Suckers United For Change

H/T Pat Dollard.

http://www.americanthinker.com
By Kyle-Anne Shiver

Now that we’re more than 100 days into the Obama presidency, the handwriting is on the wall regarding our new leader’s game plan for America. Spend other people’s money like a drunken sailor. Let every enemy on the planet know there’s a wimp in the White House. Let every ally know the wimp in the White House will do nothing to help them when push comes to shove. Let the 50 states know there’s a power coup in play that strips them of constitutionally guaranteed liberties. Let every company know that neither they nor their non-union employees are safe from Chicago-Way thugs and their mouthpieces in the media. Let the 300 million American citizens know that the rule of law, applied equally to all, is about to be replaced by special favoritism in the form of “empathy.”

All in all, one would need to be a numbskull not to see banana republic written all over the current administration and its intent.

If asked for a word to describe an Obama voter, there is only one that any sentient person could offer: SUCKER.

These are folks who buy a used car from a slick-suited, smooth-talking, salesman of the decade who laughs every step of the way to the bank. These are folks who agree to 25 medical tests to find out they have a planter’s wart. These are folks who call immediately to buy the $19.95 super deal on an under-bed storage box they could buy any old day at Wal-Mart for a buck. These are the folks who think day old bread will make you sick.

They’re the kind of voters that every crooked politician has drooling dreams about every night of the year.

So, the next time that college kid or one of his professors beams that we- were-united-for-change malarkey at you, laugh in his face. The next time that brilliant-beyond-brilliant Gen X or Y business executive gloats on his liberal-white-guilt vote, just shake your head and send him a sympathy card. The next time that giddy woman with an Obama crush fawns over The One, roll your eyes and stay clear; she has a defect you don’t want in a future mate.

Has ever a bigger lot of fools been assembled on planet earth?
Could any of these folks work his way out of a wet paper bag?

Now, the silly thing in all this is that anyone with a single grain of common sense saw right through the man with the postage-stamp sized resume the first day he announced his bid for the presidency. And as exit polling demonstrated beyond any doubt, Obama voters were so swept-off-their-feet they didn’t even know the basic facts about the candidates last year. They voted with their feelings, their fancies, and their fools’ gold blinders.

Were they just old fashioned ninnies? Or were they actually brainwashed? Now, this is a very good question.
Brainwashing and the Obama Cult

Brainwashing has a pretty sordid history and has been a stock in trade of totalitarian regimes for a century. Here is a good description from How Stuff Works:

In psychology, the study of brainwashing, often referred to as thought reform, falls into the sphere of “social influence.” (snip) For instance, the compliance method aims to produce a change in a person’s behavior and is not concerned with his attitudes or beliefs. It’s the “Just do it” approach.

Persuasion, on the other hand, aims for a change in attitude, or “Do it because it’ll make you feel good/happy/healthy/successful.” The education method (which is called the “propaganda method” when you don’t believe in what’s being taught) goes for the social-influence gold, trying to affect a change in the person’s beliefs, along the lines of “Do it because you know it’s the right thing to do.” Brainwashing is a severe form of social influence that combine­s all of these approaches to cause changes in someone’s way of thinking without that person’s consent and often against his will.

We tend to think, as Americans, that any form of brainwashing among a free people, not under the threat of physical harm, would be impossible to employ with success.

However, during this election season, we saw a generalized favoritism for the Obama campaign among influential media people, on university campuses and even in K-12 education. We saw a prolific hagiography campaign that plastered billboards and sides of buildings in major cities. We saw manufactured “news” that ogled over crowds for Obama, but failed to mention the free rock concerts that immediately preceded Obama’s best-attended speeches. We saw Hollywood celebrities in full-thrall mode for The One. We saw religious imagery hijacked for ephemeral “change,” which was never defined, yet had mesmerizing effects.

This was a classic case of the brainwashing techniques of persuasion and education models, as described above.

So, who were indeed the biggest suckers for Obama’s ubiquitous kumbayah rhetoric? Hands-down the sucker prize goes to those most prone to groupthink brainwashing techniques of persuasion: the young.

Barack Obama carried the 18-29 year olds by a whopping 66% majority. According to Pew’s analysis, this vote chunk was perhaps the biggest deciding factor in 2008. Obama also garnered 52% of the 30-44 age group. These were the only age groups that voted in majorities for Barack Obama.

