (Remember that Obama phrase?), the Democrats’ plan is quite simple: Just spend, spend, spend. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Obama’s plan will expand the debt by $9.3 trillion over the next 10 years. That’s more than all the debt accumulated by the nation from George Washington to George W. Bush.

There’s a whack to fiscal sanity.

The CBO further predicts that federal spending will average 23 percent of gross domestic product while federal revenue will equal about 19 percent of GDP. That’s government expansion of 3 percent of GDP.

Double whack!

The Democrats’ $3.6 trillion budget raises taxes on all Americans by $1.3 trillion. Hey, reader, that’s you. Whether you’re a parent struggling to pay the bills, a small-business person trying to avoid layoffs or worse, or an employee at a plant worried about keeping your job, the Democrats’ taxes are going to hit you. They promised a “middle-class tax cut” but now they’ve dropped that idea. It was merely a sleight of hand to distract attention away from the global warming taxes that will hike costs for every American who turns on a light switch.

Thing is, I rather doubt that these stealth taxes will sufficiently replace the staggering loss in income from federal income taxes. Which means the debt will continue to grow monumentally, all thanks to Obama’s devil-may-care, I-want-what-I-want-and-I-want-it-now mentality. The key to his whole personality is understanding that he wants to win. It’s all just a poker game and, if taxpayers lose, so what. He doesn’t care.

I am SHOCKED that Obots would use the race card! I am stunned they’d thuggishly try to take over an event. Well, there was that ONE time during the caucuses, but they were just excited! They’d never undermine us! Would they? (The spokepersons’ confidence is inspiring, but I hope they aren’t naive or unaware of how insidious, vicious and amoral the ACORN and HuffPo groups are, and are highly vigilant.)

The national site for the April 15th event, to locate events in your area, is “Tax Day Tea Party.” My friend, GOPMom, sent a press release for her Boston event, with great graphics!

Boston Tax Day Tea Party Protest to be held at MA State House

On Wednesday, April 15th, concerned citizens will gather on the steps of the Massachusetts State House in Boston to protest government policies of reckless spending and punitive taxation.

Boston, Massachusetts April 8, 2009 – Inspired by the growing Tea Party movement sweeping the nation, organizers have scheduled a Tax Day Tea Party to take place at the Massachusetts State House on Wednesday, April 15th from 12:00 pm – 3:00 pm. The protest will feature speakers from Massachusetts’ grassroots, business and conservative leadership, welcoming over 1,500 followers who have committed to attending to voice their displeasure with the egregious growth of government and the irresponsible policies our local, state and federal governments are pursuing. Speakers, led by emcee Todd Feinburg of WRKO-AM 680, will take to the steps at 12:00 PM, offering their opinions and suggestions as to how to best deal with the recession and the government’s role therein.

The goal of the organizers of the protest has always been to provide a platform for citizens and grassroots leaders to come together in hopes of inspiring participation in the conservative movement, with a focus on recruiting conservative candidates for the 2010 elections. Carla Howell, Committee for Small Government, State Senator Bob Hedlund, R-MA, Jim Stergios, Executive Director of the Pioneer Institute, Michael Johns, conservative leader and writer, David Tuerck, Executive Director of the Beacon Hill Institute, Brad Marston, ConservativeSolutions.org, Chip Faulkner, Associate Director of Citizens of Limited Taxation, Shawni Littlehale of Smart Girl Politics, Barry Hinckley, MA State Director of FairTax.org and Sheridan Folger of Sovereignty Alliance will all speak.

Organized by three conservative women of varying political affiliations and backgrounds - a college student, a recent law school graduate and a stay-home mom - this protest has grown from 300 Facebook members to over 1,500 online members on various web pages on the internet. While the organizers have not received funds for any organization or political party, they have managed to coordinate volunteers, recruit speakers and secure permits from the city to hold the event in conjunction with over 300 protests being held nationwide on Tax Day, April 15th.

More info available at GOPMom’s Boston Tea Party site.

Aren’t you glad I mentioned that song? Now you can have it stuck in your head all day long like I have! Ahem. Of course, I am talking about the ever-changing figure from Obama and his spokespeople on where he draws the line on being rich. First it was $250,000 (though the WSJ said it was really more like $164,500, though Obama never acknowledged that), then it was $200,000, then $150,000 (via Biden), and then yesterday Bill Richardson said $120,000 was rich. Huh - I wonder what it will really end up being should he steal the election? (And you know damn well with ACORN and Project Vote, there will be shenanigans going on because THERE ALREADY ARE!)

