In which Orson Scott Card demonstrates tunnel vision

[unixronin]

From an article in the Greensboro, NC Rhinoceros Times:

One Party Rule Forever!

Because the mainstream press refuses to see anything wrong in the Obama administration, even the most outrageous actions are given astonishingly gentle treatment -- if they get any treatment at all.

So of course we hear almost nothing about the coup d'etat that is under way in the White House.

OK, you can probably tell the general drift of the article from those first couple of paragraphs.  Card's basic point is that the Obama administration plans to steal the next election, and all subsequent ones, by gerrymandering based upon falsified census numbers that use padded "estimated" numnbers for the poor, the homeless and illegal immigrants.  (I'm not quite sure how he thinks padding the numbers of illegal immigrants is relevant to election theft via gerrymandering, since they can't vote anyway.)

But the point that caught my eye here is about two thirds of the way down the article:

Remember how, when the Patriot Act was passed, we were flooded with outraged stories in the press about how Americans' rights were going to be trampled on?

None of it came true.

... Uh, wait a minute here.  Run that last bit by me again?  None of it came true?

Funny, I thought Card lived in the same US that I do.  Show of hands, please, if YOU think nobody's rights got trampled on as a result of, or in manners enabled by, the USA-PATRIOT Act.

(That said, I am in basic agreement with Card's point that basing the census on "estimates" is a pretty questionable practice.  I don't happen to agree with him that it's part of a coup d'état though.)

Comments

[unix-jedi.livejournal.com]

Err, count me as one of the ones without my hand up.

Not to say I was hugely in favor of the "PATRIOT" Act - it was written by Reno's Justice department, and it shows the danger of leaving these things around to get dusted off later.

But neither was it totally horrible. It codified a number of practices (for example, the procedure for getting search warrants for electronic records) that was being done in different ways in different jurisdictions even among the same organization.

What Card gets right - the screaming about it was baseless.

The press did go nuts, and insist it would be the end of the World and Fascist Police and... It didn't turn into that. It has been misused in a few places - but the predictions were wrong. Yet those predictors refuse to admit that, and insist that they were right and...

(I'm not quite sure how he thinks padding the numbers of illegal immigrants is relevant to election theft via gerrymandering, since they can't vote anyway.)

Because they're used to establish voting boundaries. Really. The number of voters isn't use, it's the number of people.

And I can make some argument for that. What if a city was occupied by 40% illegals, 40% felons, and only 20% eligible to vote? How would their proportional representation be properly counted?

But when it comes to drawing lines and determining the division of the 435 house seats, it's based on the total count. 100k one way or the other could make a big difference between states.

[databeast.livejournal.com]

I know plenty of folks that have gotten a shit tonne of hassle from cops of all sizes, under the guide of PATRIOT's provisions. True, it didnt cause the end of the free world, but it's created a likely irreversible increase in the tolerance of law enforcement being able to do whatever the fuck they want to people whenever they want, and be utterly unaccountable for it under the guise of 'we thought he might be a terrorist!'

[unix-jedi.livejournal.com]

under the guide of PATRIOT's provisions.

I've yet to have a cop actually cite anything regarding the Patriot Act.

Now, I know a lot have claimed that, but let's be honest, knowledge and understanding of the law aren't high on the list of requirements for LEO, sadly.
If I were to detail ALL the stupid and wrong things that cops have told me, or people I trust... We'd run out of ones and zeros.

I don't know of any "rights" lost. What are cops doing now, that they weren't before?

See, that's what I'm talking about. People aren't actually rebutting the law, they're waving anecdotes and "well, the cop said that according to patriot, he had to get a reach-around..."

What does Patriot allow the government to do that they _weren't before_? Research that, and it might be a lot scary. (I'm objecting to a lot of the prior actions, I'm just saying that PA didn't massively change any freedoms like it's portrayed.)

[databeast.livejournal.com]

just like the senators who didnt even read the bill before signing, patriot made cops believe that they had even greater powers than before.. you're kind of agreeing with me here, that it wasnt the specific details of the bill, but how it was interpretted as allowing more abuse, that may be irreversible.

Aka, it's not the bill itself, or the laws within it that was the problem, but the side-effects of it.

[lebo-superman.livejournal.com]

My wife is a librarian, and her whole industry was negatively impacted by specific provisions of Patriot. Specifically, black suits can walk into any library and demand certain things from the first librarian they see (even if it isn't her area), and if she can't produce it, she can be carted off and held incommunicado. Even if it isn't POSSIBLE to get that information from the computer systems in that library. Plus, anyone else in the library is instantly placed under a total gag order, not even allowed to tell anyone the government was there.

Though not widespread, it has happened. Of course, it's always in whispers, but there are reports of about a half-dozen cases where librarians have disappeared. From work. The ACLU is working on it - but of course keeps getting the "government has no specific knowledge of such an incident" story.

[unix-jedi.livejournal.com]

Specifically, black suits can walk into any library and demand certain things from the first librarian they see (even if it isn't her area), and if she can't produce it, she can be carted off and held incommunicado.

Even more specifically, please cite this.

Though not widespread, it has happened.

I've never heard of a case where the FBI started trivia contests and disappearing people.

This is sounding again like the fevered ranting that Card was referencing. I've heard much the same from many librarians, and nobody could document anything. But they heard, from their friend, who knew somebody...

Most librarians of my acquaintance believe they're in a special caste system, where their data is sacrosanct (even though their job is information dissemination... I'm not saying it makes sense, mind you.) Point out that their data is in fact owned by the government (I've never heard a private librarian rant about PA), and that it's always been available, and they start hyperventilating that it should be protected, they should delete it, etc. etc.


there are reports of about a half-dozen cases where librarians have disappeared. From work.