This makes perfect sense, when one acknowledges that universities and public education institutions have been leftist indoctrination centers for the past 30 years. The vast majority of American Universities subject entering freshmen to Sensitivity Training seminars as part of orientation.

In 2000, Reason published an in-depth article on university brainwashing seminars, euphemistically called “sensitivity training.” The author, Alan Charles Kors, provides an in-depth look into the Orwellian programs offered at nearly every American university. It is a frightening overview, entitled “Thought Reform 101,” which notes:

Tony Tillman, in charge of a mandatory “Social Issues” orientation at Dartmouth, explained in the Journal that students needed to address “the various forms of `isms’: sexism, racism, classism,” all of which were interrelated. Oberlin “educated” its freshmen about “differences in race, ethnicity, sexuality, gender, and culture,” with separate orientations for blacks, Hispanics, gays and lesbians, and Americans of Asian descent. Columbia University sought to give its incoming students the chance “to reevaluate [and] learn things,” so that they could rid themselves of “their own social and personal beliefs that foster inequality.” Katherine Balmer, assistant dean for freshmen at Columbia, explained to the Times that “you can’t bring all these people together…without some sort of training.”

American universities are unashamedly using brainwashing techniques, and have finally produced a generation willing to vote for an “acceptable” cult leader for president.

If the words, “I’ve been had,” are not at this juncture forming in the mind of nearly every Obama voter, I would give terrific odds that he has been brainwashed and needs to reclaim his common sense before the clock strikes 12 on the United States of America.

We live in a dangerous world, where no quarter will be given those whose brains have been turned to mush. If you were an Obama Cult follower, the time to wake up and smell the coffee is right this very minute.

**Inspiration for this column from reader, Lee Hazel. My sincere thanks to him.**

Kyle-Anne Shiver is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. She welcomes your comments at commonsenseregained.com.

California as Liberalism's Laboratory

By George Will

WASHINGTON -- California's increasingly severe and largely self-inflicted economic crisis will deepen on May 19 if, as is probable and desirable, voters reject most of the ballot measures that were drafted as part of a "solution" to the state's budget deficit. They would make matters worse. National economic revival is being impeded because one-eighth of the nation's population lives in a state that is driving itself into permanent stagnation. California's perennial boast -- that it is the incubator of America's future -- now has an increasingly dark urgency.

Under Arnold Schwarzenegger, the best governor the states contiguous to California have ever had, people and businesses have been relocating in those states. For four consecutive years, more Americans have moved out of California than have moved in. California's business costs are more than 20 percent higher than the average state's. In the last decade, net out-migration of Americans has been 1.4 million. California is exporting talent while importing Mexico's poverty. The latter is not California's fault; the former is.

If, since 1990, state spending increases had been held to the inflation rate plus population growth, the state would have a $15 billion surplus instead of a $42 billion budget deficit, which is larger than the budgets of all but 10 states. Since 1990, the number of state employees has increased by more than a third. In Schwarzenegger's less than six years as governor, per capita government spending, adjusted for inflation, has increased nearly 20 percent.

Liberal orthodoxy has made the state dependent on a volatile source of revenues -- high income tax rates on the wealthy. In 2006, the top 1 percent of earners paid 48 percent of the income taxes. California's income and sales taxes are among the nation's highest, its business conditions among the worst, as measured by 16 variables directly influenced by the Legislature. Unemployment, the nation's fourth highest, is 11.2 percent.

Required by law to balance the budget, the Legislature has "solved" the problem by, among other things, increasing the income, sales, gas and vehicle taxes. This, although one rationale for the federal government's gargantuan "stimulus" was to spare states the need to raise taxes which, in California, will more than vitiate the stimulus.

Proposition 1A would create a complicated -- hence probably porous -- spending cap, and a rainy day fund. Realists, however, do not trust the Legislature to obey the law, which may be why some public employees unions cynically support 1A. Another May 19 proposition, opaquely titled the "Lottery Modernization Act," would authorize borrowing $5 billion from future hypothetical lottery receipts. The title is a measure of the political class' meretriciousness.

If voters pass 1A's hypothetical restraint on government spending, their reward will be two extra years (another $16 billion) of actual income, sales and vehicle tax increases. The increases were supposed to be for just two years. Voters are being warned that if they reject the propositions, there might have to be $14 billion in spending cuts. (Note the $15 billion number four paragraphs above.) Even teachers might be laid off.