Here is Obama in 2003 claiming those who earn more than $70,000 are rich. The cap of the middle class just goes lower and lower. You cannot make this up. But Obama does as he goes along:

Now, I realize that to some people, $70,000 sounds like a lot of money. But if you live in a place like Boston, or NYC, or Chicago, or LA (or anywhere in CA, for that matter), it is not a lot of money. It’s all about context. And, in my neck of the woods, ALL of the businesses are small businesses, many family - owned ones. But hey - don’t take my word for it. Here’s a video for you:

Sigh - if only the DNC had not stolen the nomination from Hillary. But I digress…

It is impossible to give 95% of Americans a tax break when 40% of Americans do not pay taxes. There goes that Obama Logic again…

Here’s Joe Biden - i she once again making a gaffe by actually speaking the truth?

But get this - Obama is now claiming that people who do NOT want to be taxed more are selfish. No, I am not kidding:

Okay - it is selfish to not want more than half of your income to go to taxes. Now, let me just say right up front that I am not someone who is anti-tax. I know that we NEED taxes to pave our roads, employ our firefighters and police officers, educate our children, and care for those in need. BUT - I do not think that it one group of people should disproportionately carry another group of people. And it is absurd to even TALK about raising ANYONE’S taxes in the midst of economic difficulties. That is not new thinking - that has been accepted wisdom for decades now. How about actually collecting taxes from people and businesses who owe it? Or close loopholes for the freakin’ OIL companies?? If Exxon was having record breaking profits every single quarter for years, why should they have gotten an breaks? They sure weren’t giving US any! The point is - obviously we need tax revenue, but to burden an already burdened group of people is not the solution. There are other options available, including growing jobs, which also grows tax revenue, if you think about it.

Bottom line is that I know Obama got used to the line moving all of the time when he was running against Clinton. The media made damn sure of that. But he needs to stop moving the line, or having his surrogates do it for him. Even better, let’s make sure we don’t have to DEAL with Obama’s ever-changing tax ideas by not electing him president.

Or by allowing Obama and his minions to take the election through voter fraud. Once again, if you see any kind of fraudulent or suspicious behavior at your poling place, people wearing political buttons into the polling place, or machines flipping votes, or whatever, the McCain/Palin Team has set up a HOTLINE for suspicious voting activity. Here is the number: 866-976-VOTE. Take your cell phone with you, if you have one. Take photos if you can. Again, 866-976-VOTE. Because we don’t want to find out how low he will go with who is in the middle class (in terms of taxes - we already know how low Obama will go with sexism, promises made FISA, and broken, GLBT rights, etc., etc.)…

For all of Sen. Obama’s rhetoric about the need for tax return transparency, you’d think he’d have released all of his tax records. Guess again.

For weeks, Sen. Obama and his campaign relentlessly demanded that Hillary release all of her tax returns even though 20-years of them were already publicly available. His campaign held an endless string of conference calls, issued press releases and flooded the airwaves with surrogates attacking Hillary for not immediately releasing the returns for the last few years she has been in public life.

Sen. Obama said the American people “deserve to know where you get your income from,” stressing the need for “full transparency” and bragging that his campaign has “set the bar.”

Well, Hillary released tax returns earlier this month and is now the only candidate in this race who has made thirty years worth of tax returns public.

But despite his rhetoric, Sen. Obama doesn’t abide by the standards he sets for others.

Sen. Obama has refused to release his tax returns for 1997, 1998 and 1999, even though he was in public life as a state senator during those years. During this period of time, Sen. Obama was accepting contributions from special interest lobbyists, PACs and even directly from corporations.

In fact, Sen. Obama has a habit of demanding higher standards of transparency for others than for himself. The National Archives has released hundreds of thousands of pages of documents from Hillary’s years as first lady, including her entire schedule. Throughout the campaign, Sen. Obama has demanded Hillary release more documents, even though they are not under her control. Meanwhile, Sen. Obama refuses to release any documents that are more than three years old. At first, Sen. Obama and his campaign told the press that he had records from his state senate years. Later, he said he threw them all out.

Whether it’s tax returns or legislative records or his relationship with indicted political fixer Tony Rezko, Senator Obama seems to take “the dog ate my homework” approach to disclosure.

When it comes to transparency, the only thing transparent about Senator Obama is his claim to be transparent.