Seems simple enough to start looking, then. People disappearing are easily noticed.

Best cite I could find was: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/06/librarians-desc.html ... Which hardly sounds like they were disappeared.

Peter Chase and Barbara Bailey, librarians in Plainville, Connecticut, received an NSL to turn over computer records in their library on July 13, 2005. Unlike a suspected thousands of other people around the country, Chase, Bailey and two of their colleagues stood up to the Man and refused to comply, convinced that the feds had no right to intrude on anyone's privacy without a court order (NSLs don't require a judge's approval). That's when things turned ugly.

As they often do when you tell the police to FO.

If you want to end war and stuff you got to sing loud. - Arlo Guthrie

I'm not saying they weren't right, I'm not saying they're not justified. But as of right now, that's the law, they violated it, and they're upset that there were repercussions, that the FBI didn't just say "Oh, OK", and leave.
Actually, I *am* saying that they weren't right to turn over public records. FOIA requests don't require a judge, either, and there's no appeal, no negotiation, just "Hand 'em over" and that's to *anybody*. Yet Librarians aren't screaming about FOIA being wrong - most I know scream that it should be easier to wrench open GOVERNMENT (non-librarian, of course) records...

[lebo-superman.livejournal.com]

In my wife's library, all their records are computerized. However, the system was designed to forget who checked out a book as soon as it got checked back in. However, imagine those black suits (since, according to PA they don't even have to identify themselves) coming in and demanding a list of everyone in the last year who has looked at a certain book.

Not only can't they produce a list of who's checked it out, they have no idea who's looked at it without it being checked out. When PA was first signed, her boss (the head of the library) placed a hasty call to the software vendors who sold them the system to ask about compliance issues, and he was told that not only didn't the current system comply - it couldn't be made to comply without a total re-write. That was years ago, and that system still doesn't comply.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Specifically, black suits can walk into any library and demand certain things from the first librarian they see (even if it isn't her area), and if she can't produce it, she can be carted off and held incommunicado. Even if it isn't POSSIBLE to get that information from the computer systems in that library. Plus, anyone else in the library is instantly placed under a total gag order, not even allowed to tell anyone the government was there.

And that is an astoundingly dangerous precedent, as is the idea of treating someone as guilty of planning terrorism merely because of something they read.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Was it not the PATRIOT Act that gave the government the powers to use inquisitional trial tactics when trying anyone accused of terrorism-related charges? No right to know the charges against you, no right to see evidence against you, no right to confront witnesses against you, reduced right to legal representation, be held incommunicado indefinitely with no right of habeas corpus, etc?

PATRIOT is also the justification that has been used to prevent people from photographing ... well, pretty damn near anything, actually. Bridges, trains, reservoirs, even fences. Never mind if there's fifty thousand photos of it in the public domain already.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Oh, and as pernishus reminded me, I completely forgot to mention the PATRIOT-enabled no-fly list. No, that hasn't affected anyone at all. Especially not people who got put on the no-fly list apparently for holding political views opposed to Bush administration policies.

[skellington.livejournal.com]

And exactly how many articles screaming about the Patriot Act did we actually get published in mainstream publications?

Second, http://mediamatters.org/items/200902200014

Card is full of it. Again. *sigh*

[jmkelly.livejournal.com]

Did Card object to the coup-de-Supreme-Court that decided the 2000 general election?

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Actually, Card looked at it from the opposing point of view — that the Supreme Court blocked the Gore campaign from "stealing" the election by the various shenanigans in the recounts. For instance, the inch-thick manual distributed by the legal team gave detailed instructions for using every possible legal technicality to throw out ballots that were expected to be Republican votes, such as military absentee ballots on which someone had failed to dot an I or cross a T, while keeping absentee ballots from Israel which were expected to be Democratic votes.

The truth of the matter is, our elections are dirty, and when any election is as close as Florida 2000 was, both sides pull every dirty trick they can get away with to try to swing it their way, both sides accuse the other of trying to steal it, and both are probably correct to about the same extent.

[http://users.livejournal.com/crossfire_/]

We can't even agree on a budget, let alone plan a coup d'etat. *snicker*

Padding the Census numbers

[rain-manpnw.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure what OSC means, but it sounds to me like he's confusing statistical sampling w/ guessing.

It's a practical impossibility to accurately count all the homeless and illegal immigrants in this country. Too many factors, from distrust of anyone associated with the governement, to just movement, will combine to make it necessary to use sampling and estimate.

That said, it is possible to skew the estimates if the sampling method is biased. I worked in the 1990 census, and IMO that is what the Bush Admin. did - deliberately skew the sampling method to undercount the number of homeless. Details if desired.

Re: Padding the Census numbers

[lebo-superman.livejournal.com]

I know that the Census is supposed to be as accurate as possible, but from what I've read the Obama administration isn't even trying for accuracy. Their statistical sampling has placed the majority of homeless and illegals within districts that are mostly Democrat. Obama wants to deliberately OVER ESTIMATE the number of homeless and illegals within those areas, to increase the number of elected officials they are eligible for. Which would of course increase the majorities of the Democrats in the House - permanently (or he seems to hope).

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

Card is a gifted storyteller. He is also pretty weird on a number of subjects that he claims to know about. He is so shrill it is hard to read his editorials.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

That. But occasionally he does come up with something that has a grain of truth underlying it. (Not necessarily the grain he thinks is there....)

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

Same delusional paranoid bullshit, different flavor.

"Bush isn't going to leave the White House."