California teachers -- the nation's highest paid, with salaries about 25 percent above the national average -- are emblematic of the grip government employees unions have on the state, where 57 percent of government workers are unionized (the national average is 37 percent).

Flinching from serious budget cutting, and from confronting public employees unions, some Californians focus on process questions. They devise candidate-selection rules designed to diminish the role of parties, thereby supposedly making more likely the election of "moderates" amenable to even more tax increases.

But what actually ails California is centrist evasions. The state's crisis has been caused by "moderation," understood as splitting the difference between extreme liberalism and hyperliberalism, a "reasonableness" that merely moderates the speed at which the ever-expanding public sector suffocates the private sector.

California has become liberalism's laboratory, in which the case for fiscal conservatism is being confirmed. The state is a slow learner and hence will remain a drag on the nation's economy. But it will be a net benefit to the nation if the federal government and other state governments profit from California's negative example, which Californians can make more vividly instructive by voting down the propositions on May 19.

Remember the story of the mule that paid attention only after being walloped by a two-by-four? The Democratic-controlled state Legislature is like that. Fortunately, it has handed voters some two-by-fours -- the initiatives. Resounding rejections of them should get Sacramento's attention.

 

georgewill@washpost.com

 

Related: Daily Policy Digest

“My blog, my rules. If you want ‘free speech,’ go get your own blog!”

Contrary to what some bloggers and some blog readers seem to believe, a private blog is not a “public space.” Yes, most are open to the public for reading, but the blogger is ultimately responsible for the content on his or her blog (including the content in the comment section), and is under no obligation to allow readers to comment.

Comments are a great way to network, and interact with readers, but just as in a private home or in a private business, the blogger has the right to set the tone and ambiance, and to kick unruly guests out at will.

And no, it is not hypocritical to support “free speech,” and first amendment rights and at the same time to implement what more obnoxious commenters may refer to as “gestapo” tactics that would rival airport security. Just like our Dad’s used to tell us (paraphrased), “My blog, my rules. If you want ‘free speech,’ go get your own blog!”

The irresponsible, the angry, the obscene and the stupid have virtually taken over many Internet dialogues. But there is an easy fix, and websites owe it to society to use it. Just ban anonymous postings and send the trolls packing.

Blog Troll, aka, septic neurocritic

1.(n) -A pathetic and moronic person who maintains a blog with an unhealthy obsessive-compulsive drive, especially angsty goths (sorry to all the likeable goths out there). The content of their blogs usually includes events that no sane person would care about. Here's sample of what a blog troll might write on their blog:

"today, I ate a sanwich. It bad - it was just ok, mediocre, I guess you could call it. After that I read a few chapters out of an Anne Rice book and was deeply moved by her erotic descriptions of gay vampires fornicating. . Then I took a nap.

2.(n) -A depraved individual who sits in front of a computer all day and posts flames of an idiotic or pseudo-intellectual nature on public forums and private websites. Many of these people actually become emotional about what is said on the afore-said mediums and feel it is their duty to punish those who disagree with them. They too may pursue this object in an obsessive-compulsive manner.

The Common Blog Troll

Scientific name: Blogus-trollus

Physical Characteristics: Since the common blog troll is a very elusive species and tends to emulate homo sapiens when confronted in Real Life (the habitat of homo sapiens) it has thus escaped proper description. It is said that its head is covered with green warts and its body largely resembles a cone.

Color: Yellow-green, orange, red, black, white, purple and variations there-of.

Habitat: The common blog troll can be found nosing around any weblog that allows the posting of comments.

Belongs to the common troll group.

The Common Blog Troll is a recently discovered species, most likely evolved from the Common Usenet Troll or perhaps its close cousin, the Common Forum Troll. Its primary source of nourishment is a response to its excrement, which is left in the form of a comment on any weblog which allows comments. Its best not to feed the troll, otherwise it might make itself at home and litter said blog with ever growing piles of excrement. Once the pest moves into a weblog the best way to eradicate it is by the use of "IP Ban" which comes free with many forms of weblog -- if yours does not possess such feature you can always enlist the help of a local system administrator.

It should be noted that even an IP ban is not entirely effective in removing the most persistent of trolls - as the more clever ones have the ability of using different IP addresses. In that case only vigillance, patience and time will get rid of the pest completely. As always there are exceptions to that. Do The Right Thing and a few other friendly blogs have the same blogus-trollus frequenting the various comment sections, posting IT's inane, irrelevant lies for the sole purpose of reminding us just how stupid this particular trollus ignoramous is.

Excerpts taken from; 5 Ways To Defeat Blog Trolls and Cyberstalkers;

Essentially, a troll is a person who posts with the intent to insult and provoke others, Wood explains. The goal is to disrupt the normal traffic of a discussion group beyond repair. "A group is considered to be cohesively destroyed when two-thirds to three-quarters of the messages are a result of [trolls'] comments," Wood explains. They often target new users, who are more likely to take offense, hence the term "troll" (as in "trolling" for newbies).

Many trolls are characterized by having an excess of free time and are probably lonely and seeking attention, Wood says. "They often see their own self-worth in relation to how much reaction they can provoke," he says.

Woods categorizes trolls in the following ways:

Spamming troll: Posts to many newsgroups with the same verbatim post.

Kooks: A regular member of a forum who habitually drops comments that have no basis on the topic or even in reality.

Flamer: Does not contribute to the group except by making inflammatory comments.

Hit-and-runner, (aka, drive-by): Stops in, make one or two posts and move on.

Psycho trolls: Has a psychological need to feel good by making others feel bad.

Cyberstalkers

Cyberstalkers can also assume many different forms, according to Wood, although they're basically characterized by a continuing pattern of communication that the recipient considers to be offensive. Other common traits of cyberstalkers are malice, premeditation, repetition, distress to the victim, an obsession on the part of the stalker, seeking of revenge, threats that make victims fear for their physical safety and disregarded warnings to stop.

As with trolls, there are several different types of cyberstalkers, according to Wood:

Intimate partner: The most common type of stalker, this is usually a man who has a history of controlling and emotional abuse during a relationship.
Delusional stalkers: This type of stalker builds an entire relationship with the victim in his or her mind, whether any prior contact has taken place or not. Such stalkers are likely to have a major mental illness such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or erotomania, which means they believe the victim is in love with them. The typical delusional stalker is unmarried, socially immature and a loner who is unable to sustain close relationships with others.

Vengeful stalker: This type of person is angry with the victim due to some real or imagined insult or injury. Some of these stalkers are psychopaths -- a person affected with an antisocial personality disorder -- who have no conscience or remorse. They may have paranoid delusions, often feeling that they themselves are victims and are striving to get even.
 

 
What to do

In many cases, victims feel they have very little ammunition -- whether legal, technological or tactical -- to stop the abuse. However, there are some things bloggers and other online contributors can do to try to avoid this kind of harassment or at least keep it from crossing into the physical world.

1. Know the trolls' tactics

According to Wood, the first rule for dealing with trolls is to avoid being deceived by them in the first place. Don't trust anything you receive or read without verifying the poster through known, reliable sources, he says. Also, ignore postings or private e-mails that are suspicious, such as those that praise, flatter or evoke a sympathetic response.

2. DFTT

This is one of the more important acronyms in the blog world, meaning, "Don't feed the trolls." "Just like in-person bullies, trolls feed off your reaction." "Under no circumstances should you acknowledge the behavior or repay it with anger or defensiveness. If you don't react, they'll get bored and go away."

Even if ignoring the harasser doesn't get him to stop, at least you won't fan his flames, Wood says. "The more a person responds, the more they teach the stalker about themselves or divulge information they shouldn't," he says.

3. Maintain your privacy

Don't publish any personal information, such as your address or phone number. If you need to, use a Post Office box number. Wood suggests asking your state's motor vehicles and voter registry to put a block on your address and phone number. "Otherwise, any person may obtain them just for inquiring," he says.

Some longtime bloggers, such as Bray and his wife Lauren Wood, a senior technical program manager at Sun, refrain from posting photos of their children on their blogs.

4. Block and ban

If you're experiencing abuse on a moderated blog, you can appeal to the administrator, who can try banning the troll. Be prepared to include a history of the troll's posts, including full headers.

Some blog services offer technologies that enable you to block offensive participants. Using Wordpress, Silverstein can moderate the comments of anyone who hasn't contributed to the site before, which helps eliminate the hit-and-run type of trolls. "That allows me to weed out 90% of the abuse I get," he says.

Another plug-in enables him to ban certain IP addresses. "That's especially good for the really crazy people, if they post one comment that goes beyond the pale," he says.

5. Keep a log

Be sure to keep a copy of anything you receive from the harasser, Lauren Wood suggests. If they contact you by phone rather than e-mail, take notes on what they say and how often they call, she says. "You'll need proof rather than, 'I think he was calling three times a day,'" she says. "You'll want a log that says, 'He called at 9:14 p.m."

Above all, when you have an online presence, you need to prepare yourself for the possibility of becoming a target, Wood adds. "Just like in the real world, you need to realize which dark alleys you shouldn't enter at night, and if you do, have protection and know what you should do when," she says.

Adds Silverstein, "you're very vulnerable as a blogger. You're out there hanging on the line, and anyone can take a shot at you."

The comment section is for the readers of Do The Right Thing, a place for political conservatives and Christians to share information and discuss current events. We are not "fair and balanced," and we aren't refereeing a "free speech zone." Intelligent, funny, and on-topic comments are welcome. Trolls, spam, left wing fools, liberal propaganda, and cyber stalkers are not. We may occassionally approve a comment with an obvious lefty-slant so that we can amuse ourselves by making fun of it, but most will be deleted. (Why? Because we're busy, we have lives, and when we want to talk to you we'll go visit you on Digg or the Daily KOS or your own pathetic blog.)

This is a private blog, and we reserve the right to make up our own rules as we go along. The few comments which manage to squeak by our censors reflect the opinion of the commentator, and not necessarily the staff of Do The Right Thing.

While it may be fun to "whack a troll," the best policy is to ignore them. The more vile manifestations of trolls expose themselves as the slimy gutter crawlers and cave dwellers they are.

Trolls are utterly worthless to any decent discussion. They systematically inject their own hatred, spewing whatever dreamed up or conjured untruths they think will impress readers to disrupt a discussion. Most are in various stages of dementia while some can even be classified as psychopathic narcissists.

The solution is to ban and delete them whenever they rear their ugliness. Most go to great lengths to hide their identities, using multiple on line aliases, random I.P. generators, and false emails set up for the purpose of projecting more of their inner hatred to those they stalk.

We keep logs of all comments. Particularly those of the more vile cave dwellers, gutter rats, and moonbats.

Finally, as a warning to our daily readers we ask that you not respond to the vitriolic nonsense that may on occassion make it past our moderators.

Remember DFTT.

 

 

 

PoliticalCorrectness, Part 2

H/T Pat Dollard.

Political Correctness is a poison being handed out daily and in toxic doses by its proliferators.

“Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional illogical liberal minority & rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous liberal press which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

Libtards are positioned so far Left they would rather argue that they posses two Left Arms than admit to having anything resembling or categorized as right. The damage to all societies caused by the relentless and irresponsible spread of the PC doctrine will continue unchecked as long as WE tolerate it. PC has been around as long a Political Passivity and was present in the earliest writings of the communist parties strongmen like Mao and Lenin.

The Pacifist/Liberal movements have been tumors in the colon of society since humans have been organizing governments, and the Toxin known as Political Correctness will continue until we wipe it from the face of the earth.

For the conservative, to possess knowledge of the Frankfurt School, is to possess Excalibur.

The Making of A Fuehrer - With Video

Cross posted from Pat Dollard's.

Due to the length of this article I will only post part of it. You can follow the links provided to finish reading.

 

 It is hard to distinguish narcissists from psychopaths. The latter may simply be a less inhibited and less grandiose form of the former. Indeed, the DSM V Committee is considering to abolish this distinction altogether.

- Suite101.com
The Betrayal:

The brilliant scholar Ali Sina wrote a scary but highly relevant article about Barack Obama’s Narcisissm that every American should read.

Understanding Obama: The Making of a Fuehrer

I must confess, I was not impressed by Sen. Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident, a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling.

His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama’s speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history.

Never a politician in this land had such a quasi “religious” impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishment makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact, he is quite ignorant on most important subjects.

Barack Obama is a narcissist.

Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of “Malignant Self Love,” also believes, “Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist.” Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands it and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person.

When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama’s language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, nearest and dearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).

Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People’s Temple , the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist.

Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Joe Stalin, Saddam, Mao Zedong, Kim Jong IL, and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time.

All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers and followers. They created a personality cult around themselves, and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirer’s souls, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life.

Those men gave their followers hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, they invariably brought them to their doom.

When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you don’t know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse.

“Obama’s early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations,” says Vaknin.

Continue reading HERE.

“Activist” Turns In Would-Be RNC Convention Firebombers

H/T Pat Dollard.

ST. PAUL PIONEER PRESS:

COURTS

Social activist, organizer … and FBI informant

It was all about stopping violence, says Austin man who revealed alleged firebomb plot at GOP convention.

By David Hanners

ST. PAUL, Minn. — In a federal courtroom in Minneapolis this month, the public transformation of Brandon Darby of Austin will become complete.

In four years, he has gone from a never-trust-the-government activist to the confidential informant who helped the FBI arrest two Austin men on suspicion of building firebombs during the Republican National Convention in St. Paul in September.

“I feel like, as an activist, I played a direct role in stopping violence,” Darby, 32, said in his first interview on his role.

(Crowder)

Darby was the government’s chief informant in the case against David McKay and Bradley Crowder. The two are scheduled to go on trial in U.S. District Court on Jan. 26 on accusations they built Molotov cocktails during the convention. They are being held without bail.

Prosecutors say the two men built the firebombs because they were angry that police had seized a trailer filled with riot shields they had built and hauled to Minnesota.

(McKay)

In a conversation recorded by the FBI, McKay told Darby he planned to use the explosives on law-enforcement cars parked in a lot near the convention site, officials said.

“What if there’s a cop sleeping in the car?” Darby asked McKay, according to an affidavit by Christopher Langert, a special agent in the FBI’s Minneapolis office. “He’ll wake up,” McKay allegedly replied.

McKay also told Darby, “It’s worth it if an officer gets burned or maimed,” the affidavit said.

Darby had been working as an informant since November 2007, almost a year before the GOP convention , and in an e-mail sent to friends Monday, he said he was comfortable with that.

“Like many of you, I do my best to act in good conscience and to do what I believe to be most helpful to the world,” he wrote.

Darby’s admission shocked Austin’s activist community, which includes people who have worked with him on a variety of grass roots organizing efforts for years.

“Everyone that knew Brandon has gone through a whole range of emotions. Clearly, he’s betrayed the trust of the community, and all the communities he’s worked with,” said Lisa Fithian, a social-justice activist who worked with Darby in Austin.

A spokesman for prosecutor Frank Magill, the U.S. attorney for Minnesota, declined to comment.

McKay, Crowder and nine other people riding in a van with Darby had little reason to suspect he was a government informant. Darby long had been known for having a strong mistrust of authority, particularly police.

“He and I faced the cops with arms, ‘law enforcement’ (and some within our communities) view him as very antagonistic toward the cops and all their flavors,” friend Scott Crow wrote of Darby on an online independent site in November.

“He often tried to inflame situations,” Crow said in an interview.

It was in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina that Darby made a name for himself as an activist, organizer and, as he calls it, proponent of “service-oriented direct action.”

After Katrina hit the Gulf Coast in August 2005, Darby and others started the Common Ground Collective, which began by delivering supplies to people in the ravaged city.

Darby said he saw firsthand what happens when government fails to protect its citizens. “When I showed up in New Orleans, I was very angry at my government,” he said.

But he said that while working there, he concluded that some activists seemed more intent on promoting radical agendas than helping people.

As for why he got involved with the FBI, Darby said it was because he discovered that people he knew were planning violence.

“Somebody had asked me to do something that would’ve resulted in hurting people, and I said no,” he said. “So they started asking other people. At that point, that’s when I went forward and contacted somebody in law enforcement.”

The Media's Top 10 Worst Economic Myths of 2008

Note: This contains more Bush Derangement Syndrome nonsense, reference "The Attack of The Killer Tomatoes."
I have no doubt that Bush is responsible for the blown tire on my motorcycle in 1986 and likely responsible for the broken thumb I suffered in 1977 as well.
Dean

BMI's collection of outrageous economic bias for the entire year: From the salmonella outbreak to the media's call for a new, New Deal.

By Julia A. Seymour and Paul Detrick
Business Media Institute
12/11/2008

Each year the Business Media Institute looks back on the year's news and selects the top 10 worst economic myths. Here is our 2008 list:

10. Capitalism is dead or dying.

9. Gas at $4-a-gallon, blame the oil companies.

8. Fannie’s failure

7. Barack Obama sends stocks soaring, but not sinking.

6. Alternative energy: All gain, no pain

5. The economy has a fever and the only prescription is more bailouts.

4. Attack of the Killer Tomatoes

3. Oil prices will skyrocket to $200 a barrel, gas to $15.

2. Welcome to 1929: Great Depression II

1. America needs a new, New Deal.

Read the details here.